Jesus and the Trinity

[Balthasar]

Hi daneel,

I'm quite sure you are aware of how trinitarians define the Triune God. We don't believe in 3 Gods, and are quite open about it.




<><

I'm quite aware how trinitarians define their "Triune God". But are you intellectually honest about the definition? How can you say "One God three persons" and still honestly say you don't believe in 3 Gods? You keep not wanting to confront this question.

You claim the "person" of the Father is God, the "person" of the Son is God , and the "person" of the Holy Spirit is God . Using grade one math, that adds up to three Gods, yet you still say One God. If I told you the person of John, the person of James and the person of Jack were not 3 but 1 , would you not immediately call me a liar?

Stop kidding yourself.

best wishes,

 

[Balthasar]

Hi daneel,

Interesting that Jesus is to worshipped, and only God is to be worshipped.

<><

let the parsing begin....

The word used for "worship" of Christ is proskuneo . If proskuneo makes Christ God, then the Saints are God also, since they too are given proskuneo in Rev. 3:8. Or the human Lord in Matt. 18:26 is also God, since he too is given proskuneo.




Lol.

 

[gort]

Hi daneel,



But are you intellectually honest about the definition? How can you say "One God three persons" and still honestly say you don't believe in 3 Gods? You keep not wanting to confront this question.

You claim the "person" of the Father is God, the "person" of the Son is God , and the "person" of the Holy Spirit is God . Using grade one math, that adds up to three Gods, yet you still say One God. If I told you the person of John, the person of James and the person of Jack were not 3 but 1 , would you not immediately call me a liar?

Stop kidding yourself.

best wishes,

I'm quite aware how trinitarians define their "Triune God".

Then portray it as such.

"One God three persons" and still honestly say you don't believe in 3 Gods?

Honestly portrayed as One God in 3 persons.

You keep not wanting to confront this question.

Confronted, explained, expounded upon many times.

Using grade one math, that adds up to three Gods, yet you still say One God. If I told you the person of John, the person of James and the person of Jack were not 3 but 1 , would you not immediately call me a liar?

The non-trinitarian always tries to portray God as a singular person, much like the roman gods, such as Zeus, etc.

Yet the word of God tells us differently.

Your example above tries to allegorize 3 human beings into 1 person, which cannot be compared to a Holy God, who is above all human understanding in regards to comprehension.

Yet, the being of God is clearly shown in Scripture as a Triune God.


As you have often stated, God is not a man who.....


There is also a difference in saying something in ignorance, just as there is in saying something in stupidity, just as there is in saying something as a lie.


<><

 

[gort]

Hi daneel,



The word used for "worship" of Christ is proskuneo . If proskuneo makes Christ God, then the Saints are God also, since they too are given proskuneo in Rev. 3:8. Or the human Lord in Matt. 18:26 is also God, since he too is given proskuneo.




Lol.

Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

Perhaps a mistake? I don't see 'worship' here.


But so far, no points for the parsing job.

<><

 

[Balthasar]

Hi daneel,

Then portray it as such.

I'm portraying it as such. "One God three persons".

Confronted, explained, expounded upon many times.

You have neither confronted, explained nor expounded how "one God is three persons".

The non-trinitarian always tries to portray God as a singular person, much like the roman gods, such as Zeus, etc.

Thank you. God is not a singular person. He's 3 persons.

Your example above tries to allegorize 3 human beings into 1 person, which cannot be compared to a Holy God, who is above all human understanding in regards to comprehension.

And that's the polite way of saying the trinity doctrine makes no sense at all. This is the closest you've ever come to "confronting, expounding and explaining" this trinity business.

Lol.


best wishes nonetheless,

 

[Balthasar]

Perhaps a mistake? I don't see 'worship' here.



<><

Yes, it should be Rev. 3:9 not 3:8.

But so far, no points for the parsing job.

You're in denial.

 

[gort]

Thank you. God is not a singular person. He's 3 persons.

At last, you're beginning to see the Truth.



<><

 

[Harlin]

Hi Harlin,



Sometimes you frankly admit to believing in two Gods, at other times you don't.

I don't know why you refuse to grasp what I am saying to you, it is not illogical or unreasonable. It seems deliberate on your part. I have been as honest as I can be and I have explained my beliefs quite clearly. One True God, the Father, and His Son, God, by virtue of his birth, or coming forth. It is very simple, not difficult like you make it out to be.

Where is your scripture to prove me wrong? What is your rebuttal for Jesus having life in himself, and being the resurrection and the life, you just don't respond, if you think Jesus is just a man, what is your understanding of these passages?.



The Bible doesn't allow for the possibility of God reproducing himself. This is a figment of your immagination.

Scripture please, you just saying it doesn't make for a good argument.

