[arcura]

Triund,
Excellent point.
Thanks,
Fred

[I Newton]

One of you made the comment:
> MARK 13:32"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Tow which a philosophical reply was:
> When Jesus said that, He was here on earth in the flesh as a man, having humbled Himself to live as one of us, dependent upon the Father.

Okay, let’s take that view: Jesus was not God when he was on earth, but in heaven he is God (putting aside the fact that Jesus said “the father and I are one” when he was on earth, in the flesh, lower than the angels) This is where religious people have what I call an explanation of “BUTS”

Jesus is the Son of God, BUT he is God
God is one God, BUT he is three
Jesus is God BUT not when he was on earth BUT he said he was one with God when he was on earth.
Jesus said to pray through him to the father, BUT you can pray to Saints.
Jesus did say not to call religious teachers with the title “Father” BUT we require it out of respect.
The Bible says not to bow to statues BUT it is okay if it helps to concentrate.
The Bible says not to defile yourself with other religions or adopt their practices BUT it is okay if it encourages the other religions to join you.
Etc etc etc

So they say they agree with the Bible BUT use philosophy to reason the opposite.

All I can say is what is in the Bible, so let us look at that.
(all the others are free to believe the different teachings, philosophies and reasoning of 2000 different Christian religions.

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him,

Jesus was not on earth then.
God did not give it to himself.

1Corinthians 3:23 and you belong to Christ; and Christ belongs to God.

Jesus was not on earth then.

1Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.

Jesus was not on earth then.

1John 2:22 Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist–he denies the Father and the Son.

Jesus is the Christ, not God.
Jesus is the Son, not the Father.
Yahweh and Jesus are Father and Son
Trinitarians say “We agree BUT he is also the Father”
Trinitarians deny this.

1John 4:15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

Trinitarians say “We agree BUT his is also the Father”

1John 4:9 God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

God do not send himself.

1Peter 1:3 Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,

Jesus was not on earth then.
It does not say “Blessed be God Jesus”

1Timothy 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Jesus was not on earth then.
This scripture would be false if Jesus was God

Acts 2:27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. 31 His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens 36 God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ

Jesus was not on earth then.
Jesus was at God’s mercy to get out of Hades.
Jesus prayed that God would not leave him there. (So Jesus is not God)
Notice it says, God raised Jesus. (So Jesus is not God)
BTW notice that David did not go to Heaven.
Notice God made Jesus Lord and Christ (So Jesus is not God)

Acts 13:33 God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.'

So Jesus is not God

Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Hebrews 1:3 The Son reflects God's own glory, and everything about him represents God exactly.

He is not God but merely the image of the invisible God,
Like the Moon reflects the suns power so does Jesus merely reflect God’s glory and perfectly represents him.
Obviously not God himself.

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

The son is not the father.

Hebrews 1:13 Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?

He is obviously not God

Hebrews 3:6 But Christ is faithful as a son over God's house.

This would be meaningless if Christ was faithful to himself.
So Christ is not God

Hebrews 9:24 now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

Trinitarians would see it as a used car salesman saying “I will have to speak to my superiors and I will go into bat for you and get you a better deal” and then the salesman goes into the next room, closes the door, waits there for five minutes on his own and emerges with “The boss says you have a deal.”

Jesus did not appear before himself on the behalf of others.
So the Christ is not God

Romans 12:5 so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others.

The apostles are not one person
Husband and wife are not one person
Jesus and Yahweh are not one person

John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

Jesus did not break the Sabbath and did say he was equal to his father.

Trinitarians make the same mistake; They believe that if Jesus is the Son of God then he must be equal, and they go one step further and say he is not only equal but he is actually his own father.

[arcura]

God is infinite and eternal.
Period.
Therefore Jesus is and was always God.
He just humbled Himself to live as a human being for a time.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Fred

[I Newton]

It is not hard. You can believe anything you like, no one is, or ever should stop you.

I can only comment on what is in the Bible; there are far too many Christian religions out there for me to comment on what each of them teach.

The trinity, or even the concept of the trinity is just not in the Bible and was never taught by Jesus or the apostles, or any Christians for several hundred years after the first century Christians had died out and the Catholic Church usurped power over the known world's governments and began setting people on fire if they did not conform.

Some of course believe that Jesus' message of love allowed the church to set people on fire for owning a copy of or even reading the scriptures.

