The Trinity Doctrine

Participant

Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 26 2006,09:29)

There are Three separate Beings, each God and equal with one another. Though they hold different offices, they are nevertherless each God.

Three Divine beings within the Godhead with three different offices they choose to perform,

H2O can exist in three different realities, yet remain H20
•Ice
•Liquid
•or Steam

Each Person of the Godhead can choose a different office within the plan of salvation, yet remain God.

Hi CB:

Going along w/ your analogy, how shall H2O refer to itself: singlular or plural? I, My, Me vs We, US, Our?

Or are these optional, depending on the circumstances?

I shall venture to say that YHWH in all his identity speaks of himself in the first person singular, and that the only times he spoke in the plural indicated that he was with others who were not HIMSELF.

Similarly w/ Jesus.

If using the singular and plural pronouns to speak of himself (the one God) is optional, then we've got a God with an identity crisis on our hands.

Legion (remember them?) spoke in the plural.

Mar 5:9 And he asked him, What [is] thy name? And he answered, saying, My name [is] Legion: for we are many.

My brothers and sisters, I say YHWH is One and singular, and refers to himself accordingly, in the first person pronoun (I, Me, My), except in the examples given when he clearly acknowledged the presence of OTHER beings who were not intended to be regarded as HIMSELF, but subject to himself.

December 27, 2006 at 12:32 am#35330

Participant

So LEGION said…

MY name IS…for WE ARE many!

This is what Trinity wants to make of YHWH who declares of himself that he is one and that beside him is no one else.

December 27, 2006 at 12:38 am#35332

Participant

The Father says of Jesus, “This is MY Son.”
Jesus says of his Father, “MY Father…”
Then says… Father make them one as we are one… and when I look around, we being many are one body in Christ but we are not the same and indeed Christ is our Lord.

December 27, 2006 at 1:20 am#35334

Participant

And if Jesus DID NOT consider himself a separate being from God, should he not have said,

“Jhn 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.

It should have been something like, that you all may be one as I am one in myself that you also may be one in me that the world may believe that I sent myself. Why? because although I am three I must really insist on the ONE part as you ought not to practice polytheism and must know that I … that is we… or rather … it is me myself and I that speak w/ you…sometimes I am my own father and sometimes I am my own son…but always me, the one and only, that's me…! Oh, sometimes I speak to myself out loud from heaven, in public, addressing my other self…and pray to myself and call on myself for help…. and will submit to myself in the end that I would be all in all after my submission…
the list goes on…

Sorry ST, I love you and do love my Trinitarian brethren in the Lord but sometimes can't help the Elijah thing coming over me when he asks the prophets of baal to carry on a little louder because perhaps their Gods have fallen asleep or gone out to lunch or something!

December 27, 2006 at 6:19 am#35350

Participant

If we're looking at trinity we need to look at the Holy Spirit.

Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. (his ultimate lie was to God but it was done through the Holy Spirit, if you lie to the representative, you lied to the one they represent.)

Mathew 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. 31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. blas·phe·my A contemptuous or profane act, utterance, or writing concerning God or a sacred entity. (it appears that if what we are teaching goes against what the Holy Spirit is guiding us towards, we are guilty of blasphemy)

December 27, 2006 at 6:45 am#35355

Participant

Quote (Cubes @ Dec. 26 2006,20:20)

I forgive you cubes, I didn't really believe it would work but thought it was worth a try. It wasn't a waste of time however as I have learned a lot. CB supplied me with a lot of good scriptures to lookup (thanks CB). I still want to keep compiling the scriptures and sort them.

You sound very certain of yourself, I try to be only as certain as my depth of scripture allows on a given subject. I know what I feel the Lord has shown me but our safeguard against being decieved is the whole of scripture and an open mind.

Bless you Wm

December 27, 2006 at 8:13 am#35364

Cult Buster

Participant

Quote

Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. (his ultimate lie was to God but it was done through the Holy Spirit, if you lie to the representative, you lied to the one they represent.)

ST. What you presented is inference perhaps because of your unitarian bias.

There is an abundance of scripture which I have presented that shows The Holy Spirit as a Divine Person.

See again the following.

Acts 5:3 Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

Blasphemy is against God. In this case The Holy Spirit.

