Trinity Debate – John 17:3

Subject:  John 17:3 disproves the Trinity Doctrine
Date: Mar. 18 2007
Debaterst8  & Is 1: 18


t8

We are all familiar with the Trinity doctrine and many here do not believe in it but think it is a false doctrine and even perhaps part of the great falling away prophesied in scripture.

As part of a challenge from Is 1:18 (a member here, not the scripture) I will be posting 12 scriptures over the coming weeks (perhaps months) to show how the Trinity doctrine contradicts scripture and therefore proving it to be a false doctrine.

The first scripture I would like to bring out into the light is John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

This scripture clearly talks about the only true God and in addition to that, Jesus Christ who (that true God) has sent.

Trying to fit this scripture into a Trinity template seems impossible in that Jesus Christ is NOT being referred to as the True God in this scripture. So if Jesus is also God (as Trinitarians say) then that leaves us with John 17:3 saying that Jesus is a false God, (if we also say that there are no other gods except false ones), as the ONLY TRUE GOD is reserved for the one who sent him.

Now a possible rebuttal from a Trinitarian could be that Jesus is not the only True God here because it is referring to him as a man as Trinitarians say that Jesus is both God and Man. But if this argument is made by Is 1:18, then he is admitting that Jesus is not always the only True God and therefore the Trinity is not always a Trinity as would be concluded when reading John 17:3. Such a rebuttal is ridiculous if we consider that God changes not and that God is not a man that he should lie.

Secondly, the Trinity doctrine breaks this scripture if we think of God as a Trinity in that it would read as “the only true ‘Trinity’ and Jesus Christ whom the ‘Trinity’ has sent.

We know that such a notion makes no sense so the word ‘God’ must of course be referring to the Father as hundreds of other similar verses do and to further support this, we know that the Father sent his son into this world.

If a Trinitarian argued that the only true God i.e., that The Father, Son, Spirit decided among themselves that the Jesus part of the Trinity would come to earth, then that would be reading way too much into what the scripture actually says and you would end up connecting dots that cannot justifiably be connected. It would be unreasonable to teach this angle because it actually doesn’t say such a thing. Such a rebuttal is pure assumption and quite ridiculous because the text itself is quite simple and clear. i.e., that the ONLY TRUE GOD (one true God) sent another (his son) into the world. It truly is no more complicated than that.

Such a rebuttal also requires that one start with the Trinity doctrine first and then force the scripture to fit it, rather than the scripture teaching us what it is saying. In other words it is similar to the way you get vinegar from a sponge. In order to do that, you must first soak the sponge in vinegar.

I conclude with an important point regarding John 17:3 that is often overlooked. The fact that we can know the one true God and the one he sent is of paramount importance because we are told that this is “eternal life” and therefore it would be reckless to try and change its simple and straight forward meaning.

My final note is to watch that Is 1:18’s rebuttal is focussed around John 17:3. I wouldn’t put it past him to create a diversion and start talking about the possibility or non-possibility of other gods. But the point in hand here is that John 17:3 says that the only true God sent Jesus, so let us see how he opposes this.




Is 1:18

Nice opening post t8. You have raised some interesting points. Thank you, by the way, for agreeing to debate me, I appreciate the opportunity and hope that it can be as amicable as is possible and conducted in good faith. With that in mind let me start by complimenting you. One of the things I do respect about you is that your theology, as much as I disagree with it, is your own, and I know that the material I will be reading over the next few weeks will be of your own making. Okay, enough of this sycophancy…..

:D

My rebuttal will be subdivided into three main sections:

1. The logical dilemma of the reading a Unitaritarian “statement of exclusion” into John 17:3
2. Some contextual issues
3. My interpretation of John 17:3

I’m going to try to keep my posts short and succinct, as I know people rarely read long posts through and sometimes the key messages can get lost in extraneous detail.

Section 1. The logical dilemma of the reading a Unitaritarian “statement of exclusion” into John 17:3

Let me start this section by stating what Yeshua doesn’t say in John 17:3:

He doesn’t say:

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, a god, whom You have sent.

or this:

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ a lower class of being, whom You have sent.

and He definitely didn’t say this:

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ , an untrue God.