Me? I would hazard to say that that is a red flag to make you think maybe, just maybe, something is a little fishy and maybe look at what the scriptures say.

There is a very good reason the Church did not want people reading the Bible.

You can say God was anything you like because, as you say, God is infinite in power and can do anything, and so he can be Jesus if he so wants.

But that is not in the Bible.

Galatians 1:8 tells you “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.”
1Corinthians Do Not Go Beyond he Things That Are Written
Acts 17 tells you the Beroeans tested everything with scriptures
1John 4 also tells you to test everything against the scriptures.
Acts 2 tells you the scriptures are there so you know what to do so you do not sin.
Romans 15 tells you the scriptures were written down for your instruction.
Revelations 22 tells you not to add to the scriptures or you will suffer God's wrath.

You can believe anything you like, no one is stopping you, I am simply stating what is in the Bible

A few hundred years ago I would have been set on fire for reading it.

[TUT317]

It is not hard. You can believe anything you like, no one is, or ever should stop you.

A few hundred years ago I would have been set on fire for reading it.

Hello I Newton,

Yes, three or four hundred years ago you would been set on fire, not so much for reading it but speaking out against it. This was because if something was in print then it was more or less infallible. This is regardless of its accuracy, consistency or truth value.This is a broad generalization, but it think it "fits the bill" .Think of what Galileo went through because he said the sun was at the centre of our solar system.

Today, is the exact opposite, if we don't question everything which is written (including the Bible) then there is something wrong. I AM NOT SAYING THAT WE SHOULD QUESTION EVERYTHING THAT IS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE, All I AM SAYING IS, THAT'S THE REALITY OF THE MODERN WORLD. This no doubt explains the vast number of Christian denominations.

Long before Jesus was born Socrates lived in Athens where questioning everything was the norm rather than the exception. Socrates was credited with saying something along the lines of, when you think you know what words mean they jump off the paper and quickly run away.

Modern linguists would probably say that when we try to recapture these words and return them to the paper they read differently. This is just what happens when we use language; people go away with different ideas.

[arcura]

I Newton,
Yes we can all believe as we wish.
But for you to say that the trinity is not ibn the bible idicates that...
1. You have not read it
Or
2. You have read it but not well
Or
3. You have read it but have not understood it in the case of the trinity.
Or
4. Something, such as other teachings, have closed your mind to it.
Fred

[I Newton]

Maybe I have not read the Bible. If anyone can tell me where trinity appears in the Bible I will consider it.

I think I have posted enough scriptures that will makes sense to any thinking person that the trinity is simply not a biblical teaching.

I am not here to convince you, churches have had 2000 years to squeeze their teachings into the Bible, so is not as if I expect people of blind faith to read anything I say.

As I say, I can only say what the Bible says.

Others can say they believe so-and-so, either it is in the BIble or they can feel it in their bones, or they saw an image of Jesus and so believe their church, their friend was healed etc.

If you want ot know what is in the Bible, I can tell you and will quote it for you.

I will not use words or teachings that are not in the Bible.

I thnk it is pretty simple

[arcura]

