If there is no Trinity, then

EPHRIAM777 · Feb 12, 2003

Job_38 says...

The Bible contradicts itself. Heres why:

1) Have no other Gods before me

2) There are no other Gods

3) Baptize in the name of the father, son, and the holy spirit

If the Trinity does not exist, then the Bible is contradicting itself.

Eph replies...

The "trinity" is a doctrine made by MEN...it was the best effort of mid evil men..to define God...thats all...!

You'll find NO mention of "trinity" in the scriptures....What you'll find is EXAMPLES that point to a "trinity"....but not the doctrine OF the Trinity...!

Jesus never commanded us on THIS doctrine OR about this doctrine....it is a theological idea built by MEN..not God...!

Try to remember that when defending it..Your not defending Jesus...God or anything HE ever spoke about...!

....Not to mention the fact it's very limited in it's thinking...made at a time when people still thought the world was flat...!

It is a FAITH we have...that God is or can be defined as 3 seperate but equal devine beings...!

To define GOD is impossible for man to do...WE don't have the mental capacity to define God...So the "trinity doctrine"...is our best swing at doing something impossible...and at our BEST..it is logical nonsence...!

:bow:

HE is..because HE is...!

( not because we say or define what HE is ...then force others to think as we do or else...)

Job_38 · Feb 16, 2003

I actually agree. Trinity is made up by men, but it "mid evil", whatever that is. The Bible aludes to a trinity, one that does exist but is far beyond my or anyone elses comprehension. (Isaiah 55:8-9)

unitedistand · Feb 21, 2003

20th January 2003 at 07:00 PM Job_38 said this in Post #1

The Bible contradicts itself. Heres why:

1) Have no other Gods before me

2) There are no other Gods

3) Baptize in the name of the father, son, and the holy spirit

 

 If the Trinity does not exist, then the Bible is contradicting itself.

 

The bible does not Contradict itself.  Here's why:

1) When you get into the origional versions of the bible, you'll understand the true meanings of words.

2) 1 john 5:7 says that there are three that bear record in heaven, and the three are one

3) John 1:1 says that the word was with God and the word WAS god

4) genesis 1:1.... the word "Elohiym" (which is Hebrew for "creator", translated into "God") is a plural word, but used in a singular fassion.

sparrows1029 · Feb 21, 2003

unitedistand is right, There is but one living and true God (Deut. 6:4; Is. 45:5-7, 1 Cor. 8:4), an infinite, all-knowing Spirit (John 4:24), perfect in all His attributes, one in essence, eternally existing in three Persons- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19, Cor 13:14)- each equally deserving worship and obedience.

undead1 · Feb 22, 2003

Yesterday at 07:56 AM sparrows1029 said this in Post #24 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=666867#post666867)

unitedistand is right, There is but one living and true God (Deut. 6:4; Is. 45:5-7, 1 Cor. 8:4), an infinite, all-knowing Spirit (John 4:24), perfect in all His attributes, one in essence, eternally existing in three Persons- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19, Cor 13:14)- each equally deserving worship and obedience.

I cannot accept this. "God" does not "exist" in the Father. Rather "God" is by definition the Father.

1Cr 8:6 But to us [there is but] one God, the Father,

"God" may, however, be said to "exist" in the son.

That is why The Father and the Son are not co-equal, and why the Father is greater than the Son.

unitedistand · Feb 22, 2003

that's right.... God the Father is greater then God the Son (Jesus), but check this out, it may make you think:

Jesus is the living embodiment of God's will*. with that being said, can God's will transgress God? Common sense! A person's will cannot go against a person because a person's will and a person are ONE(note John 10:30, John 14:9, etc....)

