There Are Many Scriptures That Disprove The Trinity

[johnluke]

Again, we agree on the three Persons being there.


Although I disagree with you in regard to Elohim just applying to the Father, and Yahweh just applying to Jesus, at least you say that you believe they are all one God now instead of Three Gods.

You must know the reason why I am willing to say that the 3 members of the Godhead are 1 God.

It is because you are willing to say that the 3 members of the Godhead can be in 3 different places at the same time. Do you believe this?

 

[homwardbound]

The Trinity doctrine is an illogical, non-Bible based teaching. Many are confused by this falsehood...and as a result do not feel close to God; or feel real love or real connection to/ for God because this erroneous teaching.John 7:29, is one of many verses in the Bible that disproves the Trinity doctrine.

Did Christ walk perfectly, led by God the Father? Did not John report the Holy Spirit of God that descended on Christ and hear the voice oif God that said this is my beloved Son. I see this three as one, just as I see water steam and ice as one, yet in different forms for one purpose, to bring life to us in the Spirit of God

 

[NWL]

Receiving eternal life is different from being eternal. Receiving eternal life means that, from that point on, we will exist forever. It does not mean that from that point on, we have always existed before that. We wouldn't then say that all Christians are eternal. We would say that all Christians have received eternal life.

To say that someone is eternal implies they always existed....it is a state of being.

If you understood that eternal life can be given, then I don't know what all the fuss is about Arwen4CJ. And I never said Jesus has always been Eternal, I made it very clear that believed Jesus was given Eternal life, therefore why did you have a problem? Here was my statement again;

I do believe both Jesus and the Father are eternal and that only the Father is YHWH, I believe however that Jesus hasn't always been eternal but only became Eternal when he was glorified by his Father.

BTW here's the proof that Jesus got given Eternal life; "For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; (John 5:26 NASB)

You believe that the two Persons consist of, one who is YHWH and one who isn't. I believe that the two Persons are both YHWH. So this allows them to share the same titles because they are the same God, YHWH.

Please note that I never have claimed that the Father is Jesus, or that Jesus is the Father. Yes, they are separate Persons. We agree on this. What we disagree on is whether or not they are both YHWH.

Yes, you believe the two persons, Jesus and the Father are YHWH. I believe the Father alone is YHWH and Jesus is simply the Fathers Son. In your mind frame Jesus and YHWH can share the same titles because Jesus is YHWH, and I on the other hand believe they share the same titles at times because God uses Jesus as an agent as to accomplish things through him.

Don't worry, I am very well acquainted with the proper Trinitrian belief on the relationship the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have.

Maybe you missed my earlier post, so let me repost something I posted earlier. I'll add in more comments this time to make it clearer, and I'll break it down into separate posts:
There is only one God, and that is YHWH. The Bible identifies Jesus as God, therefore it is identifying Jesus as YHWH.

Questions to ponder before reading the next one: Isaiah 44:5-7 (NASB)
1.) Who is speaking here?
2.) Who is the first and last?
3.) Who is the King of Israel?
4.) Who is Israel's Redeemer?

Questions to answer regarding Isaiah 48:11-13:
1.) Who is speaking here? (You may, of course look at all of Isaiah 48 to answer this question. I only quoted part of it here)
2.) Will the speaker give His own glory to someone who is not the speaker?
3.) Who is the first and last?[/QUOTE]

Answers regarding Isaiah 44:5-7 (NASB)
1.) YHWH is (From verse 6)
2.) YHWH is the F&L here
3.) Jesus is King through King David seed, YHWH also is King
4.) YHWH is

Answers regarding Isaiah 48:11-13
1.) YHWH
2.) No
3.) YHWH is here

I'm going to go ahead and jump the gun here, when Jesus is called the First and the Last in Rev 1:17-18 it isn't the same first and the last it YHWH is in Isaiah 44 or 48. YHWH is the first and last in time and power, then Revelation actaully goes onto to explain in what sense Jesus is the first and last.