So, on the face of it, this verse, in and of itself, is NOT a true refutation of the trinity doctrine. Why? Because clearly a contra-distinction in ontology between the Father and Himself was not being drawn by Yeshua. There is not mention of “what” Yeshua is in the verse. He simply describes Himself with his Earthly name, followed by the mention of His being sent. So because there is no mention of a contrast in ontology in the verse, I dispute that it’s an exclusionist statement at all….and let’s not lose sight of this – “eternal” life is “knowing” The Father and the Son. If Yeshua was contrasting His very being with the Father, highlighting the disparity and His own inferiority, wouldn’t His equating of the importance of relationship of believers with the Fatherand Himself in the context of salvation be more than a little presumptuous, audacious, even blasphemous? If His implication was that eternal life is predicated on having a relationship with the One true God and a lesser being, then wasn’t Yeshua, in effect, endorsing a breach of the first commandment?

But let’s imagine, just for a moment, that that is indeed what Yeshua meant to affirm – that the Father is the true God, to the preclusion of Himself. Does this precept fit harmoniously within the framework of scripture? Or even within the framework of your personal Christology t8?

I say no. There is a dilemma invoked by this precept that should not be ignored.

There is no doubt that the word “God” (Gr. theos) is applied to Yeshua in the NT (notably: John 1:1, 20:28, Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, Hebrews 1:8…). Although obfuscatory tactics are often employed to diminish the impact of these statements.  You yourself might have in the past argued that the writer, in using “theos”, intended to denote something other than “divinity” in many of them, like an allusion to His “authority” for instance. I, of course, disagree with this as the context of the passages make it plain that ontological statements were being made, but for the sake of argument and brevity I’ll take just one example – John 1:1:-

This following quotation comes from your own writings (emphasis mine):

 

Quote
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was god.This verse mentions God as a person, except for the last word ‘god’ which is talking about the nature of God. i.e., In the beginning was the Divinity and the Word was with the Divinity and the word was divine. The verse says that the Word existed with God as another identity and he had the nature of that God.

From here

So here we have an unequivocal statement by you, t8, asserting that the word “theos” in John 1:1c is in fact a reference to His very nature. The word choices in your statement (“divine” and “nature”) were emphatically ontological ones, in that they spoke of the very essence of His being. What you actually expressed was – the reason He was called “God” by John was a function of His divine nature! But there is only one divine being t8, YHWH. There is no other God, and none even like YHWH….. 

Isaiah 46:9
Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me.

So herein lies a quandry….was YHWH telling the truth when He stated “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me“? I say yes. He is in a metaphysical category by Himself, an utterly unique being.

BTW, the semantic argument in which you attempted to delineate “nature” and “identity” is really just smoke and mirrors IMO. These are not in mutually exclusive categories, one cannot meaningfully co-exist without the other in the context of ontology (the nature of ‘beings’). All humans have human nature – and they are human in identity. If they do not have human nature (i.e. are not a human being) then they cannot be considered to be human at all. It is our nature that defines our being and identity. If Yeshua had/has divine nature, as you propose was described in John 1:1, then He was “God” in identity…..or do we have two divine beings existing “in the beginning” but only one of them was divine in identity?  How implausible.

Anyway, here is your dilemma t8.

On one hand you hold up John 17:3 as a proof text, emphatically affirming that it shows that the Father of Yeshua is “the only true God” (The Greek word for “true” (Gr. alethinos) carries the meaning “real” or “genuine.”) – to the exclusion of the Son. But on the other you concede that Yeshua is called “God” in scriptureand acknowledge that the word “theos” was used by John in reference to His very nature. Can you see the dilemma? If not, here it is. You can’t have it both ways t8. If the Son is called “God” in an ontological sense (which is exactly what you expressed in you writing “who is Jesus” and subsequently in MB posts), but there isonly One ”true” God – then Yeshua is, by default, a false god.. Looked at objectively, no other conclusion is acceptable.