The evidence from the Gospels culminates in the baptismal commission of Matthew 28:20. It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known to the Twelve step by step. First He taught them to recognize in Himself the Eternal Son of God. When His ministry was drawing to a close, He promised that the Father would send another Divine Person, the Holy Spirit, in His place. Finally after His resurrection, He revealed the doctrine in explicit terms, bidding them "go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 28:18). The force of this passage is decisive. That "the Father" and "the Son" are distinct Persons follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the other by the conjunctions "and . . . and" is evidence that we have here a Third Person co-ordinate with the Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures.
The phrase "in the name" (eis to onoma) affirms alike the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature. Among the Jews and in the Apostolic Church the Divine name was representative of God. He who had a right to use it was invested with vast authority: for he wielded the supernatural powers of Him whose name he employed. It is incredible that the phrase "in the name" should be here employed, were not all the Persons mentioned equally Divine. Moreover, the use of the singular, "name," and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. Indeed the unity of God is so fundamental a tenet alike of the Hebrew and of the Christian religion, and is affirmed in such countless passages of the Old and New Testaments, that any explanation inconsistent with this doctrine would be altogether inadmissible.
The supernatural appearance at the baptism of Christ is often cited as an explicit revelation of Trinitarian doctrine, given at the very commencement of the Ministry. This, it seems to us, is a mistake. The Evangelists, it is true, see in it a manifestation of the Three Divine Persons. Yet, apart from Christ's subsequent teaching, the dogmatic meaning of the scene would hardly have been understood. Moreover, the Gospel narratives appear to signify that none but Christ and the Baptist were privileged to see the Mystic Dove, and hear the words attesting the Divine sonship of the Messias.
Besides these passages there are many others in the Gospels which refer to one or other of the Three Persons in particular and clearly express the separate personality and Divinity of each. In regard to the First Person it will not be necessary to give special citations: those which declare that Jesus Christ is God the Son, affirm thereby also the separate personality of the Father. The Divinity of Christ is amply attested not merely by St. John, but by the Synoptists. As this point is treated elsewhere (see JESUS CHRIST), it will be sufficient here to enumerate a few of the more important messages from the Synoptists, in which Christ bears witness to His Divine Nature.
• He declares that He will come to be the judge of all men (Matthew 25:31). In Jewish theology the judgment of the world was a distinctively Divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative.
• In the parable of the wicked husbandmen, He describes Himself as the son of the householder, while the Prophets, one and all, are represented as the servants (Matthew 21:33 sqq.).
• He is the Lord of Angels, who execute His command (Matthew 24:31).
• He approves the confession of Peter when he recognizes Him, not as Messias -- a step long since taken by all the Apostles -- but explicitly as the Son of God: and He declares the knowledge due to a special revelation from the Father (Matthew 16:16-17).
• Finally, before Caiphas He not merely declares Himself to be the Messias, but in reply to a second and distinct question affirms His claim to be the Son of God. He is instantly declared by the high priest to be guilty of blasphemy, an offense which could not have been attached to the claim to be simply the Messias (Luke 22:66-71).
St. John's testimony is yet more explicit than that of the Synoptists. He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his Gospel is to establish the Divinity of Jesus Christ (John 20:31). In the prologue he identifies Him with the Word, the only-begotten of the Father, Who from all eternity exists with God, Who is God (John 1:1-18). The immanence of the Son in the Father and of the Father in the Son is declared in Christ's words to St. Philip: "Do you not believe, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (14:10), and in other passages no less explicit (14:7; 16:15; 17:21). The oneness of Their power and Their action is affirmed: "Whatever he [the Father] does, the Son also does in like manner" (5:19, cf. 10:38); and to the Son no less than to the Father belongs the Divine attribute of conferring life on whom He will (5:21). In 10:29, Christ expressly teaches His unity of essence with the Father: "That which my Father hath given me, is greater than all.. . I and the Father are one." The words, "That which my Father hath given me," can, having regard to the context, have no other meaning than the Divine Name, possessed in its fullness by the Son as by the Father.
Rationalist critics lay great stress upon the text: "The Father is greater than I" (14:28). They argue that this suffices to establish that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist views, and they expound in this sense certain texts in which the Son declares His dependence on the Father (5:19; 8:28). In point of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father. No argument against Catholic doctrine can, therefore, be drawn from this text. So too, the passages referring to the dependence of the Son upon the Father do but express what is essential to Trinitarian dogma, namely, that the Father is the supreme source from Whom the Divine Nature and perfections flow to the Son. (On the essential difference between St. John's doctrine as to the Person of Christ and the Logos doctrine of the Alexandrine Philo, to which many Rationalists have attempted to trace it, see LOGOS.)
In regard to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, the passages which can be cited from the Synoptists as attesting His distinct personality are few. The words of Gabriel (Luke 1:35), having regard to the use of the term, "the Spirit," in the Old Testament, to signify God as operative in His creatures, can hardly be said to contain a definite revelation of the doctrine. For the same reason it is dubious whether Christ's warning to the Pharisees as regards blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matthew 12:31) can be brought forward as proof. But in Luke 12:12, "The Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say" (Matthew 10:20, and Luke 24:49), His personality is clearly implied. These passages, taken in connection with Matthew 28:19, postulate the existence of such teaching as we find in the discourses in the Cenacle reported by St. John (14, 15, 16). We have in these chapters the necessary preparation for the baptismal commission. In them the Apostles are instructed not only as the personality of the Spirit, but as to His office towards the Church. His work is to teach whatsoever He shall hear (16:13) to bring back their minds the teaching of Christ (14:26), to convince the world of sin (16:8). It is evident that, were the Spirit not a Person, Christ could not have spoken of His presence with the Apostles as comparable to His own presence with them (14:16). Again, were He not a Divine Person it could not have been expedient for the Apostles that Christ should leave them, and the Paraclete take His place (16:7). Moreover, notwithstanding the neuter form of the word (pneuma), the pronoun used in His regard is the masculine ekeinos. The distinction of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son is involved in the express statements that He proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son (15:26; cf. 14:16, 14:26). Nevertheless, He is one with Them: His presence with the Disciples is at the same time the presence of the Son (14:17-18), while the presence of the Son is the presence of the Father (14:23).
