-
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.
I am convinced that the earliest Trinitarians of the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP], 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] and 4[SUP]th[/SUP] centuries misinterpreted and got John 1:1-14 at least, all wrong and then they were forced to make Jesus pre-existent and the creator and himself God to fit their initial axiom/premise. They got the English translated term ’word’ all wrong. Over many hundred times in the NT the Greek word ‘logos’ is never translated as God. This was their deliberate error. The chaotic theory of the Trinity was born.
They mostly probably did this deliberately and under pressure from political forces of the time. Constantine was no Christian as I’ve read some of his history. He was a political leader first and wanted to control both Christians and pagans alike. The introduction of the Trinity concept and formula was his new 'Christian' law, creed and compromise.
Later, the holders of the Trinity theory even added in or modified text to a few NT verses in an attempt to force the Trinity into the Holy Scriptures and therefore show it was biblical. Yet it was never so. The text they added/ modified were in verses Matthew 28:19; 1 John 5:7-8 and 1 Timothy 3:16
In the first:
They say this is proof that Jesus is God along with the Spirit. These words were added in the first translation of the Bible from Greek into Latin in the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Century AD
St. Jerome or Eusebium considered the ‘Father of Church History’ wrote about this passage of scripture before it was formally first translated and handwritten into Latin. He did not have the Trinity formula in it.
He wrote “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.” (Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2 and also in Oration in Praise of Emperor Constantine, Chapter 16, Section 8).
Now when we read of the either the water or spirit baptism performed in other parts of scripture, we find that it reads like Eusebium’s version. How could the apostles and disciples get it so wrong that they always baptized in Jesus’ name only (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5). And why wouldn’t they just baptize just in Jesus’ name? Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and savior for mankind. It even makes logical sense. And why would the impersonal roles of God as the Father and Jesus as the son and God’s spirit be relevant in mimicking and having faith in what Jesus did at baptism and on the cross with his death. God did not die on the cross, the human called Jesus did. God’s spirit did not die on the cross either. Even if this portion of scripture of the Trinity formula was true it still does not say these titles or roles formed one God.
In the second verse:
1 John 5:7-8 1 “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” (KJV)
This translation was not found in any Greek manuscript until the 11[SUP]th[/SUP] century AD. Now the original Greek version that was translated in Latin then eventually to Old then modern English read like this:
“For there are three that bear record (witness/testify), the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
The modified or revised version of the passage was a deliberate attempt to show there were a God trinity and a Triune God in scripture, but also to show that the word was the son of God and he existed at the beginning of time, and tie this to John 1:1-2 and 14. So really their interpretation of John 1:1-2 is based on nothing but the empty spaces between the heads.
In the third verse: 1 Timothy 3:16 – “Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, (and) was taken up in glory.” (NIV)
Now there are some Greek manuscripts that read, “God appeared in the flesh.” Some English versions used these manuscripts for their source including these corrupt versions: King James Bible, Darby Bible Translation, Webster’s Bible Translation, World English Bible, and Young’s Literal Translation. This corrupt text in manuscripts did not appear until after the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century AD.
This Greek verse was intentionally altered by scribes in favor of the Trinity theory. Fortunately, most English versions ignored this forged Greek text and stayed with the earlier versions.
They had ‘He,’ ’Who’ or ‘which’ instead of the word ‘God’ (Brooke Foss Westcott (1825–1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828–1892)).
“By common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Beheld by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory” (NASB)
Now this part of scripture actually negates any Trinity or Triune God concept. It describes the life and events of Jesus as a man then later was glorified by God.
Now there is much more to tell, and even the dozen or verses you have cited can easily be debunked that the Trinity or Jesus is and was never God. You have misread them, like many have done and biased them to an impossible, non-Biblical slant. I just do not have the time in this setting to go over every one of them. Maybe one at a time over a period of many days or weeks.
They mostly probably did this deliberately and under pressure from political forces of the time. Constantine was no Christian as I’ve read some of his history. He was a political leader first and wanted to control both Christians and pagans alike. The introduction of the Trinity concept and formula was his new 'Christian' law, creed and compromise.