John 16:27-28 "For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God. 28. I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world and go to the Father"

"I came forth from the Father (first action), and am come into the world (second action)", Jesus clearly states two different actions here, otherwise He is repeating Himself twice in the same sentence. In fact Jesus makes similar statements throughout the 16th chapter of John.



Can I ask you a question? What denomination, if any, do you belong to?



best wishes,

I don't actually have a denomination to attend where I am. I would call myself an Historic Seventh Day Adventist, who doesn't believe in the trinity. The church pioneers didn't believe in a trinity either, the church added the trinity to their statement of beliefs officially in 1980, but it started to creep in as early as 1930. I don't believe in creeds or manuals, but the above would be the closest to my own beliefs.

God Bless

Harlin

 

[Balthasar]

Hi daneel,

At last, you're beginning to see the Truth.



<><

Now, the next step is for you to logically explain to a fair-minded person how three persons are yet one God? It's like saying three persons as in John, James and Jack are yet one person. Makes no sense at all.



Perhaps you should follow Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria in the fourth century, who said these words, "The Father incomprehensible, The Son incomprehensible and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible...Not three incomprehensibles ... but... one incomprehensible." As theologian Alister McGrath points out, many are sorely tempted to add, "The whole thing incomprehensible!"

I find the batman fairy-tale to be more believable than this trinity business.

 

[gort]

Hi daneel,





Now, the next step is for you to logically explain to a fair-minded person how three persons are yet one God? It's like saying three persons as in John, James and Jack are yet one person. Makes no sense at all.



Perhaps you should follow Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria in the fourth century, who said these words, "The Father incomprehensible, The Son incomprehensible and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible...Not three incomprehensibles ... but... one incomprehensible." As theologian Alister McGrath points out, many are sorely tempted to add, "The whole thing incomprehensible!"

I find the batman fairy-tale to be more believable than this trinity business.

It makes no sense to you because you can't seem to get past the analogy of likening God to the personage of John, James and Jack as one person, thinking that God is like a man, when, as you have stated so often, God is not a man, yet continue to describe the divine union in an analogy relating to man...

And all the while ignoring Scripture for what it plainly states are the attributes of God, found in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.



<><

 

[Balthasar]

Hi daneel,

It makes no sense to you because you can't seem to get past the analogy of likening God to the personage of John, James and Jack as one person, thinking that God is like a man, when, as you have stated so often, God is not a man, yet continue to describe the divine union in an analogy relating to man...

That's not an answer to my question. My question was, how can you logically say God is 1 God 3 persons ?

The person of the Father is God,
The person of the Son is God,
Ther person of the Holy Spirit is God.

That adds up to 3 Gods. But you're tell me it totals only 1 God. I'm sorry your math doesn't add up. Ask any grade 1 student.

And all the while ignoring Scripture for what it plainly states are the attributes of God, found in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The scripture no where says God is one God 3 persons. You're kidding yourself.

I would recommend you ask God about it.

Why do I have to ask God? He gave us the Scripture, and there's nothing in scripture that supports this trinity business.


best wishes,

 

[Deraj]

Why do I have to ask God? He gave us the Scripture, and there's nothing in scripture that supports this trinity business.


best wishes,

As you know, I do not believe in the trinity, but in answer to the question, "Why do I have to ask God?",
James 1:
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

I agree there is nothing in scripture which supports the trinity, but there is nothing in the Bible that proves the trinity doctrine to be false conclusively. There is common sense and there is prayer for when you need it.

 

[Balthasar]

Hi Deraj,

As you know, I do not believe in the trinity, but in answer to the question, "Why do I have to ask God?",
James 1:
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

I agree there is nothing in scripture which supports the trinity, but there is nothing in the Bible that proves the trinity doctrine to be false conclusively. There is common sense and there is prayer for when you need it.

Are you suggesting I ask God about the trinity doctrine even though you agree "there is nothing in scripture which supports the trinity"?

best wishes,

P.S. Have you asked God about this trinity business?

 

[2ducklow]

Hi 2ducklow,

I am good thanks, I am in no way disputing that God can speak through an angel, my point here is that Paul calls the being in the bush an angel and Moses and Mark say it is God talking to Moses from out of the bush. Who is it, an angel or God?. I believe it to be God and more specifically the Son of God.

Howdy Parnter;
Hitler invaded Poland.
Germany invaded Poland.
German troops invaded poland.
all three of these say the same thing in different ways.. Hitler invaded Germany in the sense that he directed it, the troops actually invaded poland, and germany invaded poland in the sense that its troops invaded poland.
an angel did it because god directed him to do it or say it, which is the same as god doing it or saying it.
God said it.
an angel said it.
same thing.