*-john 1:1, in greek.... Word is logos. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1045915388-5349.html

If you look in Greek, you'll understand what Spirit (or Ghost) is (ever wonder where the word for the condition Pneumonia comes from? the Prefix "pneuma" comes out to be "breath", and "spirit" comes out to be "pneuma" in greek), thus, where God's spirit is, there's life

so, there we have 1 john 5:7 broken down and thought about-

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

unitedistand · Feb 22, 2003

Concerning Genesis 1:

verse 26: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Verse 27: So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

now, if you want, we can go further by going into Hebrew:

the word for God in this instance is 'elohiym (hebrew for creator), which plural intensive, but has singular meaning.

thus, all of genesis 1 backs 1 john 5:7 up

unitedistand · Feb 22, 2003

well??? point made clear?

undead1 · Feb 22, 2003

Today at 11:58 AM unitedistand said this in Post #27 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=669017#post669017)

Concerning Genesis 1:

verse 26: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Verse 27: So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

now, if you want, we can go further by going into Hebrew:

the word for God in this instance is 'elohiym (hebrew for creator), which plural intensive, but has singular meaning.

thus, all of genesis 1 backs 1 john 5:7 up

I don't accept for one moment that this speaks of the Trinity or can be interpreted that way.

In any event, Jesus, as creator, acted alone:

"Col 1:16 For by him were all things created "

The word "him" is singular. It does correspond to "Let us make man", Even though the Hebrew is plural, it is probably only so because the word elohiym is plural, and so plural because of grammar rather than for any other reason.

OldShepherd · Feb 23, 2003

Today at 04:22 AM undead said this in Post #29 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=669439#post669439)

The word "him" is singular. It does correspond to "Let us make man", Even though the Hebrew is plural, it is probably only so because the word elohiym is plural, and so plural because of grammar rather than for any other reason.

Since you are presuming to teach us what the Hebrew says and means in the O.T. verses quoted, perhaps you can translate this passage of Hebrew for us. If not, may I suggest you learn Hebrew before you start trying to teach it to others.

ככלב עב-קאו כעיל שונה באו לתו

unitedistand · Feb 23, 2003

lol, yea, care to teach?

I suggest you ask the holy spirit and not base what you say on your own understanding before you go into debate about just who God is.

Job_38 · Feb 23, 2003

  I posted this for those who deny the Trinity to see that if this Trinity thing is false then the Bible is contradicting itself.

 I am saddened to see more of the unloving debates though. Debate, but always have the love.

 

MizDoulos · Feb 23, 2003

Just a reminder to all:

Let's remember to be kind to each other.

[noflame][/noflame]

undead1 · Feb 25, 2003

23rd February 2003 at 08:53 AM OldShepherd said this in Post #30 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=670938#post670938)

Since you are presuming to teach us what the Hebrew says and means in the O.T. verses quoted, perhaps you can translate this passage of Hebrew for us. If not, may I suggest you learn Hebrew before you start trying to teach it to others.

"It is not a formal proof of the trinity, no do believers in the inspiration of Holy Scripture so us it" - Elliott CJ Old Testament Commentary For English Readers.

The word "us" does not appear in Hebrew.

You have still not reconciled your position with Colossians "By him (sing.) were all things made". If Genesis truly infers more than one divine creator, then Paul was a liar.

However, since the law was put into effect through angels, it is possible that angels also helped in man's creation (say some Jewish commentators).

OldShepherd · Feb 25, 2003

Today at 04:43 PM undead said this in Post #34 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=674520#post674520)

"It is not a formal proof of the trinity, no do believers in the inspiration of Holy Scripture so us it" - Elliott CJ Old Testament Commentary For English Readers.

To what exactly is this referring?

The word "us" does not appear in Hebrew.

As I said if you are going to try to teach us Hebrew then learn it yourself first. While there may not be a specific word for "us" in Hebrew there is definitely a way of expressing that. Do you know what it is? I thought not!

You have still not reconciled your position with Colossians "By him (sing.) were all things made". If Genesis truly infers more than one divine creator, then Paul was a liar.

Proving that you do not understand the Christian concept of trinity. I have not posted anything that contradicts any verse in the Bible. NONE!

However, since the law was put into effect through angels, it is possible that angels also helped in man's creation (say some Jewish commentators).

And just which Jewish commentators would that be? Or are we supposed to guess? And the law was NOT put into effect through angels. Read the passage again.

undead1 · Feb 25, 2003

Well, if you are so knowledgeable about Hebrew, you are certainly not revealing it by your sarci remarks.

