The Trinity Doctrine

[david]

Hi SEEKING. You quoted this:

Quote

“Perhaps the boldest claim Jesus made about His identity was the statement,“Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM” (John8:58). Translated into English, His statement may appear or sound confusing.But in the Aramaic or Hebrew language in which He spoke, Hewas making a claim that immediately led the people to try to stone Him for blasphemy.

(There is actually another thread on just this subject I think)

The question raised was this:

“You are not yet fifty years old, and still you have seen Abraham?”

It was a question of age. Jesus said that he existed before Abraham. Before Abraham was, he was. The verb translated “am” in that version of the Bible is like the most widely used verb. It wasn't some secret message. Jesus was just responding the question asked.

And yes, people would stone someone for saying they existed before Abraham. He wasn't saying he was “God” here. He was answering the question of age. Look at the context.

Also, obviously, many (everyone) who translated those Bible's that have “I AM” where…you guessed it–trinitarians, with a trinitarian bias.

But if we look at the context, Jesus was answering their question of age, and he simply said he existed before Abraham–which he did, as the “firstborn of creation,” and “the beginning of God's creation.” (Col 1:15,16; Rev 3:14)

[david]

Quote

I read in “Trinity Doctrine” that Jesus is NOT God. In another UCG publication I read that He IS God and that those who say we believe He is not misunderstand us. Cananyone clarify please.

Perhaps they meant he was not 'THE' God of the Bible–God Almighty, the Father, but rather, that he is the Son of THE God, Jehovah, and that the word “god” is applied to Jesus, as it is to angels, human judges, etc in the Bible. (The word “god” basically means “mighty/strong/powerful one”) Hence, while not being the Almighty God, the Creator, he is called “God” in the Bible about 3 or 4 times.

But several times, the Bible says that Jesus himself has a God, and that is the Almighty God, the Creator.

[david]

Quote

Hi Seeking. The correct translation of John1:1 and the correct sequence of words in the oldest available pieces of scripture is: In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word.

Actually, incorrect.

I'm not sure what you mean by “oldest pieces of scripture.”

The Greek text was translated into more koine Greek copies, as well as syriac, aramaic, latin, etc.
Which of these copies are you referring to? NONE OF THESE LANGUAGES USE THE INDEFINITE ARTICLE “A”.

When people think of the oldest Bible's for some reason they think of KJ in English, as though it was old.
Think 1400 years before.

Koine Greek was translated into Sahedic Coptic (Egyptian language with Greek letters.) It was translated into this language by those who spoke koine greek at a time that koine Greek was still a spoken language, and by people who used the same alphabet (give or take a few letters). And guess what?
THE COPTIC DOES USE THE INDEFINITE ARTICLE: “A” OR “AN” IN ENGLISH.

Now, did they use it at John 1:1c?

YES.

Anyway, for more info, go see the coptic thread:

QUICK SUMMARY OF “COPTIC VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE” THREAD:
The Greek of John 1:1 has no indefinite article (“a”). So, if someone translates it into a language that does have indefinite articles (“a” or “an”) (such as English, Coptic, etc) the translator must put the “a” or “an” in where it is needed. (And every English Bible does this thousands of times.)

The languages that John 1:1 were translated and copied into (Greek, Latin, syriac, aramaic, etc) had no indefinite article. Around 1500, it was translated into English which does have the indefinite article.

But 1300 years before, it was translated into Coptic, which does have the indefinite article in it's language. And the translators, who lived at a time when koine Greek was still spoken and at a time when they definitely understood it, tranlsated john 1:1c with “a god.”

https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….03;st=0

[SEEKING]

Good information. It was not I but “chosenone” who asserted
the correct translation to be:

Hi Seeking.
The correct translation of John1:1 and the correct sequence of words in the oldest available pieces of scripture is:
In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word.

Blessings.

[942767]

Quote (SEEKING @ Jan. 14 2009,12:00)

I want to thank all of you for your responses to my original inquiry:    I read in “Trinity Doctrine” that Jesus is NOT God.  In another  UCG publication I read that He IS God and that those who  say we believe He is not misunderstand us. Cananyone          clarify please. I seek clarification regarding the statements made in two UCB publications.  They seem opposites.  Perhaps I need to seek for that answer elsewhere.  In everything we have posted these statements would seem, at best, conflicting.  Agreed?

Hi Seeking:

The statements are conflicting, but I believe that I have given you the answer to your question.

Quote

Eph 4:4 [There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all

Quote

Jhn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Quote

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

Quote

Jhn 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. Jhn 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.