I understand what you are saying about being pre-existant, your right it doesn't make sense, so I will say pre-earth. Yes the conception of Mary was the beginning of Jesus, the Son of Man, but it was not the beginning of the Son of God. No it wasn't reincarnation, the Son of God did not die and then become Jesus, it was incarnation, the Son of God became the Son of Man. Hebrews is saying that Christ is not created like the angels, there is nothing that says that He cannot be Michael the Archangel, or Captain of the Lords Host, or Michael your prince for that matter (Daniel).

Well it smacks of reincarnation to me.
Hebrews says nothing about how christ was created it says
Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

'unto which of the angels said he at any time' is a long way from 'this is how christ was created.'
the meaning is clear at least to me, which is. God never said to any angel at any time 'thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. So since Michael is an angel God never said to Michael, 'thou art my son' at any time past present or future.

I

There is mention of the Son of God in the OT.

"Who hath ascended up into heaven or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists?, who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell? Proverbs 30:4. I believe the evidence is there if one looks hard enough.

God Bless

Harlin

it is a messianic prophecy, if it refers to Jesus , and does not prove a pre earth or pre-existant Christ. What you are saying in effect is there are 2 Jesuses. one who is the son of man and was born to mary, and the other who is the son of god and has always existed, (presumeably in some spirit form). I believe Jesus is one being who has 2 parents a Father and a Mother, like all humans. because Mary is human it makes Jesus the son of man. Because God is the Father of Jesus in that he created male seed to cause Mary to conceive, Jesus is the son of god. Jesus doesn't have a human Father, but he is 100 percent human becasue god created human male seed for Mary. there is no such thing as spiritual seed that God uses to procreate with humans or godesses. god doesn't have genitalia. God is a spirit not a man. And spirits don't procreate other spirits.
that's how I see it.

 

[2ducklow]

As you know, I do not believe in the trinity, but in answer to the question, "Why do I have to ask God?",
James 1:
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

I agree there is nothing in scripture which supports the trinity, but there is nothing in the Bible that proves the trinity doctrine to be false conclusively. There is common sense and there is prayer for when you need it.

actually I believe there is something in the bible that specifically condemns trinity. actually two scritpures.
Ne 8:8So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
a correct interpretation of scirpture will cause people to understand the sense of the scirput4re. no one can understand the sense of trinity because it is a contradiction. 3 cannot be one.
the next one is a specific reference to the trinity, in fact the only reference in the entire bible, as far as I know , to the trinity.

Lu 13:20
And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God?
Lu 13:21
It is like unto leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till it was all leavened.

 

[Deraj]

Hi Deraj,





Are you suggesting I ask God about the trinity doctrine even though you agree "there is nothing in scripture which supports the trinity"?

best wishes,

P.S. Have you asked God about this trinity business?

Nah, just making sure you agreed with the importance of prayer for finding out things you don't know

 

[Balthasar]

Hi Deraj,

Nah, just making sure you agreed with the importance of prayer for finding out things you don't know

Agreed. For years I believed in this trinity business. It took much prayer and fasting for my eyes to finally be opened. If we truly seek Him, He will lead us into all truth. The Jews have always known God to be an absolute One. My only regret is that it took me so long to realize this simple truth! Alas.

"Come out of her , my people." (Rev. 18:4)

best wishes,

 

[Balthasar]

Hi 2 ducklaw,

actually I believe there is something in the bible that specifically condemns trinity. actually two scritpures.
Ne 8:8So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
a correct interpretation of scirpture will cause people to understand the sense of the scirput4re. no one can understand the sense of trinity because it is a contradiction. 3 cannot be one.
the next one is a specific reference to the trinity, in fact the only reference in the entire bible, as far as I know , to the trinity.

Lu 13:20
And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God?
Lu 13:21
It is like unto leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till it was all leavened.

Very interesting! There is another place in scripture where Jesus preemptively rejects this trinity business. It is in John 8: 16-18

"And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I am with the Father who sent me. It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me." God the Father testifies who the Son is, and from where he was sent.

Please note that the Law of Moses specifically states that the testimony of two or three witnesses is valid. But from John 8:16-18 above Jesus deliberately stays away from the testimony of three(trinity) witnesses and bases his testimony on only two, rejecting the trinity.

Deuteronomy 19:15.

Moses laid down the law that the testimony of two or three witnesses is required to establish a matter: "One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established."

Now John 8:17 presented Jesus the perfect opportunity to lay down the idea of the triune God. Jesus not only doesn't do it, he rejects it by stating that there are only two witnesses, his Father and himself, not three. I cannot imagine Jesus not relying on the testimony of the third person or "God the Holy Spirit" if indeed this trinity business were true.

best wishes,

 

[Odsolo]

Hi 2 ducklaw,
Very interesting! There is another place in scripture where Jesus preemptively rejects this trinity business. It is in John 8: 16-18

Please note that the Law of Moses specifically states that the testimony of two or three witnesses is valid. But from John 8:16-18 above Jesus deliberately stays away from the testimony of three(trinity) witnesses and bases his testimony on only two, rejecting the trinity.