To say otherwise is to acknowledge that John 1:1 teaches that two Gods inhabited the timeless environ of “the beginning” (i.e. before the advent of time itself), co-existing eternally (The Logos “was”[Gr. En – imperfect of eimi – denotes continuous action of the Logos existing in the past] in the beginning) in relationship (The Logos was “with” [pros] God), and that 1 Corinthians 8:6 teaches a True and false god in fact created “all things”. Which aside from being overt polytheism is also clearly ludicrous. Did a false god lay the foundation of the Earth? Were the Heavens the work of false god’s hands? (Hebrews 1:10). How about the prospect of honouring a false god “even as” (i.e. in exactly the same way as) we honour the True one (John 5:23) at the judgement? It’s untenable for a monotheistic Christian, who interprets John 17:3 the way you do, to even contemplate these things, and yet these are the tangible implications and outworkings of such a position.

I would also say, in finishing this section, that if we apply the same inductive logic you used with John 17:3 to prove that the Father alone is the One true God, YHWH, to the exclusion of Yeshua, then to be consistent, should we also accept that Yeshua is excluded from being considered a “Saviour” by Isaiah 43:11; 45:21; Hosea 13:4 and Jude 25?  And does Zechariah 14:9 exclude Yeshua from being considered a King? And on the flip side of the coin, since Yeshua is ascribed the titles “Only Master” (Jude 4, 2 Peter 2:1) and “Only Lord” (Jude 4, Ephesians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 8:4,6), is the Father excluded from being these things to us?

You can’t maintain that the principal exists in this verse, but not others where the word “only” is used in reference to an individual person. That’s inconsistent. If you read unipersonality into the John 17:3 text and apply the same principle of exclusion to other biblical passages, then what results is a whole complex of problematic biblical dilemmas…….

Section 2. Some contextual issues.

Here is the first 10 verses of the Chapter in John, please note the emphasised parts of the text:

John 17:1-10
1Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, 
2even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. 
3″This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 
4″I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. 
5″Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
6″I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. 
7″Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You; 
8for the words which You gave Me I have given to them; and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me. 
9″I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours; 
10and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine; and I have been glorified in them.

I assert that some of the highlighted statements above are utterly incompatible with the notion of a monarchial monotheism statement of exclusion in vs 3, while at least one would be genuinely absurd

 

  • In verse 1 Yeshua appeals to the Father to “glorify” Him. How temerarious and brazen would this be if Yeshua be speaking as a lower class of being to the infinite God?
  • In verse 5 we read that Yeshua, alluding to His pre-existent past, again appeals to the Father to “glorify” Him – but adds “with the “glory” (Gr. Doxa – dignity, glory (-ious), honour, praise, worship) which I had with You before the world was”. However, in Isaiah 42:8 YHWH said He would not give his glory to another. Now that is an exclusionist statement. What is a lesser being doing sharing “doxa” with the One true God? This puts you in an interesting paradox t8.
    Quote
    With thine own self (para seautw). “By the side of thyself.” Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. John 1:1) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John 1:14). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father’s side (para soi, with thee) “which I had” (h eixon, imperfect active of exw, I used to have, with attraction of case of hn to h because of doch), “before the world was” (pro tou ton kosmon einai), “before the being as to the world” – Robertson’s Word Pictures (NT)
  • In verse 10 we  truly have an absurd proclamation if Yeshua is not the true God. He said “and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine”. Would this not be the very epitome of redundancy if this verse was speaking of a finite being addressing the only SUPREME being, the Creator of everything?!?…..Couldn’t we liken this sentiment that Yeshua makes to say someone from the untouchable caste in India (the poorest of the poor) rocking up to Bill Gates and saying “everything I have is yours”?!?! I think it is the same, yet as an analogy falls infinitely short of the mark in impact. I mean what really can a lesser and finite being offer Him that He doesn;y already have?  I think that if Yeshua is not the true God then He has uttered what is perhaps the most ridiculous statement in history.So, I hope you can see that there are some contextual considerations in the John 17:3 prayer that should be taken into account when interpreting vs 3. Moreover, you should not read any verse in isolation from the rest of scripture. If the suspected meaning of the any verse does violence to the harmony of the all of the rest of biblical data relating to a particular topic, then this verse should be reevaluated – not all the others. That’s sound hermeneutics.

