The Problem With 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!

APAK

Well-Known Member
Feb 4, 2018
8,855
9,590
113
Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If my father, a man, begets a son, the he, the son, me, also is a man. Like father like son. If God begets a Son, then the Son must also be God. The Jews knew what the implications were when Jesus claimed God as his Father. They thought it blasphemy, which is why they wanted to some him. Jesus was claiming Sonship in the highest sense of the word.

Brakelite: Your analogy is simplistic and inappropriate, without scriptural merit. It does sound good though. We are speaking of God and how he created etc., not of a human being and his limited will to reproduce or 'create.'

God made a human being, the last Adam, not a divine human male baby god that became a mature divine god-man then as a Trinitarian would say, eventually or already God himself. Of course this is nonsense talk, invented by Greek taught pagans, who some were politicians of primarily the 4th century AD.

Wait a minute, divinity is only of God, the source of purity, who has no beginning or end. How can a human being with a human birth from both God’s spirit and a human woman that thought she had a baby boy, have or be a divine being? Mary believed she had a normal human being who slowly realized God was really with him as he grew to manhood and beyond. I believe scripture is quite clear on who the Christ is.

Scripture strongly supports that the attribute of divinity cannot be given or transferred somehow to other creations of God as part of their birth or any time in their life. And the unscriptural thought that Christ pre-existed (viola - the incarnation invention and myth) and was created by God still would not make him divine. God also says that Christ was not even immortal until he ascended to heaven from this earth.

Scripture also strongly supports that divinity is or can be shared with God. Christ is the first example, the first fruit that possessed this attribute besides his immortality, although it was or is not himself or a part of his nature or indigenous being.

We as believers, today, partake of part of this divinity of God through Christ. We are to be as Christ- and not divine as Christ is not, or never was divine. The marriage of the bride and bridegroom, yet in the future is about being as one, working as one, and with one purpose and sharing in the same 'fullness' of divinity (God-ness) of the Father that only he possesses. He is the source of divinity and spiritually or the source of life energy power.

Bless you brother,


APAK
 
B

brakelite

Guest
@APAK I know we've had this back and forth before.
That Jesus is the only begotten Son of God is the cornerstone... The foundation of everything we believe. But he wasn't a son in the sense Adam was a son. Jesus was not created. Nor is Jesus a son as we are sons and daughters of God... Adopted. No. Jesus was begotten. And not coming into existence for the first time as a human baby... When Jesus proclaimed "a body hast thou prepared for me" he was talking in his pre-existing incarnation state as the son.
Acts 8:37
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
John 6:68,69
‭Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.‭ ‭And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.‭
John 1:49
‭Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.‭
John 1:34
‭And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.‭
Matthew 14:33
‭Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.‭
John 20:31
‭But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.‭
Acts 9:19
‭And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.‭
Acts 9:20
‭And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.‭

In Isaiah 9: a6 we are told that a child is born, and a Son is given. The same idea comes through in John 3:16, Galatians 4:4, 1 John 4:9,10; 1 John4:14. Jesus clearly confirmed this. John10:36.
I believe that if the Bible tells us that God gave his only begotten son, then he had a son to give.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
He existed in the beginning with God, John says, and everything we see was created through Him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy
B

brakelite

Guest
Let me remind everyone here that although I firmly believe in the divinity of Christ, such does not mean I accept the popularly prescribed Trinitarian formula as found in the creeds. The Bible is my creed. I do not believe the Bible teaches that all members of the Godhead are co equal, co eternal, members of the one God.
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
If my father, a man, begets a son, then he, the son, me, also is a man. Like father like son. If God begets a Son, then the Son must also be God. The Jews knew what the implications were when Jesus claimed God as his Father. They thought it blasphemy, which is why they wanted to some him. Jesus was claiming Sonship in the highest sense of the word.
That only holds true for beings that procreate. A human procreates with another human and begets a human. Father YHWH did NOT procreate with Miriam. His Holy Spirit power, IMHO, caused Miriam's egg to be fertilized by speaking into it the necessary DNA to create a human male child.

Also, "God" is not a "kind" (kind begets like kind). It is a title. The Father is a "Spirit" (John 4:24). If your view is correct, He should have begotten another Spirit, but that was not the case. Also, if your view is correct, and He begot a flesh and blood man, then the Father should also be a flesh and blood man, but that is not the case either. Also, if your view is correct and the Father begot a 100% human and 100% God, then the Father should also be such, but that is not the case either. Yeshua is not some sort of half man, half God mongrel either. Yeshua is strictly 100% man in whom the fullness of the only true God dwelt in via His indwelling Holy Spirit. That same Holy Spirit indwells all believers, but that does not make us God. It makes God living in us. That is exactly the case with Yeshua;

