Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 1

by hooberus 133 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

ellderwho

Herk,
I certainly do not want a Trinity debate for I do not understand the trinity.
Exactly how many times does Paul have to testify to the fact that Jesus is not Almighty God before he is actually believed?

Phillippians 2:6 Pauls says"who, being in very nature God , did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.
I guess he is talking to me.
Paul did not claim that Jesus is God, that Jesus is eternal or that Jesus is the Creator.

I thought Paul said in Col 1:16 "for by him all things were created"
and someone who is begotten comes into existence as a living creature after he is begotten.

Pauls says in v17 "He is before all things"
If Jesus created all things when was he created?
ellderwho
herk
Ellderwho,
The crux of the question is the Holy Spirit enables a believer to declare Jesus is LORD or KURIOS. Thus, why would we need the Holy Spirit to declare Jesus as something less(sir) than the KURIOS?
Why would the Holy Spirit give Jesus an identity different from the identity God gave him? If we actually do have the Holy Spirit, what should our answer be to the question, "Who is Jesus?" Should we say he is God? Notice the answers that were correctly given by the apostles:
"'But what about you?' he asked. 'Who do you say I am?' Simon Peter answered, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' Jesus replied, 'Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.'" (Matthew 16:15, 16)
"'But what about you?' he asked. 'Who do you say I am?' Peter answered, 'You are the Christ.'" (Mark 8:29)
"'But what about you?' he asked. 'Who do you say I am?' Peter answered, 'The Christ of God.'" (Luke 9:20)
Please note that it was God himself who revealed the true answer to Peter. "The Christ" is not equivalent to "God." "Christ" means "anointed." No one can anoint God, but God did anoint Christ.
Anyone, even a person without the Holy Spirit, can say "Jesus is Lord." But in the pages of the Bible, the Holy Spirit reveals the full significance and impact of that title. Clearly, the Holy Spirit teaches that Jesus is an agent of God who speaks and acts for God at the present time. Nowhere does the Holy Spirit teach that Jesus is Almighty God. It teaches that only "the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ" can lay claim to that lofty position and title.
Herk
ellderwho

Herk,
I concur in part.
I have a problem understanding verses that intrinsically tie Jesus to the Father.
Micah 5:2 to Psalm 90:2
John the Baptist is to prepare the way for the coming of the ______; Isa 40:3,10; Matt 3:1-3; Luke 1:76
The angel announces to Mary that the child will be called "Immanuel" [God with us.]Matt 1:23
When the beginning began, was the Word already in existence? Jn1:1
Who is creator of the universe; Jn 1:3; Col 1:16,17; Heb. 1:10-12,2:10
But in Issaih 44:24 "I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who stretched out the earth by myself."
What am I to do with these verses?
ellderwho
JCanon

But in Issaih 44:24 "I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who stretched out the earth by myself."

Language is always understood in context. Thus if one verse says all things were made "for him, by him and through him" and this one says he made all things "himself" then you have to combine them in the context of both verses. It would be similar to:
If you were in an architect partnership who built skyscrapers and designed great buildings, you would say "we built this and we built that". But perhaps there was a personal project you wanted to do yourself that your partners decided they didn't want to participate in. Thus you built a special center for Karaoke Music that seated 20,000. Then you could say: "I built that myself". That works in the context of you not having a "partner", that is, a collaborative partner. But would you understand that the architect actually did the actual building himself? No.
So we shouldn't take things expressed out of context of what they mean, nor presume two statements that could have a conflict if taken one way and not another means the author is in conflict.
Thus in the case of the heavens and earth, God is taking credit for HIS creative work and design, though Christ was there to execute the details. Because God was the original conceptualist, he can properly claim the work as his own and solely his own.
JC
herk