Later, the holders of the Trinity theory even added in or modified text to a few NT verses in an attempt to force the Trinity into the Holy Scriptures and therefore show it was biblical. Yet it was never so. The text they added/ modified were in verses Matthew 28:19; 1 John 5:7-8 and 1 Timothy 3:16
In the first:
They say this is proof that Jesus is God along with the Spirit. These words were added in the first translation of the Bible from Greek into Latin in the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Century AD
St. Jerome or Eusebium considered the ‘Father of Church History’ wrote about this passage of scripture before it was formally first translated and handwritten into Latin. He did not have the Trinity formula in it.
He wrote “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.” (Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2 and also in Oration in Praise of Emperor Constantine, Chapter 16, Section 8).
Now when we read of the either the water or spirit baptism performed in other parts of scripture, we find that it reads like Eusebium’s version. How could the apostles and disciples get it so wrong that they always baptized in Jesus’ name only (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5). And why wouldn’t they just baptize just in Jesus’ name? Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and savior for mankind. It even makes logical sense. And why would the impersonal roles of God as the Father and Jesus as the son and God’s spirit be relevant in mimicking and having faith in what Jesus did at baptism and on the cross with his death. God did not die on the cross, the human called Jesus did. God’s spirit did not die on the cross either. Even if this portion of scripture of the Trinity formula was true it still does not say these titles or roles formed one God.
In the second verse:
1 John 5:7-8 1 “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” (KJV)
This translation was not found in any Greek manuscript until the 11[SUP]th[/SUP] century AD. Now the original Greek version that was translated in Latin then eventually to Old then modern English read like this:
“For there are three that bear record (witness/testify), the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
The modified or revised version of the passage was a deliberate attempt to show there were a God trinity and a Triune God in scripture, but also to show that the word was the son of God and he existed at the beginning of time, and tie this to John 1:1-2 and 14. So really their interpretation of John 1:1-2 is based on nothing but the empty spaces between the heads.
In the third verse: 1 Timothy 3:16 – “Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, (and) was taken up in glory.” (NIV)
Now there are some Greek manuscripts that read, “God appeared in the flesh.” Some English versions used these manuscripts for their source including these corrupt versions: King James Bible, Darby Bible Translation, Webster’s Bible Translation, World English Bible, and Young’s Literal Translation. This corrupt text in manuscripts did not appear until after the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century AD.
This Greek verse was intentionally altered by scribes in favor of the Trinity theory. Fortunately, most English versions ignored this forged Greek text and stayed with the earlier versions.
They had ‘He,’ ’Who’ or ‘which’ instead of the word ‘God’ (Brooke Foss Westcott (1825–1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828–1892)).
“By common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Beheld by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory” (NASB)
Now this part of scripture actually negates any Trinity or Triune God concept. It describes the life and events of Jesus as a man then later was glorified by God.
Now there is much more to tell, and even the dozen or verses you have cited can easily be debunked that the Trinity or Jesus is and was never God. You have misread them, like many have done and biased them to an impossible, non-Biblical slant. I just do not have the time in this setting to go over every one of them. Maybe one at a time over a period of many days or weeks.
The object of scripture study is to bring to light the meanings of what the spirit of Truth wants us to see and not what we want to see for our benefit instruction and growth.
It is therefore done with the spirit of Truth as guidance, using scrupulous context, the best translation, and understanding that words and phrases used in the 1[SUP]st[/SUP] century must be considered and evaluated possibly differently that for those especially living in the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century.
For example, when a person was sent by God, it might mean to summon someone to a different location for a specific purpose or to bring into existence the pre-planned soul/human spirit for a purpose by God. John the Baptist was sent by God and it means that God brought John into existence for a purpose. He ensured that this soul existed. Remember he was considered the greatest man ever born of a woman, by a man’s will. The spirit of God was with him while he was in his mother’s womb. Now didn’t God send Jesus? Yes he did. God created Jesus with his holy spirit, different in how John was born. Jesus was created for a very obvious purpose. Jesus was a human spirit pre-planned to come in to existence by God’s spirit (from heaven) and not of man’s will.
