TRINITY Challenge for JW's, Unitarians and Anyone Else

by UnDisfellowshipped 457 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • UnDisfellowshipped

    Great post Peacedog! And great reasoning and use of logic and exegesis! (Something which is rare to find)

    One thing that I would add to bolster your argument even more: The context of Isaiah 44.

    At the beginning of Isaiah 44, Jehovah says "I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. And who is there like me?... Does there exist a God besides me? No... I have recognized none."

    Then Jehovah goes on to say, at Isaiah 44:24, "I, Jehovah, ... am stretching out the heavens BY MYSELF, laying out the earth. WHO WAS WITH ME?"

    So, Jehovah is specifically saying those words to prove that there were NO OTHER GODS together with Him helping Him to create heaven and earth.

    Compare Deuteronomy 32:39 ("There are NO GODS TOGETHER WITH ME")

  • UnDisfellowshipped

    djeggnog said:

    "I'm not going to quibble, but no, Paul is not explaining anything about God's nature at Romans 1:20. He is making the point that God's qualities, His "eternal power and Godship" being among them, are perceived by the things made."

    My Reply:

    Do you know what the word "Godship" means? Do you know what the Greek word means? How do you define the word "Godship"?

    I will let the "Insight" Book explain for us what this word means:

    "Insight" Book, Volume 1, Page 639 (Under the heading "Divine"):

    At Romans 1:20 the apostle refers to the undeniable visible evidence of God’s “invisible qualities,” particularly his “eternal power and Godship [Thei·o´tes].” ... according to Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, the Greek word thei·o´tes means “divine nature, divinity.” (P. 788) So there is a basis for rendering thei·o´tes as referring to the quality of being a god, not the person of God, and this is supported by the context. The apostle is discussing things that are discernible in the physical creation. For example, while the creation does not reveal the name of God, it does give evidence of his “eternal power”--needed to create and sustain the universe. The physical creation also displays his “Godship,” the fact that the Creator truly is God and is worthy of our worship.

    So then, "Godship" means "Divine Nature," "The quality of being a god," "the fact that the Creator truly is God and is worthy of our worship."

  • UnDisfellowshipped


    Great suggestion!

    Defining words and terms and phrases is something everyone should do at the beginning of a debate/discussion.

    I will do so here:

    The following list gives the definition of words, terms, and phrases that I will use in this debate:

    * "Godship": "Divine Nature" [from the "Insight" Book and Liddell & Scott]; "the state of being God" [Thayer], the Essence or Being of God.

    * "Deity": Same as "Godship."

    * "Divinity": Same as "Godship."

    * "Godhead": Same as "Godship."

    * "Trinity": Three Distinct Eternal All-Powerful Persons who share the same Divine Nature.

    * "Triune": Three-in-Unity.

    * "The Logos": The Spirit Person who existed with God in the beginning, through whom all things were made. Translated as "The Word" in most Bibles.

    * "Only-Begotten": "The Greek word mo·no·ge·nes´ is defined by lexicographers as “single of its kind, only,” or “the only member of a kin or kind.” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 1889, p. 417; Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford, 1968, p. 1144)" (That was a quote from the "Insight" Book, Volume 2, Page 556)

    * "Firstborn": The one who holds the highest rank, the preeminence, the first place, the "most high" position. (See Psalm 89:27)

    * "God" with a Capital "G": The One True God by Nature, the Supreme Being, the Creator, the Almighty.

    * "god" with a lower-case "g": Anyone or thing that is called a god by people, or that is worshiped, or a representative of the True God who does not have the Divine Nature.

    * "Angel" with a Capital "A": "The Angel of the Lord," The Special Divine Angel that has God's Name within Him, who is also Jehovah.

    * "angel" with a lower-case "a": Any one of the millions of created spirit persons who serve God and do not have the Divine Nature.

  • UnDisfellowshipped

    djeggnog said:

    "No. I cannot agree with how you phrased point #4, and as to your point #6, Jehovah did make Moses God to Pharaoh, did He not? (Exodus 7:1) In fact, there are many gods mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures, not the least of which were the judges of Israel (Psalm 82:1, 6, 7)"

    My Reply:

    You got ahead of me! lol. Good job! I was planning to write today about those who are called "gods."

    You probably were not expecting me to, but I agree 100% that Jehovah called Moses a "god" and that the judges of Israel were called "gods." There may even be verses where the angels or human kings of Israel are called "gods."

