The Trinity Doctrine

Participant

Hi Is 1:18,

I would like to say that if you or anyone thinks that all scriptures that refer to God doing something means that God actually is the one who does it in body or person, then you automatically have a conflict with the scriptures that talk about God being a Spirit and that he is invisible and no one can see or has ever seen him, (except for the son).

If you can accept that God always delegates and that all good comes from him, then you will understand God in a greater way. God is the Most High and he is seated on the highest throne for a reason. Not so he can do it all himself but that he can share his vision and responsibilties with his creation. E.g. When you were born did God do that directly or did he delegate mothers to bring their children into the world in order to bring about a world of people according to his will? God delegates just as human Kings delegate and have their subjects carry out the orders.

Could it be said that the human king did it when he decrees something and delegates it? Yes you can say that. But can you say that the human king is the one who got delegated the work. No you cannot.

E.g. Did George Bush invade Iraq? Did he do it in person or did he give the order?

As I have said for a while now. Trinitarians cannot understand the difference between identity and nature. They seemingly cannot understand simple concepts like decree or delegate. Why is this? It is not because they are intellectually challenged. It is because they are interpretting it through the template of a certain doctrine and that stops them from seeing the obvious. Even the most intelligent people can be fooled this way. We only have to look at science and all the smart guys who believe in evolution. Some of these people have exceptionally high IQs. But what would happen if they threw away their pre-conceived idea about evolution. Maybe the truth would jump out and say “here I am”.

So if I said to you that no one could see God and can see God, then would you believe me? What if Jesus himself said it? If he said it then you would have to accept it right?

The conclusion is that you and I know that he did teach this. Therefore when Moses saw God, he saw God through the Angel of the Lord as it is wriiten. Why argue against Jesus teachings about God? Why is that hard to accept what Jesus said about God being invisible and Spirit? Why do you refuse to believe Jesus own words for a certain obscure view of events recorded in scripture?

Take invisible white light. A prism reveals it's beautiful colours. But is the light itself the prism. No it is not. The prism is another.

Now Jesus reflects and reveals the fullness of God to us. So he is the prism of God's revealing light. He is the glory of God as it is written.

“Show us the Father and it will be enough”, were the words of one of Jesus disciples. Jesus said “if you have seen me you have seen the Father”. Jesus was either saying that he was the Father or that he is like the Father. You should know what the answer is here.

Is 1:18, I have the feeling that you are reading the Trinity Post not to make your mind up by challenging all things with scripture, but to look for fault with the opposing argument to yours. Maybe your mind is already made up. Like a scientist who believes in evolution and reads a book about creation. Is he really searching or is he looking for a weakness in the oppositions argument? Who know? Who knows the heart of a man? I surely cannot tell, but I know human nature is deceptive.

A man who has made his mind up finds it very hard to learn new things. We should always be open to learning and being lead by God's Spirit. For life in this world is a journey of truth for some and a highway of deception for others. It is not about being a stubborn mule, but being free to let the Spirit of God blow you in God's direction.

Think about those who have been wrongly convicted of a crime and spend years in prison. When the evidence shows they are innocent (such as DNA analysis) you can usually see that such people are still thought of as guilty in the eyes of those with hard hearts.

The evidence for God being one and Jesus being his son is overwhelming in scripture. But if scripture is not good enough to shine the light of truth to you, then has the salt lost it's saltiness?

October 14, 2004 at 10:33 am#15876

Admin

Keymaster

I would like to see the debate regarding baptism moved to the following discussion.

Baptism

Why?

It seems better if this discussion remains true to it’s subject for the benefit of those who read it to challenge the Trinity Doctrine.

