The Trinity

The Trinity


  • Total voters
    121

Apple7

New member
Owned at the door step....

Owned at the door step....

Let's review your pre-school understanding of scripture...


What kind of sense does that make? Almighty God can't be a sacrifice. He can't die!

Scripture state that His flesh died....JW.



If He did, everything would cease to exist. It is Jehovah who keeps all things running.

Next, in your ignorance, you will ask us who ran the Universe while God was dead for three days...right, JW...?



It is Jehovah, the Father, who raised Jesus up from the dead.

The Trinity raised Jesus from the dead......JW....


Who raised Jesus from the dead?

• God the Father… Acts 3.26; Eph 1.15-20; Gal 1.1; 1 Thes 1.9-10
• God the Son…John 2.19-22; 10.17-18; Romans 6.4;
• God the Spirit…Romans 8.11; 1 Peter 3.18
• The Trinity…Romans 10.9; 1 Peter 1.20-21; Hebrews 13.20-21; 1 Cor 6.14; Col 2.11-12; Acts 2.23-24; 2.32; 3.14-15; 13.30-37
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Let's review your pre-school understanding of scripture...




Scripture state that His flesh died....JW.

The Lord Jesus Christ, who is God, raised Himself. :rapture:



Next, in your ignorance, you will ask us who ran the Universe while God was dead for three days...right, JW...?





The Trinity raised Jesus from the dead......JW....


Who raised Jesus from the dead?

• God the Father… Acts 3.26; Eph 1.15-20; Gal 1.1; 1 Thes 1.9-10
• God the Son…John 2.19-22; 10.17-18; Romans 6.4;
• God the Spirit…Romans 8.11; 1 Peter 3.18
• The Trinity…Romans 10.9; 1 Peter 1.20-21; Hebrews 13.20-21; 1 Cor 6.14; Col 2.11-12; Acts 2.23-24; 2.32; 3.14-15; 13.30-37
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Nope and I agree with you, all that is needed is Christ. But it is still required that we believe who He is, yes or no?
The Bible is clear on what we must believe to be saved.

John 20:31
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.​

Nothing is required beyond what the scripture states we must believe.

If you find it difficult to simply state that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, then there is something wrong with your beliefs.
 

journey

New member
No....what makes Jesus the bridge from God to humanity is his SINLESS NATURE. He doesn't have to be God to be the Redeemer. He just had to be ADAM'S EQUAL. As Adam condemned his descendants to death, Jesus (the "last Adam") will bring about humanity's salvation. (I Corinthians 15:22 & 45)

The only way you can get out of Isaiah & the N.T. that Jesus is God is if you already believe it, and you grasp at anything to "prove" it. The sad thing is, people who are not familiar with the Bible will think you are so smart (even though your "proof texts" are bogus) that they will take your word for it.

I have already done the homework, Crucible. For many years. I can turn over any argument you bring up.


:D

JWs are terribly confused and brainwashed. The below portion of Scripture is talking about Jesus Christ after His Second Coming:

Isaiah 9:2-7 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined. 3 Thou hast multiplied the nation, thou hast increased their joy: they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. 4 For the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, thou hast broken as in the day of Midian. 5 For all the armor of the armed man in the tumult, and the garments rolled in blood, shall be for burning, for fuel of fire. 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, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this.
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Yes, He is the same essence as the Father

From CARM.org

The Trinity is the Christian teaching that God exists in three eternal Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Father is not the same Person as the Son; the Son is not the same Person as the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit is not the same Person as Father. They are not three gods and not three beings. They are three distinct Persons; yet, they are all the one God. Each has a will, can speak, can love, etc., and these are demonstrations of personhood. They are in absolute perfect harmony, consisting of one substance. They are co-eternal, co-equal, and co-powerful. If any one of the three were removed, there would be no God.

You believe the heresy of three Gods.
 

csuguy

Well-known member
Here are some who did.


From Carm.org

Early Trinitarian Quotes

It took a while for the Christian Church to finally figure out what the Trinity was. But, by God's grace, the Church has defined it. However, some say that the Trinity was never taught until the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. Not so. Following are some samples of quotes taken from early church leaders regarding the plural nature of God. ...