Here’s another one. Jesus said he came from above or came from heaven, or God sent him. He indeed did although not in the way you may think. These terms always means that this special human spirit (pre-birth) came from above was born (came into existence as the right time, his spirit was sent from heaven as it was pre-planned by God) by God who is from heaven and not that Jesus literally came from heaven as a 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century reader would deduce. Remember Jesus did say he did not come by his own will, because that would have been impossible. At that time he had no will because he was not born yet. He was reinforcing the fact that God created him.
This is the way the writers of the NT thought and wrote. Now if we cannot understand these phrases and many others then there are no reasons to pump out a conclusion or meaning of some other scripture and believe it, is there?
Are you a Jehovah's Witness? They say Jesus was created, also. Of course they rewrite Scriptures to conform to their beliefs, in stripping Jesus of His Deity.
No I'm not, I'm not a denomination-type , or religious Christian in any way shape or form. I don't even do the weekly event. I'm just a plain and getting older Christian who loves the Lord Jesus Christ and I want to share what the spirit tells me.
Bless you
In Christ, always
PS ask me why 'In Christ' if you want to...
Well akap let me ask you a question regarding what you said here: "all wrong and then they were forced to make Jesus pre-existent and the creator and himself God to fit their initial axiom/premise." If Jesus Christ did not preexist His incarnation as a man then why is the Son of God identified or presented in Scripture as the Agent of creation at John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16,17, Hebrews 1:10 and Revelation 3:14 by not only the Apostles but by His own Father? Btw, welcome to the forums.
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
Well akap let me ask you a question regarding what you said here: "all wrong and then they were forced to make Jesus pre-existent and the creator and himself God to fit their initial axiom/premise." If Jesus Christ did not preexist His incarnation as a man then why is the Son of God identified or presented in Scripture as the Agent of creation at John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16,17, Hebrews 1:10 and Revelation 3:14 by not only the Apostles but by His own Father? Btw, welcome to the forums.
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
Well time is ticking and I need to be in another location....so I will be brief here...I do not have the time now to go over the verses you have cited, which I'm very familiar with to put it clearly. I will though leave this hanging until maybe you ask me again to to complete this thought. John 1:1-2 is definitely misinterpreted. It's the 'word' thing again... hint: it has everything to do with Greek word 'logos' and the way God is a planner. Everything he does, it is pre-planned...even our salvation...Bye for now
And thank you for the welcome
Colossians 1 shows and most of the OT[the theophany of the Angel of the Lord]show Jesus was before the foundation of the world....Jesus himself mentions he was with the Father before the foundation of the world many times....this does not strip away his deity, it enforces it....
I believe you mean Colossians 15-20:
Now if a clear context is not applied in these verses, and collectively you can have Jesus being the start of everything etc.... which I will show is not true.
You know that many of the Colossians were angel worshippers. They struggled with the concept that the Lord Jesus was their Lord. They were listening to false teachers. They had to be straightened out of their errors.
Note that this in the first verse it says that Christ and not God is the image of the invisible God. Meaning he represents God in all ways and is sufficient for us. This is expected.
Now if the meaning in verse 15 was meant to say that Jesus was God, it would have said this very clearly there, upfront.
Now there are some misinformed scholars out there that have misused the word, Greek word 'eikon' to mean manifestation instead of a copy or image, and not the real thing or substance. They have exaggerated its meaning for their purpose(s).....it is one thing to call someone an icon they to later believe it really meant that the icon is really the original living inside it or him or her...this would be plain and simply idolatry, right?
Further, this Greek word is used over 2 dozen times in scripture and always means a copy or icon, a symbol etc, and never the real thing that is manifested into it...
Verse 16: I've raised this area before. The words, thoughts and meanings of the 1st century versus the 21st century can be quite difference. In this verse 16 the word I'm focusing on is 'all.' It was not meant to mean everything in existence etc. It has a limited meaning, just like forever, in other places of the Bible.
His or through the Lord Jesus Christ specific things were created; not everything in existence.
God, his Father delegated or gave him authority to create these things. And what were they?
As it says,"... things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him..."