    There is only One True God by Nature, there are others who can be called "gods" in a lesser sense. These include representatives and spokesmen for the True God, who have been placed in positions of authority, such as Moses, Israelite Judges, and perhaps Davidic Kings as well as holy angels. These are called "gods" because they are in a position where they are supposed to speak for the One True God in His Name as His representatives. (See Exodus 4:15-16; 7:1; Psalm 82; John 10:35-36; Psalm 45:6; Psalm 8:5; Psalm 86:8) There are also false gods, such as mythical gods, idols, Pagan human kings, rulers, Satan, and the demons. These false gods are called "gods" because people worship them and because they exercise power over others. (See 2nd Corinthians 4:4; Exodus 12:12; Deuteronomy 4:28; 32:17; Ezekiel 28:2; Isaiah 14:14)

    Regarding these so-called gods, the Apostle Paul wrote the following:

    1 Corinthians 8:4-6: ...there is no God but one. For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.

    Now, at first glance, this passage may appear to be saying that Jesus is not God, but I will comment on this in a bit. I will not "skirt around" that issue. But first things first.

    Let us examine this passage closely, for it is a very important passage for correctly understanding all of the other Scriptures in the Bible.

    Paul starts off by saying "there is no God but one." Now, what does Paul mean here when he says there is no other God, except for the One that he is preaching?

    Paul goes on to say that there are many who are CALLED "gods" and "lords" (some are in heaven and some on earth), but to Christians, there is only One True God, and only One True Lord.

    So then, Paul is teaching that EVERY OTHER "god" besides The Father and Jesus, whether in heaven or on earth, are merely CALLED "gods" or "so-called gods."

    But what does Paul mean here when he says there is only one "God"? By comparing Galatians 4:8 and Romans 1:20, 25, we can see clearly that Paul is saying that there is only ONE God who is God BY NATURE, only One who has the Divine Nature, and that all other "gods" are NOT Gods by Nature, even if they are "called gods."

    So, from this, we can see that even though Moses, the judges of Israel, the Davidic Kings, and the angels were CALLED "gods" because they spoke for the One True God, they were actually NOT Gods by Nature--they did NOT possess the Divine Nature of God.

    However, did you notice that Paul EXCLUDES Jesus from "those called gods." Jesus is NOT one of the "so-called gods" that Paul spoke about there.

    If Jesus is not one of those who are called gods, then does that mean He possesses the Divine Nature, and is truly God by Nature? I will discuss this more in another post later.

    At first glance, 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 ["there is actually to us one God the Father"] does appear (to some people) that it is teaching that ONLY The Father is the True God for Christians, and this excludes Jesus from being the One True God.

    However, if we apply that exact same logic to the entire passage, then we must also conclude that since it says "there is actually to us... one Lord, Jesus Christ," this would EXCLUDE The Father from being the True Lord. But, we know that is false from several Scriptures which clearly teach that The Father is Lord. (Luke 10:21; Revelation 11:15)

    The best way to interpret this passage is to notice that Paul equates the so-called "gods" with the so-called "lords." Paul lumps them both together. He equates them. The "gods" are not a higher class of beings than the "lords."

    In the same way, the True God is not a higher class of being or nature than the True Lord. Both the True God and the True Lord are SEPARATE from those who are merely called "gods."

    You will notice that there IS a difference in their roles or functions (the work they perform). The Father is the Source of all things and all things came Through Jesus.

    In addition, the Scriptures teach that you must never "venerate," "worship," or render "sacred service" to any creature, but only to the Creator. (Romans 1:25; Matthew 4:10)

    Even if a creature is highly exalted and is in a God-given position of authority and is speaking for the One True God, the Scriptures still command us NEVER to "worship" or "do obeisance" (Greek word is "Proskyneo" or a variation) to creatures. The Bible even FORBIDS doing "obeisance" to the Apostle Peter who represented God on earth and spoke for Him (Acts 10:25-26), and it FORBIDS "worshiping" the holy angel who was God's spokesman in the Book of Revelation! (Revelation 19:9-10 and 22:8-9)

    However, God the Father commands all people and angels to "worship," "do obeisance," "bow down," "serve," and "honor" Jesus. (Hebrews 1:6; Revelation chapter 5; John 5:23; Philippians 2:9-11)

    So, from this we can determine that either Jesus is NOT a creature, but instead is the Divine Creator who deserves our worship and obeisance, OR the Bible contradicts itself and should not be trusted.