“deliberately stays away” “rejecting the trinity.?” This is a joke right? No reasonable, rational person would ever make a statement like this. It is a logical fallacy, argument from ignorance or argument from silence.

I guess Matthew “rejects” the existence of the other 9 disciples because he only mentions three on the mount of transfiguration, Matt 17:1, ff?

And I guess John “rejects” that two, or more women, were at the tomb, he only names Mary Magdalane, John 20:1?

Matthew must have “rejected” that three, or more, women were at the tomb, he only names Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, Matt 28:1?

Mark also “rejects” that more than three women were at the tomb, he only mentioned three names, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, Mark 16:1.

Luke alone got it right, he named Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and other women, Luke 24:10.

Now John 8:17 presented Jesus the perfect opportunity to lay down the idea of the triune God. Jesus not only doesn't do it, he rejects it by stating that there are only two witnesses, his Father and himself, not three. I cannot imagine Jesus not relying on the testimony of the third person or "God the Holy Spirit" if indeed this trinity business were true.

What you think, suppose, assume, deduce, presume, infer, cannot imagine, etc. is abso-diddly irrelevant. The fact that in one, or more, verses the Holy Spirit is not mentioned proves nothing. The scripture states the minimum requirement is two witnesses.

Did Jesus reject the trinity? Jesus said that the Holy Spirit had a self distinct from Jesus, himself, and the father, John 16:35.

Jesus states that the Holy Spirit is a comforter like himself, John 14:16.

Scripture states that the Holy Spirit has a mind distinct from the father, Rom 8:27

 

[2ducklow]

Hi 2 ducklaw,



Very interesting! There is another place in scripture where Jesus preemptively rejects this trinity business. It is in John 8: 16-18



Please note that the Law of Moses specifically states that the testimony of two or three witnesses is valid. But from John 8:16-18 above Jesus deliberately stays away from the testimony of three(trinity) witnesses and bases his testimony on only two, rejecting the trinity.

Deuteronomy 19:15.




Now John 8:17 presented Jesus the perfect opportunity to lay down the idea of the triune God. Jesus not only doesn't do it, he rejects it by stating that

there are only two witnesses, his Father and himself, not three. I cannot imagine Jesus not relying on the testimony of the third person or "God the Holy Spirit" if indeed this trinity business were true.

best wishes,

hey Balt;
I can see that. Makes sense about 3 witnesses. Incidently I have seen that scripture john 8:16-18 used to prove that god is a man. The witness of two men, god and Jesus.
Joh 8:17It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.

See god is a man and a spirit at the same time, kinda like doublemint gum. 2 gums in one. So God is a man and a spirit, and the other witness, Jesus is also a God and a man. Don't make sense? so what else is new? sorry I slipped into a little sarcasm here.
as to the verse in Luke I quoted, there are two ways of looking at it.

LU 13:21It is like leaven…
Which is small in quantity, but is of a swelling, spreading quality; and fitly expresses the small beginnings of the Gospel ministry, and its increase, also the state and case of Gospel churches, and the nature of the grace of God; unless false doctrine should rather be meant, which privately, secretly, and by little and little, got into the churches of Christ, the kingdom of God, and spread itself all over them, as in the times of the papacy:

which a woman took;
Christ, and his ministers, Wisdom, and her maidens, understanding it of the Gospel; but if the leaven of error is intended, that woman, Jezebel, is meant, who calls herself a prophetess, and teaches, and seduces the servants of God, (Revelation 2:20) and hid in three measures of meal:
among a few of God's people at first, both among Jews and Gentiles, till the whole was leavened;
until all the elect of God are gathered in, and evangelized by it; even the whole fulness of the Gentiles, and all the people of the Jews, which shall be saved in the latter day; but if the parable is to be understood of the false doctrine and discipline of the Antichristian and apostate church of Rome, it may denote the small beginnings of the mystery of iniquity, which began to work in the apostle's time by the errors and heresies then propagated, and the manner in which the man of sin was privately introduced; whose coming is after the working of Satan, with signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness, first among a few, and then more, until at length the whole world wondered after the beast,

John Gill Commentary


I believe because of the reference to '3 measures of meal' that the parable has to refer to the trinity and leaven would most probably refer to sin, it usually does in other scripture does it not?. I can't see 3 measures of meal refering to the early church because of the use of the number 3.

Despite the fact that "leaven" often is used of something evil, such as the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees, the declaration is that "the kingdom of God is like leaven," forcing the conclusion that it stands for the opposite of evil in this passage.

However, it is also possible that both meanings were intended. But I doubt that. Coffman says further on that 3 measures of meal represent all of humanity in the 3 sons of Noah. I lean much more to the theory that leaven represents sin in this parable.