Also the posts regarding baptism will get better coverage and more input in a discussion that is specifically for baptism.

thx

October 14, 2004 at 1:36 pm#15877

max2extreme

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 13 2004,20:08)

Hi I Am!!!,
It is good that you agree that baptism is necessary as the first act of obedience for a believer. Your opinion seems to be that it is not necessary for salvation. I believe the gospel of Jesus Christ says otherwise and demonstrates that meaning in our handbook –

First let me say that I am new to this board, and glad that I was led here. I will eventually read thru this thread, but wow, thats a lot! And I will get to your reply to my post Nick, but for now, I pose a question to you…If baptism is an absolute necessity, what do you say about Luke 23:40-42 where one of the other 2 crucified with Jesus recognized Jesus as his sole savior and repented, and jesus forgave him and said the thief will see him in heaven?

Have a good one (ps: I dont have a lot of time right now, and I will be away for 3 weeks (getting married), but if you address something to me, I'll reply but might take time.)

Max

October 14, 2004 at 1:41 pm#15878

Anonymous

Guest

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 13 2004,16:54)

Thanks for that Adam, What about the rest of the post?

Quote

The term YAHWEH is not a descriptive name but a personal name. It is not a name for a group of godly beings but applies specifically to the Father and cannot be applied personally to Jesus as I understand it.

To say it means Jesus is to fall into the modalism trap that say Jesus is the Father ,which is patently untrue.

Nick, I totally agree with the rest of the post!

October 14, 2004 at 6:49 pm#15879

Participant

Hi Is 1.18,
I have no doubt of your deep sincerity and love for God. The study you have done is a testimony to your faithfulness to God and your determination to search out the truth. Jesus's church needs more people like you.
I am sure your life is showing the fruit of God's work in you and you shine the true light in the world. You fand I both feel we are defending what we believe to be biblical truth as a good servant must do.
No one comes to know everything and most of us have been convinced we were right about issues for years and have been proven wrong. You have much to tell us so perhaps you should put aside what divides and let the internal teacher show you while concentrating on what unites us.

Your faith and faithfulness is precious to the Body of Christ.

October 15, 2004 at 8:00 am#15880

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 14 2004,03:17)

Hi Is,
Sorry. No offence intended.

None taken

Quote

But if you were a Jew reading Zech 14 how would you read it is all I mean? They knew about the Father but very little or nothing about Jesus. It was first written for them so we should read it through their eyes.

Considering Israel is blind to the identity of the Messiah (Rom 11:25) I don't see the your point. Do the jews currently have a monopoly on insight into the identity and nature of Jesus, the Messiah. Hardly.

Quote

I encourage you to study the all the OT passages where this name is used and see if they all pertain to the Father. Also have a look at the NT passage quotes where YHWH is used and see if the NT writers feel the same way you do. I have give you some to start with, but there are others.

Quote

Like I said I don't think you need to apply exergetical gymnastics when the passage needs no real interpretation at all. Aren't you, NH, an advocate of reading the scriptures the way a child would? This is what im doing here, and you're trying to over-ride that with extra-biblical inference.

Quote

That is open minded scriptural analysis is it not?

No. I think it's called trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Or trying to make a passage fit your theology. It plainly says that Jesus' (YHWH) feet will stand on the Mt of Olives. That's what it says, that's what I believe.

God Bless

October 15, 2004 at 8:18 am#15881

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 14 2004,13:49)

Your faith and faithfulness is precious to the Body of Christ.

Hi NH.
These are kind words and grace is at a premium in this forum so I thank you and commend you for this post. God Bless you. I honestly think that the incompatibility between us lies in hermeneutics. I literally interpret the passages you, and others, allegorise. Actually if a passage makes sense as it reads, and fits with other scripture, then i will always try to interpret it literally. I think this goes some way toward paying God's word the deep respect it deserves. It says in Psalms somewhere that God places His word above His name. That's heavy duty stuff. I do tend to get very grumpy when people spiritualise away a scripture – sorry. I hope you and I (and others) can come to a 'meeting of the minds' too some day.
God Bless
Is 1:18

October 15, 2004 at 9:08 am#15882

Participant

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 15 2004,22:18)

What about taking these scriptures literally?