Quote

2Cr 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

I've already shown you in what sense he is God, and that is through the life that he has lived in obedience to His God and our God, the Father.

[chosenone]

Quote (SEEKING @ Jan. 14 2009,10:20)

Ch The correct translation of John1:1 and the correct sequence of words in the oldest available pieces of scripture is: In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. Then is not the reverse true, “the word was God”?

Hi Seeking.
I can't see how or why the word “word” is so misused.
“word” means communication, the “spoken” word, the “written” word, the “broadcast” word. How or why would one assume that when a statement such as “God was the word”, would mean anything other than communicating the message of God?
Am I wrong in thinking this way?

Blessings.

[david]

Jehovah is a communicative God, in that he reveals to his creatures in a variety of ways what his will and purposes are.

At times he used holy men like Moses and Aaron to make known his purposes. (Ex 5:1)
“Every word” that Moses commanded Israel was in effect the word of God to them. (De 12:32)
God also spoke through the mouth of prophets such as Elisha and Jeremiah. (2Ki 7:1; Jer 2:1, 2)

In the Christian Greek Scriptures, God’s inspired word is often spoken of as simply “the word.”—Jas 1:22; 1Pe 2:2.

There are many synonyms for God’s word. For example, in Psalm 119, where references to Jehovah’s “word(s)” occur more than 20 times, synonyms are found in poetic parallelisms—such terms as law, reminders, orders, regulations, commandments, judicial decisions, statutes, and sayings of Jehovah. This also shows that the expression “word” means a complete thought or message.

The greatest exponent and supporter of Jehovah’s inspired word of truth was the Lord Jesus Christ. He astounded people by his methods of teaching (Mt 7:28, 29; Joh 7:46), yet he took no credit to himself, saying, “the word that you are hearing is not mine, but belongs to the Father who sent me.” (Joh 14:24; 17:14; Lu 5:1)

In the Christian Greek Scriptures “the Word” (Gr., ho Lo′gos) also appears as a title. (Joh 1:1, 14; Re 19:13)
REVELATION 19:13
“and he is arrayed with an outer garment sprinkled with blood, and THE NAME HE IS CALLED IS The Word of God.”

As God's chief spokesman, his chief messenger, it is fitting that Jesus be called the word of God.
A “word” is something that conveys a thought or message. Jesus said that he came to the earth to bear witness to the truth. (John 18:37) He said he was “sent forth” to declare the good news of the kingdom of God. (Luke 4:43) Up until the time of his death, this is what he did, and in a way that no other has. Hence, the title “word of God” is fitting.

david

[chosenone]

Hi David.
Your explanation is good, I have no disagreemnt with it. You say “the word of God” is fitting, this I also agree with. I guess the one statement I disagree is, in some translations that say “and the word was God”, in John.1:1, that I feel some use to try and prove the “trinity” theory, is an incorrect translation.

Blessings.

[david]

Quote

I guess the one statement I disagree is, in some translations that say “and the word was God”, in John.1:1, that I feel some use to try and prove the “trinity” theory, is an incorrect translation.

Hi Chosenone, I'm not exactly certain if you're saying you disagree with me or ones that use John 1:1 to prove the trinity. Understand that I do not believe in the trinity and have struggled more than most to show the other side of John 1:1. (See Coptic thread, for example)

Quote

is an incorrect translation.

As for the words “incorrect translation” the truth is that it could go either way grammatically. If you believe in a trinity you translate it the word was God. If you don't believe in the trinity, you could look at the context and would have to translate it another way. And both groups can pile up scriptures they believe that support their translation of John 1:1c.

[david]

Quote

Hi Seeking. The correct translation of John1:1 and the correct sequence of words in the oldest available pieces of scripture is: In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word.

–chosenone.

Chosenone, I have to know: What are “the oldest available pieces of scripture” you speak of?

[SEEKING]

David,

Thank you for your explanation and conceding there is a sense in which Jesus is God. You have help me with what appeared to be a dychotomy
in UCB writings. Your explanation makes sense.

Chosenone, I am not offended by the “word was God” interpretation. I don't believe you have to be Trinitarian to translate that way. I have always felt the Bible is its best interpreter. The context in Jn. 1 is very clear that “the word became flesh” speaking of Jesus (JN.1:14-18).

I don't reject a translation the context supports. Here the word is identified as “Jesus” not a written or spoken thought. As David pointed out, the Koine greek does not include the article and is more original in translation than the other sources cited.

Again, thank you all for your input. It has been helpful.