And you still haven't addressed the point of the natural correlation between the plural Eloyhim and the plural of "make". Despite apparently being a self-professed Hebrew scholar, you have taught me nothing.

Gal 3:19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Further, it is well known that God sat in counsel with his court of angels - see 1Ki 22:19

And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.

What sort of respose is "Proving that you do not understand the Christian concept of trinity" to the point that Paul says that one member of the trinity only, that is Jesus Christ, created the world? Seems to me your argument is based on a misapprehension that whenever Paul refers to Jesus, it also includes the Father, and vica versa. You are plain wrong.

CJ Elliots's Old Testament Commentary for English Readers was one of the most authorative commentaries to come out of the 19th century. If it says there is no correlation between the Thomas Aquinas trinity (which is certainly not the Pauline conception of the trinity), and Gen 1, it means you are faced with an uphill battle to prove the contrary.

You are losing the argument on a balance of probabilities. What further evidence will you introduce?

OldShepherd · Feb 25, 2003

Today at 07:43 AM undead said this in Post #36 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=675594#post675594)

Well, if you are so knowledgeable about Hebrew, you are certainly not revealing it by your sarci remarks.

Because you have not given any indication you are here to learn. From your posts, you are here to try to prove Christian teachings on the Trinity false but you have not done so.

And you still haven't addressed the point of the natural correlation between the plural Eloyhim and the plural of "make". Despite apparently being a self-professed Hebrew scholar, you have taught me nothing.

I have taught you nothing because you are not here to learn. What correlation exactly are you referring to. So the word "Elohim" is plural and the word "makes" is plural what exactly is your point? Think, show this in other non-theological constructions.

Gal 3:19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament., Gal 3:19
{What then is the law?} (\ti oun ho nomos?\). Or, why then the law? A pertinent question if the Abrahamic promise antedates it and holds on afterwards. {It was added because of transgressions} (\tôn parabaseôn charin prosetethê\). First aorist passive of \prostithêmi\, old verb to add to. It is only in apparent contradiction to verses #15, because in Pauls mind the law is no part of the covenant, but a thing apart "in no way modifying its provisions" (Burton). \Charin\ is the adverbial accusative of \charis\ which was used as a preposition with the genitive as early as Homer, in favour of, for the sake of. Except in #1Jo 3:12 it is post-positive in the N.T. as in ancient Greek. It may be causal (#Lu 7:47; 1Jo 3:12) or telic (#*** 1:5,11; Jude 1:16). It is probably also telic here, not in order to create transgressions, but rather "to make transgressions palpable" (Ellicott), "thereby pronouncing them to be from that time forward transgressions of the law" (Rendall). \Parabasis\, from \parabainô\, is in this sense a late word (Plutarch on), originally a slight deviation, then a wilful disregarding of known regulations or prohibitions as in #Ro 2:23. {Till the seed should come} (\achris an elthêi to sperma\). Future time with \achris an\ and aorist subjunctive (usual construction). Christ he means by \to sperma\ as in verse #16. {The promise hath been made} (\epêggeltai\). Probably impersonal perfect passive rather than middle of \epaggellomai\ as in II Macc. 4:27. {Ordained through angels} (\diatageis di aggelôn\). Second aorist passive participle of \diatassô\ (see on #Mt 11:1).

About angels and the giving of the law see on #De 33:2 (LXX); #Ac 7:38,52; Heb 2:2; Josephus (_Ant_. XV. 5. 3). {By the hand of a mediator} (\en cheiri mesitou\). \En cheiri\ is a manifest Aramaism or Hebraism and only here in the N.T. It is common in the LXX. \Mesitês\, from \mesos\ is middle or midst, is a late word (Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, Josephus) and common in the papyri in legal transactions for arbiter, surety, etc. Here of Moses, but also of Christ (#1Ti 2:5; Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24).

De 33:2 And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his (יהוה) right hand went a fiery law for them.

any questions?

Further, it is well known that God sat in counsel with his court of angels - see 1Ki 22:19

And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.

It is well known nothing! The host of heaven were STANDING BY God, NOT giving Him counsel!

