There Are Many Scriptures That Disprove The Trinity
- Thread starter Swingalong
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T
Actually I am looking at context, it'd be different if it said "they may be like us" but it says "that they may be one" as in that same being.
Stop attacking my faith as a name and just debate scripture, those in debates who attack the person rather than what they talk about are the ones who know the least about the subject.
Learn how to debate. Also what would Jesus do? Would he attack somebodies faith's name, or try to show them the truth (which is what you think you are showing me). Your sarcasm just shows how far from being christlike you really are.
Stop attacking my faith as a name and just debate scripture, those in debates who attack the person rather than what they talk about are the ones who know the least about the subject.
Learn how to debate. Also what would Jesus do? Would he attack somebodies faith's name, or try to show them the truth (which is what you think you are showing me). Your sarcasm just shows how far from being christlike you really are.
T
Actually my faith almost always quotes it, I didn't because I assumed you knew being as smart as you think you are.
27 [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (gen. 1) [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This God is Elohim. (sorry been saying emanuel, wrong "e" word) Elohim can refer to angels. [/FONT]
27 [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (gen. 1) [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This God is Elohim. (sorry been saying emanuel, wrong "e" word) Elohim can refer to angels. [/FONT]
T
He says the pharisees were hypocrites, not the unbelieving Jews, but I could be wrong there. And there is a difference. I am willing to learn, if you can prove the trinity exists, which you have failed to do because you have no silver bullet that states the trinity has to exist, but I have given one that you haven't explained John 17: 21. Jesus had the right to call them children of the devil because he clearly knew the truth as he was from God. You are not from God, and have no authority given to you to call me a so called "spade". Learn your place and humble yourself before Jesus, for you do not have the authority he has.
Herbert W. Armstrong (31 July 1892 – 16 January 1986) founded the Worldwide Church of God in the late 1930s, as well as Ambassador College (later Ambassador University) in 1946, and was an early pioneer of radio and tele-evangelism, originally taking to the airwaves in the 1930s from Eugene, Oregon. Armstrong preached an eclectic set of theological doctrines and teachings that he claimed came directly from the Bible.[3] These theological doctrines and teachings have been referred to as Armstrongism. His teachings included the interpretation of biblical prophecy in light of British Israelism,[4] and required observance of parts of the covenant Law including seventh-day Sabbath, dietary prohibitions, and the covenant law "Holy Days".
...
Armstrong’s teachings and the church he created have been the subject of much criticism and controversy.[82] Armstrong's theology and teachings are defended by his followers,[83] but face criticism from ex-followers[84][85] and the greater Christian community.[86] Common points of criticism and controversy include:
Theological
Salvation: Armstrong believed that repentance, faith and the indwelling of God's Holy Spirit enables true and full obedience to God's law, but stressed that keeping God's law (and repentance upon having sinned) is a requirement for salvation.[87][88] Critics state that Armstrong taught salvation as being legalistic obedience to God's law, including such laws as Sabbath keeping, dietary laws, and other laws kept by Ancient Israelites but not typically kept by 'mainstream' Christian denominations.[86][89]
The Covenants: Armstrong taught that the New Covenant is an 'amplification' of the Old Covenant, and that certain laws (excluding temple and unenforceable ancient civil laws) from the Old Covenant are still in effect for Christians. This included laws such as literal Sabbath keeping, 'Clean and Unclean' meats and Holy Day observances.[90] He believed that the New Covenant was yet future, to be finalized as a marriage covenant between Christ and the Church and that Christians currently existed 'between' the two Covenants.[91] Critics say that Armstrong confused the two Covenants and selectively picked which aspects of the two Covenants to keep.[92]
Gospel of the Kingdom: Armstrong taught that a reason for Jesus Christ's presence on earth was to proclaim the Gospel message of a literal Kingdom of God that will be established on earth at Christ's 'second coming', and that the message of the Kingdom should be the focus of the gospel rather than the person of Christ.[93][94] Critics indicate that this represents a diminishment of the person and importance of Christ, through whom salvation is attained, and that this represents a flawed understanding about the nature of the Kingdom.[95] Armstrong taught that - the gospel "of" Christ - began to change to - a gospel "about" Christ - around twenty to thirty years after the founding of the Church in 31 A.D. He made the extraordinary claim that the gospel Christ brought (of the Kingdom) had "not been proclaimed to the world" for about 1,900 years "until the first week in 1953" when he began preaching it again on Radio Luxembourg.[71]-
Prophetic predictions: Proponents believe that Herbert Armstrong was inspired by God and had the gift to understand prophecy. They believe that many of his predictions were inspired.[96] Armstrong was considered gifted with spiritual understanding also and that, through him, God was revealing the true meaning of parts of the Bible which, till his time, had remained locked or sealed (so could not be correctly understood). That desire for understanding had been with Armstrong since he was a small boy, "always wanting to know 'why?' or 'how?' That obsession for understanding was to have a great influence on founding the Plain Truth magazine and Ambassador College in later years." [97]- According to critics, Armstrong's predictions were rife with speculation and remain mostly unfulfilled.[98]
British Israelism: Armstrong taught a form of British Israelism, which is the belief that those of Western European descent, notably England (Ephraim) and the United States (Manasseh), are direct descendants of the ancient northern Kingdom of Israel. This theory is inconsistent with the findings of modern research on the genetic history of Jews.[99][100][101][102] It is commonly criticized for poor standards of research,[103][104] and general inconsistency with archeological, anthropological and linguistic research.[105][106][107][108]
Herbert W. Armstrong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia < click cult
...
Armstrong’s teachings and the church he created have been the subject of much criticism and controversy.[82] Armstrong's theology and teachings are defended by his followers,[83] but face criticism from ex-followers[84][85] and the greater Christian community.[86] Common points of criticism and controversy include:
Theological
Salvation: Armstrong believed that repentance, faith and the indwelling of God's Holy Spirit enables true and full obedience to God's law, but stressed that keeping God's law (and repentance upon having sinned) is a requirement for salvation.[87][88] Critics state that Armstrong taught salvation as being legalistic obedience to God's law, including such laws as Sabbath keeping, dietary laws, and other laws kept by Ancient Israelites but not typically kept by 'mainstream' Christian denominations.[86][89]
The Covenants: Armstrong taught that the New Covenant is an 'amplification' of the Old Covenant, and that certain laws (excluding temple and unenforceable ancient civil laws) from the Old Covenant are still in effect for Christians. This included laws such as literal Sabbath keeping, 'Clean and Unclean' meats and Holy Day observances.[90] He believed that the New Covenant was yet future, to be finalized as a marriage covenant between Christ and the Church and that Christians currently existed 'between' the two Covenants.[91] Critics say that Armstrong confused the two Covenants and selectively picked which aspects of the two Covenants to keep.[92]
Gospel of the Kingdom: Armstrong taught that a reason for Jesus Christ's presence on earth was to proclaim the Gospel message of a literal Kingdom of God that will be established on earth at Christ's 'second coming', and that the message of the Kingdom should be the focus of the gospel rather than the person of Christ.[93][94] Critics indicate that this represents a diminishment of the person and importance of Christ, through whom salvation is attained, and that this represents a flawed understanding about the nature of the Kingdom.[95] Armstrong taught that - the gospel "of" Christ - began to change to - a gospel "about" Christ - around twenty to thirty years after the founding of the Church in 31 A.D. He made the extraordinary claim that the gospel Christ brought (of the Kingdom) had "not been proclaimed to the world" for about 1,900 years "until the first week in 1953" when he began preaching it again on Radio Luxembourg.[71]-
Prophetic predictions: Proponents believe that Herbert Armstrong was inspired by God and had the gift to understand prophecy. They believe that many of his predictions were inspired.[96] Armstrong was considered gifted with spiritual understanding also and that, through him, God was revealing the true meaning of parts of the Bible which, till his time, had remained locked or sealed (so could not be correctly understood). That desire for understanding had been with Armstrong since he was a small boy, "always wanting to know 'why?' or 'how?' That obsession for understanding was to have a great influence on founding the Plain Truth magazine and Ambassador College in later years." [97]- According to critics, Armstrong's predictions were rife with speculation and remain mostly unfulfilled.[98]
British Israelism: Armstrong taught a form of British Israelism, which is the belief that those of Western European descent, notably England (Ephraim) and the United States (Manasseh), are direct descendants of the ancient northern Kingdom of Israel. This theory is inconsistent with the findings of modern research on the genetic history of Jews.[99][100][101][102] It is commonly criticized for poor standards of research,[103][104] and general inconsistency with archeological, anthropological and linguistic research.[105][106][107][108]
Herbert W. Armstrong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia < click cult
Category:Church of God (Armstrong)
The following articles are associated with Herbert W. Armstrong and the churches which have developed from his teachings, most of which contain the name Church of God:
Category:Church of God (Armstrong) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following articles are associated with Herbert W. Armstrong and the churches which have developed from his teachings, most of which contain the name Church of God:
Category:Church of God (Armstrong) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Armstrongism
(Philadelphia Church of God, Global Church of God, United Church of God)
Founded By: Herbert W. Armstrong, 1934.
Traditional Armstrongism denies a Trinity, defining God as "a family of individuals." Original teachings say Jesus did not have a physical resurrection and the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force.
Doctrine of the Trinity - Faith Groups that Reject the Trinity Doctrine
(Philadelphia Church of God, Global Church of God, United Church of God)
Founded By: Herbert W. Armstrong, 1934.
Traditional Armstrongism denies a Trinity, defining God as "a family of individuals." Original teachings say Jesus did not have a physical resurrection and the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force.
Doctrine of the Trinity - Faith Groups that Reject the Trinity Doctrine
A
Let's look at some verses from John 17 (NASB):
17 Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, [SUP]2 [/SUP]even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to [SUP][a][/SUP]all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. [SUP]3 [/SUP]This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. [SUP]4 [/SUP]I glorified You on the earth, [SUP][b][/SUP]having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. [SUP]5 [/SUP]Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
[SUP]20 [/SUP]“I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; [SUP]21 [/SUP]that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may [SUP][f][/SUP]believe that You sent Me.
[h=3]Their Future Glory[/h][SUP]22 [/SUP]The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; [SUP]23 [/SUP]I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected [SUP][g][/SUP]in unity, so that the world may [SUP][h][/SUP]know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. [SUP]24 [/SUP]Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]“O righteous Father, [SUP][i][/SUP]although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me; [SUP]26 [/SUP]and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”
You mentioned the glory that Jesus was talking about in John 17 in an earlier post. There are really two glories going on in John 17. The first is what Jesus mentions in verse 5. This kind of glory is a glory that Jesus shares with the Father, and that Jesus had before the world was (in other words, from eternity). The second kind of glory is one that all believers will share in.
It is the same with the unity in John 17. The unity that Jesus and the Father have is a different kind than the unity that is with all believers. For Jesus and the Father, their unity is of of the same essence and being. Obviously, believers will not have that kind of unity with God.
17 Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, [SUP]2 [/SUP]even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to [SUP][a][/SUP]all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. [SUP]3 [/SUP]This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. [SUP]4 [/SUP]I glorified You on the earth, [SUP][b][/SUP]having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. [SUP]5 [/SUP]Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
[SUP]20 [/SUP]“I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; [SUP]21 [/SUP]that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may [SUP][f][/SUP]believe that You sent Me.
[h=3]Their Future Glory[/h][SUP]22 [/SUP]The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; [SUP]23 [/SUP]I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected [SUP][g][/SUP]in unity, so that the world may [SUP][h][/SUP]know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. [SUP]24 [/SUP]Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]“O righteous Father, [SUP][i][/SUP]although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me; [SUP]26 [/SUP]and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”
You mentioned the glory that Jesus was talking about in John 17 in an earlier post. There are really two glories going on in John 17. The first is what Jesus mentions in verse 5. This kind of glory is a glory that Jesus shares with the Father, and that Jesus had before the world was (in other words, from eternity). The second kind of glory is one that all believers will share in.
It is the same with the unity in John 17. The unity that Jesus and the Father have is a different kind than the unity that is with all believers. For Jesus and the Father, their unity is of of the same essence and being. Obviously, believers will not have that kind of unity with God.
Strange, I don't see the "Jesus faith group" listed.
Jhn 20:17 "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."
Now we have to ask, did Jesus ascend to himself? Was he, in fact, his own God? Was he lying?
Who is God in this verse? Was it Jesus, or was it his Father?
Which is it?
Jhn 20:17 "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."
Now we have to ask, did Jesus ascend to himself? Was he, in fact, his own God? Was he lying?
Who is God in this verse? Was it Jesus, or was it his Father?
Which is it?