  • UnDisfellowshipped


    I hope you don't mind, but I would like to reply to your earlier post you made regarding Hebrews chapters 1 and 2 before I return to our regular debate we have going.

    djeggnog said:

    "When anyone reads the first two chapters of Hebrews without theological underpinnings, it is clear that the apostle Paul is not just speaking generally about the angels of God through whom God communicated to the Hebrew forefathers "long ago," but Paul is referring to one angel in particular through whom God spoke, who he calls "a Son ...through whom [God] made the systems of things," and who we learn, based on Paul's quoting Psalm 102:25-27 and applying this psalm to Jesus, to have been responsible for laying "the foundations of the earth" as well as the heavens, and which we also learn, based on Paul's quoting Nathan's prophecy at 2 Samuel 7:14 to Jesus, to be a very distinguished angel. (Colossians 1:15, 16)"

    My Reply:

    You say that if anyone reads the first two chapters of Hebrews "without theological underpinnings" it is clear that Paul is referring to one angel, a very distinguished angel named Jesus.

    How do you arrive at the belief that Jesus is an angel? Can you show Scriptures which teach that Jesus is an angel?

    And especially, where does Hebrews chapter 1 or chapter 2 say that Jesus is an angel? Because I have read those chapters many, many times, and have NEVER seen anywhere where it says Jesus is an angel.

    djeggnog said:

    "Contrary to what you evidently believe to be true about the Lord Jesus Christ -- and you are certainly entitled to your opinion -- neither Hebrews 1:5 nor Hebrews 1:13 eliminating the possibility of Jesus having been an angel both before he became a human being and after his resurrection and ascension to heaven. Anyway, obediently getting actively involved in the disciple-making activity now taking place during these last days as Jesus commanded for a witness and living our lives in accord with the good news is what we must do if we truly believe in Jesus and are exercising faith in the ransom provision that means everlasting life. Certainly arguing over whether Jesus was 100% human and 100% God (having a 200% hybrid nature?) or whether Jesus is Jehovah, but not the Father, and even being awarded the gold trophy for winning such an argument just isn't the same as our telling others about the good news in order that we and those we tell might be saved. Now engaging others in such arguments that have obtained since the fourth century AD over Jesus' divinity to no real purpose is useless, for nowhere do we read in the Bible that the one that is awarded the win in such contests will be saved, do we? But what we do read in the Bible is about those who have been reconciled to God through Jesus through their acceptance of the ransom 'provided they continue in the faith,' and that it is only 'those that have endured to the end are the ones that will be saved' (Colossians 1:23; Matthew 10:22)."

    My Reply:

    Would you care to explain how Hebrews 1:5 and Hebrews 1:13 are not eliminating the possibility of Jesus being an angel, when that is clearly the point of those verses that Paul wrote?

    Also, how can anyone possibly teach the "good news" about Jesus, if they don't know the truth about Jesus, or if they have the WRONG Jesus, or they believe FALSE THINGS about Jesus? Jesus said that if people do not believe in His true identity (John 8:24) they will die in their sins.

    How can someone get everlasting life if they are preaching a false "good news" about a false "Jesus"?

    So, before anyone can go out and start preaching the "good news" about Jesus, don't you agree that they better find out WHO He truly is?

    If someone is exercising faith in a FALSE Christ, what good is that going to do for that person? Is God going to save such ones?

    djeggnog said:

    "he was exalted to a position at God's right hand and given an office higher than that held by or given to any of the other angels of God."

    My Reply:

    You said "any other angels of God." Why did you insert the word "other" there which is found no where in Hebrews chapter 1 or 2. Where do those chapters say that Jesus is an angel or that He is an "other angel" or that He is a "distinguished angel"?

    djeggnog said:

    "Out of all of God's angels in heaven, to which of them did God ever declare to be his son, or to be his father. When during his second coming God next sends his Firstborn into the world, all of God's angels will also serve him even as they serve God directing their worship to God through Jesus."

    Hebrews 1:6 does NOT say the angels will worship God through Jesus, it says they will WORSHIP JESUS! And God is the One who commands this!

    In Hebrews 1:7-8, Paul is SEPARATING Jesus from the angels! Paul says that God says one thing about "the angels" and then He says something completely DIFFERENT about HIS SON.

    If Jesus were one of the angels, even a very distinguished angel, then Paul's argument would fail and would make no sense at all, because then God's statement to "the angels" would also apply to Jesus. It would be completely pointless for Paul to say what he said at Hebrews 1:7 if Jesus were one of the angels.

    djeggnog said:

    "Of all of God's angels, who are servants that provide a public service, God's Firstborn was the only one that was declared to be God's Son, the only one who, as such, has come to inherit God's throne due to his integrity and love for righteousness, so that his rulership has come to have greater than that over which other rulers anointed by God were given. As the One that had in the beginning been given the responsibility for the creation of the earth and the heavens, Jesus now has an indestructible life, so that while the things he made are not indestructible and can perish, he will never die and so he lives forever. Since Jesus now possessed immortality, which the other angels do not, it would not inappropriate to think of Jesus as being a God in his own right since the very foundation of his throne is God, as long as we do not forget that is Jehovah from whom Jesus received his throneship, his power and his great authority. (John 20:28; Revelation 3:12)"

    My Reply:

    So, correct me if I am wrong, but it appears to me that you are teaching that there are TWO Immortal Gods that we should serve and worship (or worship One through the other), but One of them is actually an angel, a creature.