2 Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was IN Messiah, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
This verse does not say God WAS Messiah or that God BECAME Messiah. God was living IN Messiah via the indwelling Holy Spirit.
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
He existed in the beginning with God, John says, and everything we see was created through Him.
That is what our modern English Bibles say because the translators read Messiah into the text of John 1. The logos/word was not a being, but a thing (the Father's spoken words, thoughts, plans, etc.). Father YHWH spoke the Son into existence just like He spoke everything else into existence. Several translators prior to the KJV translated John 1:1-4 differently, including William Tyndale. Here is his translation;

John 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginnynge with God.
John 1:3 All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made.
John 1:4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men
Several other popular translations that preceded the KJV translate it the same way (Matthew's Bible, The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible, The Bishop's Bible, etc.). For hundreds of years English speaking people were taught that the logos/word was an "it". Why? Because those translators did not put their own bias into the text.
 
  • Like
Reactions: APAK

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
God did not give us just any son. He gave us HIS one and only begotten SON.
When did He "give" us His Son? When He created him in Miriam's womb. You seem to think the Son existed prior to his conception in the womb, but that is not the case. If so, when was he begotten? Please provide a verse or two showing when the Son was begotten and when the Son was given.
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That is what our modern English Bibles say because the translators read Messiah into the text of John 1. The logos/word was not a being, but a thing (the Father's spoken words, thoughts, plans, etc.). Father YHWH spoke the Son into existence just like He spoke everything else into existence. Several translators prior to the KJV translated John 1:1-4 differently, including William Tyndale. Here is his translation;

John 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginnynge with God.
John 1:3 All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made.
John 1:4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men
Several other popular translations that preceded the KJV translate it the same way (Matthew's Bible, The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible, The Bishop's Bible, etc.). For hundreds of years English speaking people were taught that the logos/word was an "it". Why? Because those translators did not put their own bias into the text.

In the beginning the word already existed, the word was with God and the word was God. He existed in the beginning with God. God created everything through him. He is the uncreated light. You are quite mistaken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heart2Soul

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
When did He "give" us His Son? When He created him in Miriam's womb. You seem to think the Son existed prior to his conception in the womb, but that is not the case. If so, when was he begotten? Please provide a verse or two showing when the Son was begotten and when the Son was given.

yes He existed prior to His earthly birth. This is how He could say, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born I Am.

Moses was told if the people asked who had sent him to them, he was to say, I Am has sent me.
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
yes He existed prior to His earthly birth. This is how He could say, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born I Am.

Moses was told if the people asked who had sent him to them, he was to say, I Am has sent me.
Here is a study I wrote on John 8:58. There is no doubt whatsoever that Yeshua was NOT claiming to be the great I AM of Exodus 3. That name ONLY applies to his Father YHWH. I highly suggest you do not speed read it to refute it, but seek to understand it and compare my view with the common Christian view to see which is more Scriptural.
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Here is a study I wrote on John 8:58. There is no doubt whatsoever that Yeshua was NOT claiming to be the great I AM of Exodus 3. That name ONLY applies to his Father YHWH. I highly suggest you do not speed read it to refute it, but seek to understand it and compare my view with the common Christian view to see which is more Scriptural.


Maybe later if I have time, thanks.

It's pretty amazing that the jews were angry that He was making Himself out to be God, an equal of God. I guess you believe they were mistaken in that and that their being mistaken about what He was trying to say is why they killed Him, just a horrible misunderstanding. and I guess you have all the mistranslations and arguments over words ready to go.

But I will look at it later.
 

APAK

Well-Known Member
Feb 4, 2018
8,855
9,590
113
Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
@APAK I know we've had this back and forth before.
That Jesus is the only begotten Son of God is the cornerstone... The foundation of everything we believe. But he wasn't a son in the sense Adam was a son. Jesus was not created. Nor is Jesus a son as we are sons and daughters of God... Adopted. No. Jesus was begotten. And not coming into existence for the first time as a human baby... When Jesus proclaimed "a body hast thou prepared for me" he was talking in his pre-existing incarnation state as the son.
Acts 8:37
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
John 6:68,69
‭Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.‭ ‭And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.‭
John 1:49
‭Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.‭
John 1:34
‭And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.‭
Matthew 14:33
‭Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.‭
John 20:31
‭But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.‭
Acts 9:19
‭And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.‭
Acts 9:20
‭And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.‭

In Isaiah 9: a6 we are told that a child is born, and a Son is given. The same idea comes through in John 3:16, Galatians 4:4, 1 John 4:9,10; 1 John4:14. Jesus clearly confirmed this. John10:36.
I believe that if the Bible tells us that God gave his only begotten son, then he had a son to give.