1 John 4:12 (English-NIV)
No one has ever seen God; ….

1 Timothy 1:17 (English-NIV)
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.
Amen.

1 Timothy 6:15-16 (English-NIV)
15 which God will bring about in his own time, God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords,
16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.

John 6:46 (English-NIV)
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

John 1:18 (English-KJV)
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

John 5:37 (English-NIV)
And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me.
You have never heard his voice nor seen his form.

Exodus 3:2 (English-NIV)
There the angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up.

October 15, 2004 at 9:37 am#15883

Participant

Hmmm, what was it I was saying about grace?…..t8, having read most of the trinity thread one thing has been abundantly clear to me – both you and the trinitarians have been throwing verses, that seemingly support eachothers respective positions, at eachother continuously. And neither side has really been able to explain any of them satisfactorily. Both sides of the arguments have flaws and holes whether the protagonists care to admit it or not. Its true. Its pretty funny really. I imagine God is looking at us and laughing. I've basically come to the conclusion that us trying to understand the relationship between the Father and Son can probably be likened to ants trying to comprehend photosynthesis or the intricacies of the US economy.

So far one post has really stood out to me. This one by Eco on pg 51, Jan 04 2004:

Quote

Hello to all,
I accidently stumbled upon this discussion while searching about how to truelly fear God in this age of “feel good religous focus”. I have read some of the posts for the last few days (the first five pages about and then the last 3 pages about).
To my point for posting this though. I have prayed and thought about this discussion since i started reading it. I have a couple of pages of notes and questions that i have made during my reading, but i do not feel that God is leading me to talk about those, but to ask to what purpose does this discussion matter.
Both sides of the debate have some very valid arguments. Yet in the end is it not all meaningless. Am I wrong in thinking that we all believe that Jesus came from heaven and died on the crossand on the third day rose again and that he was the Savior that was prophisied about to come and clense the sins of those who believed in him as their Lord and Savior. We also believe that Jesus has/had/will always have some sort of divinity in corrorlation to and pertaining to God the almighty father. Now lets be truthfull this whole discussion is based on what might be that correlation, YET is this a fruitful discussion that will lead us to fearing the Lord our God and to making disciples of all nations. these are the two major things that has been stated for believers in God to do. And everything else is meaningless, as stated in Ecc. 12:12-14 (NIV) “Of many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body. Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: FEAR GOD and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgement, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”
Therefore the matter of the fact is that we will never undertand what the answer to the trinity question really is until we die and reach heaven, and even then the Lord may not choose to impart all of his infinite wisdom and understanding to us on this matter. As one of my favorite verses states “Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Lord is the everlasting God, the creator of the ends of the earth. He will not grow tired and weary, and his understanding no one can fathom.” Isaiah 40:28 (NIV) So the continuation of this discussion is futile. It neither advances the Kingdom of God here on earth, nor does it bring our God any glory for us to bicker about this any longer. This is creating even more dissension and fragmentation of the body of Christ then there already was (im refer to another thread on this site to T8 by a man in a church that felt torn between the agreement he signed with a church and his new found belief in the non-trinity camp), and part of your (t8) big thing is that the dinominations have torn apart the body of Christ apart. and i agree that is is why i feel the need to post this. We do not have to agree on everything and the interpitation of it all.
In the end the big thing is that we should not veiw eachother as trinitarians (and no t8 I do not think that this is some big huge thing related to the tower of Babylon and the worship of the mother of all gods and what not) or non-trinitarians, but that we focus on the advancement of God's will on earth with an earnest and God fearing heart full of love, compassion, and hope which is brought about by the Spirit of God (how ever the Spirit of God works into the correlation and relationship of God the father, and Jesus the Savior).
Sincerely, Your fellow brother in Christ,
ECO

I mean here is someone with probably the least biblical (and gramatical) literacy of all the contributers. And yet he has hit the nail on the head. He has cut through all the theological pomp and highlighted to us all what really matters in terms of christian understanding. Its not about having a self-percieved perfect theology or even having an answer to every challenge. Its about shining God's love and dispensing His grace. No matter who you understand this God to be. We will all find out in the end anyway.
Grace

October 15, 2004 at 11:36 am#15884

Participant

The big problem with this post and your endorsement of it is that it leaves us back to the Trinity as it is the default doctrine of the denominations. It also leads us to just accept the denominational system as the Body of Christ.

So we are lead back to captivity, just as they whom Moses lead out of Egypt did. They went into the wilderness because even after God gave them freedom, they actually preferred their captivity to walking with God. This is what I see you endorsing.

Imagine if Martin Luther had that attitude. Would you be doing penance or praying your loved ones out of purgatory today? Who knows?

By burying our head in the sand, we by default leave the current popular gospel that Jesus is God unchallenged and we assist in endangering all believers into breaking the greatest commandment that Yahweh is One God and our one Father.

Is 1:18, there is most certainly a place for challenging teachings and doctrines to see whether they are of God and I rebuke you with the following scriptures:

1 John 4:1-2
1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,

2 Corinthians 10:5
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

So this put my head in the sand approach is irresponsible when it comes to preserving the truth and the teachings in scripture. Imagine if Paul or Jesus took that attitude. Jesus came to destroy the works of the enemy, how could he do that if he said “what good will it do for me to challenge the teachings of the pharisees”.

Paul as an apostle looked after the Church and warned of those who were straying from the true path. What he allowed and what we allow, others will surely follow. This to me is one of the biggest differences that we have. I am passionate for the truth and I truly cannot see that in you.

It is also one thing to say that our belief about the one true God is very different, but the same goes for your attitude that says what does it really matter. Is it worth all the trouble to challenge the trinity doctrine?

Well yes it is. The truth will not only be preserved, but must be defended against the onslaught of lies from men and doctrines of demons. Let us not forget that Jesus built his Church on the acknowledgement of who he really is. This is also the true gospel. Jesus is the Christ, the son of the living God. Let those who preach another gospel be eternally condemned.

The truth will win because light shines through darkness and also those who truly serve the truth will die for it if need be. But those who don't really care will not die for their gospel. They are casual about everything. But Jesus wasn't like that. He was intense. Intense love and intense rebuke if warranted. It's about being hot. Even cold is preferred to luke-warmness.

Anyway Is1:18 if you really believe your last post, then I fully expect you to practice what you preach and give up debating for or against the trinity doctrine in order to obtain a type of unity. As Eco said, “what purpose does this discussion matter”.

If this is what you truly believe and if this post stands out as the most meaningful post to you, then prove it by practicing what you preach. That would mean that there would be no more debating the Trinity from you. Instead you would be preaching about acceptance of our differences. Lets see you do what you say or what you hold as meaningful.

If you change your stance and say that it matters enough for you to continue defending the Trinity Doctrine, then be honest and acknowledge that your last post was hastely written.

You then said something to me that I thought was very sad.

Quote

“And neither side has really been able to explain any of them satisfactorily.”

Well I think that you are on your own with that conclusion. If the Spirit in you doesn't acknowledge the truth of the scriptures or the gospel, then what Spirit is teaching and guiding you?

October 15, 2004 at 7:06 pm#15885

Participant

t8,
I think you have misunderstood me and over-reacted a bit in your post. Im not saying that all debate on God is completely futile and we should abandon any attempt to understand Him and His ways. Im saying there are aspects of this relationship btwn the Father and Son that clearly are beyond our comprehension. Take this begetting of Jesus for instance – who could really understand what this means when it happaned outside of time as we know it. None of the usual space/time rules can apply and we need to apply metaphysical ones in this instance (which of course is just conjecture). And yet people still try to explain it to eachother using the earthly time as their frame of reference. Can't you see how silly this really is. Ants and photosynthesis.
Take care

October 15, 2004 at 8:59 pm#15886

Anonymous

Guest

Hi,
If we put trinity to one side and return to the original gospel and mission of the church, as ECO has suggested, then trinity problems disappear- because trinity is not part of that gospel or mission.