In the remaining New Testament writings numerous passages attest how clear and definite was the belief of the Apostolic Church in the three Divine Persons. In certain texts the coordination of Father, Son, and Spirit leaves no possible doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Thus in II Corinthians 13:13, St. Paul writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all." Here the construction shows that the Apostle is speaking of three distinct Persons. Moreover, since the names God and Holy Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ is also regarded as a Divine Person. So also, in I Corinthians 12:4-11: "There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit; and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord: and there are diversities of operations, but the same God, who worketh all [of them] in all [persons]." (Cf. also Ephesians 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2-3)
But apart from passages such as these, where there is express mention of the Three Persons, the teaching of the New Testament regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit is free from all ambiguity. In regard to Christ, the Apostles employ modes of speech which, to men brought up in the Hebrew faith, necessarily signified belief in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use of the Doxology in reference to Him. The Doxology, "To Him be glory for ever and ever" (cf. 1 Chronicles 16:38; 29:11; Psalm 103:31; 28:2), is an expression of praise offered to God alone. In the New Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father, but to Jesus Christ (2 Timothy 4:18; 2 Peter 3:18; Revelation 1:6; Hebrews 13:20-21), and to God the Father and Christ in conjunction (Revelations 5:13, 7:10). Not less convincing is the use of the title Lord (Kyrios). This term represents the Hebrew Adonai, just as God (Theos) represents Elohim. The two are equally Divine names (cf. 1 Corinthians 8:4). In the Apostolic writings Theos may almost be said to be treated as a proper name of God the Father, and Kyrios of the Son (see, for example, 1 Corinthians 12:5-6); in only a few passages do we find Kyrios used of the Father (1 Corinthians 3:5; 7:17) or Theos of Christ. The Apostles from time to time apply to Christ passages of the Old Testament in which Kyrios is used, for example, I Corinthians 10:9 (Numbers 21:7), Hebrews 1:10-12 (Psalm 101:26-28); and they use such expressions as "the fear of the Lord" (Acts 9:31; 2 Corinthians 5:11; Ephesians 5:21), "call upon the name of the Lord," indifferently of God the Father and of Christ (Acts 2:21; 9:14; Romans 10:13). The profession that "Jesus is the Lord" (Kyrion Iesoun, Romans 10:9; Kyrios Iesous, 1 Corinthians 12:3) is the acknowledgment of Jesus as Jahweh. The texts in which St. Paul affirms that in Christ dwells the plenitude of the Godhead (Colossians 2:9), that before His Incarnation He possessed the essential nature of God (Philemon 2:6), that He "is over all things, God blessed for ever" (Romans 9:5) tell us nothing that is not implied in many other passages of his Epistles.
The doctrine as to the Holy Spirit is equally clear. That His distinct personality was fully recognized is shown by many passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church's ministers: "As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas.. . " (Acts 13:2). He directs the missionary journey of the Apostles: "They attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not" (Acts 16:7; cf. Acts 5:3; 15:28; Romans 15:30). Divine attributes are affirmed of Him.
• He possesses omniscience and reveals to the Church mysteries known only to God (1 Corinthians 2:10);
• it is He who distributes charismata (1 Corinthians 12:11);
• He is the giver of supernatural life (2 Corinthians 3:8);
• He dwells in the Church and in the souls of individual men, as in His temple (Romans 8:9-11; 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19).
• The work of justification and sanctification is attributed to Him (1 Corinthians 6:11; Romans 15:16), just as in other passages the same operations are attributed to Christ (1 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 2:17).
To sum up: the various elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are all expressly taught in the New Testament. The Divinity of the Three Persons is asserted or implied in passages too numerous to count. The unity of essence is not merely postulated by the strict monotheism of men nurtured in the religion of Israel, to whom "subordinate deities" would have been unthinkable; but it is, as we have seen, involved in the baptismal commission of Matthew 28:19, and, in regard to the Father and the Son, expressly asserted in John 10:38. That the Persons are co-eternal and coequal is a mere corollary from this. In regard to the Divine processions, the doctrine of the first procession is contained in the very terms Father and Son: the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and Son is taught in the discourse of the Lord reported by St. John (14-17) (see HOLY GHOST).
B. Old Testament
The early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the doctrine of the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament and they found such indications in not a few passages. Many of them not merely believed that the Prophets had testified of it, they held that it had been made known even to the Patriarchs. They regarded it as certain that the Divine messenger of Genesis 16:7, 18, 21:17, 31:11; Exodus 3:2, was God the Son; for reasons to be mentioned below (III. B.) they considered it evident that God the Father could not have thus manifested Himself (cf. Justin, "Dial.", 60; Irenaeus, "Adv. Haer.", IV, xx, 7-11; Tertullian, "Adv. Prax.", 15-16; Theoph., "Ad Autol.", ii, 22; Novat., "De Trin.", 18, 25, etc.). They held that, when the inspired writers speak of "the Spirit of the Lord", the reference was to the Third Person of the Trinity: and one or two (Irenaeus, "Adv. Haer.", II, xxx, 9; Theophilus, "Ad. Aut.", II, 15; Hippolytus, "Con. Noet.", 10) interpret the hypostatic Wisdom of the Sapiential books, not, with St. Paul, of the Son (Hebrews 1:3; cf. Wisdom 7:25-26), but of the Holy Spirit. But in others of the Fathers is found what would appear to be the sounder view, that no distinct intimation of the doctrine was given under the Old Covenant.

