Re: The Trinity in 5 verses flat
Please, excuse the double post. I've attempted to show Scott777ab how the verses he quoted are not necessarily proof that of the Trinitarian Doctrine.
Quote:Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Us, could be the Royal Form. As in, "We are not amused". After all, the Christians and Jews see God as a Lord, a Deity, a King. It is perfectly acceptable for Kings to use the first person plural when referring to themselves.
This can be counter-argued, by stating that the Hebrew used in that text is Elohim which is a plural term. However, this does not support Trinity. Elohim means gods. Therefore, that word supports Polytheism, not Trinity. There is no Gods, only one God, or at least, that is what the potentially flawed Bible claims anyway.
He could also have been talking to the Angels, when he said, Us and we.
Quote:1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Jo... What is Jo? John?
My version of John gives this:
Quote:7For there are three that testify: 8the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement
NIV
Furthermore, what does it mean by these three are one? One in what sense? In agreeance with each other or physically? It could after all, mean in agreement, that their testimony coincides.
After all, this is not the only passage in the Bible which Biblical literalists do not take literally.
Remember this one in Genesis?
Quote:But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 2:17, KJV
If taken literally, it means they will die in the same day. But they didn't. So it is argued that God didn't mean die, literaly, he meant spiritually.
So how are we meant to know whether it means the three are one literally or whether they are only one in thought or testimony or agreement?
Quote:Verse Three and Four
Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jhn 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.
Does that mean the Word was God as in they are the same being, or that the Word happened to be God, in the sense that it was the word God and not God himself?
Or is it that John is merely stating in terms of metaphors (and the Bible uses a lot of it) that when Jesus speaks, his words are that of God? I mean, let's face it, John's Gospel doesn't even cover Jesus' birth. It's not a completely literal account. There's some poetic licence going on here...
Furthermore, Jesus himself always stated that he represented God and that he was the Son. He never said he was God, which he should have done if he wanted to emphasis his aspect of the Trinity.
Quote:Luk 10:22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and [he] to whom the Son will reveal [him].
This does not support the Trinity. It only states that you can trust the Son.
Now, let's take the logical conclusion.
If Jesus is a part of God, he must be infallible.
Quote:Mar 13:30 Truly I tell you, this generation will not disappear until all these things take place.
Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth will disappear, but my words will never disappear."
Mar 13:32 "No one knows when that day or hour will come-not the angels in heaven, not the Son, but only the Father.
Mar 13:33 Be careful! Watch out! For you don't know when the time will come.
This is in reference to his second coming. He clearly believes it will be within the then present generation. Second, he admits he does not know the exact hour, but only the FATHER knows.
The first observation is interesting because Jesus was wrong. Many generations have passed and Jesus has not returned. So either Jesus was mistaken, or his words were recorded incorrectly. If it's the first, this shows that Jesus is not infallible, like God.
The second observation shows that the Son does not share all the knowledge of the Father. The Son, in fact, gets his wisdom from the Father, but the Father still has more knowledge than the Son.
This presents a serious challenge to Trinitarianism.
Know this, however, I am merely digging up old arguments to support the opposition to your belief. I am not highly well versed in the Trinitarian Doctrine and all the evidence for and against it.