It is a side issue of man's creation designed to distract and lead us away from simplicity. Once we leave that safe path we enter a realm of complication and confusion that is totally unnecessary.

Paul showed us the important basics of our faith in Hebrews 6 and trinity is not among them.

But neither are condemning words helpful. They are not the weapons of our faith. Only the Spirit can lead us to the truth and we cannot force that understanding on anyone. Paul pleaded but was never able to teach most of his listeners.

“not by power, not by might, but by My Spirit”

Speaking the truth in the spirit of love was what we were told to do. Please be patient with each other as we all needed God's patience for most of our lives.

October 15, 2004 at 11:23 pm#15887

Participant

Hi Is 1:18,

Yes trying to figure anything out about God is like an ant trying to figure out the job description of the US president. Of course much more so. But God gave us scripture and from scripture we can learn, teach and even rebuke if necessary.

God made us in his image and gave us the capability to learn about him. Are we to worship in ignorance? Yes we worship a great and mighty God who is beyond our comprehension, but he reveals himself to us because he created us to understand certain things about him. An image of the true God should be a very capable person and we are capable in order to understand what great and marvellous works God has wrought. So if God gives us scripture, it is only done so because we have the ability and opportunity to understand it. Lets not say that God made a mistake here. He gave us scripture in order that we may understand.

So what is it if we read scripture and teach from it. So why replace that for philosophies that use the models of men to come up with a formula for God.

Your argument works against those who use their own understanding alone. But to those who learn and teach from scripture, and in addition are lead by God's Spirit; it is they who are doing what God intended.

So if our doctrine is not based in scripture, but Greek philosophy and other influences, then I wonder why even make an issue out of such things. Surely such things should be opinions only. But to relegate such thinking to become the foundation of our faith is not only a big stretch of the imagination, but it is an extremely wicked thing to do. As Nick pointed out. It is not taught as the foundation of our faith and didn't get a mention in the gospel. And as we have laboured day and night in scripture to show you and others; it's not even in any holy book or scripture.

This is why I appose the Trinity Teaching. Many people have opinions and that is fine as opinions also help us to search out matters. But to try and replace truth with a lie is anti-truth. Just as antichrists try to take the place of Christ and his truth, so it is that false gospels and false foundations try to take the place of the real gospel and true foundation of the church. That is also why those who preach false gospels are spoken of as eternally condemned. This should be a no go area.

False doctrines of this magnitude cannot be tolerated by God's Church if we are to remain faithful to him.

Matthew 24:45
“Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time?

Matthew 25:23
“His master replied, 'Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master's happiness!'

Is allowing false doctrine to become the foundation for our faith and the gospel, considered as being faithful to God? Surely not.

You will see at oft times, Jesus and Paul rebuking where rebuke is necessary. I make no apology for it.

There is one God the Father, who begat a son and through his only begotten son he made the worlds. This is the same son who came to earth, was born through the the blessed Mary and who built his Church upon Peter's declaration that he (Jesus) is the son of the living God and the Messiah. This same Jesus died for our sins and was raised victorious from the dead in order to bring us who were lost, back to fellowship with God. God's son is the only mediator between God and man and in order to be taken to God holy and blameless, we must not only trust in Jesus as the Messiah, but we also need to respond to this free gift of salvation by repenting of our sins and obeying God's commands. This is why we are baptized into Christ, so that we may partake of the gift that God has given us.

Why do we need to add all this Greek philosophical stuff? The Greeks seek wisdom, but Paul preached to them Christ crucified which was foolishness to them.

Why can't we let the foolishness of God beat out the wisdom of man. Why should we even use the wisdom of man ourselves, when God is defeating our wisdom and placing it under the footstool of Christ.