Jesus created these positions of power since his resurrection. As Matthew at least says, He was given all authority over heaven and on the earth. He is ruler today with permission by his Father. We have to keep all this in context because we cannot lose sight of why this scripture was written to the Colossians in the first place. We can easily drift off and extract another meaning to another setting and context...
Verse 17. keeping context again... Jesus is 'before' these things already spoken of in verse 16. Jesus has the priority or more important that these things he created...and he keeps this creation intact under is own power..again delegated by his Father.
Verse 18: Jesus is head of the believers, the first human to be resurrected so that he would be in charge...and do the things in verse 17.
Verse 19: For God, his Father was please in giving him the power requires to do all these things....
Verse 20: And through Jesus' power and (at least the necessary portions) spirit of God he maintained in fellowship or union with his believers (spirit of Truth) and all things he creates...
Now back to you akap. I'm convinced that you do not understand my question. I say that because your telling me that John 1:1-2 is misinterpreted. Let's say for the sake of argument we throw out John 1:1,2. How do you address my specific question which is, "If Jesus Christ did not preexist His incarnation as a man then why is the Son of God identified or presented in Scripture as the Agent of creation at Colossians 1:16,17, Hebrews 1:10 and Revelation 3:14 by not only the Apostles but by His own Father. Notice I did not (on purpsose) include John 1:1-2.
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
Ok akap, you said this in this post, "Now if the meaning in verse 15 was meant to say that Jesus was God, it would have said this very clearly there, upfront." Your referring to Colossians 1:15 but the problem you have is that your making an argument from silence. In other words, you conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence.
It's like saying (which btw is a very common argument), "If Jesus is God why did no one say in the book of Acts that Jesus was God?" What your doing is discounting other places in the Bible where Jesus Christ was indeed identified as God. Now, I'm going to say what I said to you in my other post and for the sake of argument let's just throw out Colossians 1:15 out.
What excuses are you going to come up with at Philippians 2:5,6? "Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, vs6, who, ALTHOUGH He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped." That word "although" means "In spite of the fact" that Jesus Christ existed as God made Himself of no reputation and took upon Himself the form of a servant from vs7.
So the question is what was Jesus' form before? If He was literally, actually a man afterward what was He literally, actually before? Or to put it another way, If Jesus was only a mere human being, how does a human being, "hjumble Himself and become obedient unto death at vs8?" I mean all mankind is appointed to death, no obedience or humbling involved!
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
It would depend on if God could be reconked as a man after the flesh meaning he would have a mother and father beginning of daye end of Spirit life which the Son of man did have a corrupted body . The Son of man said His flesh it.... profits for nothing he poured out His Spirit not seen it gave spirit life .Blood without the spirit essence of life was used as a demonstration being poured out absent of spirt life it returned to the dust from where it came and the Spirit of Christ of its own volition returned to the father who gave it up.
bluto: I wish not to discourage you from searching the word of God based on my reply. I wish to strengthen my scriptural education and I hope someone else's like yours. I just gave you my commentary on the area of scripture you pointed to in your last communique. If you do not want to consider what ever I have said then move on. You are not obliged to agree with me and you are still my brother in Christ. No worries mate. Just quietly consider even some of the things I've said , synthesize it, incubate it, store it and move on.
You know if you want me to give you my commentary on the next verses of Philippians 2:5-6 then I can do that as I'm very familiar with these verses. Let me know if you want my commentary of Phil 2:5-6. You know though that you will have to deal with comments that might not sit well with you again.
In Christ, Always
You know if you want me to give you my commentary on the next verses of Philippians 2:5-6 then I can do that as I'm very familiar with these verses. Let me know if you want my commentary of Phil 2:5-6. You know though that you will have to deal with comments that might not sit well with you again.
In Christ, Always
First of all akap I am not in any way shape or form discouraged from searching the word of God regardless of who I am replying to. And yes, I did consider your commentary and that is the reason I responded to your post with the question I posed to you.
Remember, the following are your own words and that is what I'm responding to. " I am convinced that the earliest Trinitarians of the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP], 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] and 4[SUP]th[/SUP] centuries misinterpreted and got John 1:1-14 at least, all wrong and then they were forced to make Jesus pre-existent and the creator and himself God to fit their initial axiom/premise. They got the English translated term ’word’ all wrong. Over many hundred times in the NT the Greek word ‘logos’ is never translated as God. This was their deliberate error. The chaotic theory of the Trinity was born.
