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.
A
If you want to debate about the KJV vs. other translations, I suggest this thread:
http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...translations-honoring-deity-jesus-christ.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...translations-honoring-deity-jesus-christ.html
I believe we can both agree that all 3 are Divine. If one is a known Deity, we both would be comfortable calling that Deity "God or Lord". In fact we Christians call the 3 Deities in the Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.
So the idea that the 3 members of the Godhead are Gods, should not be foreign or offensive to you or me.
Where we part company is that you have a problem with the idea of 3 separate and distinct Gods because you think that adds up to a plurality of Gods and that smacks of paganism.
Well, by 150 AD, as the church moved out into the Greeco-Roman world, the debate raged between our Christian doctor/philosophers and the pagan doctor/philosophers about the nature of God. The pagans were clever, knowing that the early Christians believed in 3 separate and distinct Gods, they attacked this belief by saying that their Gods, were no different than the pagan gods, just with different names. Among the intellectuals,this attack began to win the debate. Even among the church intellectuals by 250-350 AD there was a major rift forming between those that believed in 3 separate and distinct Gods and those that believed in 3 distinct Gods, but were 1 God.
The word "Trinity" was first used around 180 AD by Theophilus of Antioch pretty much to describe that the Godhead consisted of 3 Dieties. But by around 220-250 as the debate wore on, Tertullian used the word to defend the church and moved the definition of the word "Trinity" closer to the Nicean definition. He was the first to really start attacking back with a new solution, the 3 but 1 concept. 3 hypostases, 1 God. For Trinitarians, he really did not do a very good job of explaining things, but he did move the definition closer to Nicea. By the time Nicea arrives around 325 AD, the world is now governed by Constantine and he wants unity, and he will use the Christian Bishops to get it. He finds, however, that the Christian world is not the peace-loving, do-unto-others organization he thought it was. To him it became a nightmare. 5 men sat on thrones in
Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, Rome and Alexandria to rule in the place of Jesus and what he found was incredible court intrigue, corruption, petty differences, major differences which was moving the church to war-like conditions, adultery, espionage, jealousy, nepotism and murder just to mention a few problems.
Constantine couldn't stand it any longer and so he tried to call a conference of all the Bishops in the world, but only about 1/3 came, even when he paid for them to get there. The conference was at Nicea and by heaven or otherwise he was going to have his unity. From this conference came a document that has rang down through the centuries as the pure example of what a committee of men with questionable dignity and an army of soldiers behind them can do to a rather simple concept of God the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.
They took out the word "Gods" and replaced it with "Persons". They thought they were clever and that nobody would notice that this slight-of-hand change really didn't change anything, it only caused more contention than it solved. Then they debated the oneness of the Godhead, and they came to crisis until Constantine suggested, could we use the term "homoousia"? When he talked, everyone listened because he had was the head of the church and could divest them of their rich lives instantly. So the Bishops plugged their noses and passed the word along into the creed.
Now instead of being 3 separate and distinct Gods working together as 1 God, they were 3 distinct persons, physically of the same substance making up 1 God. They thought they were really clever, and now had a God that they could combat the pagans with and would unify the realm.
Well of course they were wrong, the war within the church raged on, men were banished and killed for taking home to their people such a disgusting concept of God and the war still rages on today. Look at the pages of this thread if you doubt my words.
So I am not ashamed to call them Gods. I would be if their names were baal, moloch, and golden calf. But my Gods are Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Spirit. Rock solid Deities directly from the Bible, 3 separate and distinct Gods, whose minds and wills are so unified that they are truly 1 God in purpose and action. In the Old Testament, God and Jesus sat side by side as the world was created, then the Father sent His Son Jesus to the Earth, while he stayed in heaven, and then Jesus, after his earthly mission, went back to his Godly position, standing by the side of his God Elohim, and is waiting the time of the millenium to return again. To me it is clear and straight-forward. I love the Lord and look forward to being with him in the kingdom of God as I know all of you do.
A
Over and over the Bible declares that there is only one God.
How can Yahweh and Elohim be two different gods?
You wrote:
"In fact we Christians call the 3 Deities in the Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost."
My response -- you misunderstand what most people who identify as Christian mean by, "God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit." We do not mean that they are three different deities. I can see how someone might misinterpret it to mean that. When we say "God the Father," we are saying that the Father is God. When we say "God the Son," we mean that the Son is God. When we say "God the Holy Ghost," we mean that the Holy Spirit is God.
Christian orthodoxy has always affirmed that there is only one God. So calling each person "God" means that we are saying that each Person is the one and only God.
How can Yahweh and Elohim be two different gods?
You wrote:
"In fact we Christians call the 3 Deities in the Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost."
My response -- you misunderstand what most people who identify as Christian mean by, "God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit." We do not mean that they are three different deities. I can see how someone might misinterpret it to mean that. When we say "God the Father," we are saying that the Father is God. When we say "God the Son," we mean that the Son is God. When we say "God the Holy Ghost," we mean that the Holy Spirit is God.
Christian orthodoxy has always affirmed that there is only one God. So calling each person "God" means that we are saying that each Person is the one and only God.
Wrong...
אֱלֹהֵינוּ = “Elohim”
“Elohim” definition:
H430 A masculine plural noun. God, gods, judges, angels. This is not a “Plural of Majesty”. A better reason can be seen in scripture itself where, in the very first chapter of Genesis, the necessity of a term conveying both the unity of the one God and yet allowing for a plurality of persons is found (Gen 1.2, 26). This is further borne out by the fact that the form “Elohim” occurs only in Hebrew and in no other Semitic language, not even in Biblical Aramaic. Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
H433 “eloah” Masculine singular noun. God or god. From H410; a deity or the deity: - God, god. See H430.
References:
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) #93c, Harris, Archer, Waltke, volume 1, pp. 41 - 45
The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary of the Old Testament, Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter, p. 54
The New Strong’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible Red-letter Edition, James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D., Hebrew and Aramaic dictionary, p. 17
אֱלֹהֵינוּ = “Elohim”
“Elohim” definition:
H430 A masculine plural noun. God, gods, judges, angels. This is not a “Plural of Majesty”. A better reason can be seen in scripture itself where, in the very first chapter of Genesis, the necessity of a term conveying both the unity of the one God and yet allowing for a plurality of persons is found (Gen 1.2, 26). This is further borne out by the fact that the form “Elohim” occurs only in Hebrew and in no other Semitic language, not even in Biblical Aramaic. Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
H433 “eloah” Masculine singular noun. God or god. From H410; a deity or the deity: - God, god. See H430.
References:
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) #93c, Harris, Archer, Waltke, volume 1, pp. 41 - 45
The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary of the Old Testament, Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter, p. 54
The New Strong’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible Red-letter Edition, James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D., Hebrew and Aramaic dictionary, p. 17
AMEN.
Isaiah 43:10 (HCSB)
[SUP]10 [/SUP] “You are My witnesses”— ⌊this is⌋ the LORD’s declaration— “and My servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe Me and understand that I am He. No god was formed before Me, and there will be none after Me.
Isaiah 6:8 (HCSB)
[SUP]8 [/SUP] Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying: Who should I send? Who will go for Us? I said: Here I am. Send me.
Matthew 28:19 (HCSB)
[SUP]19 [/SUP] Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of <<<{SINGULAR} the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Philippians 2:5-6 (NKJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP] . . . Christ Jesus,
[SUP]6 [/SUP] who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
Re: Still jacked...
There are scriptures that state that Jesus is Theos. He is God the Son, but he is not God the Father. Jesus is subject to the Theos that is greater than him, at least that's what he said.
What do you do with scriptures (at least 35 ) where Jesus is referring to his God, "which is in heaven"? How many times does Jesus have to say "which is in heaven" before you believe him that he is on the earth and God is not on the earth, but is in heaven. How can they be consubstantial and Jesus be on the earth and God is in heaven?
If they were one physically, Jesus would never say, "which is in heaven" he would say, "which is in me here on earth".
This whole subject is interesting and that is why I started by quoting Matthew 3:16-17 because you can give me any number of scriptures, but they all must pass the Matthew test. Let me give you an example. One of the interesting scriptures in the Bible is John 10:30. It just says, I and my Father are "one". Well now, how more straight-forward can you get. Jesus and his Father must be "one" physically consubstantial! Now lets use the Matthew test. The Matthew test is a straight-forward declaration that they are 3 separate and distinct Gods. God the Father in heaven speaking to people on the earth, God the Son standing by the river Jordan on the earth listening to his Father speak from heaven. And the Holy Ghost coming down from heaven and eventually lighting on Jesus. All 3 members of the Godhead present and accounted for, all in different places, not one physically consubstantial, as the creed says they are. So now we have a problem, John 10:30 does not pass the Matthew test. To reconcile the Holy Bible, we must look for a possible different answer. Further study reveals that the word "one" could mean "one physically consubstantial" or it could mean "one in mind and will, purpose and action" which would not require Jesus and God to be consubstantial. Long story short, that is the answer! If you read John, chapter 17 you will find that not only is Jesus and God "one", but the Apostles are "one" with Jesus and God. And so are the billions of people that believe in the word of the Apostles and believe in Jesus. They to are "one" with the Apostles and Jesus and God. It becomes rock solid that John 10:30 does not mean "one" physically, but "one" in mind and will, purpose and action. When you read John 10:30 as "one" in purpose it passes the Matthew test and all is right with the Bible.
So give me any scripture in the Bible and lets see if it passes the Matthew test.
There are scriptures that state that Jesus is Theos. He is God the Son, but he is not God the Father. Jesus is subject to the Theos that is greater than him, at least that's what he said.
What do you do with scriptures (at least 35 ) where Jesus is referring to his God, "which is in heaven"? How many times does Jesus have to say "which is in heaven" before you believe him that he is on the earth and God is not on the earth, but is in heaven. How can they be consubstantial and Jesus be on the earth and God is in heaven?
If they were one physically, Jesus would never say, "which is in heaven" he would say, "which is in me here on earth".
This whole subject is interesting and that is why I started by quoting Matthew 3:16-17 because you can give me any number of scriptures, but they all must pass the Matthew test. Let me give you an example. One of the interesting scriptures in the Bible is John 10:30. It just says, I and my Father are "one". Well now, how more straight-forward can you get. Jesus and his Father must be "one" physically consubstantial! Now lets use the Matthew test. The Matthew test is a straight-forward declaration that they are 3 separate and distinct Gods. God the Father in heaven speaking to people on the earth, God the Son standing by the river Jordan on the earth listening to his Father speak from heaven. And the Holy Ghost coming down from heaven and eventually lighting on Jesus. All 3 members of the Godhead present and accounted for, all in different places, not one physically consubstantial, as the creed says they are. So now we have a problem, John 10:30 does not pass the Matthew test. To reconcile the Holy Bible, we must look for a possible different answer. Further study reveals that the word "one" could mean "one physically consubstantial" or it could mean "one in mind and will, purpose and action" which would not require Jesus and God to be consubstantial. Long story short, that is the answer! If you read John, chapter 17 you will find that not only is Jesus and God "one", but the Apostles are "one" with Jesus and God. And so are the billions of people that believe in the word of the Apostles and believe in Jesus. They to are "one" with the Apostles and Jesus and God. It becomes rock solid that John 10:30 does not mean "one" physically, but "one" in mind and will, purpose and action. When you read John 10:30 as "one" in purpose it passes the Matthew test and all is right with the Bible.
So give me any scripture in the Bible and lets see if it passes the Matthew test.
Johnluke,
"Ousia" means "uncreated being/uncreated energy" and "homoousia" refers to the fact that the three hypostatys of the Saint Trinity share the same essence (they were uncreated: Jesus Christ is begotten while the Holy Spirit is proceedeth).
I don`t understand what you believe in...You believe the persons of the trinity are three distinct gods?
"Ousia" means "uncreated being/uncreated energy" and "homoousia" refers to the fact that the three hypostatys of the Saint Trinity share the same essence (they were uncreated: Jesus Christ is begotten while the Holy Spirit is proceedeth).
I don`t understand what you believe in...You believe the persons of the trinity are three distinct gods?
B
friend i must tell you with all the god thats is in me. we understand that the trinity is three and the same. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit when we look deeply into the trinity of God. this is what we understand as believers and children of God. our Lord Jesus the Christ was a hundred percent man and God the three working in one. God loves you.
BrotherG
BrotherG
Re: Still jacked...
Already comprehended by the Trinity.
Again and again, you stumble all over yourself thinking that the term 'God' refers to only the Father.
It doesn't.
Who (but you) ever said that the Father and the Son were physically each other?
Like I said before, and I will say again....your theology is jacked.
Mat 3.16 - 17 is a confirmation of the Trinity.
However, your version of The Trinity has The Son being The Father - which is wrong.
No wonder you reject it...
The Father does not send Himself.
Come on....
Already comprehended by the Trinity.
Again and again, you stumble all over yourself thinking that the term 'God' refers to only the Father.
It doesn't.
Who (but you) ever said that the Father and the Son were physically each other?
Like I said before, and I will say again....your theology is jacked.
Mat 3.16 - 17 is a confirmation of the Trinity.
However, your version of The Trinity has The Son being The Father - which is wrong.
No wonder you reject it...
The Father does not send Himself.
Come on....
Re: Still jacked...
Put your 'pet' scripture in its original context...
John 10.30 - 33
I and the Father are One! Then again the Jews took up stones, that they might stone Him. Jesus answered them, I showed you many good works from My Father. For which work of them do you stone Me? The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone You concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself God.
The Jews knew what The Son meant - that He was the One God.
When are you...?
One God in three persons....as anyone can see who reads through to Mat 28.
But...cults are known to truncate and abuse scripture to fit their twisted and jacked theology.
If you could reduce the entire Holy Bible down to your favorite 'pet' word....I think that you would do this...
Jacked.
Put your 'pet' scripture in its original context...
John 10.30 - 33
I and the Father are One! Then again the Jews took up stones, that they might stone Him. Jesus answered them, I showed you many good works from My Father. For which work of them do you stone Me? The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone You concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself God.
The Jews knew what The Son meant - that He was the One God.
When are you...?
One God in three persons....as anyone can see who reads through to Mat 28.
But...cults are known to truncate and abuse scripture to fit their twisted and jacked theology.
If you could reduce the entire Holy Bible down to your favorite 'pet' word....I think that you would do this...
Jacked.
Re: Still jacked...
Three hypostasis and one ousia.
Simple.
According you only.....you....?
We already went over your 'pet' cult verses before, several times.
We cannot become God...and the context tells us plainly that this is so.
Scripture also informs the reader that the Righteous worship the Triune God for all eternity....the Righteous are NOT worshipped!
Come on....
Three hypostasis and one ousia.
Simple.
According you only.....you....?
We already went over your 'pet' cult verses before, several times.
We cannot become God...and the context tells us plainly that this is so.
Scripture also informs the reader that the Righteous worship the Triune God for all eternity....the Righteous are NOT worshipped!
Come on....