The Trinity

by meadow77 740 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  SwedishChef

  To people who actually read the Bible for what it says, the Trinity is easily seen throughout the Bible. Countless passagages in the Bible prove the fact the Jesus is the Almighty God. 1 Timothy 3:16 and Revelation 1:7-8 being a couple. The Trinity is so easily found in scripture it blows my mind that anyone can deny it. It is not a doctrine easily understood (no man can comprehend the existence of God), but it is one that is easily found.

  Genesis 1:26a "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:"
  Matthew 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"
  1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
  Note- The old testament word most frequently used for God is plural in form.
  God uses plural when speaking of Himself.
• 

  herk

  SwedishChef,

  It's more than a bit pompous to claim that people will see the Trinity if they "actually read the Bible for what it says." I read the Bible every day because I want to know what it actually says. Contrary to your claim, I have never seen evidence of the Trinity anywhere within its pages. The only way it will be seen there is when a person is looking for it and then reads the teaching into the passages. I think you know that deep down in your heart of hearts. It's more than an exaggeration to say that "countless" passages prove that Jesus is Almighty God. Making such a claim is hardly honest.

  Most translations do not agree with the KJV at 1 Timothy 3:16. The original Greek does not say "God was manifest in the flesh." Just as a trinitarian scribe went beyond what is written by inserting 1 John 5:7, someone inserted the word for "God" in place of the original word that means "he who." But not all manuscripts contain this error. So, you chose a poor example.

  Your other examples are also poor. As I stated above,

  In Revelation 1:8 the Father is both the Alpha and Omega and the Lord God Almighty. The latter title is nowhere given to Jesus, despite the attempts of some red-letter Bibles to apply this verse to Jesus.

  The Jews have long held that God was speaking to "all the army of the heavens standing by him, to his right and to his left" when he said "Let us make man in our image," "The man has become like one of us," and "Let us go down."Ge 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; 1 Ki 22:19-22; Job 38:7.

  Matthew 28:19 says nothing about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit being equal persons within the Godhead. Peter, James and John were often mentioned together, but that didn't make them one individual human composed of three persons.

  Only someone who is not a genuine Bible student would be unaware of the truth about 1 John 5:7 that I mentioned above in connection with 1 Timothy 3:16.

  Everyone familiar with Hebrew is familiar with the fact that elohim is plural in majesty, not plural in number. If it referred to more than one person, it would be accompanied by plural verbs, adjectives and pronouns, but it is not. God never calls himself "we." It is always "I" or "I myself." Others never spoke of him as "they," but always as "he."

  Herk
• 

  ThiChi

  SC:
  Not one thing you cited proves anything. Only in your mind.

  Herk: good points!

  Edited by - thichi on 26 November 2002 19:10:27

  Edited by - thichi on 26 November 2002 19:11:46
• 

  herk

  JH,

  You wrote:

  Why can't the bible be easy to understrand. Why is it that so many people searching for the truth can't find it?

  God doesn't want just anybody to understand the Bible. For example, he caused it to be written in such a way that haughty persons would be unable to understand it. Jesus said "To do thus came to be the way approved by him" since he intended to reveal his purposes only to humble persons. (Mt 11:25-27; 13:10-15; 1 Co 2:6-16; Jas 4:6)

  What has complicated things are all the wrong interpretations that have filled our minds since we were children. We know the Bible was written by and for Jews, for example, but we rarely are taught to think like a biblical Jew whose entire hope for the future rested with the promises given to Abraham. Jesus himself was Jewish in his thinking and teaching, as were the apostles and other New Testament writers. Many people tend to focus on the New Testament as the only part of the Bible that is necessary for knowing how God thinks and feels. But the New Testament is less than a fourth of the entire Bible.

  Another factor is the way the Jews themselves have messed up everything. They still prefer human tradition over the inspired accounts. Many, if not most, Christians are also like that.

  To understand the Bible requires effort and concentration since Gods ways and thoughts are higher than ours. (Isa 55:6-11) None of us should expect to really know God well if we are unwilling to make that effort. (Pr 2:1-14; 8:32-36; Mt 7:7, 8) But there is nothing more rewarding in life than letting the Bible teach us how to know God better and also to know his Son.

  Of course, worldly-wise persons are always on hand and eager to ridicule those who believe the Bible. We're called foolish and weak. But the passage of time always vindicates the Bible's superior wisdom and strength compared to the theories, philosophies and thinking of its enemies. (1 Co 1:22-25; 1 Pe 1:24, 25)

  I hope this is helpful.

  Herk
• 

  A Paduan

  By arguing the trinity I think the best you can do is put the non-trinitarian back to the place of limbo.

  "Good for you Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you"
• 

  herk

  Paduan,

  Thanks for mentioning Matthew 16:17. That verse clearly shows that the Trinity teaching is not from God. Instead, it comes from "flesh and blood."

  Peter was commended, not for being a trinitarian and identifying Jesus as God or as God the Son. Instead, he answered Jesus' question by saying, "You are the Christ [Messiah], the Son of the living God." It was that nontrinitarian statement that won Jesus' commendation. Jesus said to Peter the nontrinitarian: "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven." (vs 16) Trinitarians ought to bear that in mind. God revealed to Peter that Jesus was God's Messiah and Son, not God himself.

  Herk
• 

  William Penwell

  From Frontlines documentary, "From Jesus to Christ"

  The Romans tried to beat down Christianity but failed, as we all know. And by the fourth century, Christianity becomes the state religion, and by the end of the fourth century, if not earlier, Christianity is persecuting all non-Christian groups in the Empire. By the end of the fourth century it is illegal to do any form of public worship other than Christianity in the entire Roman Empire. There is a great mystery here, in how this happened. How such an extraordinary reversal, that we begin with Jesus who is executed by the Romans as a public criminal as a threat to the social order, and somehow we wind up three centuries later with Jesus being hailed as a God, as part of the one true God, who is the God of the new Christian Roman Empire. There's a remarkable progress, a remarkable development in the course of three centuries.... It's hard to understand exactly how it happened or why it happened, but it is important to realize that we have a progression and a set of developments, and that Christianity by the fourth century is not the same as the Christianity that we see in the first or even the second.

  As for the Council of Nicea the program goes on to say:

  The Council of Nicea, which took place in 325, was a response to a crisis that developed in the church over the teachings of a presbyter or priest of the church in Alexandria. And his teachings suggested that Jesus was not fully divine, that Jesus was certainly a supernatural figure of some sort, but was not God in the fullest sense. His opponents included a fellow who came to be bishop of Alexandria, Anthanasius, and the folk on that side of the divide insisted that Jesus was fully divine. The Council of Nicea was called to try to mediate that dispute, and the Council did come down on the side of the full divinity of Jesus. It all boils down to one iota of difference. And the debates in the 4th century about the status of Jesus have to do with the Greek word that exemplifies the problem. One party said that Jesus was homo usias with the father, that is of the same being or substance as the father. The other party, the Arian party, argued that Jesus was homoi usias with the father, inserting a single letter "i" into that word. So the difference between being the same and being similar to was the heart of the debate over Arianism. And the Council of Nicea resolved that the proper teaching was that Jesus was of the same being as the father.

  The reason why it was called was so constantine could assume "total imperial control" of the empire under one "uniformity of belief."

  The Emperor Constantine was the moving force in the Council. And he, in effect, called it in order to solve this dispute. He did so because at that time he had just completed his consolidation of authority over the whole of the Roman Empire. Up until 324, he had ruled only half of the Roman Empire. And he wanted to have uniformity of belief, or at least not major disputes within the church under his rule. And so he was dismayed to hear of this controversy that had been raging in Alexandria for several years before his assumption of total imperial control. And in order to dampen that controversy he called the Council.

  Will
• 

  SwedishChef

  Herk, if you want some verses which prove that Jesus is God, then look at the topic "Jesus is God". I posted quite a few verses there. Each one is taken in complete context.
  One good passage is Isaiah 44:6-7: "Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee."
  The Lord King of Israel and the redeemer the Lord of Hosts speak as the same person, for they are the same person. In this passage the Lord Jehovah is sending the Lord Jehovah. You can argue it all you want, but it won't change the Scripture.
  "Isaiah 44:24, Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;"
  This passage says that ONE God made everything.
  How bout Colossians 1:15-19: Who [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:[the first fruits, the first to be ressurected incorruptible] For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;"
  Hmmm, what does it mean that Jesus is the image of the invisible God?
  Jesus says "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father" John 14:9.
  Acts 20:28 "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."
  Hmmm, what does it mean that God purchased the church with his own blood, when Jesus was the one who shed his blood at Calvary? No, of course scripture can't mean what it says! That would mean a JWs are being fed lies!
  And what does it mean in Exodus 34:14? "For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:"
  If I'm not mistaken Philippians 2:10 says that every knee shall bow to Jesus Christ the Lord. That sounds like worship to me! (Jesus Christ was also worshipped by ... ... the wise men (Matthew 2:11) ... the disciples in the boat (Matthew 14:33) ... the women at the empty tomb (Matthew 28:10) ... the disciples at His ascension (Matthew 28:17) (Note in the Great Commission that the "name" of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is singular -- Matthew 28:19) ... the man born blind, who Jesus healed (John 9:38) ... all God's angels (Hebrews 1:6).) Now unless God changes his standards, Jesus has to be God. Jesus was worshipped!
  Wow, it is just sooooo hard to find scripture that says Jesus is God! Try also reading the most obvious one: John 1:1.

  PS. I just love how every JW is a Hebrew and Greek expert!
• 

  A Paduan

  herk,

  that's how it 'clearly' is to you,

  'clearly' to me, is that one does not understand the divinity of Christ ("I am"), by any wrestling of flesh & blood.

  "Peter the nontrinitarian" lol

  "God revealed to Peter that Jesus was God's Messiah and Son, not God himself."

  I take it that you have read that " no one can say Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit " ?

  Sort of the same thing as " flesh and blood has not...." isn't it ? - maybe not for you.

  paduan

  Edited by - a paduan on 27 November 2002 0:26:45
• 

  William Penwell

  How much of the bible can we believe is what was originally written? Case in point is one of the early Christian fathers, Marcion from the 2st century. He edited the "scrpitures" by cutting and pasting to support his doctrinal view. As the following that I posted in an earlier posting says:

  From the book, Honest to Jesus by Robert W. Funk;

  Marcion, a wealthy shipowner who organized his own Christian sect, gathered into his Bible only those scriptures that supported his theological position. After coming to Rome from Pontus in Asia Minor (ca 140-150), Marcion promulgated a collection of "scriptures" consisting of the Gospel of Luke and ten letters of Paul, all heavily edited. The lesson was not lost on the later church. Both Marcion and the Church excluded books if they were deemed to deviate from desirable doctrine or practice. Marcion is also know to have taken scissors and paste to the documents he chose, He cut out parts of Luke and the Pauline letters that he didn't like. We do not know how often that same approach was used prior to the fixing of the text in the fourth and fifth centuries

  Will

  Edited by - william penwell on 27 November 2002 0:24:33