October 16, 2004 at 8:29 pm#15888

Participant

Hi T8 ,
I can understand your frustration as you have laboured to bring clarity in this area. You are right,in that this and other false doctrines seriously threaten the relationship of any christian with God. God hates false teaching. Other sin fades into the background in comparison with false teaching in the light of the Bible.
Trinity is idolatry. It is a false God and not the God the bible reveals.It replaces the clear teaching about salvation with a human devised version. It insults the Father and changes the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Yes .It is a serious matter.If strong words change hearts then good may come of it. But it takes time to check the foundations of our faith as no one wants our faith building to collapse around us. That is why there must always be gentle with the person while we attack the false belief.

October 16, 2004 at 8:54 pm#15889

Participant

Reading my last post reminds me that I have been remiss at times so ..sorry Sammo and any others.

The Whore of Babylon earns special disrepute and punishment in the Book of Revelation. This Religious/political organisation based in Rome killed those of true faith, and enslaves millions and influences international governments and markets.

“She has made all the nations drink the poisoned wine of her lewdness”
” Come out of her MY PEOPLE for fear of sinning with her”

God uses the symbolism of lewdness for false teaching and idolatry often in the Word. It is this that causes the judgement to fall on her and her followers. Many have left her clutches but take some of her teachings with them into their new life. They take the risk of Lot's wife. Repentance means ploughing the ground so it can grow new seeds. Old weeds only cause trouble in your life.

October 16, 2004 at 11:59 pm#15890

Participant

Thanks for your posts and advice Nick. I consider myself to be patient with those who are learning and I hope I am right in my judgement.

But when someone is given clear scriptural teaching, but chooses to continue teaching falsely, that is when I do not hesitate to rebuke.

We are even told to not entertain those who preach a different message, to not even let them even in our house. I have no problem with those who believe wrongly, but those who teach wrongly.

As it is written:

James 3:1
Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

2 Peter 2:1
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them–bringing swift destruction on themselves.

This is why I rebuked Ringo too. Yet I have been tolerant with others, even those who do not believe that God exists.

With regards to Is 1:18, I apologise if I thought he was teaching his belief. I can appreciate questions and testing all that is said here. After all that is what I do myself and this is what this Forum is about. But I will be quick to rebuke false teachers who try and introduce destructive heresies.

So my apology to Is 1:18 if you were questioning as apposed to teaching. Questioning is good and should be encouraged.

October 17, 2004 at 3:15 am#15891

Anonymous

Guest

Quote (Ambassador of Christ @ Oct. 08 2002,16:23)

In response to Archieve:

You asked: “The question is – When God sent Jesus to earth, what did he send?”

I feel, based on your question, that you might have a misunderstanding of the doctrine of the Trinity. Here is a brief description of what the doctrine says: ‘Within the one being that is God there exists 3 separate, co-equal, and co-eternal persons, namely the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.’

Yet another misunderstanding I feel you might have is in reference to the usage of the word “God” in the New Testament. Let the context tell you which person of the Godhead the writer refers to. Each person in the Godhead has a specific ministry. If the New Testament refers to God as indwelling a person, we know that it is in reference to the Holy Spirit and his ministry (John 14). We know this because scripture tells us that it is neither the person of Jesus Christ nor the person of the Father that dwells within a believer, but rather the Holy Spirit. Note that throughout scripture, the person of the Holy Spirit is referred to as many names, including the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of the Father, God’s Spirit, etc. Let context of the passage answer the question as to which person within the Godhead the writer refers. I will give some examples:

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son. . . . .”

Which person within the Godhead is John referring to when he uses the word ‘God’? The pronoun ‘He’ and ‘His’ refer back to God in this verse. Clearly, John is referring to the Father. Jesus Christ is the eternally begotten Son of the Father. Nowhere in scripture do we find that the Holy Spirit begot the Son. Likewise, nowhere in scripture do we hear of the Son begetting himself.

Another example:

Acts 20:28 “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.”

Which member of the Godhead does Luke refer to in this passage? Again ‘He’ and ‘His’ in this verse refer back to God. Which person within the Godhead shed his blood for the church? This passage is not in reference to the persons of the Father or Holy Spirit, but to the member of the Godhead that became flesh, died on a cross, and atoned for sin with his blood. Clearly, Jesus Christ is referred to as God in this passage.

–Each person within the Godhead shares full equality and divinity, so when the bible refers to God, we know that regardless of which person it is in reference to, it is speaking of the only true God, YAHWEH.

You asked some questions about two passages:

Jon 1:18 “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”

1 John 4:12 “No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us.”

Your question was as follows: “According to the trinity doctrine – (God, Jesus and The Holy Ghost is the One God), so the question is – (Which God was John talking about)?”

To correct you, the trinity doctrines state the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all make up one God. Also note that each member is fully God, not 1/3 God. You are correct however when you say that the Trinity doctrine states there to be only ONE GOD. IN stating that, you in a sense answered your own question, “Which God is John talking about?” There is only one God. Just to specify for you, His name is YAHWEH.

To elaborate on my answer, I would like for you to note I cited John 1:18 from the NASB. You will find that most modern translations will say “the only begotten God” rather than “the only begotten Son.” Your King James Version does not however. This comes down to a translation issue, and I feel that the modern translations of this passage are much better. However, if you refuse to use any version of the bible other then the KJV, I would refer you to 1 Timothy 3:16 in your bible. I’m sure that will end your questions as to the deity of Christ, if that is something you are struggling with. If, however, you feel that after reading that verse you have a need for a better translation, I would then refer you to a more accurate translation, such as the NASB.

But, back to your last question, “Is there another God that we don’t know about?”

Again, if you are looking for an answer in light of the doctrine of the Trinity to this question, you need to do more research on what the Trinity teaches. I have defined it many times on this message board. The first thing the doctrine of the Trinity says is that there is ONLY ONE GOD. This answers your question. No, there is no other God out there that we do not know of. There is only one God; his name is YAHWEH. We know from John 4:24 that God is not spirit, “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” We cannot see Spirit. However, God did take on flesh and dwell on earth. People certainly saw him, and Christ himself said that He revealed his Father. Seeing Christ was just the same as seeing His Father in heaven. In light of this, lets look at John 1:18 again

“No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”

John says that no one has seen God, and then goes on to say that Christ has explained him. That already eliminates any possibility of the first word ‘GOD’ as being in reference to the Son. Note here also that John is clearly showing that the Father and Son are separate persons. Finally, John answers the question as to which person of the Godhead he is referring to when he refers to the Father in this passage as being explained by the Son.

As to 1 John 4:12, I will quote from a commentary of this verse I believe answers it much better that I could

“’No man hath seen God at any time,….’ The same is said by the Evangelist John, Joh 1:18; but here it is observed with a different view, and upon another account; there it signifies that no man has seen and looked into the counsels and designs of God, and been able to make a discovery and declaration of his mind and will, his love and grace, and which is there ascribed to the Son of God; but here the sense is, that whereas God is invisible in his nature, and incomprehensible in his being and perfections, so that there is no coming to him, and seeing of him, and conversing with him in a familiar way, and so not of loving him as he is in himself, and ought to be loved, as one friend sees, converses with, and loves another, and finds his love increased by sight and conversation; then we ought to love the saints and people of God, who are visible, may be seen, come at, and conversed with, see; for this clause stands among the arguments and reasons for brotherly love:” -John Gill

I hope that my response has fully answered your questions.

-God Bless

I would like to clarify what The GODHEAD is, The word godhead is Translated from the Greek word “Theotes” which means Godliness and Divinity. It does not have anything to do with co-equal persons or personalities. It namely means devine nature, eternal divinty of God. Many people try and use this word to support the trinity doctrine, yet it has nothing to do with a seperation of personalities of The Lord.

To me the word kinda makes me recognize that the lord is Devine and that you can not count him.

May God bless you all

October 17, 2004 at 4:04 am#15892