 

Section 3. My interpretation of John 17:3.

I think we both should endeavor to always provide our interpretation of the verses that are submitted to us. Just explaining why the other’s view is wrong isn’t really going to aid in progressing the discussion very far.

My interpretation is this: The overarching context of the seventeenth chapter of John is Yeshua submissively praying as a man to His Father. Yeshua was born a man under the Law (Galatians 4:4), and in that respect, was subject to all of it. His Father was also His God, and had He not been the Law would have been violated by Him, and Yeshua would not have been “without blemish”. So the statement He made in John 17:3 reflected this, and of course He was right – the Father is the only true God. But “eternal” life was predicated on “knowing” the Father and Son.

1 John 1:2-3
2and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal lifewhich was with the Father and was manifested to us
3what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

So in summary, what we are dealing with here is good evidence for the Father’s divinity and the Son’s humanity. But what we don’t have in John 17:3 is good evidence for the non-deity of the Son. If you argue that it is then would Yeshua calling someone “a true man” disprove His own humanity? No. Yet this is the essence of the argument you are using t8. The verse does not make an ontological contra-distinction between the two persons of the Father and Son, as the Son’s “being” is not even mentioned. Furthermore, given that you have previously acknowledged that the reason John ascribed the title “God” to the logos (in John 1:1) was due to His divine nature (in other words He was “God” in an ontological sense) the default position for your Yeshua is false God – if Yeshua made a statement of exclusion in John 17:3. If the Father is the only true God, all others are, by default, false ones. Then all kinds of problematic contradictions arise in scripture:

  • Were the apostles self declared “bond servants” to the One true God, as well as a false one (Acts 16:7, Romans 1:1, Titus, James 1:1)?
  • Did two beings, the True God and a false one, eternally co-exist in intimate fellowship “in the beginning” (John 1:1b)?
  • Did the True God along with a false one bring “all things” into existence (1 Corinthians 8:6)?
  • Is a false god really “in” the only True one (John 10:38; 14:10,11; 17:21)?
  • Should we honour a false God “even as” we honour the Only True God as Judge (John 5:23)?
  • Did the True God give a false one “all authority…..on Heaven and Earth” (Matthew 28:18)?The list goes on….

 

If there is a verse that teaches YHWH’s unipersonity, John 17:3 is not that verse. The false god implication bears no resemblance to the Yeshua described in the  New Testament scriptures. In the NT the Logos existed (Gr. huparcho – continuous state of existence) in the form (Gr. morphe –nature, essential attributes as shown in the form) of God (Phil 2:6) and “was God” (John 1:1c), “He” then became flesh and dwelt among us  (John 1:14), yet in Him the fullness of deity (Gr. theotes – the state of being God) dwelt bodily form…..Yeshua is the exact representation of His Father’s “hypostasis” (essence/substance) – Hebrews 1:3 (cf. 2 Cr 4:4)….not a false God t8, a genuine One.

Thus ends my first rebuttal, I’ll post my first proof text in three days.

Blessings


Discussion

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 20 posts - 601 through 620 (of 945 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #58634
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 08 2007,08:15)

    Quote (t8 @ July 06 2007,16:37)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 03 2007,03:46)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 22 2007,08:48)
    Hi W,
    You say
    “One Spirit, Three persons, One God!”
    Is this written
    or did you deduce it.

    Have you gone back to three deities after only espousing two?


    NH

    There is only “One God”. Since we know that God is Spirit and there is only “One Spirit” and the Spirit is God and Jesus is that Spirit, and that “God alone” created all things, and that By Jesus “All' things were created and without him was not anything created that was created then we know that Jesus is God!

    :D


    In other words here is your Creed:

    ====
    There is 1 God.
    There is 1 Spirit

    The Father is Spirit
    The Son is Spirit
    The Holy Spirit is Spirit

    Not 3 Spirits but One Spirit.