T
But the scripture doesn't say it's a different glory. Also is says "one in us" as in we are sharing with christ and God. It says that we all need to be one the same way Christ and God are one, and then says that we need to be one with them as well. With the trinity it is saying that we must all be one entity like God and Jesus as well as the same entity as these 2.
A
Re: Study up...
Yes, have an idea of where I am going with it....you are on the right track, but there are some specific reasons I am asking about these passages. Would you mind taking a look at one more passage from Isaiah?
You are right that God says He is our only Savior, and it is through Jesus that we are saved. However, if Jesus only represents God, and is not God Himself, then wouldn't that still make Jesus a Savior?
Does Isaiah 45 change anything for you?
Isaiah 45:21-25 (NASB)
[SUP]21 [/SUP]“Declare and set forth your case;
Indeed, let them consult together.
Who has announced this from of old?
Who has long since declared it?
Is it not I, the LORD?
And there is no other God besides Me,
A righteous God and a Savior;
There is none except Me.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]“Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth;
For I am God, and there is no other.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]“I have sworn by Myself,
The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness
And will not turn back,
That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]“They will say of Me, ‘Only in the LORD are righteousness and strength.’
Men will come to Him,
And all who were angry at Him will be put to shame.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]“In the LORD all the offspring of Israel
Will be justified and will glory.”
Yes, have an idea of where I am going with it....you are on the right track, but there are some specific reasons I am asking about these passages. Would you mind taking a look at one more passage from Isaiah?
You are right that God says He is our only Savior, and it is through Jesus that we are saved. However, if Jesus only represents God, and is not God Himself, then wouldn't that still make Jesus a Savior?
Does Isaiah 45 change anything for you?
Isaiah 45:21-25 (NASB)
[SUP]21 [/SUP]“Declare and set forth your case;
Indeed, let them consult together.
Who has announced this from of old?
Who has long since declared it?
Is it not I, the LORD?
And there is no other God besides Me,
A righteous God and a Savior;
There is none except Me.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]“Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth;
For I am God, and there is no other.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]“I have sworn by Myself,
The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness
And will not turn back,
That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]“They will say of Me, ‘Only in the LORD are righteousness and strength.’
Men will come to Him,
And all who were angry at Him will be put to shame.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]“In the LORD all the offspring of Israel
Will be justified and will glory.”
T
I agree he was alone, and I think you are going to John 1 with God being the word and Jesus being the word made flesh.
At first I thought this was a clear DUH they are one. After a lot of thought and study I found that it could be that, or it could not. The word is God's will. The word is the bible, and clearly the bible is not God himself, but his will. Jesus is the word made flesh. Jesus is God's will made flesh, for he perfectly enacted God's will.
I have never said there aren't verses that would support a trinity. There are TONS. But there are also some that support no trinity. (Like the one I'm focusing on) I'm assuming you agree that the bible does not contradict. Because of this I've come to the conclusion that the trinity does not exist because I've seen that the bible contradicts if we believe that God = three different beings. All verses that support a trinity can also be explained in a way that the trinity would not be real, like I Just did with John 1.
At first I thought this was a clear DUH they are one. After a lot of thought and study I found that it could be that, or it could not. The word is God's will. The word is the bible, and clearly the bible is not God himself, but his will. Jesus is the word made flesh. Jesus is God's will made flesh, for he perfectly enacted God's will.
I have never said there aren't verses that would support a trinity. There are TONS. But there are also some that support no trinity. (Like the one I'm focusing on) I'm assuming you agree that the bible does not contradict. Because of this I've come to the conclusion that the trinity does not exist because I've seen that the bible contradicts if we believe that God = three different beings. All verses that support a trinity can also be explained in a way that the trinity would not be real, like I Just did with John 1.
T
Re: Study up...
It's the idea of representation. If the queen sent me a letter through a courier to come to her, I could say that the courier told me it, or I could say the queen told me it. The courier physically did it, but the courier is simply carrying the queens name. It's it is one invitation, but obviously the courier isn't really the queen, she just used him to do her will.
It's the idea of representation. If the queen sent me a letter through a courier to come to her, I could say that the courier told me it, or I could say the queen told me it. The courier physically did it, but the courier is simply carrying the queens name. It's it is one invitation, but obviously the courier isn't really the queen, she just used him to do her will.