(Revelation 1:17, 18) "...And when I saw him, I fell as dead at his feet. And he laid his right hand upon me and said: “Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last,  and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Ha′des..."

Jesus was the first and the last in the sense that he was the only one, whom God directly brought forth from death by means of His holy spirit, never to die again. (Acts 3:15) All the rest who are brought forth to life in the last day will be brought forth through Jesus as the Agent of YHWH (John 5:22,25). Jesus is thus, also, the first and the last of God’s firstborn from the dead, for there will never be another who will be the firstborn of the dead.

 

[posthuman]

81 pages and no consensus?

perhaps it is true as it is written, "His ways are unsearchable" and infinitely higher than the understanding of men.

To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him?
(Isaiah 40:18)

 

[Arwen4CJ]

I will answer the rest of this post and your previous ones later. Right now, I just want to respond to this part of your post:

Answers regarding Isaiah 44:5-7 (NASB)
1.) YHWH is (From verse 6)
2.) YHWH is the F&L here
3.) Jesus is King through King David seed, YHWH also is King
4.) YHWH is

Answers regarding Isaiah 48:11-13
1.) YHWH
2.) No
3.) YHWH is here

I'm going to go ahead and jump the gun here, when Jesus is called the First and the Last in Rev 1:17-18 it isn't the same first and the last it YHWH is in Isaiah 44 or 48. YHWH is the first and last in time and power, then Revelation actaully goes onto to explain in what sense Jesus is the first and last.

(Revelation 1:17, 18) "...And when I saw him, I fell as dead at his feet. And he laid his right hand upon me and said: “Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last,  and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Ha′des..."

Jesus was the first and the last in the sense that he was the only one, whom God directly brought forth from death by means of His holy spirit, never to die again. (Acts 3:15) All the rest who are brought forth to life in the last day will be brought forth through Jesus as the Agent of YHWH (John 5:22,25). Jesus is thus, also, the first and the last of God’s firstborn from the dead, for there will never be another who will be the firstborn of the dead.

But Revelation 1:17-18 isn't the only place in Revelation where Jesus is called the First and Last.

Revelation 1:8 (NASB)
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

Revelation 21:6-7 (NASB)
6 Then he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give water as a gift from the spring of the water of life. 7 Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God and they will be my children.

Revelation 22:12-13 (NASB)
12 “See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone’s work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

These verses clarify that Jesus is indeed the First and the Last in the same sense as in the passages from Isaiah.

 

[Bowman]

Hi again Bowman. You obviously misunderstood my previous statements towards you. Not once did I say that the original languages had no bearing in scripture, I simply stated that its not completely necessary to study the original its its entirety. Because of the modern time we live in we can see scholarly works of many translators who come from all walks of life with all different belief back grounds, because of this the isn't a need for everyone or anyone to study the original to the depth as some people do because of the many many different references of insight which they can look toward.

No doubt studying the originals texts can prove beneficial, but again its not necessary in these modern times. My original comments which troubled you are below so that you can try to better understand what I meant.

What you are communicating to us is that study of the original languages is warranted ONLY when you feel that it might benefit your world-view.

When it does NOT benefit your world-view, then you refuse to even consider referencing the original languages.

You have amply demonstrated this to be true, not only in your recent activity between jobs, but also last year when you were on the forum, at which time you were shown exegetical material that destroyed your googled ‘proskyneo’ assertions.

 

[NWL]

I will answer the rest of this post and your previous ones later. Right now, I just want to respond to this part of your post:

But Revelation 1:17-18 isn't the only place in Revelation where Jesus is called the First and Last.

Revelation 1:8 (NASB)
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

Revelation 21:6-7 (NASB)
6 Then he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give water as a gift from the spring of the water of life. 7 Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God and they will be my children.

Revelation 22:12-13 (NASB)
12 “See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone’s work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

These verses clarify that Jesus is indeed the First and the Last in the same sense as in the passages from Isaiah.

For one to identify who the alpha and Omega is, all you need to do is find out who the one ‘who is, was and is to come’ is in Rev 1:8, the context of Chapter 1 makes this very clear. For example Rev 1:4,5 makes it extremely clear that Jesus is distinguished apart from he ‘who is, was and is to come’;

(Revelation 1:4, 5) "...John to the seven congregations that are in the [district of] Asia: May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from “The One who is and who was and who is coming,” and from the seven spirits that are before his throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ..."

So it is so very clear from Rev 1:4,5 that Jesus isn't the one ‘who is, was and is to come’. Therefore the one who calls himself the Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:8 isn't Jesus, rather the Father. We know its the Father because when talking about he ‘who is, was and is to come’ it says "the seven spirits that are before his throne", who's throne? Well the Bible makes it clear that Jesus sits with the Father on his Fathers throne, and since the Holy Spirit is never -for some strange reason- talked about having or sitting on a throne, it can only be referring to the Fathers throne.

Therefore its the Father who says “I am the Al′pha and the O·me′ga,”...“the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.” (Rev 1:8). This then makes it abundantly clear who the other two verses (Rev 21:6-7, Rev 22:12-13) are about, obviously its in reference to the same person Rev 1:8 is about, namely, the Father Jehovah.

So again you're wrong, they don't prove that Jesus is the same "first and last" from Isaiah, rather it just adds to the fact that the Father Jehovah is the first and the last in the sense of time and power.

Look forward to your upcoming post friend.

 

[NWL]

What you are communicating to us is that study of the original languages is warranted ONLY when you feel that it might benefit your world-view.

When it does NOT benefit your world-view, then you refuse to even consider referencing the original languages.

You have amply demonstrated this to be true, not only in your recent activity between jobs, but also last year when you were on the forum, at which time you were shown exegetical material that destroyed your googled ‘proskyneo’ assertions.

Assume what you want Bowman, I made no such claim. You just said what I'm expressing "is that study of the original languages is warranted ONLY when you feel that it might benefit your world-view" when in reality I said "No doubt studying the originals texts can prove beneficial" and that even when people don't study them it their entirety that even then "we can see scholarly works of many translators who come from all walks of life with all different belief back grounds".

Again, what I was trying to express is that its good to look into the original languages, and even when people don't, they can still refer to the work of scholars who have. Not once have I said that people shouldn't look themselves into the original languages, but simply that its not a necessity (for the reason of insight from the hundreds of Scholars).

 

[Bowman]

Assume what you want Bowman, I made no such claim. You just said what I'm expressing "is that study of the original languages is warranted ONLY when you feel that it might benefit your world-view" when in reality I said "No doubt studying the originals texts can prove beneficial" and that even when people don't study them it their entirety that even then "we can see scholarly works of many translators who come from all walks of life with all different belief back grounds".

Again, what I was trying to express is that its good to look into the original languages, and even when people don't, they can still refer to the work of scholars who have. Not once have I said that people shouldn't look themselves into the original languages, but simply that its not a necessity (for the reason of insight from the hundreds of Scholars).

What scholars, in particular, would that be...?

 

[Bowman]

Therefore its the Father who says “I am the Al′pha and the O·me′ga,”...“the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.” (Rev 1:8). This then makes it abundantly clear who the other two verses (Rev 21:6-7, Rev 22:12-13) are about, obviously its in reference to the same person Rev 1:8 is about, namely, the Father Jehovah.

So again you're wrong, they don't prove that Jesus is the same "first and last" from Isaiah, rather it just adds to the fact that the Father Jehovah is the first and the last in the sense of time and power.

Look forward to your upcoming post friend.

Both Yahweh and Jesus make this claim, in the first-person singular, three separate times, regarding themselves....as each is The One Triune God.

 

[NWL]

What scholars, in particular, would that be...?

Any Scholar Bowman, it's not up to me who what scholar people should go to to gain any insight. I'm having to repeat myself, its getting boring.

Because of the modern time we live in we can see scholarly works of many translators who come from all walks of life with all different belief back grounds

 

[Bowman]

Any Scholar Bowman, it's not up to me who what scholar people should go to to gain any insight. I'm having to repeat myself, its getting boring.

Show us a scholar who agrees with your JW worldview...

 

[johnluke]

Each has the same name in the OT, Yahweh.

The Son was referred to as Malek Yahweh, Yahweh, The Glory, El Shaddai, The Word of Yahweh, etc...

Etc... is right, there are many names, but there is one name for the Son that is interesting and that name is found in
Genesis 2:4 and in Hebrew it is "Yahweh Elohim", in English it is translated "Lord God". I believe this name carries forward into the New Testament as 'Lord Jesus Christ'.

I also believe that the name for God the Father in Hebrew is Elohim (plural) and El (Singular), both of which are translated into English as God. So El Shaddai refers to the God the Father because it means "El Who Suffices", and translated into English it is "God Almighty". So I believe this name carries forward into the New Testament as God the Father.

Elohim OT = God the Father NT, and Yahweh OT = Lord Jesus Christ NT, the Holy Spirit OT = Holy Spirit NT

 

[phil36]

I would love to hear NWL's biblical analysis of Colossians regarding 'firstborn', I am sure it would make for an interesting read.

 

[NWL]

Show us a scholar who agrees with your JW worldview...

The Jehovah's Witnesses no doubt have Scholars within their organization, however because they choose to remain no part of the world they wouldn't seek academics routes which would make them prominent in their field of work, thus not making them referable.

Some Scholars however have translated their own translations with the same meaning as some NWT verses, some verses which other Bibles (pro-trinitrian Bibles alike) render the same as the JW's NWT are; John 1:1, Zec 12:10, Heb 1:8, Psalms 45:5, Matthew 4:10, Luke 23:43. These one are just of the top of my head, there's no doubt more.

If you wish to ask any more random question such as this one Bowman, then I ask you to consult Google. I don't appreciate random and unrelated questions from a disputatious person such as yourself.

 

[NWL]

I would love to hear NWL's biblical analysis of Colossians regarding 'firstborn', I am sure it would make for an interesting read.

If Arwen4CJ agree's to accept my question regarding it, then I'll readily give it. Its waiting game for now.

 

[phil36]

Hi NWL,

Hasn't noticed your post above was watching a film. Anyhow, Arwen has nothing to do with the question I asked you and I am sure you are more mature than that?

 

[phil36]

Hi NWL,

Do you worship a created being?

 

[GreenNnice]

nwl, what does this verse below mean to you? You didn't comment on what I said in my post,, I can only assume you haven't read it, for whatever reason, no matter, I know, you're concentrating on the Word said by arwen and others.

But what does , "Before Abraham was born, I am" mean to you? Isn't it profound speech by Jesus in The Word ? Read my post, too, for understanding of what I related to you on this matter, please. Thank you.

 

[VCO]

"Before Abraham was born, I am." -- Jesus

This explains Jesus was not mortal on Earth, He was eternal. He was fully man, but, He was fully God, too. "I am" is transcendent speech, it has NO beginning and no end. "I am" means you ARE . It doesn't mean 'You were,' or, 'You was,' it means, foreverness, transcending time and space. Jesus has NO beginning and no end, He is Alpha and Omega, which He calls Himself , and, 'the beginning and the end.' This Jesus, this person whom you think was mortified and deified NEVER was , He always IS God. NO beginning, no end, ALWAYS was. Hard to fathom this thought, but, we don't need to. We are NOT God and trying to read God's mind is something that's NOT happening, EVER, just read 1 Cor. 2 last few verses and you will understand that, fully

“What no eye has seen,
what no ear has heard,
and what no human mind has conceived”[SUP]b[/SUP] —

the things God has prepared for those who love him—



10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.
11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us.
13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.[SUP]c[/SUP]
14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments,
16 for, “Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?”[SUP]d[/SUP]

But we have the mind of Christ.

AMEN! And without that "mind of Christ" in us from the Holy Spirit bringing our human spirit to eternal life (born again), spiritual truths such as the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, would continue to sound like pure foolishness.