[Rabsheka]

I have said in another place here that I do not hold the doctrine of the trinity as truth. My concern with the matter began some 10 years ago for reasons I can not explain. However, like many of you I consulted the scriptures and read the explanations of men and also searched the meanings of words in the greek, the aramaic, coptic etc, becoming confused over it to the point if it becoming vanity. And yes, I did stumble over the word Of John 1:1. I had analysed the problem like a scientist, a lawyer, a psycologist and all the other “ists” who search for truth through reason and analysis – and had still failed. I then decided to ignore the problem for a while and simply try to get on with being a christian – yes, but together with whom. For we must worship in spirit and in truth- it would not go away.

So I prayed. And I prayed and I prayed and I prayed. Soon, a phrase began to recur in my thoughts, until one day I began to listen – “by their fruits you will know them”. I knew from previous efforts that most of the denominations held the trinity doctrine as truth, which they had inherited from the roman catholic church. Now you can at least argue that some of the denominations are worthy of our Lord Jesus Christ, but from it's own confessed history the catholic church cannot. For a bad tree cannot bare good fruit and they have murdered Holy Ones. Moreover, Christ had given the keys of the Kingdom to the Apostles, who thus had the authority to enact just about any doctrine they liked. Yet all they did with it was to lighten our burden by declining the need for we gentiles to do the law of Moses. No apostle or close associate preached the mystery of the trinity, yet the denominations expect us to accept the decision of a committee with political origins, who had no such authority.

Now the vexation of this matter for me ended again with a question that just seemed to come to me – What would Christianity really be if Jesus was in fact God (or somewhere around 33 1/3 percent of him perhaps, etc)? Now the attribute Christ had to possess that was most central and critical to his ministry and to God's purpose, even unto death, was “obedience” – “Not what I want but what you want”. No person, and we know God is a person, can be obedient to himself. Yes, a person can indeed do the things he wants to do if he has the wherewithall, and God can therefore do anything he wants to do, except be obedient to himself. For to attempt to do such would be nothing more than self serving behavour retitled for the sake of expediency. Obedience requires a relationship to exist between two distinct and separate persons, wherein one bows to the soverienty of the other utterly and is indeed the servant of that one. Which is of course what happened.

So, here we are with the answer to the question “what would christianity really be if the doctrine of the trinity is true? It would be a cheap trick and a lie. AND MAY THAT NEVER HAPPEN!

May the peace and undeserved kindness of our Lord be with you

[NickHassan]

Thanks RS,
Blessings

[SEEKING]

I finally found the blurb that stimulated my initiation of this discussion:

Misunderstandings clarified

I have read and enjoyed many of your magazines. However, I recently noticed that you don't believe Jesus was God. Don't try to convince me otherwise. Take my name off your mailing list. Do not send me anything else!

—C.K., Elko, New York

We regret any reader cancellations,but especially the ones where our readers think we believe something that we clearly don't. The two free booklets Who Is God? and Jesus Christ: The Real Story both show that Jesus Christ is God along with the Father (see Hebrews 1:8; Titus 3:4; John 20:28).

Note especially the last sentence.

[martian]

From a standpoint of reality, the trinity does not work. Oh, you can say it does and site multitudes of scripture from a mental perspective, but the fact still remains that the comcept does not follow reason. It does not function for the purposes of making us like Christ.
If you change Jesus in any way from pure and normal humanity, you then deny us the posibility of becoming like Him.
The Pharasees caught the woman in adultry. They had proof. they had the law which stated that she must be stoned. Jesus came along and and saw a different picture. His heart was to restore her and heal her. So Jesus broke the law? From the pharasees standpoint yes he did. From a scriptural standpoint yes he did!
From the standpoint of the heart of God no He did not. He looked at her and how she could be helped, not at what could be proved by mentally probing and disecting the law.
As a christian that wants to really be like Jesus (and not mentally project myself there) I have to ask myself how do I do it?
Jesus taught many ways in which to act and those are good, but that does nothing to change my character and heart to become like His. It’s not about following the rules and looking the part. It is about really being like him in character.
How does a man change his character to be like Jesus.
Step one would be to believe it is possible . Without that you are lost from the beginning. If one starts with a doctrine that makes it impossible the rest is just rhetoric.
I am a man. I cannot change the essence of who I am and become a God. I have a single human nature. That nature is completely human.
Now we come to Chriatianity. It teaches that Jesus is my example and I am to become like him.
Much of christianity teaches that Jesus (in some manner) is a God. He either is an empty shell that housed God, a God that became a man and yet remained God or dual natured both God and Man.. With this teaching can I become like him?
1. It is not possible for me to become an empty shell to house God
2. I am not a God that became a man and yet remaind a God.
3. I am not dual natured both God and man.

