The Case Against the Trinity

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

BARNEY BRIGHT

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2017
4,032
1,119
113
67
Thomaston Georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Justbyfaith said:
Because there is only one true God; and therefore if He is not the true God He is a false god; if He be a god.[/Quote\]

The scriptures say the Judges of Israel were God's and that's The True God calling them gods since the scriptures are inspired by God. So all you showing me is that you believe you have the right to judge God. Me since the True God calls the Judges of Israel God's I'm going to believe him and not you. The True God has the authority to call someone a god. Now I certainly agree that some who were called gods in scripture were and are false gods, but that isn't true when God said the Judges of Israel were gods. So there is a True God and those he calls gods and the True God isn't wrong for doing so.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Pardon me for the delay, my phone and internet have been down for two days - I'm in Texas.

Sin needs to be judged, it is a Biblical principle. From the beginning, God's plan was to send a Savior, who would sacrifice himself for our sins.
"The wages of sin is death ..." Rom. 6:23 That is the judgment, physical and spiritual death.
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul." Lec. 17:11
So animals were sacrificed, but they did not remove sin, just covered them, temporarily, He passed over them, but it was an imperfect practice. The Law could not be fulfilled. The Law was a shadow and animal sacrifices were symbolically pointing to a coming sacrifice, once and for all, Jesus.
It is impossible to remove sins by the blood of bulls and goats. (Hebrews 10:4)
But, "For by one offering, He has perfected forever, those who are being sanctified." Heb. 10:15
How? "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of His Being ..." HEB. 1:3
You cannot be the radiance and exact representation of God unless you are God. God emptied Himself and became a man.
Christ, "whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God has passesd over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justified of the one who has faith in Jesus" Rom. 3:25, 26
There is your justice, a sacrifice, "The just for the unjust". (1Pet.3:18)



Love is not at all elementary. In fact most people strive and yearn their entire lives trying to figure it out, to be fulfulled in that love.
God is love and the greatest act of love is that He gave His life for all.
" In this is LOVE, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." 1 John 4:10
"He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world." 1 John 2:2
Sorry to hear about your demise in Texas, hope that things recover soon!

Sorry RDB, my question is how does God obey His own commandments, in order to propitiate Himself? This is where the nonsense lies.
I understand everything that you said about the Law and how blood redeems, but, just for the record, I disagree with your point that the blood of bulls & goats were not sufficient to absolve sins. They were, that's why God demanded it, it was not a superfluous act with no efficacy, obviously. They just didn't exonerate perpetually - you were only as good as your last cleansing under the Law. As the author of Hebrew states, '...if the blood of bulls were sufficient to purge sin for the time being, how much more the son of God...'

Adam disobeyed God, this is where the crime started, and man has been defying God ever since. Thus, there is absolutely nothing that God can do in order to judiciously absolve man from his transgressions, this is Law 101. So, in order to offer a man a means for redemption, God agreed that if there were one man that could obey Him, even unto death, then God will justify all men out of His grace. Similarly, as God promised not to destroy all of Sodom if there were at least 10 righteous men in the city, God allowed the same principle to be applied to men in regard to Jesus' righteousness, and everlasting life.

The trinity judicial system is utter nonsense, to the point that it undermines and defames God's wisdom and jurisprudence, rather than glorifies it.
 
Last edited:

101G

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2012
12,259
3,385
113
Mobile, Al.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God, or gods. "Judges of Israel were God's", ERROR, they was called, called, judges/gods. and that was in Government which is ordained of God.
but gods in reference to deity, no. 1 Chronicles 16:26 "For all the gods of the people are idols: but the LORD made the heavens." and as "a god" with God or was God as in John 1:1c ... well God himself answer that, Deuteronomy 32:39 "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

1 Chronicles 16:26 "For all the gods of the people are idols" and what is an IDOL? 1 Corinthians 8:4 "As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one."