    The Holy Spirit is 100% Spirit, same with the Father and the son.

    And God is not 300% Spirit but 100%.

    Cursed is the man who thinks God is 300% anything.
    Cursed is the man who thinks any member of the God substance is 33.33333%
    ====

    OK, WJ. I give you this creed for nothing. You can have it. I think it best describes what you said, teach, and believe.

    It's all yours.

    :)


    t8

    And here is your creed!

    There is 1 God!
    There is a smaller god!
    There is a Spirit! (which is what God is)

    The Father is a Spirit
    The Son is a Spirit
    The Holy Spirit is what God is!

    Not 1 Spirit, but 2 Spirits and a “what God is”!

    The Spirit is 100% “what God is”.

    And the lessor god, Jesus who is the other Spirit, came to dwell in us!

    Through the lessor god, the Bigger God made all things.

    Cursed is the man who thinks there is another god beside God!
    Cursed is the man that thinks there is another god like him!
    Cursed is the man who says that God made all things through a lessor god than himself!

    God is sextillion percent God! 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 %

    :O


    I noticed that you didn't defend what I thought your creed was, so I take it that you believe it. Like I said you can have it. I claim no copyright. You don't even have to cite me as the author because I think it is rubbish anyway.

    :D

    But I would like to make some changes to the one you think I believe.

    There is 1 God! – Correct (not a triune one)
    There is a smaller god! – Should say there is the only begotten son
    There is a Spirit! (which is what God is) Correct, God is Spirit and the Father is the Father of all spirits.

    The Father is a Spirit – Yes
    The Son is a Spirit, – Should read “has a spirit”
    The Holy Spirit is what God is! – Correct, God is Spirit and God is Holy. He is the Holy Spirit.

    Not 1 Spirit, but 2 Spirits and a “what God is”! – Should read: God is the Father of all spirits.

    The Spirit is 100% “what God is”. Yes God is Spirit, it is written.

    And the lessor god, Jesus who is the other Spirit, came to dwell in us! – Should say that all are less than God. Jesus is the son of God and we can be one with God, his son, and each other in spirit. So all our spirits can be one in unity. See it isn't that hard to understand is it?

    Through the lessor god, the Bigger God made all things. – Correction, God made all things through Jesus his son who shares his nature. After all God is his Father.

    Cursed is the man who thinks there is another god beside God! – Should say that there is one original Most High God who has sons. Some scripture refers to sons as 'theos'. Not my fault, that is scripture.
    Cursed is the man that thinks there is another god like him! – Correct, however according to scripture the image of God is most like God.
    Cursed is the man who says that God made all things through a lessor god than himself! – God made all things through his son. He is the son of God and that truth is crucial for true faith. Moslems and even Trinitarians trample on this with their doctrines.

    God is sextillion percent God! 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 % – Correction, God is one. This was your biggest misconception. 1 not sextillion.

    Hope this helps.

    :D

    #58677
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    oneladyband

    Quote
    And, I agree that Jesus was NOT the “GOD” he was WITH in Jn 1:1.  

    So, I ask you trinitarians, since it doesnt say he was Almighty God, then WHICH “God” WAS he?  

              Jesus The King of Kings and Lord of Lords is the Almighty God

    Rev 19:13  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
    Rev 19:14  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
    Rev 19:15  And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
    Rev 19:16  And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
    Rev 19:17  And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;

    The Word of God described in verse 13 is Jesus because

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,

    Jesus is described here as KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS,The Word of God, Almighty God, and the great God

    The following  verse confirms that Jesus (the Lamb of God) is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

    Rev 17:14  These shall make war with the Lamb , and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

    Let us now look more closely at Rev 19:15.

    Rev 19:15  And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

    Who is this Almighty God who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron?

    Rev 12:5  And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron

    It’s JESUS!……the Almighty God!