Based on any of these three concepts it is impossible for me to become like him. The only way to justify this belief is to deny our commandment/ability to actually become like Christ.You can throw around scripture all night and still will not resolve this basic truth.

The world around us hears preachers yammer on about becoming like Christ and in the next breath proclaim him to be a God. And then we wonder why it is so hard to convince people that Christianity is not just another metaphisical myth?
We ask peopole to believe in an all pwerfull, all knowing, all loving, unchanging spirit being we call God. Five minutes latre we speak of Christ and tell them That He is a God that changed from God to man and yet remained God. Then we wonder why people do not take christianity seriously?
We tell people to read their bible and they read many places that the judeo christian concept of one God is written very plainly in the text. Then we tell them that one does not mean one it means three. And we wonder why they laugh.
We read translations made at least 1600 years after the originals and accept their words over the originals in the original languages. We do this of course because the translations words support some preconcieved doctrine we wish to maintain.
We read scriptures written by people of a completely different culture and deny or ignor the impact that culture has on the meaning of those scriptures.
While doing all of these things we develope teachings to guide us and those that are foolish enough to follow.

For those who will not follow we conjure up a pseudo-caring and empathy. We make statements like it is so sad that you just can’t see it.
We tell them they just do not understand the spirtual nature of God. We tell them that their reasoning abilities are of a lower natural realm and by doing so insult them. And we wonder why they do not listen.

And finally we get on web sites and debate non stop over details of doctrine and never look to see the reasonability of it. We never look to see if believing that doctrine really really enables us to become like christ.
We do not see the difference between believing something in our head and actually aquiring that truth or lie contained within. We think that because we can convince ourselves in our brain that something is right that it must be right. We never try to make the truth functional. We never put it in practice in our hearts to see if it really works. We never look at the reasonability of it, but pride ourselves in being able to prove it. We perform day after day on these forums and actually believe that we are accomplishing some ministry.

How can a person believe that his character can be changed to be like Christ without first extablishing hope that it can happen. Without the full humanity of Christ there is no hope in becoming like him.

[GeneBalthrop]

martian….Amen brother, if we don't see Jesus as a simple human being just like us we are pushing him away from our real identity, Saying he preexisted as some kind of super being or what ever, Separates Him from our exact identity. Good post brother.

love and peace to you and yours……………..gene

[Tiffany]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 16 2009,04:15)

martian….Amen brother, if we don't see Jesus as a simple human being just like us we are pushing him away from our real identity, Saying he preexisted as some kind of super being or what ever, Separates Him from our exact identity. Good post brother. love and peace to you and yours……………..gene

Gen Then scriptures are wrong? I do not think so. John 1:1 In the beginning there was the the Word and the Word was God and was with God.
Col. 1:15 He ( Jesus) is the firstborn over all creation.Read the rest of 1:15-18
Rev. 3:14….These things say the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.
John 17:5 ” And now Father glorify Me together with Yourself with the glory which I had with you before the wold was.

Jesus was there before the world was, unless you want to ingore this scripture and call Jesus a liar.

The Father send His Son into the world, He send Him from where?
He came from Heaven to die for us, gave up his glory and became a man like us to do so.
Died for us was resurrected and went back were He came from.
Peace and Love Irene

[NickHassan]

Hi S,
If Jesus was God who was in him?

2Cor 5
19To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation

[SEEKING]

I believe your proof text is saying that Christ was the vehicle
by which God was reconciling the world to himself.  It speaks nothing of the location of God or Christ.  But, to answer your question, the following texts address it planily.

John 14:10 (KJV)  
   Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

John 14:11 (KJV)  
   Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

John 17:21 (KJV)  
   That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

This is the statement made by UCB, “The two free booklets Who Is God? and Jesus Christ: The Real Story both show that Jesus Christ is God along with the Father (see Hebrews 1:8; Titus 3:4; John 20:28).”

Nick, apparently you  disagree with UCB teaching which you are free to do.  But in these discussions I have seen nothing that refutes it.  For example, obedience had much to do with the “earthly” ministry of Jesus. yet some He had to posses divine qualities to be the creator and sustainer of all things.

Col. 1:16 (KJV)  
   For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

SEEKING

[NickHassan]

Hi S,
Did Jesus have his own divine qualities or abilities of were they of God in him?

Acts 10
38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

John 5:19
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

[Author]

Posts