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"
 
Last edited:

BARNEY BRIGHT

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2017
4,032
1,119
113
67
Thomaston Georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
and Colwell has been shot down by nearly all other Scholars. and you forget that following standard rules of translation God does not precede the verb but must follow the verb. If in translation it preceded the verb, colwell would have available possibility, but it doesn't and he doesn't as legions of Greek scholars have written on this and why He and others were wrong!

And anarthrous appear specifically without an article, and only demand an indefinite article in English when the English demands it! and it far from demands it here! Sorry but the Watchtower has led you astray if this is where you got that argument.

If you wish, I can link you to many articles from expert Greek Scholars (some not even believers) who declare that John 1:1 says whoever God is, the Word is! and they are separate



This is an actual place for place translation, but that is not how it has to be formed in English




You need to realize MArshall also employed a "dynamic equivalent" form of translating. Like teh New World Paraphrase it includes in the translating- his opinion.

Explanation of John 1:1

Here is one of many authors and experts that explain why the watchtower is wrong about Jon 1:1

.

No thank you, I honestly don't believe you to be different from anyone else that I've heard from who like so many others are doing their best to get as many people as possible to deny that it was the Only Begotten Son of God that came to the world of mankind, that died for the world of mankind and that God resurrected three days after his death. What other people choose to believe is their choice. I'll continue to believe a I always have believed that God gave his Only-begotten Son to die for mankind and resurrected him three days after his death. He did this to save the World of mankind.
 

BARNEY BRIGHT

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2017
4,032
1,119
113
67
Thomaston Georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
and Colwell has been shot down by nearly all other Scholars. and you forget that following standard rules of translation God does not precede the verb but must follow the verb. If in translation it preceded the verb, colwell would have available possibility, but it doesn't and he doesn't as legions of Greek scholars have written on this and why He and others were wrong!

And anarthrous appear specifically without an article, and only demand an indefinite article in English when the English demands it! and it far from demands it here! Sorry but the Watchtower has led you astray if this is where you got that argument.

If you wish, I can link you to many articles from expert Greek Scholars (some not even believers) who declare that John 1:1 says whoever God is, the Word is! and they are separate



This is an actual place for place translation, but that is not how it has to be formed in English




You need to realize MArshall also employed a "dynamic equivalent" form of translating. Like teh New World Paraphrase it includes in the translating- his opinion.

Explanation of John 1:1

Here is one of many authors and experts that explain why the watchtower is wrong about Jon 1:1

.

What you or someone else has to say about coldwell or Marshall I could care less. What others who deny it was the Only Begotten Son of God that came to the world of mankind to save humanity by dying for humanity then be raised from death by the true God three days after, those who deny these things I could care less what they have to say about the watchtower. Also Ronald I think it's you and people like you who are leading people astray, because you and those others you listen to have been led astray.
 

Ronald David Bruno

Well-Known Member
Nov 7, 2020
3,808
1,855
113
Southern
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God obey His own commandments, in order to propitiate Himself?
That is why He became a man. Jesus had two natures, He was fully man and fully God. He relinquished and set aside His glorified nature to fulfill the requirements of the Law as a man.
He was propitious by His sacrifice, acceptable to the Father and afterwards, He was glorified again. The Father gave Him all authority of heaven and in earth. To have all authority, you must be omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent.
God agreed that if there were one man that could obey Him, even unto death, then God will justify all men out of His grace.
.
And that was Jesus, also refered to as the Son of Man.

The trinity judicial system is utter nonsense, to the point that it undermines and defames God's wisdom and jurisprudence, rather than glorifies it.
Is it nonsense to be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit?
I attended a water baptism for a Jehovah Witness and was astounded that prior to the baptism, nothing of substance was discussed (except to make an oath to be obedient to the Organization), but no prayer, no prior confessions of sin, no desire and request for forgiveness, no preparations of the heart or blessings for this new relationship that they were to embark on. He just went and got dipped in the water ... didn't even mention Jehovah? It seemed so empty and meaningless.

Our church required an hour class prior to our baptism to explain what this relationship meant with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. That we were making a convenant, an everlasting bond to serve and obey our Lord and Savior.
Our Pastor wanted to make sure we understood what the gospel meant and that we took it seriously, that from now on the Holy Spirit would dwell in us. Jesus said that the Father would send another Helper, a Comforter, who would teach us all the truth and glorify the Son, as we should. He would also guide us, counsel us, search all truth and reveal it to us, comfort us, give gifts, LOVE us, fellowship with us, sanctify us, justify us, convict us of sin and edify us. We were to approach this union in humility. We understood that we would, by being baptized into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, be transformed spiritually/ born again. Receiving the Holy Spirit/Being born again, may not necessarily occur at the time of water baptism but it was clear that we were preparing for just that. Our willingness to enter into this union, to ask for forgiveness of our sins and to ask for the Holy Spirit, and acknowledge Him was essential. The water baptism does not save us, but it was symbolic for the cleansing of our souls by the blood of Christ, an outward act of obedience to reflect the inward spiritual cleansing. That's how it was done. We entered the water and after we asked the Lord Jesus for forgiveness of our sins and stated our willingness to receive Him as our Lord and Savior, the Pastor spoke the words, "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." I was dipped in the water, came up with a smile and he said, "Welcome to the Kingdom of Heaven."
Anyways, that's my belief and that was what I received.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
That is why He became a man. Jesus had two natures, He was fully man and fully God.
But, as far as the atonement is concerned, there was no need for him to be God. For, again, it was obligatory that a 200% man fulfill the mission. (Romans 5, by one man sin entered the world, by one man humans are absolved ) Never is a god-man mentioned in Paul's didactic explanation of the Atonement.

The Father gave Him all authority of heaven and in earth.
That's right, and this point is repeated countless times throughout the NT. So, clearly Jesus was not God, in order to have the Father exalt him to such an eminent position - if he were God, no exaltation required.
.
Is it nonsense to be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit?
No, but in trinitarian terms it is nonsense and meaningless. Non-trinitarians understand that the Atonement is only effectuated through the Father creating the Son in the womb of Mary, and then upon the completion of the son's mission, the Father sends His spirit into those who accept the testimony of Christ. The three are not one being. Only the Father is God, and there are no other divine beings in the entire universe, but Him. Jesus is His pre-eminent and created son that God waited to reveal at the appointed time. The Holy Spirit is the Father's gift to empower the elect.

Just for the record, I'm not Jehovah Witness - I'm adamantly non-denominational, and like I said , God the Father is the only divine being in the entire universe (pure monotheism)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Only Satan and his children are against the Trinity.
No, only satan and his cohorts devised the doctrine of the trinity, and only the feeble-minded embrace and adhere to it.
It's complete diabolical nonsense from start to finish.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
What you or someone else has to say about coldwell or Marshall I could care less. What others who deny it was the Only Begotten Son of God that came to the world of mankind to save humanity by dying for humanity then be raised from death by the true God three days after, those who deny these things I could care less what they have to say about the watchtower. Also Ronald I think it's you and people like you who are leading people astray, because you and those others you listen to have been led astray.
@Ronald Nolette
Typically, whenever any type of etymology must be performed on a word in order to extract the meaning, the context has been entirely dismissed. In other words, the exegete has not a clue of the meaning of the text.
John 1:1, axiomatically, is employing the literary convention called antanaclasis, where the same word is used several times in the same sentence, but each time has a different meaning.
Christ was not an after though, he was always in the mind of God from the beginning of creation and was His pinnacle creation (in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God). And, Christ was what God intended from the beginning, not the Garden of Eden, not the choosing of Abraham, not the Levitical Law, not the monarchy, but Christ as head of the Church, as God ordained (and the Word was God - what He intended). The mystery of Christ is in his chronology, not his ontology.

If one reads the prologue in a hyper-iteral fashion, you come to the conclusion of the absurd and implausible, god-man enigma. And, even that fails, '...the Words was God, and was with God...' what in the world does that mean?
Utter, putrid, blasphemous nonsense.
 

kcnalp

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2020
7,326
1,782
113
Indianapolis
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, only satan and his cohorts devised the doctrine of the trinity, and only the feeble-minded embrace and adhere to it.
It's complete diabolical nonsense from start to finish.
No Scripture? lol
Which One isn't God? Jesus? Father? Holy Spirit? I don't think you have a clue!
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,695
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No thank you, I honestly don't believe you to be different from anyone else that I've heard from who like so many others are doing their best to get as many people as possible to deny that it was the Only Begotten Son of God that came to the world of mankind, that died for the world of mankind and that God resurrected three days after his death. What other people choose to believe is their choice. I'll continue to believe a I always have believed that God gave his Only-begotten Son to die for mankind and resurrected him three days after his death. He did this to save the World of mankind.

Well I do believe Jesus is the only begotten on of God and that He died to pay the price foreach andevery single sin of mine, past present and future. But you do not believe in teh resurrection! You deny He rose in teh body He went to teh grave in. That is what resurrection means and you know that

Resurrection= ana (again) stasis (standing) So resurrection means a standing up again and in this case, from the dead! You believed He died a man and arose an invisible spirit creature (Michael the Archangel unless the Watchtower changed that teaching as well) That is not resurrection.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,695
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What you or someone else has to say about coldwell or Marshall I could care less. What others who deny it was the Only Begotten Son of God that came to the world of mankind to save humanity by dying for humanity then be raised from death by the true God three days after, those who deny these things I could care less what they have to say about the watchtower. Also Ronald I think it's you and people like you who are leading people astray, because you and those others you listen to have been led astray.

I know. You find the people whom nearly all experts disagree with that believe like you do and hang your hat on them. that is why you read the Watchtower New World Paraphrase. It is not recognized by any serious Greek scholar for its linguistic fidelity. but because they have added to teh bible to support the Arian apostasy they promulgate about teh Trinity- you buy it! I am truly sad for you.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,695
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
@Ronald Nolette
Typically, whenever any type of etymology must be performed on a word in order to extract the meaning, the context has been entirely dismissed. In other words, the exegete has not a clue of the meaning of the text.
John 1:1, axiomatically, is employing the literary convention called antanaclasis, where the same word is used several times in the same sentence, but each time has a different meaning.
Christ was not an after though, he was always in the mind of God from the beginning of creation and was His pinnacle creation (in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God). And, Christ was what God intended from the beginning, not the Garden of Eden, not the choosing of Abraham, not the Levitical Law, not the monarchy, but Christ as head of the Church, as God ordained (and the Word was God - what He intended). The mystery of Christ is in his chronology, not his ontology.

If one reads the prologue in a hyper-iteral fashion, you come to the conclusion of the absurd and implausible, god-man enigma. And, even that fails, '...the Words was God, and was with God...' what in the world does that mean?
Utter, putrid, blasphemous nonsense.

Wrong on so many levels.

John 1:1 is not an example of anatnaclasis. John did not know Greek rhetoric to use such a device. Also no known scholars that I have read say it isthis.

Secondly all the examples of antanaclasis are simply passages where in English we have one word with more than one meaning. like live.

1. to exist.
2. where one abides
3. actual and not recorded.

So you are wrong. But I welcome you to show some liunguistic scholares give the reason why they think John 1:1 is an example of an antanaclasis.

Givent he fact that the nouns are different forms of the same word and one is accusative and one is nominative lets us know they are not of different definitions

Also why do they not say teh Word is also antanaclasis as well? that appearss both times in the nominative.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,695
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If one reads the prologue in a hyper-iteral fashion, you come to the conclusion of the absurd and implausible, god-man enigma. And, even that fails, '...the Words was God, and was with God...' what in the world does that mean?
Utter, putrid, blasphemous nonsense.


Well it is utter nonsense to those who have been deceived by crafty wolves who devour the flock!

But given that in JOhn 1:1 the first appearance of God has the definite article it refers to a specific person. and as the definite article does not appear in teh second appearance it is describing the essence, nature and character of a person! That is why Jesus could say honestly if anyone sees Him, they see God and that He and His Father are one (not in union as the NWMT wrongly translates)

Teh fact He is called God and there is only one true god- would make Him a false god ! there is no- well he can be called God because He reflects God- that is the utter blasphemy nonsense!
Jesus is called Jehovah, He is called Lord, He is called God, He is also the first and last! John called HIm equal to God and Thomas declared Him as God! So didn't Paul.

And so didn't Jesus when He called HImself the "Iam" (Jehovah) That is what Gods' Inpsired Word teaches.

It is the machinations of men that teach differently. and this teaching is old. It started with the Gnostics and origen then Arius and repicked up by the unitarians, then the IBS, then popularized by the zealous IBS adherent Charles Taze Russel.
 

Ronald David Bruno

Well-Known Member
Nov 7, 2020
3,808
1,855
113
Southern
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But, as far as the atonement is concerned, there was no need for him to be God.
He fulfilled the Law physically as a man, but it took something more powerful than a mere man could accomplish on the cross (spiritually), He became sin. He carried the sins mankind for all time - at least 10 billion people having each thousands of sins. Only God can do that. You must be omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent to do that. And His all powerful and all encompassing authority also requires an all mighty God to handle.


Non-trinitarians understand that the Atonement is only effectuated through the Father creating the Son in the womb of Mary, and then upon the completion of the son's mission, the Father sends His spirit into those who accept the testimony of Christ. The three are not one being.

Non-trinitarian don't understand the nature of God. No one does fully. We see dimly, and know in part.
Jesus became a human and dwelt among us. "In the beginning was the Word (Jesus) and the Word was with God and the Word was God."
He pre-existed with the Father before the foundation of the world.
"For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him." Col. 1:16 This says it All, Jesus is the Creator. Did He create himself? No, He is an eternal being.

Only the Father is God, and there are no other divine beings in the entire universe, but Him
Jesus is divine. HE said, "I and the Father are one" ... " If you've seen Me, you have seen the Father."
No mere man can claim that. No prophet or angel could make that claim. The whole Bible is about Jesus. We are to have faith in Jesus. If He wasn't God, the Bible would not have focused so much on Him and would have been written quite differently. It would have said, have faith in our Father only and Jesus would not receive worship as He does, as angels have and do worship Him.. Even the Father refers to Him as God. " But unto the Son he says, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever ..." Heb. 1:8

Just for the record, I'm not Jehovah Witness

Didn't imply that you were, just used their non-trinitarian theology as an example of how it doesn't work concerning a basic essential, like baptism.
 
Last edited:

BARNEY BRIGHT

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2017
4,032
1,119
113
67
Thomaston Georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well I do believe Jesus is the only begotten on of God and that He died to pay the price foreach andevery single sin of mine, past present and future. But you do not believe in teh resurrection! You deny He rose in teh body He went to teh grave in. That is what resurrection means and you know that

Resurrection= ana (again) stasis (standing) So resurrection means a standing up again and in this case, from the dead! You believed He died a man and arose an invisible spirit creature (Michael the Archangel unless the Watchtower changed that teaching as well) That is not resurrection.

You can deny that Jesus was resurrected an immortal incorruptible being who is a life giving spirit but the scriptures say he is. So that means again you deny what's written down about Jesus when he was resurrected from the dead. Seems you're the one who is denying the scriptures concerning the resurrection of Jesus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler
Status
Not open for further replies.