I'm pretty sure I've addressed these same quotes from you before. You are blindly quoting these Church Fathers - simply assuming that they are Trinitarians and support your view. You couldn't be more wrong. The only way for you to truly become convinced of this is for you to take the time to go study their writings in context to try to understand what they were saying.

Here's a quote from that same Justin Martyr you blindly quoted - still think he's Trinitarian?

Our teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the times of Tiberius Cesar; and that we reasonably worship Him having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third, we will prove. For they proclaim our madness to consist in this, that we give to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all; for they do not discern the mystery that is
herein, to which, as we make it plain to you, we pray you to give heed. (Justin Martyr, The First Apology, ch. 13.)​

Here Justin notes a clear heirarchy between the three: Father > Son > HS.

Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things, - numerically, I mean, not in will. For I affirm that He has never at any time done anything which He who made the world – above whom there is no other God – has not wished Him both to do and to engage Himself with (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 55.)​

Here Justin asserts that the Son is numerically distinct from God Almighty, the Creator. He considers Jesus a second, lesser god.

Solomon has made clear that He, whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten before all His creatures and as offspring by God. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 62.)​

Here Justin asserts that Jesus was the first born of all creation, begotten before all else. Aka - there was a time when Jesus did not exist.

In summary, Justin held that Jesus was a second lesser god than God Almighty, the Creator. If you read his works, you will find that he believes Jesus to be the Angel of the Lord that appears throughout the OT. He is not just distinct from the Father - but numerically distinct. They are not one in the same being. And he taught that Jesus was begotten before all else - but before that point Jesus did not exist.
 

csuguy

Well-known member
Yeah, and let's also not forget that those Arians saw Jesus Christ as something like the Caped Crusader and less like what modern unitarians profess He was. Modern unitarianism is a brand new, never-heard-of before idea---certainly not in the fourth century, when the "non-Trins" believed something more like, rather, that our Lord's real name was "Kal-El."

I'm not a unitarian, so I'm not going to speak to what they believe. But the Ante-Nicene Fathers had many different ideas. Justin Martyr was very influential in this period. He maintained that Jesus was a second, lesser god - numerically distinct from the Creator. He maintained that Jesus was the first begotten of all creation - even the Wisdom spoken of by Solomon.

Even early Trinitarians like Tertullian maintained that there was a time when God was not the Father, when the Son did not exist.
 

KingdomRose

New member
I take it you have a problem with the KJV? Do you you feel it to be an invalid translation?

Many things are amiss in the KJV, though I grew up with it and love the language.

When the King's translation committee got together, they looked for suitable mss (manuscripts), and most were in Latin. There were some in Greek, but quite recent, so the committee chose to translate from the Latin mss. The Latin Vulgate (of the 5th century)was "well-understood," and what it said filled in for any question about what the original Greek meant. There were differences of opinion among the members of the committee, and, lo and behold, the differences were solved by what the implications were for current doctrine and practice! So much for being un-biased! When these biases were held in common, they went unrecognized and unaddressed.

Today there is an advantage for scholars because they have available a much larger set of Greek manuscripts, having gone throughout the world to find them. Many of them are much OLDER than the mss that the King's committee had, therefore being CLOSER to the originals.

This is the bottom line as to why the KJV might be inferior to other versions.
 

KingdomRose

New member
God head is scriptural, in fact, my phone pulled up Godhead when I began to type it.

Colossians 2:9

So we go by what your phone pulls up, whether reasonable or not? I just told you that "Godhead" is not a word that some versions use at Colossians 2:9. The NASB says "fullness of DIETY." If you look at an Interlinear Bible you can see that the rendering of "Godhead" is problematic.
 

KingdomRose

New member
Pandering for renderings that artificially insert words that do not appear in the original Greek, will not help your lame JW worldview.

You did not understand what I said. I said that the NIV inserted "God," but other versions do not. The meaning is still the same. It is God who subjected all things to Jesus.
 

