Prove the Trinity wrong challenge.

[jaybird]

Scripture interprets scripture (1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv)).

now we use scripture to change / add to acripture, i dont think so. 1 Cor IMO is about understanding scripture guided by the spirit rather than being guided by men.

Sorry, it means God, capital "G". If you are going to put a small "g" on it, then the plurality of the affix, "im" applies, and it would refer to gods, or, all the holy host of heaven; as Jesus is the LORD of hosts.

Not sure on that one. If the pharisees when they asked “you make yourself god” meant Jesus was claiming to by the Most High, it makes little sense.
Pharisees – you claim to be the Most High
Jesus – your own law says - I said you are Most High

and now psalm 82 is the Most High in a divine council with the Most High?
How do you make any sense of this?

 

[justbyfaith]

now we use scripture to change / add to acripture, i dont think so. 1 Cor IMO is about understanding scripture guided by the spirit rather than being guided by men.



Not sure on that one. If the pharisees when they asked “you make yourself god” meant Jesus was claiming to by the Most High, it makes little sense.
Pharisees – you claim to be the Most High
Jesus – your own law says - I said you are Most High

and now psalm 82 is the Most High in a divine council with the Most High?
How do you make any sense of this?

That Jesus was claiming to be the Most High, and that the Pharisees understood that, is evident in that they picked up stones to stone Him for blasphemy, not once, but twice; and the third time (Mark 14:61-64) they crucified Him for it.

 

[jaybird]

That Jesus was claiming to be the Most High, and that the Pharisees understood that, is evident in that they picked up stones to stone Him for blasphemy, not once, but twice; and the third time (Mark 14:61-64) they crucified Him for it.

not really in light of what i said in my last few responses, the ones you ignored. if i was standing where you are i guess silence would be as good a response as any.
blasphemy is profaning the name of the Most High. which could be many things, not limited to claiming to be the Most High and nothing more. remember Jesus teaching about blasphemy against the spirit, was He teaching not to claim to be the spirit, no. so hanging your hat on the idea that they thought he was committing blasphemy doesnt really help you.

 

[jaybird]

Deuteronomy 6
4“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

 

[ScottA]

KJV 1 Corinthians 8
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

This is what is true. But your bold, underline, and italics makes it appear that you believe that only the Father is God. Better if enhanced as follows:

KJV 1 Corinthians 8
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

...Thus, three in One.

 

[brakelite]

This is what is true. But your bold, underline, and italics makes it appear that you believe that only the Father is God. Better if enhanced as follows:

KJV 1 Corinthians 8
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

...Hence, three in One.

I only count two, but I know what you mean. You bold portions may work if there were other scriptures to support it. I don't know of any. But I do know of several that exclusively support the concept of the Father only being
the one true God, such as in Jesus prayer in John 17:3. And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you did send. There is no way this could be construed as Jesus claimng'to be a part of that one true God. Even after the resurrection, Jesus said to Mary, I go to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.
Please do not charge me however with claiming Jesus is any the less divine. Or any less deity. He is the Son of God. The Jews were absolutely correct in saying that in this claim of Jesus being God's Son, he was therefore claiming to be equal to God.

 

[ScottA]

I only count two, but I know what you mean. You bold portions may work if there were other scriptures to support it. I don't know of any. But I do know of several that exclusively support the concept of the Father only being
the one true God, such as in Jesus prayer in John 17:3. And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you did send. There is no way this could be construed as Jesus claimng'to be a part of that one true God. Even after the resurrection, Jesus said to Mary, I go to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.
Please do not charge me however with claiming Jesus is any the less divine. Or any less deity. He is the Son of God. The Jews were absolutely correct in saying that in this claim of Jesus being God's Son, he was therefore claiming to be equal to God.

I only jumped in because you have come so very close.

One indeed means One. The rest ("of", "in", and "by" in 1 Corinthians 8) speaks less of who, and more how (of actions, rather than persons). A tree is known by its fruit, and so it is also with God.

 

[bbyrd009]

I will ___be saved by grace___ instead of ___attempting to be saved by works___.

This is evidenced by the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that salvation is by works and that this is somehow connected to their belief that Jesus is "the Son of God" (with the definition of that given by Arius) rather than the Son of God (with the definition of that given through Isaiah 9:6). And that those of us who believe that Jesus is God know that we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4:1-8, Romans 11:5-6, Titus 3:4-7).

imo you did not give a genuine answer here sorry

And you think there is something wrong with that? Jesus Himself said, "The kingdom of God is like..." and then filled in the blank on more than one occasion in His ministry.

hey, and you will do even greater things, right? 'Member what happens after you answer this though?

that other Q you been running from, ok?

 

[bbyrd009]

You apparently are not coming from a biblical perspective.

ya i know, this is bc we have been raised on the Hegelian dialectic and you can't effectively read the Bible that way i guess. Well, it has an effect alright lol. kinda hard to explain, it's like a human nature thing. All sin is forgiven though. The sins of the whole world. If it doesn't seem like it would work, that is bc we forget what it is like to be forgiven when we are guilty

"many" not "all"!

no offense but you are the one singing "when we all get to heaven" here right, why are you taking my side of this discussion alla sudden?

 

[justbyfaith]

And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you did send. There is no way this could be construed as Jesus claimng'to be a part of that one true God.

The word for "and" in that verse is "kai" in the Greek which can be translated "even". Likewise in 1 Corinthians 8:6.

So there is only one true God, even Jesus Christ whom He hath sent.

And there is one God, the Father, even one Lord Jesus Christ. As evidenced by Ephesians 4:5; Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21; 1 Corinthians 12:3, and 1 Corinthians 8:6.

 

[brakelite]

The word for "and" in that verse is "kai" in the Greek which can be translated "even". Likewise in 1 Corinthians 8:6.

So there is only one true God, even Jesus Christ whom He hath sent.

And there is one God, the Father, even one Lord Jesus Christ. As evidenced by Ephesians 4:5; Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21; 1 Corinthians 12:3, and 1 Corinthians 8:6.

According to you the Father did not send His only begotten Son... He became a Son.
That kind of convoluted reasoning, to them have to explain that the Father is still in heaven and on earth and that he talks to himself in prayer... Is more difficult to grasp than the original orthodox Trinity. You are no different from the Trinitarian who goes beyond what is revealed and attempts to explain God.
What is the harm... What is so unbiblical... In simply accepting

• that the Father begat a Son
• Created all things through Him
• Sent Him into the world to die for mankind
• Raised Him from the dead because of His faithfulness and obedience
• Set Him at His own right hand until all His enemies are dealt with.
• Sent His own Spirit through His Son to bless, empower, vitalise, teach, and convict of truth in and among those who believe.
• Reveals to man through His Son that as we honour the Son, we honour the Father. That in all things the Father and Son are equal, except in rank.

Why go beyond this? Why attempt to explain the relationship between Father and Son? Why attempt to explain their union? Why delve into the nature of the Godhead, ground which is sacred and holy, simply to formulate something we know nothing about?