Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 1

hooberus

In this series I hope to discuss some common verses used by the Watchtower to "disprove" the Trinity and deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The first one is 1 Corinthians 8:6:

"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

The Watchtower reasons that since the Father is the one God and is separate from the one Lord Jesus that Jesus could not also be God. However by this same reasoning since Jesus is called the one Lord then the Father could not also be Lord. Yet the Bible in many places calls the Father "Lord". If the Father can be Lord even though the passage calls Jesus the one Lord, then it also stands to reason that Jesus can be the one God also.

In fact Jesus elsewhere is called both Lord and God. John 20:28

"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."

Taken in context this verse (1 Corinthians 8:5-6) actually establishes the full deity of both the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6

5: For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6: But to us there is but one God, the Father, [Thus the Father must be the one true God Jehovah] of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, [Thus Jesus must be the one True Lord Jehovah] by whom are all things, and we by him.

Psalm 136

1: O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever.
2: O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy endureth for ever. (Applicable to the Father 1 Cor. 8:6)
3: O give thanks to the Lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever. (Applicable to the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 8:6)

Deuteronomy 10

17: For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Both the Father and the Son are God of Gods and Lord of Lords both are God both are Lord. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 is showing that though there are those who are "called" gods and lords (idols in this context), for the Christian there is only one God Jehovah and one Lord Jehovah.

ellderwho

Hooberus,

I have not shown the elder I study with this one yet:

Gen 19:24 NWT --Then Jehovah made it rain sulphur and fire from Jehovah from the heavens.

Or look at the many theophanies(seen God) in the OT. If you can not look upon Yahweh who were they or what were they beholding?

Just a thought

ellderwho

mizpah

Hooberus:

The context of 1 Co. 8 has to be considered. Paul is contrasting the "many gods and many lords" with the true "God" and true "Lord" of the Christians. He, in fact, recognizes the existence of gods and lords in heaven and earth. (Vs. 5) The terms are not exclusive and are used in the Bible to describe angels and men.

I don't think most unitarians disagree with the fact that both deity and lordship was conferred upon Christ by his Father. Therefore, Thomas's words are appropriate. The point of disagreement would be the convoluted arguments that try to rationalize the simple words of Paul "one God, the Father" and "one Lord, Jesus Christ" to make it sound as if the trinity doctrine was being promulgated. Wouldn't it be much easier to just accept Paul's words at face value?

Dean Porter

Hooberus, I think you are really stretching the meaning of this verse beyond belief. Clearly Paul is showing the importance of the position and role of Christ in the faith of the Christian but at the same time upholding the fact that THE FATHER is still the one and only God. If Paul was trying to show monotheistic Jews that JHWH was in fact three persons then why did he not mention the Holy Spirit in this passage? If Pauls intention here was to show new light on the identity of GOD then he only at best showed that the Godhead was composed of the Father and the Christ. But even that is not actually proved here. It is such a simple and clear statement - the Father is God. The terms Lord and God can be applied to many individuals and they are in the bible to the Father and the Christ AND ALSO to men. Paul is not saying that only the Christ can be called Lord as the term Lord was even used in Bible times as a simple form of address like we would address a person as Sir or Lord ( like a Judge or Minister ). Paul is just showing that our faith revolves around these two most important persons and of these only the Father is God. I could write much more on the subject but it would be pointless as the truth of the scripture is so simple and straight forward. There is no question of bad translation or debate about Greek words - the Father is God - end of story. Goodnight to the Trinity!

ClassAvenger

Dean Porter, Paul was not trying to give a lesson on the Trinity, he was just stating what he knew and believed (that both the Father and Jesus are God). Therefore, there was no reason to talk about the Holy Spirit.

Hooberus, Amen brother.

ClassAvenger

Dean Porter, prove us your simple and straightforward explanations.

ellderwho

Dean Porter,

You make an interesting point,

Christ can be called Lord as the term Lord was even used in Bible times as a simple form of address like we would address a person as Sir or Lord

1Cor. 12:3 .....' nobody cay say: "Jesus is Lord!" except by the Holy Spirit. NWT

Or that Jesus is the "KURIOS."

ellderwho

Dean Porter

Classavenger,
you say that Paul was not trying to give a lesson on the Trinity here and thus did not need to mention the HOLY SPIRIT. Well, whilst I respect your point of view and your right to believe what you want, I think you are avoiding the point of my earlier comment. Many have pointed out in print and on the internet that Paul was using the terms of the Shema in this passage. By doing so he was showing the importance of the Christ to our faith and how bound up together is the acknowledging of the authority of the Christ as part and parcel of our worship of Isreals God THE FATHER. Now, I believe that trinitarians say that the Trinity is outlined and revealed in the New Testament. Surely this was an opportunity for Paul to instruct on the Trinity if this was a major part of the new light that Christians had to teach especially to Jews who had only previously understood God to be one person. However, He does not do so. You suggest that he " had no reason to" i.e. speak about the Holy Spirit here. Well I cannot see your reasoning here because surely if Paul 's purpose in this passage and in all his writings is to proclaim the new light of the Trinity then every opportunity to do so would be clearly taken and lucidly demonstrated. Why did he not say " but to us there is only One God, the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit. If the Trinity was a bible doctrine he would surely have stated it here. He does not do so because he does not teach a triune Godhead. I think that some of the strongest arguements against belief in the trinity is not what some passages do say but rather what some passages DO NOT SAY. For all the debate we could go in to over titles like LORD and GOD and the application of them to the Father and the Christ , the SIMPLE point here in this passage where Paul is discussing the important persons in our worship he only mentions TWO PERSONS not three. I think this is a serious omission and one that would confuse the readers if the Trinity was later to be enunciated further. But to my mind I think it is the case that Paul has simply stated that the Father and the Christ are the objects of our worship. Christ being our Lord to the glory of .... GOD THE FATHER.
I responded to this topic as I felt that this scripture is one of the strongest arguements against the Trinity and no amount of " stretching the truth" is going to change the fact of what it says and what it does not say.

regards

DEAN

herk

Mizpah and Dean Porter have made some excellent points.

Psalm 41:13 says concerning God, "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel, From everlasting to everlasting. Amen and Amen." Jesus cannot be the Lord God Almighty since he has not always been "the Lord" from eternity past just as God has been.

Acts 2:36 says concerning Jesus, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified." Obviously there was a time when Jesus was not Lord.

No one appointed God to anything. He has supreme authority and is the giver of all things. That cannot be said of Jesus. And so, Jesus said,

"All things have been handed over to me by my Father." (Matthew 11:27)
"All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth." (Matthew 28:18)
"The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand." (John 3:35)
"Even as Thou gavest [the Son] authority over all mankind." (John 17:2)

We read elsewhere:

"Jesus [knew] that God had given all things into his hands." (John 13:3)
"[God] seated him ... far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come. And he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him as head over all things to the church." (Ephesians 1:20-22)
"Therefore also God highly exalted him , and bestowed on him the name which is above every name." (Philippians 2:9)
"[Jesus] is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to him ." (1 Peter 3:22)

Every knee must bend at the name of Jesus, but such bending of the knee is in effect bending to the Father since Jesus at the present time is acting in behalf of the Father. But it will not always be that way. Someday, as 1 Corinthians 15:28 points out, "the Son himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to him , that God may be all in all."

Herk

rocketman

Good points Herk.....it's hard to grasp an equality between God and Jesus with verses like that.

Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 1

Share this