What sort of respose is "Proving that you do not understand the Christian concept of trinity" to the point that Paul says that one member of the trinity only, that is Jesus Christ, created the world? Seems to me your argument is based on a misapprehension that whenever Paul refers to Jesus, it also includes the Father, and vica versa. You are plain wrong.

"You are just plain wrong!" Prove I am wrong! Again demonstrating that you do NOT understand the Christian concept of Trinity. God is a Him NOT a them!

CJ Elliots's Old Testament Commentary for English Readers was one of the most authorative commentaries to come out of the 19th century. If it says there is no correlation between the Thomas Aquinas trinity (which is certainly not the Pauline conception of the trinity), and Gen 1, it means you are faced with an uphill battle to prove the contrary.

No you have the uphill battle. I have NOT quoted or referred to Thomas Aquinas. His writings are irrelevant!

You are losing the argument on a balance of probabilities. What further evidence will you introduce?

What law of probabilities. You have presented NO evidence. Nothing but a few borrowed arguments that you evidently do not even understand..

Future Man · Mar 1, 2003

Undead-

OS writes:

"You are just plain wrong!" Prove I am wrong! Again demonstrating that you do NOT understand the Christian concept of Trinity. God is a Him NOT a them!

Thanks OS for clarifying this. I've always noticed that the plural references [Gen1:26 'us' etc,.] are spoken from the first person view of God, whereas the singular references [Gen1:27] are spoken from the perspective of the author. Anyone can note in the book of Revelation for example that the Father and Son are never spoken of as a "them" or "they", but always as "God and the Lamb" or a "Him."

As for angelic creation:

Isa 44:24 So says Jehovah, your Redeemer, and He who formed you from the womb, I am Jehovah who makes all things; who stretches out the heavens alone; who spreads out the earth; who was with Me?

God alone created the earth and all that is in it.

Job 38:4-7 Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell if you have understanding! Who has set its measurements, for you know? Or who has stretched the line on it? On what are its bases sunk, or who cast its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

The angels are portrayed as mere joyful onlookers rather than participants in God's creation.

Also:

Talmud - "He created in the beginning one man only, so that heretics should not say that there are several Powers in heaven (Sanh, 38a); "All agree that nothing was created on the first day, so that people should not say that the archangel Michael stretched the south end of the firmament and Gabriel the north end; for 'I am the Lord that stretched forth the heavens alone'" (Gen R 1:3).

-God bless-

True Believer · Mar 14, 2003

2nd February 2003 at 03:11 PM Job_38 said this in Post #14

Um...huh? That was because He was 100% Man and 100% God. Go and try to understand and explain it anymore and you will go insane.

Jesus was a perfect man according to Jewish law which passes all things through the fathers linage that is why linage was so important to the Jews Jesus father was GOD so no sin was past down to him by his father and he did not sin while on earth so he brought himself the his sacrificial death as a perfect human to be a ransom in exchange for all mankind to atone for adams putting man in a sinful state with God that makes it possible by Jewish law to conter adams sin that is on us

lared · Mar 14, 2003

Only God Almighty, Jehovah, is from everlasting to everlasting. Jesus had a beginning. And even if one thought that Jesus had no beginning, then one would still have to minus parts of three days.......thus everlasting to everlasting minus parts of three days.

Jesus is the son of God.....the word son indicates a beginning.

Also, who did Jesus pray to? Himself, the trinity, or to his heavenly Father.

True Christians will follow in Jesus footsteps and do what he did. So again,....who did Jesus pray to?

Sincerely, Lared

If there is no Trinity, then

A REAL NICE GUY..!

<font size="1"> In perfect orbit they have circled

Crying for the Bridegroom

Member

Active Member

Crying for the Bridegroom

Crying for the Bridegroom

Crying for the Bridegroom

Active Member

Zaqunraah

Crying for the Bridegroom

<font size="1"> In perfect orbit they have circled

<font color=6c2dc7><b>Justified by grace through f

Active Member

Zaqunraah

Active Member

Zaqunraah

Priest of God and the Lamb

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads