Why The Trinity is a False Teaching - Summarized Doctrinal Reasons

[klutedavid]

Hello Lightray.

You made this claim in your last post.

So, to me you have it backwards, the apostles had it right, but later men went after other gods,
and false doctrine.

Jesus Christ is certainly not another god, I am saying that these two, the Father and the Son, are in fact one God.
I fully endorse that the God of the Bible is one God. I would promptly burn a heretic at the stake, for claiming
that there are two gods in the Bible.

I have the perfect interpretation of the entire scripture, Lightray.

Then you said 'God is light', I repeat, the English word 'God' is a general term for a deity. God can be Buddha
or Allah, or any deity. This word 'God' is a general term that is non definitive. You cannot know a God, not
unless that God reveals His real identity!

Not sure whether you meant that, 'the Son' is the light, or 'the Father' is the light, by using this phrase
'God is light'. So shall we see what the Bible says about the identity attributed to the phrase 'the Light'.

John 1
9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world,
and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those
who were His own did not receive Him.

This passage is clearly referring to Jesus as being the true light. This is why the phrase, 'God is light',
is so loose and undefined. If you had rightly said, that 'Jesus is the light' that came into the world, then
your proclaiming what the scripture declares.

Do you see why I find that your theology is loose and incorrect.

Please reply in addressing why you believe that 'the Father' is the light?

Also, how do you read the passage below, I am so puzzled by your method of interpretation, Lightray?

John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning
with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come
into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the
darkness did not comprehend it.

By the way Lightray, are you a Christadelphian?

 

[Hoghead1]

A favorite metaphor for the Trinity, Klutedavid, was the rays (Son and Spirit) emanating out of the sun (Father). However, I am not sure what your model of the Trinity is. Many like the social theory. The Father, Son, and Spirit are three unique, separate personalities. Their oneness comes from the fact hey work in perfect harmony. However, to many, including myself, this is just another form of polytheism.

 

[klutedavid]

A favorite metaphor for the Trinity, Klutedavid, was the rays (Son and Spirit) emanating out of the sun (Father). However, I am not sure what your model of the Trinity is. Many like the social theory. The Father, Son, and Spirit are three unique, separate personalities. Their oneness comes from the fact hey work in perfect harmony. However, to many, including myself, this is just another form of polytheism.

Hello Hoghead.

To be able to define the trinity in human thought and language, is one very tough
endeavor. My personal view is that Jesus is the absolute revelation of the entire
scripture. The only name under heaven by which we can be saved. By looking at
Jesus we can see and know the Father, so the trinity is seen through the Christ.

I believe that we were made in the very image of this visible God, Jesus Christ.
All the visions of the prophets are of a YHWH, who has a human appearance.
Jesus is truly the creative alpha, and the creative omega, of all creation.

The scripture is all about Jesus, the concept of the trinity comes in a close second.

If I tried to describe the trinity, the only description available is in the description
of the Christ in the scripture. The operative word in any absolute explanation of
the trinity would be the word 'love'. The Father loves the Son, and set the earth
as a footstool for the Son's feet.

 

[Hoghead1]

What happened to the Holy Spirit, Klutedavid. All you talked about was the Father and the Son. Also, are you assuming the Father and Son are two unique personalities? I guess I'm still concerned I'm getting two to three Gods here.

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.

You made this claim in your last post.

Jesus Christ is certainly not another god, I am saying that these two, the Father and the Son, are in fact one God.
I fully endorse that the God of the Bible is one God. I would promptly burn a heretic at the stake, for claiming
that there are two gods in the Bible.

Hello klutedavid,

I understand, but someone could also say, the two cars in their driveway are not two cars, but one car. They could say that, and believe that, but that does not make it so.

I have the perfect interpretation of the entire scripture, Lightray.

So far it's been letting you down, for you said Jesus is the only one that is the Yhwh, and I've shown the Father is the Yhwh.

Then you said 'God is light', I repeat, the English word 'God' is a general term for a deity. God can be Buddha
or Allah, or any deity. This word 'God' is a general term that is non definitive. You cannot know a God, not
unless that God reveals His real identity!

This is not any “god” this is “the God” with the definite article (G3588 – ho).

Not sure whether you meant that, 'the Son' is the light, or 'the Father' is the light, by using this phrase
'God is light'. So shall we see what the Bible says about the identity attributed to the phrase 'the Light'.

John 1
9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world,
and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those
who were His own did not receive Him.

This passage is clearly referring to Jesus as being the true light. This is why the phrase, 'God is light',
is so loose and undefined. If you had rightly said, that 'Jesus is the light' that came into the world, then
your proclaiming what the scripture declares.

Do you see why I find that your theology is loose and incorrect.

Please reply in addressing why you believe that 'the Father' is the light?

Your puzzled by my method of interpretation? Why do I believe the Father is light? That's quite easy, we don't have to go to any other passage, this passage itself tells us who the light is...

1 John 1
5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him [God] is no darkness at all.
6 If we say that we have fellowship with him [God], and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7 But if we walk in the light, as he [God] is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son [there is only one “God” this could be referring to that has a Son, and that is the Father] cleanseth us from all sin.​

Commenting on John 1:9, Jesus spoke the true word of God the Father. When they were rejecting the words of Jesus, they were rejecting the Father Psalm 69:9; Luke 20:9-14.

Also, how do you read the passage below, I am so puzzled by your method of interpretation, Lightray?

John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning
with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come
into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the
darkness did not comprehend it.

This is how John 1:1 reads in the Greek...

In beginning was the word and the word was with the god and god was the word.​

I see no justification to make the “word” a person, other then one wanted to. How do we make the “word” a person, who is the God, yet with the God? Either you are the God, or your not. And if God is what they are, how can you be with what you are? You are what you are. God makes it clear, He cannot be contained in flesh.

The word is the plan, wisdom and reason of God, the word reveals God. Through God's creative word He revealed Himself in creation. Through God's written word, He revealed Himself in books. Now through the word that became flesh, He revealed Himself through His son Jesus the man.

Context determines how the word “G846 - autos” is translated.

John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.​

The word “him: G846 - autos” is Part of Speech: Personal / Possessive Pronoun; Case: Genitive; Gender: Masculine; Person: 3rd Person; Number: Singular, and is translated here as “him.”

The very same is translated as “it” in...

John 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?​

The word “it: G846 - autos” is Part of Speech: Personal / Possessive Pronoun; Case: Genitive; Gender: Masculine; Person: 3rd Person; Number: Singular, and is translated here as “it.”

I think the rest should be fairly self explanatory.

By the way Lightray, are you a Christadelphian?

No, I am not. What I believe has nothing to do with any denominational teaching.

 

[Hoghead1]

I'm not following you, Lightray, when you talk about "person." What exactly do you mean? Is teh Word, to you, a personality, or just an impersonal force? Also, could you be more specific on your model of teh Trinity? Are you dealing with three personalities? What?

 

[Der Alte]

Hello klutedavid,
I understand, but someone could also say, the two cars in their driveway are not two cars, but one car. They could say that, and believe that, but that does not make it so.

Problem: Cars, rocks or anything else, are not omnipotent, omniscient, omniscient, God is. Because something cannot be true about a finite someone or something, does not mean that God is also limited in the same way.

This is not any “god” this is “the God” with the definite article (G3588 – ho).

Is it your understanding that when Theos occurs without the definite article it does not refer to the creator? In the 1st chapter of John 1, in addition to vs. 1, the word Theos occurs four times without the definite article. Who does it refer to in these vss.? John1:6, John 1:12, John 1:13, John 1:18

Your puzzled by my method of interpretation? Why do I believe the Father is light? That's quite easy, we don't have to go to any other passage, this passage itself tells us who the light is...

1 John 1
5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him [God] is no darkness at all.
6 If we say that we have fellowship with him [God], and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7 But if we walk in the light, as he [God] is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son [there is only one “God” this could be referring to that has a Son, and that is the Father] cleanseth us from all sin.​

I see no justification to make the “word” a person, other then one wanted to. How do we make the “word” a person, who is the God, yet with the God? Either you are the God, or your not. And if God is what they are, how can you be with what you are? You are what you are. God makes it clear, He cannot be contained in flesh.

Where does God make it clear He cannot be contained in flesh? Jesus said nothing is impossible for God.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. ​

The word translated "was made" is a first aorist, middle deponent, indicative. The middle deponent is translated as active voice. In the active voice the subject, in this vs. the Logos, performs the action. Thus the Logos acting upon Himself became flesh.

ESV John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known. ​

In the oldest most reliable manuscripts this verse Theos occurs twice, it reads θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ ὢν/theon oudeis eoraken popote monogenes theos o on. "The only, unique Theos the being in the bosom of the father." In LXX Genesis 3:14 the words Ehyeh 'sher ehyeh, English "I am that I am," is translated Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν/Ego eimi o on,"/"I am the being."

The word is the plan, wisdom and reason of God, the word reveals God. Through God's creative word He revealed Himself in creation. Through God's written word, He revealed Himself in books. Now through the word that became flesh, He revealed Himself through His son Jesus the man.

God's plan cannot act upon itself!

Context determines how the word “G846 - autos” is translated.

You are correct!

John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The word “him: G846 - autos” is Part of Speech: Personal / Possessive Pronoun; Case: Genitive; Gender: Masculine; Person: 3rd Person; Number: Singular, and is translated here as “him.”

The very same is translated as “it” in...

John 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?​

The word “it: G846 - autos” is Part of Speech: Personal / Possessive Pronoun; Case: Genitive; Gender: Masculine; Person: 3rd Person; Number: Singular, and is translated here as “it.”

I think the rest should be fairly self explanatory.

The problem with this "interpretation" is, the Greek word "autos" does not occur in John 6:60

No, I am not. What I believe has nothing to do with any denominational teaching.

Evidently it does as I have shown.

 

[7xlightray]

I'm not following you, Lightray, when you talk about "person." What exactly do you mean? Is teh Word, to you, a personality, or just an impersonal force? Also, could you be more specific on your model of teh Trinity? Are you dealing with three personalities? What?

You could interpret “word” as a person, but there is no reason to think of “word” as a person, just as there is no reason to understand “love,” or “voice” as a person.

The word, is the word of life, truth, the plan of God, wisdom and reason of God. Would it not even include the gospel, and what was written of His Son in the O/T that became flesh, that they touched and handled? God had written what His Son would be like, say and do, what would happen to him, what his life would be like, before he was born, then that word became flesh, and was like, and did, and said the things the Father had written about him, Whom He said His Son would be an image of Himself, that God was in him, and they seen and handled this word of life that became flesh.

 

[7xlightray]

Problem: Cars, rocks or anything else, are not omnipotent, omniscient, omniscient, God is. Because something cannot be true about a finite someone or something, does not mean that God is also limited in the same way.

You seem to have missed my point. I was not trying to make an exact comparison. Just making the point, that because one says something is true, does not make it true, nor does it make it logical.

Is it your understanding that when Theos occurs without the definite article it does not refer to the creator? In the 1st chapter of John 1, in addition to vs. 1, the word Theos occurs four times without the definite article. Who does it refer to in these vss.? John1:6, John 1:12, John 1:13, John 1:18

That is not my understanding. My understanding is when they do use the definite article they are making a point their not referring to any God. Like if I were to say, get the car, I'm not referring to any car, but a specific car.

Where does God make it clear He cannot be contained in flesh? Jesus said nothing is impossible for God.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. ​

The word translated "was made" is a first aorist, middle deponent, indicative. The middle deponent is translated as active voice. In the active voice the subject, in this vs. the Logos, performs the action. Thus the Logos acting upon Himself became flesh.

ESV John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known. ​

In the oldest most reliable manuscripts this verse Theos occurs twice, it reads θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ ὢν/theon oudeis eoraken popote monogenes theos o on. "The only, unique Theos the being in the bosom of the father." In LXX Genesis 3:14 the words Ehyeh 'sher ehyeh, English "I am that I am," is translated Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν/Ego eimi o on,"/"I am the being."

So, someone could pray and ask God, and expect God to answer with a “Yes,” to become a liar, and evil, to renege on His word, destroy His earth, and every soul, and He would do it? Or, would this be impossible for God to reply with a, Yes?

If God was contained in flesh, who was in heaven? If one left the other two, then God was not whole. If only one of them was contained in flesh, then God was not contain in flesh, only part of Him, 1/3 to be exact.

2 Chronicles 6:18
But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built!​

God's plan cannot act upon itself!

You only quote part of my sentence. On top of that, have not considered all that I have said in this thread, referring to the word. God said let there be light and there was light, God's word going forth and accomplishing what God thought. Word I want you to accomplish a yearly cycle, every year of winter spring, summer, and fall, and have grass start to grow in spring, and snow in winter. God's word accomplishes what He sent it to do.

The problem with this "interpretation" is, the Greek word "autos" does not occur in John 6:60

Of course it is, check again...

Textus Receptus: 6:60 Πολλοὶ οὖν ἀκούσαντες ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ εἶπον, Σκληρός ἐστιν οὗτος ὁ λόγος τίς δύναται αὐτοῦ ἀκούειν

In fact, there are two of them, one interpreted “his,”and the other “it.”
And both are G846 - autos” is Part of Speech: Personal / Possessive Pronoun; Case: Genitive; Gender: Masculine; Person: 3rd Person; Number: Singular

Evidently it does as I have shown.

What I am saying, is I did not glom onto a denomination and learn their doctrine. Are there denominations that are going to believe as I do, or vice versa? I would hope so, and I'm sure there would be.

 

[Der Alte]

. . . So, someone could pray and ask God, and expect God to answer with a “Yes,” to become a liar, and evil, to renege on His word, destroy His earth, and every soul, and He would do it? Or, would this be impossible for God to reply with a, Yes?

If you want to argue with the words of Jesus, do so at your own peril. But arguments like this are silly and nonsensical.

If God was contained in flesh, who was in heaven? If one left the other two, then God was not whole. If only one of them was contained in flesh, then God was not contain in flesh, only part of Him, 1/3 to be exact.

Where do you get this 2, 3, 1/3 etc?

2 Chronicles 6:18
But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built!

​

That refers to a temple made by man, not what God can or cannot do.

You only quote part of my sentence. On top of that, have not considered all that I have said in this thread, referring to the word. God said let there be light and there was light, God's word going forth and accomplishing what God thought. Word I want you to accomplish a yearly cycle, every year of winter spring, summer, and fall, and have grass start to grow in spring, and snow in winter. God's word accomplishes what He sent it to do.

Ignores John 1:14.

 

[7xlightray]

If you want to argue with the words of Jesus, do so at your own peril. But arguments like this are silly and nonsensical.

I'm not the one arguing with the words of Jesus, I'm agreeing with the words of God the Father.

What are you saying? It's a simple question! Only what is good and right, and what does not go against His word, is possible. Not something that would make Him a liar. If God said a temple cannot contain Him, because the heaven of heavens cannot contain Him, then fits into a body that is smaller then a temple, which is smaller then heaven, He is not being truthful to His word. Nothing silly and nonsensical, about it.

I believe there are some things impossible for God, like for God to break His promise. I have God's word that sates the heaven of heavens can't contain Him, so, there must be a proper understanding to for example “For with God nothing shall be impossible Luke 1:37,” which statement is referring to things in this visible world.
Could it be the angel is simply saying everything he just told her is not impossible for God? As the ASV puts it “For no word from God shall be void of power.”

That is the point I'm making.

Where do you get this 2, 3, 1/3 etc?

The whole God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, according to the trinity doctrine. If all of God could fit into a man, then the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit would have to fit into a man. If only one of them became man, then not all of God became man.

​

That refers to a temple made by man, not what God can or cannot do.

Your ignoring heaven of heavens. If God can't be contained in the heaven of heavens, never mind a temple, how can God be contained in a man that is smaller then a temple, which is smaller then heaven?

Ignores John 1:14.

Not sure what your trying to say here?
If you are saying I did not answer...
I did answered you, but I guess you did not comprehend my reply, or that I did answer?

Did you find both “G846 autos” in John 6:60?

 

[klutedavid]

Hello Lightray.

In an earlier post you claimed that 'God is light', meaning that you readily assumed of course, the Father was the light.
When you see the word 'God', you automatically equate the word 'God' when it occurs in the Old Testament, with the
identity of the Father, and never with His only Son.

You see the revelation of the scripture as being solely the revelation of the one true God, i.e., the Father. Throughout
the Old Testament, all references to 'God' are referring to the Father only. Appearances of Jesus cannot be found in the
Old Testament in person, simply because Jesus had not yet been born. The revelation of the scripture, is not the revelation
of Jesus Christ to the world, the scripture is the revelation of the Father to the world. For when Jesus stated the following.

John 5
39 “You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that testify on
my behalf.

You would say that this man Jesus, is certainly not the primary subject of the scripture, the Father is the subject of the
scripture. So the scriptures do not testify to the son, but always to the Father.

When God declares that He is the light, you naturally will read this as saying, 'the Father' is the light. You would refer
to say the following verse for support.

1 John 1
5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light.

Therefore the Father is the light.

So when Jesus states that he is in fact the light, for example as in the verse below.

John 8
12 “I am the light of the world".

You would say that Jesus is not the light, for 'God is light', which means 'the Father' is the light, therefore Jesus
is merely the lens, that magnifies the light of the Father.

Then you mentioned that God raised up this man, this 'word', this 'thought', this man Jesus Christ from the dead.

Acts 2
24 But God raised him up, having freed him from death.

Then we have Jesus stating that He raised Himself from death, a contradiction of this earlier concept that the apostles
offered.

John 2
19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

Were the apostles correct, i.e., did God raise Jesus, or was Jesus correct Lightray, i.e., Jesus raised Himself?

When we read the first verse of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, written by the apostle John very late in his life.

John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God...

You said Lightray, that 'the Word' is the word of life, the truth, the plan of God, the wisdom and reason of God.

Shall we substitute the 'plan' in the place of Jesus in the following verse.

John 5
22 The Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the 'plan', 23 so that all may honor the 'plan' just
as they honor the Father?

Thus we will be judged by the 'plan', the 'plan' must be honored as the Father is honored?

How does anyone worship or honor 'a plan' of God?

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.

In an earlier post you claimed that 'God is light', meaning that you readily assumed of course, the Father was the light.
When you see the word 'God', you automatically equate the word 'God' when it occurs in the Old Testament, with the
identity of the Father, and never with His only Son.

You see the revelation of the scripture as being solely the revelation of the one true God, i.e., the Father. Throughout
the Old Testament, all references to 'God' are referring to the Father only.

Hello klutedavid,

Actually that's not a true assessment of what I believe. Jesus is called god, some men are called gods, angels are called gods. I'm replying to your verses, that you are claiming that call Jesus the God, and I'm showing they speak of the Father. It's just the nature of this discussion. Some of your passages do have Jesus in them, but usually he is either speaking to the Father, or the Father speaking to him. Also I'm not trying to show Jesus is the God, you are, nor am I trying to show Jesus in scripture, because it's not what I'm required to do in our discussion, if I was, I would.

You see the revelation of the scripture as being solely the revelation of the one true God, i.e., the Father. Throughout the Old Testament, all references to 'God' are referring to the Father only. Appearances of Jesus cannot be found in the Old Testament in person, simply because Jesus had not yet been born. The revelation of the scripture, is not the revelation of Jesus Christ to the world, the scripture is the revelation of the Father to the world. For when Jesus stated the following.

John 5
39 “You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that testify on
my behalf.

You would say that this man Jesus, is certainly not the primary subject of the scripture, the Father is the subject of the
scripture. So the scriptures do not testify to the son, but always to the Father.

Jesus is definitely revealed in the O/T, for he is the word made flesh, as he said in John 5:39, not that he appeared in person in the O/T. Yet Jesus also came to make known the true Father Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 5:30; John 8:19; John 14:7,9; John 15:15; John 17:25-26.

The O/T does not just talk about Jesus, it also speaks of the church, unbelievers, sin, Balaam, David, the Father, the plan of God, and so forth.

When God declares that He is the light, you naturally will read this as saying, 'the Father' is the light. You would refer
to say the following verse for support.

1 John 1
5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light.

Therefore the Father is the light.

The reason I naturally read this is the Father, is because that is what this passage reveals, that this God has a Son, so, obviously God referrers to the Father.

No, that verse and this in verse 7 “and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son”, reveals that God is the Father that is spoken of in this passage.

So when Jesus states that he is in fact the light, for example as in the verse below.

John 8
12 “I am the light of the world".

You would say that Jesus is not the light, for 'God is light', which means 'the Father' is the light, therefore Jesus
is merely the lens, that magnifies the light of the Father.

What, why would I state the Father is the light in that passage when clearly Jesus is the light there? Jesus clearly stated he is the light of the world in that verse...

12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.​

If our reasoning is that God is light, and Jesus is light, then therefore Jesus is God, then with this same interpretational reasoning we would also have to conclude we are God (which we know is not true), for we are also light...

Matthew 5:14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

Philippians 2:15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;​

So we are also light. We can see there must be a proper understanding then. The understanding we have from scripture is, God the Father is head of all, including Christ, and Christ head of us.

Deuteronomy 18:18 I [Father] will raise them up a Prophet [Christ] from among their brethren, like unto thee [Moses], and will put my [Father John 8:28] words in his [Christ] mouth [Christ is the Fathers mouth]; and he [Christ] shall speak unto them all that I [Father] shall command him [Christ John 5:30; John 12:49-50; John 15:15].

John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak [Deuteronomy 18:18]. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting [His Word of life]: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak [Jesus is the word of life, the word that came down from heaven became flesh].

John 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me [as Exodus 4:15 says], I speak these things.

Exodus 4:15 And thou [Moses, Jesus] shalt speak unto him [Aaron, disciple], and put the words in his [disciple] mouth: and I [God the Father] will be with thy [Jesus] mouth [John 14:10], and with his [disciple] mouth [Matthew 10:20], and will teach you [Jesus John 8:28] what ye shall do. 16 And he [disciple] shall be thy [Jesus] spokesman unto the people; and it shall come to pass, that he [disciple] shall be to thee [Jesus] a mouth, and thou [Jesus] shalt be to him [Jesus] as God.​

The order of the light passed down.

James 1:17-18
17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

18 Of his [Father] own will begat he us with the word of truth [which was through Christ, the doctrine of Christ], that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.​

Then you mentioned that God raised up this man, this 'word', this 'thought', this man Jesus Christ from the dead.

Acts 2
24 But God raised him up, having freed him from death.

Then we have Jesus stating that He raised Himself from death, a contradiction of this earlier concept that the apostles
offered.

John 2
19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

Were the apostles correct, i.e., did God raise Jesus, or was Jesus correct Lightray, i.e., Jesus raised Himself?

They are both right. The problem is, your not understanding what Jesus meant when he said he would raise himself from the dead, as we are also told to do, not literally, but walking in truth, how he and we live our lives. The Father did literally raise him from the dead.

When we read the first verse of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, written by the apostle John very late in his life.

John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God...

You said Lightray, that 'the Word' is the word of life, the truth, the plan of God, the wisdom and reason of God.

Shall we substitute the 'plan' in the place of Jesus in the following verse.

John 5
22 The Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the 'plan', 23 so that all may honor the 'plan' just
as they honor the Father?

Thus we will be judged by the 'plan', the 'plan' must be honored as the Father is honored?

How does anyone worship or honor 'a plan' of God?

Your not interpreting it the same way scripture reads. You can substitute for Jesus all you like, you can even substitute Jesus for the the word, but Jesus is not literally a word either. That's just bad reasoning. The proper way, is as scripture puts it, the word became flesh, the plan of God became flesh, the wisdom of God became flesh, truth became flesh. The word/plan/light that became flesh, became the image of God, and so forth. Here is one example of the plan of God “And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Revelation 13:8, this word and plan all starts with Christ, the promised one.

The Father is light/truth, and Jesus walked in the Fathers light/truth, speaking and doing the Fathers will, and because of Jesus, we walk in the Father light/truth through Jesus light/truth. It was the Father's light that was revealed through Jesus. That true light, the word of life, became flesh, Jesus! The image of God! And we are the image of Christ, who is the image of God the Father, therefore making us in the image of God the Father. Great is the wisdom of God, the Father!

 

[SkyWriting]

The teaching of the trinity skews the understanding of certain basic truths

It is just a handy tool. Like the demarcations added to scripture.
It's not false.

 

[klutedavid]

​

Hello Lightray.

Fascinating topic, this discussion concerning the Christ and His position in the heirarchy.

If our reasoning is that God is light, and Jesus is light, then therefore Jesus is God

Correct Lightray, Jesus existed as God, then humbled Himself and became a mere servant of men. From
the cradle to the cross, Jesus fooled them all. After Jesus accomplished the designated mission, His Father
promoted Him back once again, to His own throne in heaven. The name of Jesus in the O.T, is a hidden and
too wonderful a name to be spoken. This name is identical to the Father's name of course, when they both
become one again, then you will know this hidden name.

then with this same interpretational reasoning we would also have to conclude we are God

I agree that this interpretation of man's position in the hierarchy is unacceptable. Though we can easily
have Christ as YHWH.

So Lightray, would you care to apply your interpretation skills to the following verses.

Philippians 2
6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human
form, 8 he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death.

 

[Hoghead1]

I don't fully agree, Der Alter. I believe that if we are to have a realistic model of God, then yes, we have to take seriously our experiences of reality, what the situation is with us finite creatures. I believe all knowing is analogous knowing, we generalize from the familiar tot he unfamiliar. Now, if there is one thing we are most familiar with, it is human existence. So, unless, there is some analogy, some uniformity between ourselves and the rest of reality, most especially God, then we haven't got an inkling what's going on. If we assume we work one way and God works another, then God an creation are like oil and water, they just oppose and contradict one another. How unfortunate. Another problem is how we can say anything affirmative at all about God if creaturely finite attributes do not describe God. You couldn't say God has "being," as being is something creatures have. You couldn't say God is loving, as love is a characteristic of us creatures. And if you did say God is loving, then you'd end up giving God's love such a contradictory definition that one would wonder why you call it love. St. Thomas Aquinas is a good example here.

 

[Hoghead1]

I don't agree, Skywriting. The Trinity has always been a source of confusion and misunderstanding. To la large extent, this is due to the muddled thinking on the part of the church fathers.

 

[7xlightray]

​

Hello Lightray.

Fascinating topic, this discussion concerning the Christ and His position in the heirarchy.

Correct Lightray, Jesus existed as God, then humbled Himself and became a mere servant of men. From
the cradle to the cross, Jesus fooled them all. After Jesus accomplished the designated mission, His Father
promoted Him back once again, to His own throne in heaven. The name of Jesus in the O.T, is a hidden and
too wonderful a name to be spoken. This name is identical to the Father's name of course, when they both
become one again, then you will know this hidden name.

I agree that this interpretation of man's position in the hierarchy is unacceptable. Though we can easily
have Christ as YHWH.

Hello klutedavid,

Yet, what I'm saying is, if God is light, and Jesus is God, because he is also light, then we are also God, for we are light as well. So, Jesus being light would not make him God in and of it self.

Jesus was trying to fool his disciples?

How does Jesus, if being God, give up His authority, if He still remains God, and never stopped being God? This is why God is God, because all come from Him, all are His, and He is over all. So, who can give to God seeing as He is over all, and all things belong to Him, and come from Him? If He is no longer over His creation and has authority over His creation, then He is no longer God of His creation, which is a ridiculous statement, but is His creation. He has now become under and equal with his creation. Which means he did the impossible, and reversed all that He did, being creator of all, to now being under, and equal to His creation.

So Lightray, would you care to apply your interpretation skills to the following verses.