    All these verses are obviously speaking of the same Person our Lord and God Jesus Christ.
    Look at all of His titles.

    the Lamb, the Word, The Word of God,  KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS, Lord of lords, and King of kings,  Almighty God, and the great God,

    Jesus Christ is our Almighty Jehovah God. :O

    Rom 16:17  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
    Rom 16:18  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
    :O

    #58701
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi CB,
    Then who is the Son of God?

    #58731
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Hi Nick.

    We both know that the foundational truth that God wants us to come to, is the revelation that Jesus is the son of God and the messiah.

    As you are aware, many philosophies and religions deny this truth and the Trinity doctrine seems to be the most deceptive of all because they say that Jesus is the son of God, and then turns around and say that he is the God that he is the son of.

    In other words their second statement nullifies the first. This is the deception.

    We would do well to not follow this doctrine, nor the people who teach it.

    Blessings Nick. Keep up the faith.

    #58938
    kejonn
    Participant

    Quote (Cult Buster @ July 09 2007,00:44)

    Jesus The King of Kings and Lord of Lords is the Almighty God

    Rev 19:13  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
    Rev 19:14  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
    Rev 19:15  And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.


    Freeze! “And he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.” Hmmm, you took that to mean that Yeshua was being called “Almighty God”? Does that verse REALLY say that? I think not. It is saying that those who will be judged will be dropped into the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God, and that Yeshua will be the one trampling them in that winepress. The winepress is God's, the one smashing the bad grapes will be Yeshua.

    Quote
    Rev 19:16  And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.


    You forgot “God of gods” (Dt. 10:17). Oh right, that was one name Yeshua did not inherit. Wonder why…

    Quote
    Rev 19:17  And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;


    Um, did you happen to notice the first part of 19:17? A different angel is speaking. This angel is not speaking of Yeshua.

    Quote
    Jesus is described here as KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS,The Word of God, Almighty God, and the great God


    Yes, yes, yes, no, no. Its all about context, not filters.

    Quote
    The following  verse confirms that Jesus (the Lamb of God) is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

    Rev 17:14  These shall make war with the Lamb , and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

    Let us now look more closely at Rev 19:15.

    Rev 19:15  And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

    Who is this Almighty God who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron?


    Already showed your fallacy in interpreting 19:15.

    Quote
    Rev 12:5  And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron

    It’s JESUS!……the Almighty God!


    Yes!…..No!

    Quote
    All these verses are obviously speaking of the same Person our Lord and God Jesus Christ.
    Look at all of His titles.

    the Lamb, the Word, The Word of God,  KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS, Lord of lords, and King of kings,  Almighty God, and the great God,


    What's with all the vain repetition?

    Quote
    Jesus Christ is our Almighty Jehovah God. :O


    no….

    Rom 16:17  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
    Rom 16:18  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
    :O[/quote]
    Yet another who can't seem to see verses unless they pass through the Trinity filter.

    #58968
    OneLadyBand
    Participant

    (OneLadyBand)
    I read where someone mentioned how the universe was created, citing the scripture that said YHWH did it “alone.”
    In my endeavor to understand the context of the Bible as a whole, having once been a trinity-believer and since then studied many translations and come to the conclusion against the doctrine, I consider how Almighty God could have created it all “alone,” and yet created it “through” his Son, as other scriptures say.

    As many words express various meanins considering how they are applied, the word “through” applies to both the Father and the Son in different ways:

    It applies to the Father, as creation took place through him as him being the source of it, the one who purposed it, then worked to bring it to fruition.

    The word “through” applies to the Son in that creation took place through him as him being the instrument used by the source.

    The same word can be used, however, the meaning, the position of those two involved, is not the same. If one questions that fact, 1 Corinthians 8:6 really takes away any confusion, showing that the “one God” (Jn 17:3) “the Father,” obviously be a wholly separate and distinct being from the “one Lord, Jesus Christ”.

    ” ….. yet for us there is ONE GOD, THE FATHER, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, AND ONE Lord, Jesus Christ, THROUGH WHOM are all things and through whom we exist.”
    –Luke 1:31,32, John 20:17

    Mary : )

    OLB

    You say…Quote
    The word “through” applies to the Son in that creation took place through him as him being the instrument used by the source.
    So “Alone” and “By myself” dosnt mean “Alone” and “By myself”?