KingdomRose

New member
JWs are terribly confused and brainwashed. The below portion of Scripture is talking about Jesus Christ after His Second Coming:

Isaiah 9:2-7 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined. 3 Thou hast multiplied the nation, thou hast increased their joy: they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. 4 For the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, thou hast broken as in the day of Midian. 5 For all the armor of the armed man in the tumult, and the garments rolled in blood, shall be for burning, for fuel of fire. 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, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this.

What makes you think that I don't agree?
 

KingdomRose

New member
I'm pretty sure I've addressed these same quotes from you before. You are blindly quoting these Church Fathers - simply assuming that they are Trinitarians and support your view. You couldn't be more wrong. The only way for you to truly become convinced of this is for you to take the time to go study their writings in context to try to understand what they were saying.

Here's a quote from that same Justin Martyr you blindly quoted - still think he's Trinitarian?

Our teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the times of Tiberius Cesar; and that we reasonably worship Him having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third, we will prove. For they proclaim our madness to consist in this, that we give to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all; for they do not discern the mystery that is
herein, to which, as we make it plain to you, we pray you to give heed. (Justin Martyr, The First Apology, ch. 13.)​

Here Justin notes a clear heirarchy between the three: Father > Son > HS.

Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things, - numerically, I mean, not in will. For I affirm that He has never at any time done anything which He who made the world – above whom there is no other God – has not wished Him both to do and to engage Himself with (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 55.)​

Here Justin asserts that the Son is numerically distinct from God Almighty, the Creator. He considers Jesus a second, lesser god.

Solomon has made clear that He, whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten before all His creatures and as offspring by God. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 62.)​

Here Justin asserts that Jesus was the first born of all creation, begotten before all else. Aka - there was a time when Jesus did not exist.

In summary, Justin held that Jesus was a second lesser god than God Almighty, the Creator. If you read his works, you will find that he believes Jesus to be the Angel of the Lord that appears throughout the OT. He is not just distinct from the Father - but numerically distinct. They are not one in the same being. And he taught that Jesus was begotten before all else - but before that point Jesus did not exist.

Excellent.
 

Bright Raven

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Today there is an advantage for scholars because they have available a much larger set of Greek manuscripts, having gone throughout the world to find them. Many of them are much OLDER than the mss that the King's committee had, therefore being CLOSER to the originals.
State your source. And just for grins, I have a problem with NWT. They inserted the article before God in John 1:1. Is there any other translation that does that?
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Triune God.
The Bible never teaches that God is Triune, and belief in a Triune God is not necessary for salvation.


John 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.​

 
Last edited:

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
The Bible never teaches that God is Triune, and belief in a Triune God is not necessary for salvation.


John 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.​


Father Son Holy Ghost = 3
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Christ rejectors: Ben Masada, CherubRam, csuguy, Elia, genuineoriginal, HisServant, jamie, keypurr, KingdomRose, Krsto, meshak, oatmeal, OCTOBER23, SabathMoon
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
The Bible never teaches that God is Triune,
That's correct, or, at least, I agree. People disagree with us about that though, and not a few of them.

But the Holy See does teach that God is Triune, and even how.
and belief in a Triune God is not necessary for salvation.
You and me and the Holy See agree. Again, not a few people disagree with us.

John 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.​

The Holy See teaches same.

Now perhaps you wonder at the relevance of the above. It is this. Believing the Trinity isn't about being a diligent Bible student, one who studies to show themselves approved, but it is about submission. I believe in the Trinity because the Holy See teaches the Trinity, and I believe the Holy See is a gift from God to His Church, to help guide us, to feed us, along our way through this mortal coil. In another thread I mentioned that the dispute about the Trinity is really a dispute about the Holy See, and here I'm offering that the dispute about the Trinity is really a dispute about submission to God's authority to teach us about Himself, through His chosen instrument, the living and continuing Holy See; the office of Peter, the first supreme pastor of the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Father Son Holy Ghost = 3
Yes, the Bible teaches about three separate beings, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
The Bible is quite clear about the relationship between then.

What is not taught in the Bible is that these three separate beings are a single Triune being.
 
Top