Ellderwho,
It seems I have to repeat my question: Exactly how many times does Paul have to testify to the fact that Jesus is not Almighty God before he is actually believed?
So far, we in this thread who do not accept the Trinity dogma have supplied an abundance of texts that disprove the Trinity.
Now, if by far the majority of texts teach against the Trinity, how should we view those comparatively few that seem to support it? Should we attribute more force to those few and ignore the majority? I am sincerely interested in what your answer to that question would be.
Isn't it more reasonable to humbly acknowledge that perhaps we misunderstand those few that seem to contradict the majority? If we believe that the Bible is inspired of God, we surely will not view it as a book that contradicts itself.
Do you really believe that Philippians 2:6 teaches that Jesus is equal to God? Let me show you why it simply doesn't:
As far as I know, only the NIV says that Jesus "was in very nature God." The translators here are showing their bias toward the Trinity rather than making an effort to convey the original meaning. Most translations say he was "in the form of God." (See ASV, ESV, KJV, KJ21, NASB, NKJV, and YLT) So the truth of the matter is that Jesus is "in the form of God," not that he is God himself. The Greek word for "form" occurs in only one other place, at Mark 16:12, and there even the NIV says "form," not "nature." As I've shown in an earlier post, Paul most certainly did not believe that Jesus is God. Jesus has been "given" all authority in heaven and on earth to represent God and speak for him. And in that sense he is "in the form of God." The theme of Philippians 2 is humility like Christ's. Having humility, it never entered into Christ's mind that he should "consider equality with God something to be grasped."
If you really want to understand the Bible, I would not recommend the NIV. It shows far more bias than even the NWT.
Does Colossians 1:16 prove that Jesus is the Creator of the universe? As JCanon expressed it above, "we shouldn't take things expressed out of context of what they mean." So, what is the context of this verse? Is Paul writing about the Genesis creation--the creation of rivers, mountains, animals, birds, etc.? No. Paul is writing about "the new creation." He wrote: "For by [Christ] all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he himself will come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in him, and through him to reconcile all things to himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross; through him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven." (Colossians 1:16-20)
A careful reading of these verses and the entire epistle to the Colossians reveals that Paul's interest is in new things that God is creating. These have to do with the church and the kingdom of God. They focus on how God by means of Christ will reconcile and restore all creation back to himself.
Yes, as Colossians 1:17 says, "[Christ] is before all things." He is the foundation and builder by God's authority and power of a new heavens and a new earth wherein righteousness will dwell. No one can enter that new realm without going through Christ.
In Bible study, our attitude should always be this: If a comparatively few texts contradict the majority, and if our faith is that the Bible does not actually contradict itself, the likelihood is that somewhere we ourselves are missing the point of the context in one or another of the texts.
Does the Bible teach that Jesus is God? The emphatic answer of the overwhelming majority of texts is "Absolutely not!"
Herk
Pistoff

Talk, talk talk............for me, I do not believe in the trinity, but have come to see that the WT has intentionally dumbed down the discussion about the divinity of Jesus in order to make it "simple" and for all things to harmonize the way they want.
I fail to see how the discussion is even important; can anyone make the case about why this is important? If it was important for me to think that the trinity is true, should there not be more evidence? Don't give me the one about it needing to develop; by the time the trinity was declared true, the "church" was more about political power and less about religious liberation from needles rules and tyrants.
The scriptures that could go either way do not prove anything to me other than that the bible writers and followers were also confused about the true nature of Jesus.
Why should I care about this? Is it more important than charity, hope, faith and love for others?
P
herk
Ellderwho,
Micah 5:2 does not prove that Jesus was without a beginning. The rest of the Bible does not teach that, and neither does this verse. What the Bible does teach is that the future ruler from Bethlehem is he who has been in God's view from the very beginning. His beginnings are rooted in God's primeval redeeming plan. Similarly, Revelation 13:8 speaks of "the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world." Christ has not been literally slain since the world was founded, but his sacrificial death has been in God's mind since that time.
In view of what we've already discussed about Christ being appointed to act for God, there should be no problem in understanding Isaiah 40:3, 10; Matthew 3:1-3 and Luke 1:76. Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father's name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him. In the parable of the vine growers, Jesus made it plain that it was not God himself who came to earth. He said: "A man planted a vineyard ... and rented it out to vine-growers and went on a journey. At the harvest time he sent a slave to the vine-growers, in order to receive some of the produce of the vineyard from the vine-growers. They took him, and beat him and sent him away empty-handed. Again he sent them another slave, and they wounded him in the head, and treated him shamefully. And he sent another, and that one they killed; and so with many others, beating some and killing others. He had one more to send, a beloved son; he sent him last of all to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' But those vine-growers said to one another, 'This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours!' They took him, and killed him and threw him out of the vineyard. What will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the vine-growers, and will give the vineyard to others." (Mark 12:1-9)
At Matthew 1:23, the angel did not tell Mary that Jesus would be "God with us," but that his name would be such. There is a difference. Isaiah, for example, was not the Saviour of the world simply because his name means "Salvation of Yahweh."
John 1:1 is subject to much speculation and interpretation. The reasonable conclusion is that it teaches nothing contrary to the rest of the Scriptures. There was a time when English Bibles did not use a capital "W" for "word." "Word" cannot refer directly to a person simply because a person cannot be "with God" and yet be God at the same time. The Greek word logos which is translated "word" here is translated in other places as account, cause, communication, doctrine, intent, preaching, reason, saying and tidings. The "word" is only spoken of as "he" because logos is masculine in Greek. The German Luther verson speaks of "das Wort" (neuter) while the French Segond version speaks of "la parole" (feminine), showing that "the word" does not necessarily indicate a male person.
John is simply saying something that is expressed elsewhere in the Bible:
"Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... Then God said, ... " (Genesis 1:1-31)
"By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host. For he spoke, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast." (Psalm 33:6, 9)
"God ... gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist." (Romans 4:17)
"God ... said, 'Light shall shine out of darkness." (2 Corinthians 4:6)
"By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible." (Hebrews 11:3)
"By the word of God the heavens existed long ago." (2 Peter 3:5)
Just as the word that existed in God's mind from the beginning became a book known as the Bible, that word became flesh in the man Jesus of Nazareth.
When understood correctly, John 1:3 is simply stating that "All things came into being through it [the word spoken by God], and apart from it [the word spoken by God] nothing came into being that has come into being."
Hebrews 1:10-12 and 2:10 are not about the Genesis creation. The writer expressly says that it is about "the future world," "the world to come" or the "habitable world of the future." (Hebrews 2:5, NLT, NASB, Amplified Bible)
Herk
ellderwho

Herk,
Do you really believe that Philippians 2:6 teaches that Jesus is equal to God?
Yes I do.
Phil.2:6 NASB who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to grasp .
Your right Herk, sounds better in the NAS. Still what is Pauls message? "Grasping" the idea of equality which somehow you are able to do.
Micah 5:2 does not prove that Jesus was without a beginning
Why not, if Christ is from everlasting.
Who is the rock of Israel Duet. 32:1-4 ________?
What did people do to the Rock YHWH? Duet 32:15-18__________.
According to 1Cor.10:1-4, who was the Rock of Israel(YHWH) reffered to in the OT.?________.
Herk,
Did the Father share His glory with the Son? John 17:5
Would the Father share His glory with a created being? Isaiah 42:8
ellderwho
ellderwho

Herk,
Help me out here Im confused.
You state:
Does Colossians 1:16 prove that Jesus is the Creator of the universe? As JCanon expressed it above, "we shouldn't take things expressed out of context of what they mean." So, what is the context of this verse? Is Paul writing about the Genesis creation--the creation of rivers, mountains, animals, birds, etc.? No. Paul is writing about "the new creation."
But Jc says:
Thus in the case of the heavens and earth, God is taking credit for HIS creative work and design, though Christ was there to execute the details. Because God was the original conceptualist, he can properly claim the work as his own and solely his own.
Herk,
So you say Paul wasnt talking about the present heaven and earth(Genesis) only to a future, but elude to JC example of Jesus doing the work that you disagree with Jesus doing at all.
ellderwho
ellderwho

how should we view those comparatively few that seem to support it? Should we attribute more force to those few and ignore the majority? I am sincerely interested in what your answer to that question would be.

Herk,
My answer is simply what Paul states "its not something to grasp"
I can not explain the mystery of God. I can not grasp the idea or thought of a trinity.
John 1:1 is as you state"is controversial." With that said, what to do with the LOGOS. Should we honor it, just as the father, worship it, look to it as salvation, see that it can forgive sin, see that it returns with the inscription on its thigh "King of Kings and Lord of Lords, See that it is the exact representation of God, see that all fullness of the deity dwells in it in fleshly form, see that it is from everlasting, If what is true in Rev 5:12 He is worthy of Honor, glory, praise, riches "to him that sit on the throne and to the Lamb" v14 'and they fell down and worshiped."
Is the Lamb co-ruler because its in the midst of the throne, or is at the right hand as a co-ruler?
I dont know how you view John 1:1. I believe if God is NOT the LOGOS then somehow you wind up with a created deity.
If Yahweh looks in a mirror does he not see his LOGOS?
ellerwho

Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 1

Share this