[I Newton]

Goodness me, what a lot of weird and wonderful religious words that do not appear in the Bible.

I doubt and infant could understand what was posted as is suggested in 2Timothy 3:15 “and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation”

I have my suspicions that this explanation of this 'very easy to understand subject that leaves no doubt' was too hard to write and so was copied from elsewhere.

But let us look at these “easy to understand scriptures that leave absolutely no doubt” that Jesus is in fact his own father.

Matthew 28:20 Go therefore* and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
2 Corinthians 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit [be] with you all. Amen.

If this is in any way a clear and doubtless understanding that they are all the same person then so is Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Matt 8:11)
And the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac (Gen 48:16)
So we can all see this is simply religious philosophy.

1Timothy 5:21 I charge you in the sight of Yahweh, and Yeshua, and the elect angels
By the Trinitarian philosophy, the angels are also part of the trinity.

Yeshua has many titles and Yahweh has many titles, they are at times called the same thing.
But David is also called King of Kings but no one says he is Yeshua.
The apostles are also called the light of the world, but no one is stupid enough to say they are the Christ.

Daniel 2:37 You, O king, [are] a king of kings. For the God of heaven has GIVEN you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory; (David is King of Kings)
Revelation 17:14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings
Matthew 5:14 You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.
John 8:12 Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, "I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life."

Look at how a Trinitarian tries to reason:
> It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known to the Twelve step by step.

And yet he states the following
> Indeed the unity of God is so fundamental a tenet alike of the Hebrew and of the Christian religion

And then he shows that is was not so easy:
> The early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the doctrine of the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament and they found such indications

So … it was well known in the OT, BUT Jeus shad to break it them gently, but the fathers had to be persuaded that the trinity must be in the OT. (Gobbledegook)

This is typical of the mumbo jumbo that happens when they try and squeeze false teachings into the Bible.

Notice he sued the word “Fathers”. Jesus explicitly said NOT to call religious teachers 'Father' and what does the Catholic Church require you to do? That's right, fly it right in the face of the very God they say they love.

Notice too that the Trinitarian will use non-Biblical phrases such as Jesus Christ is “God the Son” over and over in the hope that 'some mud will stick'

The Trinitarian will try and reason that Jesus, being divine means he is actually his own father. In fact Jesus is very much divine, and Trinitarians make the very same mistake as the Pharisees and say this means he is equal to God.

Do we want to make the same mistake as the Pharisees?

Jesus or Yeshua is no doubt a God and he is divine, but as you can see, he is not his own father, or even equal.

1Corinthians 8:5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth--as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"--

Psalm 82:1.6 A Psalm of Asaph. God stands in the congregation of the mighty; He judges among the gods … I said, "You [are] gods,

Revelation 3:12 (Jesus says) He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of MY GOD, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of MY GOD and the name of the city of MY GOD, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from MY GOD. And [I will write on him] My new name.

1Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman [is] man, and the head of Christ [is] God.

Trinitarians will tell you:
> In Jewish theology the judgment of the world was a distinctively Divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative.

Matthew 20:23 but to sit on My right hand and on My left is not Mine to give, but [it is for those] for whom it is prepared by My Father."

Jesus cannot even say who sits at his right hand and who sits at his left, so he is obviously not God.

Would you expect the only begotten son of God, the son that God sent to earth to suffer and die for God's creation, would you logically expect the only begotten son of God to be given a position and a name far above the angels?

Of course; and yet Trinitarians claim that because Jesus is above the angels, this is proof that he is God. It should be easy for people to see the deception.

This is how weird Trinitarian teachings are, they say that the following scripture is, get this “yet more explicit than that of the Synoptists. He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his Gospel is to establish the Divinity of Jesus Christ. Now I agree that Jessu is the Son and not the father and I agree that Jesus is divine, but just read the scripture that is so supportive of the Trinitarian belief.
John 20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

This is how weak their position is. If this is what they call as 'more explicit' in proving Jesus is in fact God, they are in a lot of trouble.

“The Father Is Greater Than I”
> In point of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father.

And after he was resurrected BY God and GIVEN a position above all the angels and a name above all other names ….. he is no longer less than God?

BUT …. What of all the other Biblical quotes inmy last post, did you read them?
DID you notice those quotes were about Jesus AFTER he was resurrected BY God and taken to Heaven?


Let's look at a few more scriptures that do NOT need big religious invented words and explanations.

John 6:57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father
Obviously not God

Hebrew 7:7 Now beyond all contradiction the lesser is blessed by the better.
Does God bless Jesus or does Jesus bless God?

John 17:21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, [are] in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Jesus and the father as one just like the apostles and Jesus are one.
No mystery there.

John 4:22 You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews.
Trinitarians do not even understand the Trinity; this most basic and easy to understand belief that everyone knew in the OT but Jesus had to reveal it slowly in the NT.

John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, [fn] who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared [Him].
No one has seen God.
No mystery here

Matthew 26:39 He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You [will]."
This prayer is completely meaningless if he os praying to himself.

John 8:17,18 It is also written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me."
This would be a lie if he was his own father.

Matthew 12:32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him
This means the spirit is greater than Jesus and so of course not equal.

Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old, For I [am] God, and [there is] no other; [I am] God, and [there is] none like Me,
As many scriptures say there are other Gods, but NONE of them are like Yahweh.

Is Jesus a God? The Bible says he is.
Is Jesus a Might God? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus Lord? The Bible says he is.
Has Jesus been GIVEN a name above everyone else? The Bible says yes.
Has Jesus been MADE King? The Bible says yes
Would that mean he is also King of the angels? The Bible says yes
Does Jesus deserve such a position given his obedience to his father? The Bible says yes.
Has Jesus been GIVEN the right to judge? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus the only way for us to approach HIS GOD? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus the Son of God? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus the Messiah? The Bible says yes.
Did God resurrect Jesus? The Bible says yes.
Did God GIVE power to Jesus/ The Bible says yes.
Did Jesus pray to God? The Bible says yes.
Did Jesus say he would approach HIS GOD for us? The Bible says yes.
Did Jesus say he was going to HIS GOD? The Bible says yes.
Did Jesus say the father is greater than I am? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus merely a reflection of HIS GOD? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus a representative of HIS GOD? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus a PERFECT representative of his God? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus a perfect reflection of his God? The Bible says yes.
Is it obvious that if you have seen a perfect representative and reflection of God that no one has seen you can say you HAVE seen God? The Bible says yes.
Is Jesus and God one? The Bible says yes.
Is husband and wife one? The Bible says yes.
Are the apostles one with Jesus just like Jesus is one with HIS God? The Bible says yes.
Is Yahweh the head of Yeshua? The Bible says yes.
Is Yahweh the head of Yeshua AFTER Yahweh resurrected Yeshua? The Bible says yes.
So is Jesus less than HIS GOD? The Bible says yes.
Did the father send the son? The Bible says yes.
Did the son send the Father? The Bible says no
Is Yahweh in subjection to Yeshua? The Bible says no
Does Yahweh receive power from Yeshua? The Bible says no
Is Yeshua, Yahweh's GOD? The Bible says no
Does the term God the Son appear anywhere at all in any of the books of the Bible? NO
Does Jesus teach God what to say or do? NO
Does God learn obedience from Jesus? NO
Can God do anything on his own? The Bible says yes
Can Jesus do anything on his own? The Bible says no
Is the father begotten? The Bible says no
Is the son begotten? The Bible says yes
Did Jesus fully explain who HIS GOD is? The Bible says yes