December 27, 2006 at 8:28 am#35366

Cult Buster

Participant

Quote

Heres the Son.

NKJV
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

KJV
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

NLT
And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we are in God because we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life.

NIV
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true–even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

ESV
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life

RSV
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, to know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

NASB
And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

Truly Jesus Christ is the true God.

December 27, 2006 at 8:49 am#35372

NickHassan

Participant

Hi CB,
Scriptures speak of the Son of God.
Who is he then??

December 27, 2006 at 8:52 am#35373

Participant

Why is it that all the proof texts of this school of thought are so unclear and can be taken more than one way. Just about every one of them are like this.

1 John 5:

Verse 18: Speaking of God
Verse 19: Speaking of God
Verse 20a: Saying that the Son “of God” and therefore, according to logic, not God himself, helps us to gain knowledge of “the true one.” (These verses were speaking of God. In this verse, is it saying that Jesus helps us to understand Jesus? Is Jesus the one that these verses are speaking of? Or is it God almighty?
Verse 20b: Says that we're in union with the “true one” by means of someone else, his son, Jesus Christ. Again, every form of logic known to man indicates that the true one and Jesus are not the same.
Verse 20c: “This is the true God and life everlasting.”

Since the preceeding verses were speaking of God and since God and Jesus are at least twice distinguished as separate in this verse, if we use the normal rules of logic and how people think and understand, this verse is speaking of not Jesus, but his Father as being the “true God,” a title that is applied to him in other places.

December 27, 2006 at 8:54 am#35374

Participant

John 17:20,21 may also be related.

December 27, 2006 at 8:56 am#35376

Participant

“This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.”—John 17:3.

Unlike the scripture above (1 John 5:20) that seems like it can be taken more than one way, and hence, which trinitarians love and are forced to use, this scritpure if very clear, on who the “true God” is.

Jesus is distinguished from him…as being the one that the true God sent.

December 27, 2006 at 9:02 am#35380

Participant

1 John 5:20:
“We are in union with the true one, by means of his Son Jesus Christ. This(hou′tos) is the true God and life everlasting.”

Believers in the Trinity doctrine hold that the demonstrative pronoun “this” (hou′tos) refers to its immediate antecedent, Jesus Christ.

Cambridge University scholar B. F. Westcott wrote: “The most natural reference [of the pronoun hou′tos] is to the subject not locally nearest but dominant in the mind of the apostle.”

German theologian Erich Haupt wrote: “It has to be determined whether the [hou′tos] of the next proposition refers to the locally and immediately preceding subject . . . or to the more distant antecedent God. . . . A testimony to the one true God seems more in harmony with the final warning against idols than a demonstration of the divinity of Christ.”

Even “A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament,” published by Rome’s Pontifical Biblical Institute, states: “[Hou′tos]: as a climax to [verses] 18-20 the ref[erence] is almost certainly to God the real, the true, [in] opp[osition to] paganism (v. 21).”

Often hou′tos, generally translated “this” or “this one,” does not refer to the immediately preceding subject of a phrase. Other scriptures illustrate the point. At 2 John 7, the same apostle and penman of the first letter wrote: “Many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This [hou′tos′] is the deceiver and the antichrist.” Here the pronoun cannot refer to the closest antecedent—Jesus. Obviously, “this” refers to those who denied Jesus. They collectively are “the deceiver and the antichrist.”

In his Gospel, the apostle John wrote: “Andrew the brother of Simon Peter was one of the two that heard what John said and followed Jesus. First this one [hou′tos] found his own brother, Simon.” (John 1:40, 41) It is evident that “this one” refers, not to the last person mentioned, but to Andrew. At 1 John 2:22, the apostle uses the same pronoun in a similar way.

Luke makes similar use of the pronoun, as seen at Acts 4:10, 11: “In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you impaled but whom God raised up from the dead, by this one does this man stand here sound in front of you. This [hou′tos′] is ‘the stone that was treated by you builders as of no account that has become the head of the corner.’” The pronoun “this” clearly does not refer to the man who was healed, though he is the one mentioned just before hou′tos. Certainly, “this” in verse 11 refers to Jesus Christ the Nazarene, who is the “cornerstone” on which the Christian congregation is founded.—Ephesians 2:20; 1 Peter 2:4-8.