    Isa 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*;

    Isa 45:18
    For thus saith the *LORD that created the heavens; *God himself* that formed the earth and made it*; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and *there is none else*.

    Mary>>>Allow me to direct a few questions back at you in answer to what you just said: “Alone and by myself doesn't mean alone and by myself”?

    You do accept that “the Word was WITH God,” do you not? (Jn 1:1; John 17:5)
    If you do, then no, “alone” and “by myself” do not mean “alone” and “by myelf,” in every strict sense of the word.

    You do accept that there are three PERSONS included in the Godhead, do you not (if not, please disregard this part)?
    If you do, then no, “alone” and “by myself” do not mean “alone” and “by myself” in every strict sense of the word.

    You do accept that Jesus was existing eternally as being a part of the Godhead as long as the Father has existed, do you not? (Most trinitarians do not believe that Jesus IS the Father, so this quetion would be applicable)
    If you do, then, no, “alone and by myself” do not mean “alone and by myself” in the strictest sense of the word.
    Do you see my point?

    : )

    #58970
    OneLadyBand
    Participant

    Please let me clarify one thing further on the “alone” and “by myself” question:

    YHWH did create the universe “alone” and “by himself” in that it was HIS POWER ALONE, and HIS AUTHORITY ALONE which accomplished the task.

    However, other scriptures do say that the world was made “through” Jesus Christ.
    In the doing, Jesus was the instrument HIS GOD/Father used to do the creating.

    : ):blues:

    #58971
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi OLB,
    Yes unless “I alone” means “we together” the trinitarians are no further ahead.

    #58973

    Quote (OneLadyBand @ July 10 2007,11:13)
    Please let me clarify one thing further on the “alone” and “by myself” question:

    YHWH did create the universe “alone” and “by himself” in that it was HIS POWER ALONE, and HIS AUTHORITY ALONE which accomplished the task.

    However, other scriptures do say that the world was made “through” Jesus Christ.
    In the doing, Jesus was the instrument HIS GOD/Father used to do the creating.

    : ):blues:


    So the scriptures say he created all things   “alone”   “By himself”, but then the NT Apostles contradicts them by saying through a lessor being than himself he created all things?

    ???

    Dont think so!

    #58974

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 10 2007,11:17)
    Hi OLB,
    Yes unless “I alone” means “we together” the trinitarians are no further ahead.


    NH

    If Jesus is God we are!

    :O

    So live with the contradiction!

    #58975
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    So you think the verse in Isaiah includes us?

    #58976

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 10 2007,11:41)
    Hi W,
    So you think the verse in Isaiah  includes us?


    NH

    No I think if Jesus is God we are ahead in our theology since you have a contradiction if you dont believe Jesus is God!

    :O

    #58977
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    If you find an apparent contradiction is scripture
    Is it allowable
    or wise
    to add an extrabiblical teaching to try to resolve it?

    Is theology a progressive science?
    If so I would rather avoid it and become more simple in my approach to scripture.
    Children have a head start over theologians.

    #58979

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 10 2007,11:45)
    Hi W,
    If you find an apparent contradiction is scripture
    Is it allowable
    or wise
    to add an extrabiblical teaching to try to resolve it?

    Is theology a progressive science?
    If so I would rather avoid it and become more simple in my approach to scripture.
    Children have a head start over theologians.


    NH

    If you find a contradiction in scripture, should you not be concerned that maybe your theology or doctrine is not sound?

    Especially one as big as the creation of the Universe!

    ???

    #58981
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    Trinity theory cannot be added into the pure words of scripture without perverting them.
    You have resolved nothing.

    #59054
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    The Trinity, Evolution, it's all the same. They are lies.
    Man thinks he knows more than the truth.

    The pride of man is silly. His wisdom is far below God's foolishness.

    #59066
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    You said
    “If Jesus is God we are!”

    Well I for one am not God.
    How about you W?