SO … Jesus has been GIVEN power and glory and a position far above anything else in the entire universe.

No mystery there.

[jakester]

Newton I, my feeling is that this whole discussion is not going anywhere and your sarcasm is beginning to take on a mean-spirited tone. I don't think Arcura is attacking you but merely engaging in discourse so come on my friend, there's no need to start getting nasty. Let's treat each other in a dignified manner.

This thread will be closed soon, otherwise.

[I Newton]

I agree; some things get up my nose. M beef is not with Arcura but with the church that fills Arcura with all that rubbish.

Just look at the difference in the use of scripture.

In one case there are big religious words and explanations to describe vagues scriptures to support the trinity teaching.

In the other case the scriptures are straight forward and do not need any explanation; they are so simple a child can see what it says.

I am sorry if my post sounds sarcastic, the only paragraph I meant to be sarcastic was about it being copied from elsewhere, but in the long post I probably slipped more than I thought I was.

Sorry to you all if I have offended you.

[arcura]

I Newton,
Yes, you have offended God's holy Church and therefore me.
My Church is the one that Jesus founded with Peter as the first leader thereof.
That is also in the bible if you bother to read it with an open mind.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[adam7gur]

The term Trinity is wrong cause one may think that God is a three part being. The simple truth is that God gave birth to His begotten Son, the Word. Can God's Son be anything less than a God? No He can't because my son can not be anything less than human and it is written that God made everything in a way that everything reproduces at its own kind and it is written that God said that this is good.So if this is good then this also goes for Him.So God gave birth to the Word.That makes Him a Father and that makes the Word a Son. The Father is the source of everything.Before anything was ever created , the Father gave birth to His Son and everything was made through and for His Son, the Word.
Time was made through His Son , that's why the Son is eternal, because He was before time.Is the Father greater than the Son? No doubt about it, since the Son Himself says that.In other words , the Son would have not exist if the Father did not gave birth to Him.
God made everything through His begotten Son, the Word, who incarnated as Yeshua or Jesus.Does this make the Son something less than God? No , He is still God's Son and He will always be and no matter what kind of form the Son takes He is always God's Son, a God Himself.
Could the Father exist without the Son? Yes He could, actually He did. Could the Son exist without the Father? No He could not!
Trinity is a very wrong term to describe the Son's or the Holy Spirit's deity but this is how it has been described for many years.
Personally I think we would have understood the Godhead better without the Trinity term. After all the flaws of that term lead people to question the Son's deity.
My opinion is , since that term is not mentioned in the Bible in any way, we should not use it either. We can manifest the deity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit without using that term.
Yeshua was crucified because He testified that He is God's Son and that immediately made the Pharisees say that He is making Himself equal to God and that is true. The son of a human being is a human being and the Son of God is a God.
Blessed be the Father, for through His Son, we are.
Blessed be the Son, for His obedience to His Father, made us God's children for ever and ever.
Amen!