Acts 7:18, 19 also illustrates the point: “There rose a different king over Egypt, who did not know of Joseph. This one [hou′tos] used statecraft against our race.” “This one” who oppressed the Jews was, not Joseph, but Pharaoh, the king of Egypt.

So this scripture which can be taken either way, isn't a good verse to build one's faith on, if they ignore other clear scritpures that seem to indicate the opposite of how they take this scritpure.

david

December 27, 2006 at 1:51 pm#35386

Participant

CB,
You said “What you presented is inference perhaps because of your unitarian bias.” partially true, what I wrote was based on my bias, but I am not an unitarian. (If you haven't read it already I posted what I believe in the thread “trinity” on page 480. However that is not important to what I'm trying to accomplish here.) I was responding to your post which had your bias, I'm never afraid to hear someones bias on scripture as long as we allow scripture to speak for itself. Below I have responded to the scriptures you had listed for “proving” that the Holy Spirit is God. My big problem is with saying that the Holy Spirit is equal to the Father. I'm also uncertain how much of a “person” the Holy Spirit is but I agree there seems to be a lot of scripture infering some level of personhood. Just my opinion.

1 Corinthians 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? (a true unitarian would say this is only God's Spirit, I dis-agree there seems to be just too many scriptures inferring something more)
6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. (you state that God in 6:20 is the Holy Spirit but it reads better as the Father)

1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God (the Father) , and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? (the Spirit belonging to the Father)

2 Corinthians 3:7 Now if the ministry (the old covenant) that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit (the new covenant) be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!
12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. 13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit (as in the “ministry of the Spirit”) , and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom from the letter of the law) . 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. (the New Covenant is based on Spirit and what Paul was stressing was the spiritual nature of the new covenant, just my opinion based on the context)

9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? ( this is best explained back a few verses “9:11 for if that which is being made useless [is] through glory, much more that which is remaining [is] in glory.” if the ashes which are useless bring glory how much more the blood of Christ who remains eternally also indicated in verse above 11 And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!
)

December 27, 2006 at 6:12 pm#35397

music4two

Participant

Quote (david @ Dec. 27 2006,08:52)

Why is it that all the proof texts of this school of thought are so unclear and can be taken more than one way. Just about every one of them are like this.

1 John 5:

Primary principle of hermaneutics is never base a doctrine on ambigous scriptures. Once one deletes the questionable scriptures out of the Trinitarian doctrine the few that seem clear can be easily debuncked.

Even without this method the real test and one i have constantly pursued is the test of function. Every time I have broached the subjest Trinitarians run for the hills because their doctrine does not work within the plan of God. they have a concept in their mind of a triune God and because of this SOME do the following,
1. They filter scripture through preconcieved ideas of doctrine, searching scriptues daily not to seek truth but to prove doctrine. they only dig as far as necessary to find some crumb of evidence that seems to justify their stand.
Example – Elohyim – Is stated as a plural noun. This is as far as most Trinitarians go in research. They found their seeming proof. The truth is that when one studies Hebrew it is clear that the plural nature of Elohyim is that of a plurality of majesty. In otherwords Hebrews use plurality in terms of quality and not quanity. Elohyim indicates the most high God not plural persons of God
2. They believe that head knowledge is suffiicent to have aquired a truth.
Without experiantial testing of it's functional qualities nothing is established except a theory.
Example –
If Jesus is anything other then fully human he can not be a true example for us that are fully human. this denies the entire plan of God for man. Even the dual nature does not solve this problem because if Jesus had a dual nature then that still makes him different then us. They throw out scripture after scripture that they believe proves the trinity and never take into consideration if their doctrine actually produces fruit. Does it actually help us become more like Christ?

December 27, 2006 at 6:26 pm#35400

NickHassan

Participant

Hi ST,
You quote with an addition
“6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God (the Holy Ghost) in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. (you state that God in 6:20 is the Holy Spirit but it reads better as the Father)

We do not worship the Spirit of God in our temple

Rom 8
” 26Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

27And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.”

The Spirit of God communicates with and for us to God Himself because the Spirit is never separate from God.

1Cor 2
” 10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.'

The finger of God takes us into the presence of God.

December 27, 2006 at 11:09 pm#35422