    If you are teaching that we should serve TWO Immortal Gods, how does that teaching harmonize with Deuteronomy 32:39, Isaiah 45:5, James 2:19, Isaiah 43:10-11?

    How can the Bible command us to worship a creature at Hebrews 1:6, while at the same time, it forbids us from worshiping creatures at Romans 1:25 and Matthew 4:10?

    Hebrews 1:13-14 says:

    "But with reference to which one of the angels has he ever said: "Sit at my right hand, until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet"? ARE THEY NOT ALL spirits for public service, sent forth to minister for those who are going to inherit salvation?"

    There is no way of denying it. Paul is teaching that ALL (as in, every single one) of the angels are public servant spirits, and God has NEVER said to ANY OF THEM that they should sit at His right hand.

    There it is! Paul has declared that Jesus is NOT one of the angels. He categorizes Jesus as being SEPARATE from ALL ANGELS. Period.

    Would you care to explain how you can harmonize your belief that Jesus is an angel with what Paul said at Hebrews 1:13-14?

    djeggnog said:

    "Jehovah has not subjected the new earth that God is making to angels, but given dominion over it to His Son"

    My Reply:

    But earlier you said that Jesus was an angel. If so, then God actually HAS subjected the world to come to an angel, and Paul was wrong.

  • UnDisfellowshipped

    djeggnog, I will get back to our debate and post more tomorrow after I get home from work, and I believe I am still on "Point [2] Part One -- Jesus".

  • UnDisfellowshipped


    If you look at Ezekiel 14:7 and the surrounding verses closer, it is only in that one verse that Jehovah uses the word "myself". He does not use it in any of the verses where He is using other things or people to accomplish His purpose.

    Also, regarding Psalm 72:18, what if the "wonderful works" or "marvelous deeds" spoken of in that Psalm are referring to God's creating all things? If so, then it would harmonize perfectly with Isaiah 44:24. (Both John Gill's Commentary and Matthew Henry's Commentary said that this verse was speaking of God creating all things)

  • Podobear

    @Peacedog: As promised, would you now answer for me, your understanding of the The Two Lords mentioned in Psalm110, and now laterly the question I have asked in response to Snowbird's comment... why does Jesus still have a God and Father, after his death, resurrection and exaltation.. cf; Revelation 3 to the Church of Philadelphia... what is the name of HIS GOD written on the Head of the Faithful of that Church?

    Many thanks.


  • UnDisfellowshipped


    Hope you don't mind me jumping in here.

    In the Hebrew of Psalm 110 it shows that a Person named YHWH is speaking to a Person who is called the Lord of David, and telling Him to sit at His right hand.

    So there are two Divine Persons -- One is speaking to the other.

    The Trinity Doctrine includes within it the belief that The Father has a greater rank within the Trinity and that the Son obeys the Father, and that the Father is the God of Jesus.

    The early church fathers explained this by using the illustration from Hebrews 1:3 which compares The Son to light rays that are constantly flowing out from the "sun" (The Father). The Father was the Source and The Son proceeds out from Him. Same Nature but different "ranks" and "functions."

    And there was never a time when the Son did not exist because there has never been a time when The Father has not been producing light rays of glory.

  • Podobear

    As a non-Trinitarian and believer that Jesus and Jehovah are separate beings, I accept that Jesus is "divine" in nature, and that is all the Scriptures are saying Undisfellowshipped. The reward for his faithfulness is Immortality.. which he evidently did not have before.

    Following on, he still addresses his God and Father and writes the name "of his God" on the foreheads of the faithful of the church of Philadelphia.

    Would it not have been easier for the Bible writers to pen their words more succinctly if your particular view of Trinitarian concept were the truth?

    NO! The LORD YHWH is different from the Lord (Jesus) because the First is Almighty and the Creator of the Other. The Latter is the faithful creation of the other, and is our means of Salvation. He is the Light of the World, the means of Our Salvation, champion of Jehovah his Father.

    The Bible message is simple throughout, once the difficulties of transliteration from Ancient texts are overcome in the text of our poor excuse of a modern language... English.


Share this