Philippians 2
6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human
form, 8 he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death.

I know how many trinitarains understand this passage, the real question is why would you bring this passage up, if you believe Paul was grappling with who Jesus was, and did not understand who Jesus was?

 

[CGL1023]

The teaching of the trinity skews the understanding of certain basic truths, and they are the following,

Jesus Christ, birthed in the beginning of creation, which is why he is called a "son", by the Father, whose identity is I AM, as the Father does not have a name, as he is not created as we are to have name, and was said to be "engendered" today, which was day one of creation. A son does not precede a father nor does a son come at the same time as a father, but a father comes first, then a son, and since the father never began, therefore the son did indeed begin, as that is the next natural order of precedence. Jesus Christ is also said to be "only son", and this is because he was the only being created directly by the Father, and then all life came into existence through Jesus.

Before Jesus Christ began speaking things into existence, the Father created first, which included preparing the heavens, founding the earth which had water, and bringing forth the spirit of God that bore upon the water. When these things came into existence, day one had begun, and in that same day, Jesus Christ then uttered his first words, "let there be light".

Jesus Christ was the spirit of God that bore upon the water, and this is the evidence of his pre-existence in the Genesis account, and the identity of this spirit was a mystery until his name was revealed thousands of years later, as Jesus, which is when he became incarnate of a virgin. This spirit of God, is also the one who started speaking, hence why Jesus Christ is also called the word of God, because he spoke things into existence, which included all life.

On day four of creation, when Jesus Christ spoke the luminaries of the heavens into existence, is the first day other living beings came forth into existence, which were angels. Of these angels, the angel YHWH became revealed, which was the name revealed to Moses when the angel YHWH gave his own name to Moses in a burning bush, and this was name that the Hebrews used to seek God in the old covenant until much later we were given a new name, for a new covenant, which is the name of Jesus Christ, which is even higher than the name of YHWH, and by whom only in the name of Jesus can a man now be saved. This angel named YHWH was the being Jesus Christ then spoke to on day six of creation, which is why Jesus said, "Let us...", as he was not speaking to the Father, as the Father already gave Jesus words to speak, but instead, it was Jesus speaking to this angel. This angel, was indeed a holy spirit, that then breathed into man the breath of life, as commanded, and thus demonstrated that life not only came by the utterances of Jesus Christ, but also by holy spirit giving forth breath to bring forth life. And this same type of life giving holy spirit, is the same kind of spirit that is said to raise Jesus Christ from the dead, and also all who are believers and sons of the resurrection as well, as it is holy spirit inside each that brings forth life.

There is not just one holy spirit, but many. Each believer receives a distinct holy spirit, which is indeed an angel given to each believer to inhabit the body of each believer, that is sent from heaven to guide, teach, reveal things of the future, give power, sanctify, and perfect.

For a deeper study on these topics, I recommend reading the following studies,

http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2016/01/08/why-the-trinity-is-a-false-doctrine/

http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2015/12/1...-also-began-only-the-father-has-no-beginning/

http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2015/12/2...ng-that-lives-in-us-that-is-sent-from-heaven/

http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2016/01/15/the-power-of-the-spirit-and-being-baptized-in-holy-spirit/

I am seeing so much flawed reasoning I am only rugged enough to read what is in view without following the links. One need only read the New Testament casually to see clearly the Father, Son and Holy Spirit mentioned over an over again. They are referred to collectively as the Godhead in Colossians 2:9. There is much more to mention but I will leave you to your opinion and will stand with mine.

 

[robycop3]

In the story of jesus' baptism in Scripture, we see Jesus being physically present, of course, with the Holy Spirit appearing in the forma a dove, being physically separate from Jesus, and a voice from heaven, undoubtedly the voice of God The Father, Yahweh, saying "This is My beloved SON...", and Scripture calls eacha them "God" in sundry places, as well as Jesus saying speaking against the Holy Spirit shall never be forgiven, which is all the proof I need for the Holy Trinity, as Scripture is 100% correct.

Sure, the concept is hard for us to understand, but we must remember GOD is unimaginably superior to man in every way.