[arcura]

Adam,
Thanks for that.
I keep in mind that we are a trinity of body, mind and spirt.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[adam7gur]

Fred my brother!
That's what I am trying to say. A body , a mind and a spirit do not make a human being just like , lemon juice and lemon pulp and lemon peal do not make a lemon.Have you ever tried that so called lemon juice in those yellow plastic bottles? It has nothing to do with lemon juice. It is a chemical product. They added all the ingredients of a normal lemon juice and made that thing.
It is not what we have to add to something so that we can have God as a result of a union but it is what comes from God Himself who is the origin of everything, the source of everything.
Nature can be so helpful on that .
Before anything else came to existence, there was only God, alone and silent. And at one point He spoke, His voice was heard and the Word was born. At that moment before time was created, God's Son was born and God became a Father .
Think the Son's birth as the birth of Eve (and eve was born because when something comes out of something then this is a birth). Eve was Adam's helper. In Hebrew the word helper has the meaning of responder. Adam did not have anyone to respond to him and God saw that this was not good. This is an amazing example of how God's Son, the Word was born. God wanted a responder and the Word was born, God's begotten Son.
If we go backwards we can only see God as a result of something, but we have to see things from the beginning, so that we can understand that we are the result.
Father, I pray that you grow us in the knowledge and understanding of your beloved Son and our Savior, Yeshua HaMoshiacha, Jesus The Christ, so that we can understand You better.
In the name of Yeshua, Amen!

[paraclete]

If Jesus left, and said he would come back...

and if jesus was both simultaneously god, and the holy spirit...

doesn't this mean that all those three things left back then...and still hasn't come back?

Hi socks

The HOLY SPIRIT came, was poured out, on the day of Pentecost, so Jesus physically left but the Holy Spirit came to be with us. Jesus is yet to return physically. It is not correct to say "if" but when. For the believer the facts are not in question. Father God, Yehweh, appointed Jesus to came to us in physical form and Jesus, when he returned to the Father, appointed the Holy Spirit to come to us. God has never actually left us but it is about how he interacts with us

[I Newton]

Thank you Adam.

I agree with you, at least I think I do.

It seems that you are saying that God Yahweh is theFather and God Yeshua is the Son.

Yahweh existed first.
Yahweh created Yeshua.
As Yeshua is of the same 'substance' as Yahweh than Yeshua is equal.

Of this I agree and is plainly seen by reading the Bible.

Yeshua cannot and could not have survived without Yahweh and so Yahweh is superior to Yeshua.

Of this I agree and is plainly seen by reading the Bible.

If you are saying that Yahweh IS Yehsua and Yeshua IS Yahweh and thereby Jesus is actually his own Father... I do not agree.

BUT I do not think you are saying this, so I would have to say I agree with you totally.



However, just because the Roman Empire assumed control of the Church, 'slapped a christian stamp on it and called itself Holy' and maintained rule as the Roma Catholic Church, does not mean it IS the church Jesus founded.

For 300 years the Roman Empire persecuted the Christians and after assuming pwer of the church maintained its toture and burning and persecuting of Christians.

Just because the Christian church went underground while the Roman Catholic Church ruled the known world and set people on fire that disagreed with it, does not mean it is the Church of God.

Any reasonable person can see that setting people on fire was not Jesus' way speading the word of Love and forgiveness.

But, maybe I'm wrong; maybe Jesus secrety told his apostles to burn people alive if they had a copy of the scriptures.

Food for thought I suppose.

[paraclete]

Thank you Adam.

I agree with you, at least I think I do.

It seems that you are saying that God Yahweh is theFather and God Yeshua is the Son.

Yahweh existed first.
Yahweh created Yeshua.
As Yeshua is of the same 'substance' as Yahweh than Yeshua is equal.

Of this I agree and is plainly seen by reading the Bible.

Yeshua cannot and could not have survived without Yahweh and so Yahweh is superior to Yeshua.

Of this I agree and is plainly seen by reading the Bible.

.

Hi Newton you cannot understand this using human logic.
Scripture tells us Christ is the lamb slain before the beginning of the world so on a spiritual level Yehweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit existed from the beginning. Read John.

In the Old Testament Yehweh tell us he is salvation, in the New Testament Jesus uses the same words to refer to himself. In fact his name means salvation. Jesus tells us that he and the Father are one, however the Father does not have a physical body and Jesus does.

[arcura]

I Newton,
I agree with paraclete on this.
Before He became Jesus Christ He was the word of God, therefore one with the Father from eternity as the bible says, "I the beginning was the Word and the Word was God."
Your slam against the Catholic Church is unfounded and unnessessary and if you check you will see that slamming other denominations is frowned by the powers that be here.
Please refrain from doing that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[I Newton]

So now we are back to Jesus IS his own Father?

No slam, you said your church was founded by Jesus, I argue that the church's past acts prove otherwise.

1John 3:10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.

Romans 12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."