1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

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

Trinitarian Doctrine

Discussion in 'Paterology, Christology & Pneumatology' started by jbenjesus, Mar 7, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    I'll quote from various sources why the doctrine of the Trinity does not “really” support a monotheistic God.

    Furthermore, this doctrine really is using various scriptures to create what really is an originally man-made doctrine from men not filled with the Holy Spirit who crucified and persecuted many who would not accept their tritheistic God. It was used to amalgamate "barbarians" and others of polytheistic religious backgrounds to conform to their new religious/political system in order to gain control of the masses of people.

    David K. Bernard J.D. has observed these issues in regards to Trinitarian terminology.

    “Orthodox trinitarians deny tritheism, which is the belief in three gods. However, when asked to explain how there can be three distinct persons and yet only one God, they ultimately explain that the trinity is a mystery our finite human minds cannot comprehend fully.”

    “This reluctance to use terms that sharply divide God is commendable; however, person is itself such a word. Webster defines person as "an individual human being" and "the individual personality of a human being."

    This is not just a mere quibble over terminology; for throughout the history of trinitarianism, many trinitarians have interpreted the concept of person practically, and even theologically, to mean three beings. For example, the three Cappadocians of the fourth century (Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzus, and Basil of Caesarea) emphasized the threeness of the trinity to the point that they had three personalities. Boethius (c. 480 - c. 524) defined person as an "individual substance with a rational nature." From medieval times to the present trinitarians have often represented the trinity by a picture of three men, or by a picture of an old man, a young man, and a dove.”

    These are quotes from some famous and some respected Trinitarians explaining “persons” in the Godhead.

    Finis Dake (from the famous Dake’s bible) explains the mysterious trinity this way, “What we mean by Divine Trinity is that there are three separate and distinct persons in the Godhead, each one having His own personal spirit body, personal soul, and personal spirit in the same sense each human being, angel or any other being has his own body, soul, and spirit… Thus there are three separate persons in divine individuality and divine plurality… The word God is used either as a singular or a plural word, like sheep."

    Jimmy Swaggart in 1981 explained it this way, "Thus there are three separate persons in divine individuality and divine plurality… Individually each is called God; collectively they can be spoken of as one God because of their perfect unity… Everything that could pertain to God collectively could also apply equally to each member of the Godhead as individuals. However there are some particulars which relate to each individual person of the deity as to position, office, and work that could not be attributed to either of the other members of the Godhead."

    Carl Brumback, uses the definition of “person” in Webster’s dictionary and does not hesitate to use it either. He tries giving his own definition of, “A person is one who has intellect, sensibility, and will." He explains it this way, "Thus there are three separate persons in divine individuality and divine plurality… Individually each is called God; collectively they can be spoken of as one God because of their perfect unity… Everything that could pertain to God collectively could also apply equally to each member of the Godhead as individuals. However there are some particulars which relate to each individual person of the deity as to position, office, and work that could not be attributed to either of the other members of the Godhead."

    Looking at what many respected and renown Trinitarians explain, it is obvious that they mean three separate and different beings, with three personalities, three wills, or even three different bodies in the Godhead. They speak of the indivisible one God in “threeness” terms and then conclude it is a mystery unexplainable. In reality, the bible doesn’t speak at all of a mystery of the indivisible One God. It speaks of other mysteries, but not about the Godhead.

    This is assessment of trinitarian’s explanation: “They reduce the concept of God's oneness to a unity of plural persons. By their definition, they convert monotheism into a form of polytheism, differing from pagan polytheism only in that there is perfect agreement and unity among the gods. Regardless of trinitarian denials, this is polytheism - tritheism to be exact - and not the monotheism taught by the Bible and upheld by Judaism.” – David Bernard J.D.

    Today, for the most part, Trinitarians deny any subordination of any of the three, yet they still say God the Father is the head of the trinity (3). Contradiction?

    Originally, during the many years that it took to formulate and agreed upon popular doctrine of the trinity, subordination and the non-eternality of the Trinity was taught. Trinitarian Carl Brumback admits that Tertullian, one of the many father’s of the doctrine of the trinity, taught that the Son was subordinate to the Father and that the trinity is not eternal. Origen, another father of the trinity doctrine, saw the Son as subordinate to the Father in existence and maintained that prayer should be addressed to the Father alone (which Otto Heick, noted in A History of Christian Thought).

    Bernard notes, “Both men meant the deity of Christ when they used the term Son. It can, therefore, be said that trinitarianism began as a doctrine that subordinated Jesus to God. In modern trinitarian circles, there is a form of subordinationism when trinitarians use the human limitations of Christ to prove a distinction between God the Father and "God the Son" instead of simply a distinction between Christ's divine nature (Father) and His human nature (Son). For example, note their use of Christ's prayers, lack of knowledge, and lack of power to prove "God the Son" is different from God the Father. Even while asserting the co-equality of the Son and the Father, they often deny it in a practical way and confess they do not understand what it really means.”

    ... continued in next post...
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    In their effort to explain the mysterious 3 in one, Trinitarians have had to go outside of the bible to speak to us in terms that are unbiblical, and at many times, contrary to explicit statements in scripture that speak of God’s indivisible oneness of existence.

    I think we both agree that “trinity” is nowhere found in the bible. Nowhere in the bible is He describe as the eternal persons, or beings, or wills, or personalities of any kind. The only time three is used in relation to God is referring to the witness (singular) in heaven and in earth and, even then, it says, “these three are one” and only in the King James Version translation.

    The word “person” is not used in relation to God, nor are “persons” for that matter. Trinitarian scholars admit the bible does not explicitly express the doctrine of the trinity. That is really the whole point.

    Bernard asserts that, “Speaking of God as a plurality of persons further violates the biblical concept of God. Regardless of what persons meant in ancient church history, today the word definitely connotes a plurality of individuals, personalities, minds, wills and bodies. Even in ancient church history, we have shown that the vast majority of believers saw it as a departure from biblical monotheism.”

    If it is not expressed explicitly, but rather the contrary is expressed explicitly, why teach of “threeness” contrary to biblical thought and writings? Heick explains, "There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical theologians… that one should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament without serious qualifications… New Testament exegesis is now accepted as having shown that not only the verbal idiom but even the patterns of thought characteristic of the patristic [church fathers] and concilian [church councils] development would have been quite foreign to the mind and culture of the New Testament writers."

    Emil Brunner, a trinitarian Protestant theologian is quoted as saying in his book, The Christian Doctrine of God, “The doctrine of the Trinity itself, however, is not a Biblical doctrine and this indeed not by accident but of necessity. It is the product of theological reflection upon the problem…. The ecclesiastical doctrine of the Trinity is not only the product of genuine Biblical thought, it is also the product of philosophical speculation, which is remote from the thought of the Bible."

    Do you realize what that statement is expressing? It is a product of theological reflection, which in essence, is man’s own thinking. He even admits it is a “Product of philosophical speculation, which is remote from the thought of the Bible.” Hello!!!

    The “trinity” is not preached by the Jewish apostles. In fact, The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits it is nothing but 4th century invention. It was brought about at least 300 years after the apostles slept!

    The origin of the trinity doctrine can be found to have its roots and parallels in pagan worship, as far back as Babylon.

    Alexander Hislop writes that the Babylonians worshipped one God in three persons and used the triangle as its symbol. He is quoted from his popular book, The Two Babylons, as saying the Babylonian cult which included – father, mother, child was the Babylonian trinity of “the Eternal Father, the Spirit of God incarnate in a human mother, and a Divine Son, the fruit of that incarnation."

    Historian Will Durant describes the trinity in ancient Egypt as Ra, Amon, and Ptah. Egypt also had a divine trinity of father, mother, son in Osiris, Isis, and Horus. Other pagan religions that have a trinity God(s) are Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism.

    Bernard, again notes, “A philosophic trinity appears in Plato and becomes very significant in Neo-Platonism. Of course, Greek philosophy, particularly Platonic and Neo-Platonic thought, had a major influence on the theology of the ancient church. For example, the trinitarian Logos doctrine stems from the Neo-Platonic philosopher Philo. Thus, we can see that the idea of a trinity did not originate with Christendom. It was a significant feature of pagan religions and philosophies before the Christian era, and its existence today in various forms suggests an ancient, pagan origin.”

    The whole concept of the trinity is simply foreign to scripture and actually parallels many polytheistic pagan influences of worship outside of and contrary to biblical Jewish culture.

    “In summary, in the first century after the apostles, the doctrine of the trinity had not even developed. However, in some circles a form of subordinationistic binitarianism emerged based on Greek philosophical ideas, a doctrine denounced in the first chapter of John's Gospel. The New Catholic Encyclopedia says of trinitarianism at this time in church history: "Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective; among the second century Apologists, little more than a focusing of the problem as that of plurality within the unique Godhead… In the last analysis, the second century theological achievement was limited… A trinitarian solution was still in the future.", summarizes Bernard.

    Just by the study of the origin of the trinity doctrine itself, should make you wonder, if this is just a farce. There is a simpler, better and more biblical explanation that Jesus and the Jewish apostles taught.

    Zone... feel free to quote and paste your responses wherever you like.

    I simply don't buy the trinitarian explanation anymore now that I have researched it on my own. I held to that doctrine for close to 20+ years. When I believed that doctrine, without knowing any of the details I just shared, I thought he was 3, in an uncomprehendable one. Three people, that are one, three beings that were different except they were one and I simply can't relate to such nonsense anymore.
  3. filosofer

    filosofer Senior Veteran

    And that is?


    Here are some questions then to ponder?

    Is Jesus true God?
    Is the Holy Spirit true God?
    How do you understand the presence of the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit at Baptism (Matthew 3; Luke 3)?
    How do you understand the "Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" of Baptism (Matthew 28)?
  4. Chester

    Chester New Member

    Catholics do not believe this. We believe that God (Father Son & Holy Spirit) all possess the same will, knowledge, power, etc. the only distinction is relation. In fact, we define "person", when referring to the Trinity, to mean - A real relation as subsistent in the divine nature.
  5. Navigator

    Navigator Pizzagator...

    Waitaminit... are you saying [GLOW=orangered]Jimmy Swaggert [/GLOW] is a respected Trinitarian theologian?


    you might ask that whomever wrote that screed to update their sources...

    Go find the Anathasian Creed, and use that for the definition of the Trinitarian creed...

    I'd take that over Swaggart... the others... I've never heard of..

    [sub]heads off to read How to build a Strawman[/sub]
  6. VOW

    VOW Moderator

    It's my understanding that Alexander Hislop is a rabble rouser and a rumor-monger, not a respected historian.

    Peace be with you,
  7. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    This is a continuing discussion between Zonechaos and I from another thread...

    For the scoffers, my sharing was not intended to build a straw-man, but rather to give understanding as to the original thoughts and intentions of the creators of the trinity doctrine and its thoughts today.

    To understand the baptism, which isn’t much to understand, we need to look at it from the participants perspective. Jews are strict monotheist and always have been. The dotrine of the trinity (3 person god) was not around during Jesus’ days in the flesh. One God was not an issue to them at all, much less the idea of a 3 in 1 God. As the multitude heard the voice and as John the Baptist saw the Spirit of God descending on Jesus, they were not immediately thinking, “Oh my God, he’s three.” This idea is completely foreign to the Jewish mindset of God being one.

    Do we agree that God is omnipresent? Hopefully, so. Yes God is omnipresent. God was manifested in the flesh in the man we know historically as Jesus the Messiah. Does that mean God ceased to be omnipresent? Of course not. God can manifest Himself in an innumerable amount of places all at the same time without losing His omnipresence. God is a Spirit. His Spirit is omnipresent, even if He chooses to dwell in a body or manifest Himself as a dove or as a burning bush or as someone protecting 3 others in the fire, etc. God is immutable and cannot change. Jesus is/was God manifested in the flesh and yet He still remained omnipresent.

    To distinguish, please understand, the physical body of Jesus was not omnipresent. His Spirit was omnipresent. The Spirit of Jesus cannot be confined to one local area of time and space. Jesus could be on earth and in heaven at the same time (John 3:13) or even with His disciples, at the same time (Matthew 18:20).

    With this omnipresence in the forefront of our thinking, we understand that the Spirit of Jesus could speak from heaven, manifest (simply means reveal) Himself as a dove, and have His physical body in the Jordan river getting baptized, all at the same time. There is no reason to jump to the conclusion that there is now a 3 person God because of this example. To say that the voice and dove represent different persons in the Godhead is illogical and a grandiose assumption at best. The voice of God spoke from Mt. Sinai, but we don’t explain that the mountain was a separate intelligent person in the Godhead.

    Since the dove and voice are symobolic manifestations of, the explicitly stated, one God, let us ask why did He represent Himself in these 2 fashions.

    Why did Jesus get baptized at all? He didn’t get baptized b/c of His sin and He certainly did need the Holy Spirit as if He never had the Holy Spirit. Jesus Spirit was/is the Holy Spirit. So why would Jesus show us this perspective?

    Jesus used the baptism as the starting point of His, very public, ministry.

    First, Jesus needed to be manifested to Israel as the promised Messiah. John the Baptist was to manifest Him to Israel. John the Baptist was told by God that on whomever he saw the Spirit descending, that that is the One God spoke to Him of. Hence, we see the Spirit descending on Jesus. God used that manifestation to reveal to John the Baptist that Jesus was the One that God spoke of. After the baptism, John declared Jesus was the Lamb of God and the Son of God that would take away the sins of the world. John 1:32-34 explains that the dove was clearly for John the Baptist. He may have actually been the only one to see the dove, but that’s neither here nor there. The dove was for John to know who the Messiah really was – Jesus was both God and Messiah (See Isaiah 40:3). Jesus chose the dove to show John that He was the anointed one.

    It has been shown, in the Old Covenant, that oil symbolized the anointed or anointed of God. In the New Covenant, the dove represents what the oil did in the Old. Jesus really could not be anointed by someone with sin. So the Spirit of God anointed Jesus Himself and the dove was the representation of that anointing.

    Second, Jesus chose to give a greater witness. He used a voice so that everyone could hear that Jesus was the beloved Son – the Messiah promised to them (the Jews). The voice was for the benefit of the people. Has that ever happened another time in the scriptures? Yes. See John 12:28-30. The voice was not for Jesus to hear, but for the sake of those around Him. God used this audible voice to speak to Israel that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the Son of God. Many were baptized the day Jesus was and the Spirit singled out Jesus of all the men there, and said “He is the One.”

    The baptism of Jesus does not teach 3 persons of God. If anything, it not only teaches the humanity of the Son of God, but also reveals the omnipresence of God. If God were to speak to four different people around the world at the same time telling each person something different in references to their circumstances, we would not say there is a 4 person God would we?

    David Bernard explains the voice from heaven in this manner:
    “God did not intend for the baptism to reveal to the monotheistic Jewish onlookers a radically new revelation of a plurality in the Godhead, and there is no indication that the Jews interpreted it as such. Even many modern scholars do not see the baptism of Christ as an indication of a trinity but as a reference to "the authoritative anointing of Jesus as the Messiah.

    Three times in the life of Jesus a voice came from heaven: at His baptism, at His transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-9), and after His triumphal entry into Jerusalem (John 12:20-33). We have just explained that a voice does not indicate a separate person in the Godhead but only another manifestation of the omnipresent Spirit of God.

    In each of the three cases, the voice was not for the benefit of Jesus but for the benefit of others, and it came for a specific purpose. As we have discussed, the voice at Christ's baptism was part of the inauguration of His earthly ministry. It was for the people's sake, just as the dove was for John's sake. The voice introduced Jesus as the Son of God: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Matthew 3:17). The voice at the transfiguration unquestionably was for the benefit of the onlooking disciples, for the message was, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him" (Matthew 17:5). The third manifestation of the voice occurred when a group of Greeks (apparently Gentile proselytes) came to see Jesus. Jesus explained that the voice was not for Him but for the people (John 12:30).”
  8. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member


    As you have pointed out, "manifest" means reveal.

    Looking at the Cambridge Dictonary we see:

    verb [T]
    to show (something) clearly, through signs or actions.

    Manifest means easily noticed or obvious.

    Webster's shows: To show plainly; to make to appear distinctly, -- usually to the mind; to put beyond question or doubt; to display; to exhibit.

    Nowhere does manifest mean two things being the same. As we see from the definitions, when something is manifest, it is made easier to see or understand.

    You make a good point about how the dove is a manifestation of God and not God himself. It was God's way of showing who was the chosen one, the Messiah.

    But more properly the word "moshiach" should be used instead of messiah. The term "moshiach" literally means "the anointed one," and refers to the ancient practice of anointing kings with oil when they took the throne.
    Judaism 101: Moshiach - The Messiahshows the following:
    The moshiach will be a great political leader descended from King David (Jeremiah 23:5). The moshiach is often referred to as "moshiach ben David" (moshiach, son of David). He will be well-versed in Jewish law, and observant of its commandments. (Isaiah 11:2-5) He will be a charismatic leader, inspiring others to follow his example. He will be a great military leader, who will win battles for Israel. He will be a great judge, who makes righteous decisions (Jeremiah 33:15). But above all, he will be a human being, not a god, demi-god or other supernatural being.

    When the scriptures speak of God being manifest in Jesus, it means that God is showing himself through Jesus, not that Jesus is God.

    Again, if something is manifest, it is shown, revealed, or made easy to understand.
  9. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    Hi drmmjr,
    I don't want to get sidetracked in this thread. Please, don't be offended drmmjr with what I'm saying. I don't want to address your comments and get started off on another topic. Plus you give me Webster's and I use Vine's, so there maybe some differences in use and understanding between us. ;)

    This thread was opened as a continuing conversation between Zonechaos and I. It's not that I don't want others to respond, but I would like if responders could stick to the subject at hand.

    This thread is not about whether Jesus is God or not, which I believe, but again that's not the topic of this thread.

    Simply and scripturally put, Jesus is God manifest in the flesh.

    We already have a thread on that, so let's keep that subject with that subject, ok?

  10. ZoneChaos

    ZoneChaos Senior Veteran

    All I can say to this, is that we use a different definition of "person", and we use person, becasue there is not a word in existance that accurately labels what we call "persons" of the Trinity.

    We say persons because each member (Father, Son ans Spirit) have thier own will, communicate with each other, and interact with eachother. Either from this we see 3 seperate entities of some sort or another, or God has a multiple personality disorder of some kind.

    I would agree wiht this, the three personalities, with the understanding that these three are One God, and think as a collective to the point of being in one accord as God.

    I also agree with this, for it kis that perfect unity that pats tribute to the monotheistic concept of the Trinity.

    But, notice they all do not agree... :)

    The ones that I did not quote, have got it wrong, in my understanding of the Trinity.

    This is a good example of the lack of existance of words adequte for us to use to label anything of God. "Father" does not mean the same as "father" as it is applied to us.

    TheFather is the father os the Son, but the Son was not born, nor does the Father act as a parent in anyway to the Son. The Son is (again, for a lack of better words) "lower" in "standing" than the Father, not becasue He is less than GOd, but becasue of te on's second nature of being Human. By taking on the second nature of being Human, the Son lowered Himself, and yet remained equal with the Father unto His devine nature.

    As I said above, this is explained yb the dual nature of the Son, both being God and equal to the Father and the Spirit) and being man, and thus lower then the nature of being God.

    Websters: "For there are three that bear testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one."

    Young "because three are who are testifying [in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these -- the three -- are one;"

    Luke 22:42 "42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. If Jesus is God (as scripture shows), then the SOn ans the Father have two seperate wills.

    I Corinthians 12:11 "But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will." Here we see Paul saying that the SPirit has a will. And it should be noted that earlier in the passage, paul make sit clear that he is speaking of the holy Ghost here, and not the Father.

    you realize this all makes sense considering that all these religions came from one source: Off spring of those who served the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

    Noah would have taiught his children what he knew of God.

    As nations grew from poeple, it is no suprise, that while they steered away from God, they kept similar concepts about God, like a Triinty in nature of some sort.

    I would say, that since there are so many varied religions, the odds of them having a trinitarian model would show that the concept of the Trinity did not originate with them either... as stated above.
  11. ZoneChaos

    ZoneChaos Senior Veteran

    Also, le tme add, that it is not necessary for onwe to accept the Trinity Doctrine as Biblical, in order to recieve salvation.

    however, it is necessary to accept Jesus Christ as God. In that it leaves you to wonder How God can be in Heaven and on earth in a physical form (as the fullness of God) at the same time...
  12. LouisBooth

    LouisBooth Well-Known Member

    "For the scoffers, my sharing was not intended to build a straw-man, but rather to give understanding as to the original thoughts and intentions of the creators of the trinity doctrine and its thoughts today.

    I kinda take issue with this since it wasn't created today. :)
  13. macro11

    macro11 New Member


    You wrote,
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    you realize this all makes sense considering that all these religions came from one source: Off spring of those who served the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

    Noah would have taiught his children what he knew of God.

    As nations grew from poeple, it is no suprise, that while they steered away from God, they kept similar concepts about God, like a Triinty in nature of some sort.
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    You are using the existence of pagan trinities to prove the existence of the Christian trinity. You are saying these pagan trinities were built on the base of understanding of the offspring of those born to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. You are saying Noah taught his children the trinity.

    What is seriously lacking in this is the understanding of the direct children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the people of Israel. An idea of God being a trinity is completely lacking in their understanding of God. More important than that is the complete lack of specific correction to their “misunderstanding” of God in the New Testament.

    God specifically corrected their misunderstanding of grace. God specifically corrected their misunderstanding of the place of the Gentiles in God’s Kingdom plans. I would say the correct understanding of the nature of God is more important than these teachings, yet, God gave no specific correction of their understanding of God as one and only one person. There is no specific teaching of the trinity in the NT. There are only a few scriptures which can be twisted to fit the trinitarian definition.

    Therefore, your attempt to use the pagan trinities to prove substance to the Christian trinity is entirely without foundation.

    You wrote,
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    however, it is necessary to accept Jesus Christ as God. In that it leaves you to wonder How God can be in Heaven and on earth in a physical form (as the fullness of God) at the same time...
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    Give me just one verse which says I have to accept Jesus as God in order to have salvation.

  14. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    No one said it was created today :p . It has been posted that by looking at the historical origin of the trinity that it was developed over centuries after all the Jewish apostles slept. It was finally agreed upon at the end of the 4th century and cemented in the psyche of society in the next few centuries. :(
  15. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    If the trinity doctrine is correct then God does have a multiple personality disorder, because to say that He communicates with the other two and each has their own will is a mighty schizophrenic description indeed. You would think the same if you described any one person in the same manner that you describe God as you do now.

    To me, it’s simpler to use this example: My name is Jesus. I am a father. Yet, I am also a son. I am a husband. I am a teacher. Yet, you would never consider me schizophrenic by that description, would you? No, because you realize my name is Jesus and I have different roles. I am a father, whose name is Jesus. I am a son, who incidentally was named after my father, and my name is still Jesus. Yet I am not two people. I am a husband, whose name is still Jesus and I am a teacher and my name is still Jesus. I still remain one person, with one will, and one personality.

    My children know me as their father. One day soon they will know my name is Jesus. My wife knows me as her husband and friend. She knows my name is Jesus as well, yet she doesn’t consider me two people because I have a different relationship with her than I do my own children. She realizes I relate differently to different people, yet I remain one. My dad knows me as his son and knows my name, yet he doesn’t consider me 3 different people and I relate to him differently than I do my wife and children. I am teacher to my students in school. They know I’m a father, a husband, and a son but they don’t see me as four people. Even they recognize that I am one person with one will and one personality playing different roles in my relations to different people. I still remain one.

    What I did was try to relay to you in human terms, without being contrary to scripture, concerning there being One God. He has manifested Himself in different ways, at different times, to different people. But He manifested Himself in a way like never before when He manifested Himself in the flesh and lived just like every other man in existence, except He did not sin. Born like any man from the womb of a woman. Hungered, thirsted, went to the bathroom, sweated, tired, slept, like any man for He clothed Himself in human nature, without sin, yet He remained God. That is the mystery which we’ll talk of later.

    The Spirit of God is invisible and does not have flesh and bones, and His name has always been Jesus. Yet, He never revealed that name, which is above all other names, until He manifested Himself in the flesh to redeem mankind from the curse of sin and destroy the works of the devil. Slowly, repetitively and progressively, Jesus has revealed Himself through the Old Covenant through names that showed His multifaceted character and attributes, as well as His presence. When I use the word multifaceted, please do no interpret that to mean multi-person. His character and attributes were revealed in His works toward the people of Israel and He revealed His name progressively as time went on. Names such as Jehovah Jireh (our Provider), Jehovah Nissi (our victory), Jehovah Tsidkenou (our righteousness), Jehovah Rohi (our Shepherd) and many more. But the name of Jesus, encompasses and fulfills all names revealed previously. Jesus is our Provider, Victory, Righteousness, Shepherd and all the other names He gave us previously. Jesus is encompasses all of the names given previously and the only name in which we can find salvation.

    Jesus came in the name of the Father, just like I was named after me dad. The Father’s name is Jesus. Jesus is the Father (the eternal Spirit of God) and also the Son. How is this possible? That is the mystery. Not that there is a mysterious trinity Godhead. The mystery is the mystery of Godliness – how the Eternal Father (the Spirit of God) manifested in the flesh.

    ...Continued in the next post...
  16. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    ...continued from previous blue post by jbenjesus...

    David Bernard puts it this way:

    “The Mystery of Godliness

    The fact that God became flesh is one of the most wonderful and yet one of the most incomprehensible things about God. "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…" (I Timothy 3:16). Jesus is like no other man that ever has been or will be. He has two natures; He is fully God and fully man. Most problems in people's minds concerning the Godhead come from this great mystery. They cannot understand the dual nature of Christ and cannot correctly separate his two roles. They cannot comprehend how God could take on the form of a baby and live among men.

    It is true that we cannot comprehend fully how the miraculous conception - the union of God and man - took place in the womb of Mary, but we can accept it by faith. In fact, if we do not believe that Jesus is come in the flesh we have an antichrist spirit (II John 7), but if we do accept this doctrine of Christ we will have both the Father and the Son (II John 9). Both Father and Son are revealed in Christ (John 10:30; 14:6-11).

    The mystery of God in flesh was a great stumbling block to the Jews. They never could understand how Jesus, being a man, could also be God (John 10:33). Because He claimed to be God they rejected Him and sought to kill Him (John 5:18; 10:33).

    Even today, many Jews cannot accept Jesus for this reason. In a conversation, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi told us he could never accept Jesus as God. He felt that since God is an omnipresent, invisible Spirit He can never be seen by man and cannot be visible in flesh. His reasoning reminded us of the Jews in Jesus' day. Like this rabbi, they tried to limit God by their own preconceived ideas of how God should act. Furthermore, they did not have a thorough knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures that proclaim the deity of the Messiah.

    While it is humanly difficult to understand how the infinite God could dwell in flesh, yet the Scriptures declare it to be so. We reminded the rabbi of God's appearance in the form of a man to Abraham in Genesis 18. He admitted this was a problem for him, but he tried to explain it in terms of an anthropomorphism or figurative language. Then we referred to other verses of Scripture such as Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Jeremiah 23:6, and Micah 5:2 to show that the Messiah would be Jehovah God. The rabbi had no answer except to say that our translations of these verses of Scripture were possibly incorrect. He promised to study them further.

    There never has been a mystery as to "persons" in the Godhead. The Bible clearly states that there is only one God, and this is easy for all to understand. The only mystery about the Godhead is how God could come in flesh, how Jesus could be both God and man. But the truth of this mystery has been revealed to those who will believe. The mystery of Jesus Christ has been kept secret since the world began, but was revealed in the New Testament age (Romans 16:25-26; Colossians 1:25-27). A mystery in the New Testament is simply a plan of God that was not understood in the Old Testament but which has been made known to us. We "may understand… the mystery of Christ which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit" (Ephesians 3:4-5).

    We can know the mystery of God and the Father, which is Christ (Colossians 2:2; see also the NIV and TAB). In fact, Paul explained this mystery by saying that in Jesus Christ dwells all the wisdom, knowledge, and fulness of God (Colossians 2:3, 9). The mystery of God has been revealed to us by God's Spirit (I Corinthians 2:7-10). This revelation comes to us through God's Word, which is illuminated by the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 2:7-10). The light of Christ, who is the image of God, has shined in our hearts (II Corinthians 4:3-4). There is therefore no biblical mystery about the Godhead and certainly no mystery about the number of persons in the Godhead. The only mystery is Christ, and He has been revealed to us! The mystery of God and the mystery of Christ converge in the Incarnation. It is simply that the one God of Israel came to the earth in flesh. This mystery has been revealed and God's Word declares that it has been made known to us today.

    Jesus is the Father

    If there is only one God and that God is the Father (Malachi 2:10), and if Jesus is God, then it logically follows that Jesus is the Father. For those who somehow think that Jesus can be God and still not be the Father, we will offer additional biblical proof that Jesus is the Father. This will serve as more evidence that Jesus is God. Actually two verses of Scripture are sufficient to prove this point.

    1. Isaiah 9:6 calls the Son the everlasting Father. Jesus is the Son prophesied about and there is only one Father (Malachi 2:10; Ephesians 4:6), so Jesus must be God the Father.

    2. Colossians 2:9 proclaims that all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Jesus. The Godhead includes the role of Father, so the Father must dwell in Jesus.

    3. In addition to these two verses, Jesus Himself taught that He was the Father. Once, when Jesus was talking about the Father, the Pharisees asked, "Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also" (John 8:19). Jesus went on to say, "I said therefore unto you, if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24).

    We should note that he in the verse is in italics, which indicates that it is not in the original Greek, being added by the translators. Jesus was really identifying Himself with the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14. The Jews, who did not understand His meaning, asked, "Who art thou?" Jesus answered, "Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning" (John 8:25). However, "they understood not that he spake to them of the Father" (John 8:27). In other words, Jesus tried to tell them that He was the Father and the I AM, and that if they did not accept Him as God they would die in their sins.

    4. In another place Jesus said, "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). Some try to say that He was one with the Father much as a husband and wife are one or as two men can be one in agreement. This interpretation attempts to weaken the force of the assertion Jesus made. However, other verses fully support that Jesus was not only the Son in His humanity but also the Father in His deity.

    5. For example, Jesus stated in John 12:45, "And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me." In other words, if a person sees Jesus as to His deity, he sees the Father.

    6. In John 14:7 Jesus told His disciples, "If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him." Upon hearing this statement, Philip requested, "Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us" (John 14:8). In other words, he asked that Jesus show them the Father and then they would be satisfied. Jesus' answer was, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake" (John 14:9-11). This statement goes far beyond a relationship of agreement; it can be viewed as nothing less that the claim of Christ to be the Father manifested in flesh. Like many people today, Philip had not comprehended that the Father is an invisible Spirit and that the only way a person could ever see Him would be through the person of Jesus Christ.

    7. Jesus said, "The Father is in me, and I in him" (John 10:38).

    8. Jesus promised to be the Father of all overcomers (Revelation 21:6-7).

    9. In John 14:18 Jesus said, "I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you." The Greek word translated "comfortless" is orphanos, which Strong's Exhaustive Concordance defines as "bereaved ('orphans'), i.e. parentless." Jesus was saying, "I will not leave you as orphans" (NIV and TAB), or "I will not leave you fatherless: I will come to you." Jesus, speaking as the Father, promised that He would not leave His disciples fatherless.

    Below are some comparisons which provide additional proof that Jesus is the Father.

    10. Jesus prophesied that He would resurrect His own body from the dead in three days (John 2:19-21), yet Peter preached that God raised up Jesus from the dead (Acts 2:24).

    11. Jesus said He would send the Comforter to us (John 16:7), but He also said the Father would send the Comforter (John 14:26).

    12. The Father alone can draw men to God (John 6:44), yet Jesus said He would draw all men (John 12:32).

    13. Jesus will raise up all believers at the last day (John 6:40), yet God the Father quickens (gives life to) the dead and will raise us up (Romans 4:17; I Corinthians 6:14).

    14. Jesus promised to answer the believer's prayer (John 14:14), yet He said the Father would answer prayer (John 16:23).

    15. Christ is our sanctifier (Ephesians 5:26), yet the Father sanctifies us (Jude 1).

    16. First John 3:1, 5 states that the Father loved us and was manifested to take away our sins, yet we know it was Christ who was manifested in the world to take away sin (John 1:29-31).

    We can easily understand all of this if we realize that Jesus has a dual nature. He is both Spirit and flesh, God and man, Father and Son. On His human side He is the Son of man; on His divine side He is the Son of God and is the Father dwelling in flesh.”
  17. jbenjesus

    jbenjesus <font color="blue">Berean</font>

    Certainly, you must realize by now that there is not one mention anywhere in the Old Covenant that God is three? In stark contrast to all religions outside of Israel, the God of Israel was unique in that He was an indivisible One. He has never even alluded to being three in the Old Covenant. Ever. He has explicitly declared and revealed Himself to the people of Israel as One, who alone made the heavens and the earth, where no god was formed before Him or after Him and no savior besides Him, He is the first and final and except Him there is no other God beside Him, who alone spread the heavens and expanded the earth by Himself, who with no one else formed the light and created the darkness, who formed the earth and created it to be dwelled in (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 41:16; Isaiah 37:16 and Genesis; Isaiah 43:10,11; Isaiah 44:6,9; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:6,7,18,21; Isaiah 46:9,11; 47:4).

    Please, Zone, don’t tell me God was revealing Himself as a trinity to Noah. He plainly was not and to allude to that is to be either plainly deceptive or unaware of the Old Covenant scriptures. Whenever, they built tabernacles or altars for God (i.e. Abraham, Jacob, etc.) they never built three because they believed there were three to worship. They built one tabernacle or altar for they knew He was One and they worshipped only One.

    This is an excerpt from the first chapter of David Bernard’s book The Oneness of God:

    "There is one God. There is only one God. This doctrine is central to the Bible message, for both the Old Testament and the New Testament teach it plainly and emphatically. Despite the simplicity of this message and the clarity with which the Bible presents it, many who believe in the existence of God have not understood it. Even within Christendom many people, including theologians, have not comprehended this beautiful and essential message. Our purpose is to address this problem, and to affirm and explain the biblical doctrine of the oneness of God.

    Monotheism Defined

    The belief in only one God is called monotheism, which comes from two Greek words: monos, meaning alone, single, one; and theos, meaning God. Anyone who does not accept monotheism can be classified as one of the following: an atheist who denies the existence of God; an agnostic - one who asserts that the existence of God is unknown and probably unknowable; a pantheist - one who equates God with nature or the forces of the universe; or a polytheist - one who believes in more than one God. Ditheism, the belief in two gods, is a form of polytheism, and so is tritheism, the belief in three gods. Among the major religions of the world, three are monotheistic: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

    Within the ranks of those labelling themselves Christian, however, there are several divergent views as to the nature of the Godhead. One view, called trinitarianism, asserts that there are three distinct persons in the Godhead - God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost - but yet one God.

    Within the ranks of trinitarianism, one can discern two extreme tendencies. On the one hand, some trinitarians emphasize the unity of God without having a carefully developed understanding of what is meant by three distinct persons in the Godhead. On the other hand, other trinitarians emphasize the threeness of the trinity to the point that they believe in three self-conscious beings, and their view is essentially tritheistic.

    In addition to trinitarianism, there is the doctrine of binitarianism, which does not classify the Holy Ghost as a separate person but asserts belief in two persons in the Godhead.

    Many monotheists have pointed out that both trinitarianism and binitarianism weaken the strict monotheism taught by the Bible. They insist that the Godhead cannot be divided into persons and that God is absolutely one.

    These believers in strict monotheism fall into two classes. One class asserts that there is only one God, but does so by denying, in one way or another, the full deity of Jesus Christ. This view was represented in early church history by the dynamic monarchians, such as Paul of Samosata, and by the Arians, led by Arius. These groups relegated Jesus to the position of a created god, subordinate god, junior god, or demigod.

    The second class of true monotheists believes in one God, but further believes that the fulness of the Godhead is manifested in Jesus Christ. They believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are manifestations, modes, offices, or relationships that the one God has displayed to man. Church historians have used the terms modalism and modalistic monarchianism to describe this view as held by such early church leaders as Noetus, Praxeas, and Sabellius. In the twentieth century, those who believe in both the indivisible oneness of God and the full deity of Jesus Christ frequently use the term Oneness to describe their belief. They also use the terms One God and Jesus Name as adjectives to label themselves, while opponents sometimes use the misleading or derogatory designations "Jesus Only" and "New Issue." (The label "Jesus Only" is misleading because to trinitarians it implies a denial of the Father and the Holy Spirit. However, Oneness believers do not deny the Father and Spirit, but rather see Father and Spirit as different roles of the One God who is the Spirit of Jesus.)

    In summary, Christendom has produced four basic views of the Godhead: (1) trinitarianism, (2) binitarianism, (3) strict monotheism with a denial of the full deity of Jesus Christ, and (4) strict monotheism with an affirmation of the full deity of Jesus Christ, or Oneness."

    Now according to the definition of monotheism and tritheism, and the comments that you agreed with from you first post, you have admitted to teaching and believing in a tritheisic god, not a monotheistic God.
  18. Tyler

    Tyler Member

    The problem with misunderstandings of the gospel, is that people rely on others to teach them instead of reading for themselves.

    For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
    And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
    If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son.
    He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son.

    Read Your Bibles! Trust in God not men!
  19. Tyler

    Tyler Member

    " I and the Father are one."

    Who can forgive sin? God only, Jesus Christ Forgives.
  20. Tyler

    Tyler Member

    And we know the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ,
    This is the true God and eternal life. end.

    Who can give eternal life but God? Jesus Christ Saves!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.