Yes I can see how one can look at John 3:16 as you spoke of as your last statement, 'only begotten son,' and think well God must have had a son already in the way it is written.. I really can, although I believe that in John 3:16 and along with other scripture that he had as part of his his plan for mankind's salvation, before creation a Son as our savior, the Son of God. 'Begotten' is the word for conceiving a child pr being born for the first time in the context of other scripture. He was in the bosom (his consciousness and center of his thoughts) of the Father and not alive before he was begotten or born some 2000 years ago as the only one of his kind. That is as you said is the only substantial sticking point between us.

The scripture in Hebrews speaking of a 'body being made or prepared' for Christ is not an indication that Christ pre-existed and now he would be born a human being. To the casual observer one can easily read this thought. It was all about be prepared, his body, for the sacrifice for men. In order to so qualify Christ as to make him a fit servant for the redemption of mankind, a body was absolutely necessary. Without this, there could have been no adequate sacrifice for sin, and without an adequate sacrifice, there could have no suitable atonement, and without an atonement, the claims of Divine mercy or justice could not have been satisfied, and without this, the will of God could never have been accomplished in the redemption of mankind.

I just hope if Jesus was or is divine and I do not, that he does not beget some of his own type of gods as himself. We could have many gods running around the Universe as the Greek philosophers thought (Apollo, Hercules etc), and they are dead wrong. This is how the Trinity concept was born through this Greek-Romanist thinking. No, I believe God almighty is the only divine one and he does not share this of himself else he would not be God Almighty by definition. He would not be the God of all spirits that stands alone, not even for or with his only created son.

Got a few pics I dug up and to share on the Photo thread of a visit I took, when I went back to the NZ some 10 years ago with my better -half.

Bless you again brakelite. I hope your family is doing great.


APAK
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Same subject. It is a parallel passage in which Matthew gives us a little more detail/context about Yeshua's words.
not even close, and obviously not even close, sorry.
One is talking about unwashed hands, and the other is not until you need it to be imo.

καθαρίζων
(katharizōn) 2511: to cleanse from katharos
all πάντα
(panta) 3956: all, every a prim. word
foods βρώματα
(brōmata)

but if you want to read "hands" in there somewhere fine with me, yes they had a hand cleanliness fetish too
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
not even close, and obviously not even close, sorry.
One is talking about unwashed hands, and the other is not until you need it to be imo.

καθαρίζων
(katharizōn) 2511: to cleanse from katharos
all πάντα
(panta) 3956: all, every a prim. word
foods βρώματα
(brōmata)

but if you want to read "hands" in there somewhere fine with me, yes they had a hand cleanliness fetish too
Surely you jest?

Mark 7:2 and having seen certain of his disciples with defiled hands--that is, unwashed--eating bread, they found fault;
Mark 7:3 for the Pharisees, and all the Jews, if they do not wash the hands to the wrist, do not eat, holding the tradition of the elders,

Matthew 15:2 `Wherefore do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they do not wash their hands when they may eat bread.'
Matthew 15:20 these are the things defiling the man; but to eat with unwashed hands doth not defile the man.'
Not to mention all the other parallels in these parallel passages.
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Surely you jest?

Mark 7:2 and having seen certain of his disciples with defiled hands--that is, unwashed--eating bread, they found fault;
Mark 7:3 for the Pharisees, and all the Jews, if they do not wash the hands to the wrist, do not eat, holding the tradition of the elders,
yes gadar, the passage begins with the same dirty hands ok, but the same bad belief that got them that also got them food restrictions, and v 18 and 19 make this plain; "whatever" is whatever, not what you want it to be
Mark 7:18 Lexicon: And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him,
Mark 7:19 Lexicon: because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)

and you are left to interpret "katharizon panta bromata" however you like, ok
seems pretty clear to me
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
yes gadar, the passage begins with the same dirty hands ok, but the same bad belief that got them that also got them food restrictions, and v 18 and 19 make this plain; "whatever" is whatever, not what you want it to be
Mark 7:18 Lexicon: And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him,
Mark 7:19 Lexicon: because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)

and you are left to interpret "katharizon panta bromata" however you like, ok
seems pretty clear to me
So what do you do with Matthew 15:20?

Mat 15:20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashed hands defileth not a man.
Did Matthew make a mistake in adding that to the same account?

If you are correct that Yeshua was declaring all foods clean at that time, then were the Jews free to eat all swine's flesh they wanted to from that moment on? How come Peter didn't know that and for the next 10+ years he continued refusing to eat anything common or unclean? How could Yeshua's apostle not know Yeshua cleansed all unclean meat?
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
So what do you do with Matthew 15:20?
consider it whenever i am talking about the ritual washing of hands i guess, after all we are still pretty consumed with this, antibiotic gels and the like, prolly actually a much bigger problem even, even if it is the same problem
you are left to interpret "katharizon panta bromata" however you like
the Q right now is what do you do with this, and if you think Peter was a knowledgeable guy to follow, then follow Peter if you like. Seems like he was the one who had the most trouble with the sheet coming down, etc? Same principle
 
Last edited: