Why do you believe in the trinity when God and his word is simple

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

You are twisting scripture. Was Jesus lying when He said "glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world existed."

He wasn't lying but you have to ask yourself after you read a verse, well what does this mean? How does this all fit into the big picture. When you do that it helps you understand what he means. Let me try to reformulate what I am saying. Jesus is referring to something that was a reality before the foundation of the world. That is this was something that was predestined to happen. Jesus talks as if he already had the glory because god had granted him this glory before the world. And it came to pass once he rose from the dead. Simple to understand?

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

This thread should be consolidated to the other thread that speaks to the same topic.


You've made up your mind and won't be dissuaded. That's your prerogative. However, you're wrong when you think Jesus was not God.
Furthermore, lower case in writing Jesus name is disrespectful. As is the lower case you use to write the word, Christianity.

I'd suggest you read the New Testament.

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:14, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."


Just two more examples in scripture that Jesus was divine, that Jesus was God in flesh.

I'm open to reasonable objections to my arguments but john 1:1 the word is the good news and john 1:14 is not talking about some incarnation but talking about the good news became flesh when jesus came into this world and preached it.

 

[Der Alte]

Why didn't he just use yehovah if that is what he meant? He certainly didn't use adonai which he also couldve used to end this trinitarian discussion. It is clear he meant something else besides the father. I hope that trinitarian stronghold is loosening up a little bit. Because being set free from it brings about a certain amount of clarity of the word of God you can't get while believing in the 3 gods in one fallacy.

You are now ignoring the fact that you linked to a source which you claimed supported your argument. How could anything be loosening up when you have not presented any evidence to support your argument. If it is so clear why can't you provide clear and convincing evidence? You keep trying to change John 17:5 to make it say what you want it to. Evidently you do not know anything about the Trinity doctrine. It is not 3 gods in one. If you want to discuss the Trinity please learn what it is and not a straw man of your own making.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

I just want to say I have no bias and no reason for bias on the subject of Christs divinity. If Christ was God I would be fine with that. There is nothing wrong with Christ being God. The issue is that he is not God and never was. He has been turned into an idol. When he was just a man like you and me albeit a man with perfect dna who willingly chose to follow every command god Gave. Its quite remarkable and actually more remarkable to know that a man was able to do what Jesus did. Seems a little less remarkable if you think he was God himself and told God don't worry I got this and goes into marys womb and puts on a 30 year show.

 

[Tiny Bible]

He wasn't lying but you have to ask yourself after you read a verse, well what does this mean? How does this all fit into the big picture. When you do that it helps you understand what he means. Let me try to reformulate what I am saying. Jesus is referring to something that was a reality before the foundation of the world. That is this was something that was predestined to happen. Jesus talks as if he already had the glory because god had granted him this glory before the world. And it came to pass once he rose from the dead. Simple to understand?

Now you're writing "God" in lower case?
Philippians 2:5-11
John 10:30-33
John 8:56-59

 

[Der Alte]

He wasn't lying but you have to ask yourself after you read a verse, well what does this mean? How does this all fit into the big picture. When you do that it helps you understand what he means. Let me try to reformulate what I am saying. Jesus is referring to something that was a reality before the foundation of the world. That is this was something that was predestined to happen. Jesus talks as if he already had the glory because god had granted him this glory before the world. And it came to pass once he rose from the dead. Simple to understand?

You just keep repeating the same illogical argument over and over. Jesus did not say or imply that it was something that was predestined to happen. There was no reason for Jesus to be using figurative langue when praying to the Father. Your unsupported opinion cannot, does not change the literal prayer that Jesus prayed to the father. Jesus did not say "god had granted him this glory before the world." In order to prove your doctrine you have to twist scripture and make it say what it does not say.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

You just keep repeating the same illogical argument over and over. Jesus did not say or imply that it was something that was predestined to happen. There was no reason for Jesus to be using figurative langue when praying to the Father. Your unsupported opinion cannot, does not change the literal prayer that Jesus prayed to the father. Jesus did not say "god had granted him this glory before the world." In order to prove your doctrine you have to twist scripture and make it say what it does not say.

The bible is not a book that can be completely understood if read literally. There are certain phrases they use that if you take them literally you end up in error. Before the world is not literal. Case closed. I have proven it with hebrews 4:3 where the same lingo is used. Before the world= predestination in gods foreknowledge. Thats what it means. Why don't you believe that is what that phrase before the world means. Why take it literal in john 17:5 when hebrews 4:3 expounds on what before the world means. God had finished all his works from the foundation of the world. Including the glorifying of Jesus Christ. Jesus knew this hence he mentions it and prays for it.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

Look at john 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them. Does anyone believe that the ones jesus has given the glory were around before the world? Of course not. Same applies to Christ. In john 17:22 he is giving us something in the past tense that we can receive present tense. But when did he give it? Before any one reading this was born yet we can receive it now yet it was given 2000 years ago. I can't explain it any better than that. But that is what Christ is talking about.

 

[Sophrosyne]

My main issue that perplexed and drove me to accepting the trinity was the fact that a "man" soul vs a "God" soul would have how much power in a sacrificial situation? I contend a perfect "man" soul would only have the power to save 1 sinner either man or woman and most likely only one who was alive during the time sacrificed because in the Old Testament there were never sacrifices made for those who had died or those who were not yet living made it was only for those who were alive and had sinned and the sacrifices made were temporary.... ALSO no human sacrifices were ever allowed to be made for sin by God although one was asked to be made it was never suggested it was for sin and never made either. I can only see God sacrificing himself to have enough power to take the sins of more than one person, to transcend time to the past and the future.
I don't see any man who even if perfect to be able to sacrifice himself in a way to save everyone.

In other words I don't think any man... perfect or not could be able to withstand it when God poured out the sins of the world upon Jesus.
Jesus also said... if you have seen me you have seen the Father (God). John 14 goes on and one has to conclude that Jesus and the Father are "one" John 10:30. If one rejects the trinity then none of this makes any sense for Jesus to even say it.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

My main issue that perplexed and drove me to accepting the trinity was the fact that a "man" soul vs a "God" soul would have how much power in a sacrificial situation? I contend a perfect "man" soul would only have the power to save 1 sinner either man or woman and most likely only one who was alive during the time sacrificed because in the Old Testament there were never sacrifices made for those who had died or those who were not yet living made it was only for those who were alive and had sinned and the sacrifices made were temporary.... ALSO no human sacrifices were ever allowed to be made for sin by God although one was asked to be made it was never suggested it was for sin and never made either. I can only see God sacrificing himself to have enough power to take the sins of more than one person, to transcend time to the past and the future.
I don't see any man who even if perfect to be able to sacrifice himself in a way to save everyone.

In other words I don't think any man... perfect or not could be able to withstand it when God poured out the sins of the world upon Jesus.
Jesus also said... if you have seen me you have seen the Father (God). John 14 goes on and one has to conclude that Jesus and the Father are "one" John 10:30. If one rejects the trinity then none of this makes any sense for Jesus to even say it.

Jesus Christ was our passover lamb we can all agree there. What were the requirements of the lamb? male and without blemish. Jesus was both. There is no reason why a perfect male couldn't undo what another perfect male did to get us in this mess in the first place.

When Jesus says if you have seen him you have seen the father, he is talking about the works he has done including the miracles and how he did the fathers will perfectly. He doesn't literally mean he is the father or GOD. Jesus and the father being one means they have the same will. I reject the trinity and what I have said not only makes sense but fits.

 

[Maurious Paul]

I shall give you a verse,

"...which God will bring about in his own time--God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen." - 1 Timothy 6:16(NIV)

The context of the verse is that the The Father is "Immortal" and not "anyone else". But as far as we know Son of God had been "Mortal" once. Let me give another proof,

"...I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." - 2 John 1:7(NIV)

And see yourself that anyone who don't believe that Son of God came into this world as "Mortal" is the deceiver and the antichrist. And conclusion is that God can't be mortal but his son was a mortal once(now he is immortal and can't be mortal anymore). This blows up the concept of trinity and proves that it is Man-made fiction. That's all.

 

[Wgw]

I shall give you a verse,

"...which God will bring about in his own time--God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen." - 1 Timothy 6:16(NIV)

The context of the verse is that the The Father is "Immortal" and not "anyone else". But as far as we know Son of God had been "Mortal" once. Let me give another proof,

"...I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." - 2 John 1:7(NIV)

And see yourself that anyone who don't believe that Son of God came into this world as "Mortal" is the deceiver and the antichrist. And conclusion is that God can't be mortal but his son was a mortal once(now he is immortal and can't be mortal anymore). This blows up the concept of trinity and proves that it is Man-made fiction. That's all.

Our Lord was mortal or corruptible according to His human nature; because of His death and resurrection, we shall be raised ourselves incorruptible; we shall put on incorruptibility as He did (as explained by St. Paul). Our Lord is immortal, incorruptible and indeed impassable and immutable, according to His divinity.

Your criticism of the Trinitarian position might well be applicable if we were Eutychians, but we are not.

Speaking of ancient heresies, what St. John refers to in 2 John 1:7 is the heresy of Docetism. The Docetae believed that our Lord was purely spiritual, that he did not take on flesh as described in John 1:14. Docetisim was closely related to, and usually believed in by adherents of, Gnosticism, which was a dualist religion which was usually nominally Christian, but which regarded matter as evil (the God of the Old Testament was also usually regarded as an incompetent and malign demiurge, and some Gnostic sects like the Ophites glamourized the Serpent in the Garden of Eden as the purveyor of salvific hidden knowledge; this crypto-Luciferianism is interesting to note in light of what St. John the Apostle writes in 2 John).

 

[Maurious Paul]

You poor friend you can not understand what I say since

"...They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the one who sent me." - John 15:21(NIV)

"...No one can come to me(Son of God) unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day." - John 6:44(NIV)

My apologies if I hurt someone but the truth is straight forward and plain.

 

[Maurious Paul]

Messiah said:
"If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
John 8:31-32

Did Messiah ever mention the word "Trinity"...?

 

[Sophrosyne]

Jesus Christ was our passover lamb we can all agree there. What were the requirements of the lamb? male and without blemish. Jesus was both. There is no reason why a perfect male couldn't undo what another perfect male did to get us in this mess in the first place.

When Jesus says if you have seen him you have seen the father, he is talking about the works he has done including the miracles and how he did the fathers will perfectly. He doesn't literally mean he is the father or GOD. Jesus and the father being one means they have the same will. I reject the trinity and what I have said not only makes sense but fits.

You really need to study the Bible more.. the passover lamb had nothing to do with sin to begin with it is non sequitor. You do know when Jesus said he and the Father were one that it infuriated the Jews who took it as blasphemy don't you?
I still contend logically that one man without sin can only take the place of one man with sin and Adam is not responsible for ALL of our sins otherwise we wouldn't need to bother with accepting Jesus as our savior.... only Adam would need to do that for ALL of us.

 

[Wgw]

Messiah said:
"If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
John 8:31-32

Did Messiah ever mention the word "Trinity"...?

This is a logical fallacy known as an "argument from ontology," and it has the effect of bei meaningless. The Trinitarian doctrine is taken from the words of our Lord regarding His divine unity with the Father, and His sending of the Holy Spirit, as well as from other passages, for example, John 1:1-14, Matthew 28:18, and so on.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

You really need to study the Bible more.. the passover lamb had nothing to do with sin to begin with it is non sequitor. You do know when Jesus said he and the Father were one that it infuriated the Jews who took it as blasphemy don't you?
I still contend logically that one man without sin can only take the place of one man with sin and Adam is not responsible for ALL of our sins otherwise we wouldn't need to bother with accepting Jesus as our savior.... only Adam would need to do that for ALL of us.

It is not just that Jesus was without sin, but that he was the perfect sacrifice. The only one who could do it. I don't know why you think only god can die for us. For one gods cant die and are never sacrificed. If jesus was a sinner and was sacrificed I could see your point but he was perfect and fulfilled the old testament requirements to be our passover lamb.

In case you don't know the idea behind Jesus Christ being our passover lamb and passover itself is that like the israelites were redeemed from egypt by an unblemished lamb so too men have been freed from slavery to sin by the messiah, who is the lamb of God.

 

[Maurious Paul]

First of John 1:1 does not say that Messiah was god. It says,

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine(was like God)." - John 1:1

"And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth." - Matthew 28:18

So there exists someone before Messiah or alongside Messiah who has granted the authorities to Messiah. He does not gain authorities by himself but by The Father himself.

 

[Wgw]

First of John 1:1 does not say that Messiah was god. It says,

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine(was like God)." - John 1:1

Only the intentionally distorted New World Translation published by the non-Christian Jehovah's Witnesses renders John 1:1 in that manner. John 1:1 actually reads "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Not "was like God," or "was divine" but "was God."

As a Christian member posting in the Christian-only forum Controversial Theology, it would behoove you to use a Christian translation of the Bible, such as those versions loaded into the site's Scripture Search function (KJV, RSV, NASB, etc.).

It is imperative that Christians like yourself and myself avoid intentionally misleading J/W propaganda.

"And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth." - Matthew 28:18

So there exists someone before Messiah or alongside Messiah who has granted the authorities to Messiah. He does not gain authorities by himself but by The Father himself.

"Before" would be an error, but "alongside" is more or less acceptable, since Nicene theology recognizes that the Son received these authorities from the Father.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

First of John 1:1 does not say that Messiah was god. It says,

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine(was like God)." - John 1:1

"And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth." - Matthew 28:18

So there exists someone before Messiah or alongside Messiah who has granted the authorities to Messiah. He does not gain authorities by himself but by The Father himself.

The New Testament contains a very early and high Christology. St Paul assumes and argues from the presupposition that Jesus' identity is part of the One God, 1 Corinthians 8:6 makes this explicitly clear, it was an expansion of the Shema (Deuteronomy 4:6) I believe that 1 Corinthians 8:6 is the most important statement on early high Christology in the New Testament. Throughout the Pauline epistles he constantly quotes from the Old Testament and where in the Old Testament texts which initially mentioned Yhwh however became translated as "Lord" (Kyrios) in the Septuagint, Paul would constantly use these texts to refer to Jesus. I'll give some examples: Romans 14:11 (Isaiah 45:23); 1 Corinthians 1:31 (Jeremiah 9:23-24); 1 Corinthians 2:16 (Isaiah 40:13); 1 Corinthians 10:21-22 (Malachi 1:7, 12; Deuteronomy 32:21); 1 Corinthians 10:26 (Psalms 24:1 [23:1 in the LXX]); 2 Corinthians 3:16 (Exodus 34:34); 2 Corinthians 10:17 (Jeremiah 9:23-24); Philemon 2:10-11 (Isaiah 45:23); 1 Thessalonians 3:13 (Zechariah 14:5); 1 Thessalonians 4:6 (Psalms 94:1-2). St Paul isn't the only one to do this in the New Testament. 1 Peter 2:3 makes use of Psalms 34:8 [33:9 in the LXX], 1 Peter 3:15 makes use of Isaiah 8:13 and Hebrews 1:10-12 makes use of Psalms 102:25-27.