Quote:
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.
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59Then took they up stones to cast at him
John 10:28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30I and my Father are one.
31Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
Rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.....
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Rev 21:6And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
7He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
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.
No idea what you mean by this. The passage plainly says the Word was God. What are you talking about? Seems like you are really stretching, trying to make it say something else that even you don't understand.
That is not a logical objection at all.
How does omitting Jesus' birth make it inaccurate in any respect?
Wolf_ODonnell wrote: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.
Yes, he did.
Quote:John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59Then took they up stones to cast at him
John 10:28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30I and my Father are one.
31Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
You go, Wolfie! I would add only that many bible translations render the noted portion of John 1:1 as 'the word was divine'. The Greek text clearly indicates a generic understanding of Jesus' divinity.
So Real Life did you like my the Trinity 5 verses flat post???
real life wrote:
That is not a logical objection at all.
How does omitting Jesus' birth make it inaccurate in any respect?
I never said it was inaccurate. I said it was proof that John was far less concerned with the physical, historical account of Jesus's early life and more with the spirituality of it. Hence, that paragraph cannot be literal and is more a metaphorical spiritual account of Jesus' authority, not how he came to be.
Inaccuracy has nothing to do with the argument I made.
My argument there, however, has everything to do with on what particular aspect of Jesus that John focused on. And that particular aspect happens to be Jesus' authority, not his birth.
That part of the Gospels can be easily interpreted as meaning, Jesus is God's authority on Earth and what he says is God's word.
Quote:Wolf_ODonnell wrote: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.
Yes, he did.
Quote:John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59Then took they up stones to cast at him
That proves nothing about the Trinity. It merely states that he was there before Abraham. It says nothing about him being a part of God.
Quote:John 10:28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30I and my Father are one.
31Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
Here, we have a passage that internally contradicts itself. If he is a part of the Trinity, no one part can be greater than all. But he clearly states that his Father is greater than all, that includes him. Then he states he and his father are one.
Did he mean spiritually one or literally one?
John 14:2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.
5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?
6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
7If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9Jesus saith unto him, 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, Show us the Father?
10Believest 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.
11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
Because let's face it, there were many times when Jesus and even God did not speak literally. The parables are a good example. When God said, you will die the same day when you ate of the fruit of the Tree with the stupidly long name, he did not mean it literally. Unless he did mean it literally, in which case he lied or was wrong.
The Trinitarian Doctrine, however, falls flat on its face when you do not consider the Bible and consider recorded, secular history.
It had to be reinforced by fallible, humans. First by the Nicene creed in 325/381AD and the Athanasian creed (circa 500AD). This standardised the texts of the New Testament, but it was ultimately fallible humans that did it.
And let us not forget the pagan origin argument, which I shall link to here:
Theory of pagan origin and influence
Ultimately, the Trinity is no more fact than "talk7200's bizarre Jesus is Lucifer" hypothesis.
The early church understood Jesus to be God. The writings of the NT, and the writings of the early church Fathers show this. It was not the invention of a Council three centuries later.
real life wrote:The early church understood Jesus to be God. The writings of the NT, and the writings of the early church Fathers show this. It was not the invention of a Council three centuries later.
The writings do not show this. They show an argument between the two factions, non-Trinitarian and Trinitarian. I never said it was an invention of the Council, but it was enforced by the Council because of their own prejudices.
There were just as many books arguing against the Trinity that weren't included because they wanted it their way.
I am working on a new Trinity Post that will blow all doubt from the minds of those who believe in GOD.
I am taking my time and actually writing this out on paper frist before I post it here.
Soon you will see a post named:
The Trinity: In Depth
Have fun.
The New Testament books were chosen solely for their purpose in presenting the Trinitarian Doctrine.
Almost all christians would agree Jesus lived on earth and died a humiliating death to redeem mankind. But another very important reason was to answer the issues Satan raised about all God's intelligent creation. One of these was clearly raised in the time of Job.
Recall that Satan claimed Job served God only out of selfishness. Accordingly, God gave Satan the opportunity to prove his point. Job passed his test; but what about the most important of God's creations, his firstborn?
That Jesus was also subject to the same challenge was notably shown when Satan tempted Jesus. For example, how could Satan have offered the kingdoms of the world to Jesus if he did not in fact own them? Later, when Jesus faced death, how could Jesus prove his integrity to his creator if he were the creator?
The trinity doctrine is a god dishonoring pagan fabrication.
Wolf_ODonnell wrote:The New Testament books were chosen solely for their purpose in presenting the Trinitarian Doctrine.
I thought your position was that the Bible did not present Christ as God? So now you are saying it does, but you simply disagree?
neologist wrote:Almost all christians would agree Jesus lived on earth and died a humiliating death to redeem mankind. But another very important reason was to answer the issues Satan raised about all God's intelligent creation. One of these was clearly raised in the time of Job.
Recall that Satan claimed Job served God only out of selfishness. Accordingly, God gave Satan the opportunity to prove his point. Job passed his test; but what about the most important of God's creations, his firstborn?
That Jesus was also subject to the same challenge was notably shown when Satan tempted Jesus. For example, how could Satan have offered the kingdoms of the world to Jesus if he did not in fact own them? Later, when Jesus faced death, how could Jesus prove his integrity to his creator if he were the creator?
The trinity doctrine is a god dishonoring pagan fabrication.
The Bible does not teach that Christ was created. The term 'firstborn' refers to His position as heir, and the First to be resurrected from the dead, not to being a created being.
The Bible refers to Christ as Creator ,
see Hebrews 1:8But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy."[f]
10He also says,
"In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end."[g]
It clearly says that it is the Son that is referred to when He says "in the beginning , you O Lord[/b] laid the foundations........"
And also
Colossians 1:15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16For by him all things were created[/u]: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead[/u]
The Old Testament definitely does not present God as a Trinity.
real life wrote:Jesus' prehuman existence:neologist wrote:Almost all christians would agree Jesus lived on earth and died a humiliating death to redeem mankind. But another very important reason was to answer the issues Satan raised about all God's intelligent creation. One of these was clearly raised in the time of Job.
Recall that Satan claimed Job served God only out of selfishness. Accordingly, God gave Satan the opportunity to prove his point. Job passed his test; but what about the most important of God's creations, his firstborn?
That Jesus was also subject to the same challenge was notably shown when Satan tempted Jesus. For example, how could Satan have offered the kingdoms of the world to Jesus if he did not in fact own them? Later, when Jesus faced death, how could Jesus prove his integrity to his creator if he were the creator?
The trinity doctrine is a god dishonoring pagan fabrication.
The Bible does not teach that Christ was created. The term 'firstborn' refers to His position as heir, and the First to be resurrected from the dead, not to being a created being.
The Bible refers to Christ as Creator ,
see Hebrews 1:8But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy."[f]
10He also says,
"In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end."[g]
It clearly says that it is the Son that is referred to when He says "in the beginning , you O Lord[/b] laid the foundations........"
And also
Colossians 1:15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16For by him all things were created[/u]: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead[/u]
"The LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.
23: Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth.
24: When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water.
25: Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth;
26: before he had made the earth with its fields, or the first of the dust of the world.
27: When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep,
28: when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep,
29: when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth,
30: then I was beside him, like a master workman; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always,
31: rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the sons of men." (Proverbs 8:22-31) Revised Standard Version