    #59072
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    Rev 1:8  I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

    Rev 22:13  I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

    Who is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first and the last?

    “I am the first and the last, and besides me there is no God.” (Isaiah 44:6)

    Turn to Revelation 1:17-18 which says, “Do not be fearful; I am the first and the last, and the living one; and I became dead but look! I am living forever.”

    Who is speaking here? Obviously, it is Jesus for He lived, died, and is now alive, and guess what? He is called the First and the Last.   Rev 1:8 also describes Him as the Almighty.

    Rev 19:15  And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations:and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

    Rev 12:5  And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron

    Comparing Rev 19:15 and Rev 12:5, we see Jesus  described as Almighty God.

    Isa 9:6 also describes Jesus as The mighty God

    Isa 9:6  For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    Zec 7:11  But they refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear.
    :O

    #59074
    Cult Buster
    Participant

           Jesus is Jehovah: The Alpha and Omega: The First and the Last.
                                 (From the cult's own bible, the NWT)

    In Revelation 1:8. I am quoting from the Jehovah's Witness’s own Bible, and it reads, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, says Jehovah God. ”

    Ask the Witness, “What does Alpha and Omega mean?” They'll reply, “The beginning and the end.” Then ask them, “How many Alphas and Omegas can you have?” They'll answer, “Only one.” They will agree that there is only one Alpha and Omega.

    Then turn to Revelation 22:12-13 which says, “Look I am coming quickly, and the reward I give is with me….I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

    Ask the Jehovah’s Witnesses, “Who do you say the Alpha and Omega is?” They will say, “Jehovah.”

    Now take a careful look. The Alpha and Omega in verse twelve is coming quickly. Let's see who is speaking in verse twelve.

    Look at verse sixteen, “I Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to you people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star.”

    It is Jesus speaking in verse twelve. If there is any doubt go to verse 20 which says, “He that bears witness of these things says, 'Yes; I am coming quickly' Amen come Lord Jesus.” So it is clear that the Alpha and the Omega in verse twelve is Jesus.

    Here is a strong proof text that Jesus is God because both Jehovah and Jesus are called the Alpha and the Omega.

    Another pair of verses that are effective when used together are Isaiah 44:6 and Revelation 1:17-18.  Again from the Jehovah’s Witnesses own Bible.

    Isaiah 44:6 says, “This is what Jehovah has said, 'The king of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, I am the first and I am the last.'”

    Ask the Jehovah’s Witnesses how many firsts and lasts can you have? It's obvious to anyone you can only have one first and one last. Ask them, “Who is the first and the last?” They will say, “Jehovah.”

    Now turn to Revelation 1:17-18 which says, “Do not be fearful; I am the First and the Last, and the living one; and I became dead but look! I am living forever.”

    Who is speaking here? Obviously, it is Jesus for He died but is now alive, and guess what? He is called the First and the Last.

    Here again we see overwhelming evidence that   Jesus is Jehovah God.

    Isa 42:20  Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not.
    :O

    #59101

    Quote (t8 @ July 10 2007,19:56)
    The Trinity, Evolution, it's all the same. They are lies.
    Man thinks he knows more than the truth.

    The pride of man is silly. His wisdom is far below God's foolishness.


    t8

    Yes it is very pridefull to hold on to a belief that says “God” made all things through a “lessor being” “or a “smaller god'  than himself when scriptures are clear that “by himself”, “alone” he made all things!

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning “God” created the heavens and the earth!

    Isa 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*;

    Isa 45:18
    For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: *I am the LORD; and there is none else*.

    Isa 46:9
    Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and *there is none else*; I am God, and *there is none like me*,

    And yet we read by a strict Monotheistic Jew…

    John.1
    1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    2 The same was in the beginning with God.
    3 All things were made by him; and *without him was not any thing made that was made*.

    As clear as the nose on ones face!  :)

    Ps 138:6
    Though the LORD be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly: but the proud he knoweth afar off.

    2 Peter 3:16
    As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction

    :O :) :p

Viewing 20 posts - 601 through 620 (of 945 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account