They mostly probably did this deliberately and under pressure from political forces of the time." My question still stands even after I said "let's eliminate John 1:1,2" and address my question using the other verses I posted which were Colossians 1:16,17, Hebrews 1:10 and Revelation 1:14.
You clearly gave your opinion on why you think Jesus Christ did not preexist His incarnation as a man. If that is true, then why is Jesus Christ the Son of God identified or presented as the Agent of creation by the verses I provided? Now, you also said, "You are not obliged to agree with me and you are still my brother in Christ. No worries mate. Just quietly consider even some of the things I've said , synthesize it, incubate it, store it and move on."
Since I do not agree with you, (and as I said I did consider what you said but not quietly whatever that means) how can we move on without debating our positions more thoroughly. Remember, others including lurkers read these post and instead of leaving them hanging it's part of our duty to show what we believe and why we believe it. So if a person makes a claim like you did that Jesus Christ did not preexist His incarnation then you have to prove you claim with evidence. Not with "probablys" or assumptions, presumptions. Even your opinion has to be based on something.
So, please deal with my question and I will be more than happy to address your opinions regarding Philippians 2:4-9 in another post. Is this not fair akap?
And PS: Can you please give me your understanding of the Trinity doctrine? Thanks!IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
D
Dagallen
Guest
Jesus did not call himself God, his mother did not call Jesus God, his brother's did not call Jesus God, the 12 did not call Jesus God, interesting.
The Spirit of God is mentioned quite a few times in the Tanakh. Some examples:
Genesis 1:2
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Genesis 41:38
And Pharaoh said unto his servants, Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?
Exodus 31:3
And I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship,
Exodus 35:31
And he hath filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship;
Numbers 24:2
And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel abiding in his tents according to their tribes; and the spirit of God came upon him.
Numbers 27:16
Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation,
1 Samuel 10:10
And when they came thither to the hill, behold, a company of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them.
1 Samuel 11:6
And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly.
1 Samuel 19:20
And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit ofGod was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied.
1 Samuel 19:23
And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah: and the Spirit of God was upon him also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah.
2 Chronicles 15:1
And the Spirit of God came upon Azariah the son of Oded:
2 Chronicles 24:20
And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the Lord, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the Lord, he hath also forsaken you.
Job 27:3
All the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils;
Job 33:4
The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.
Psalm 143:10
Teach me to do thy will; for thou art my God: thy spiritis good; lead me into the land of uprightness.
Isaiah 61:1
The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
Ezekiel 8:3
And he put forth the form of an hand, and took me by a lock of mine head; and the spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the door of the inner gate that looketh toward the north; where was the seat of the image of jealousy, which provoketh to jealousy.
Ezekiel 11:24
Afterwards the spirit took me up, and brought me in a vision by the Spirit of God into Chaldea, to them of the captivity. So the vision that I had seen went up from me.
Ezekiel 39:29
Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord God.
There are others but I shall stop there
The fact that the Spirit is mentioned throughout the OT is not the point. The Messiah is also seen in the OT. The point is that the Christian perception of the Holy Spirit did not line up with that of the Jews. Just like the Christian view of the Messiah didn't quite line up with the Jewish perception. No Jew expected their Messiah to die on a cross. But with the coming of Christ, He opened minds. He shed light on OT texts. This is why Christians see the death of the Messiah prophesied about in the OT.
Really? The Apostle Thomas said this at John 20:28, "My Lord and my God." Or literally, "The Lord of me and the God of me." Then there is the Apostle Paul at Titus 2:13, "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus." And the Apostle Peter at 2 Peter 1:1, "Simon Peter, a bond servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, tol those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ."
And here's an oldie but goodie from God the Father Himself, "But of the Son He says, Thy throne, O God is forever and ever." Hebrews 1:8. Now it's your turn dagallen to tell me that all these verses really don't mean what the say? I also find it "interesting" that you don't seem to notice these verses in your Bible, why? Are you using by chance the New World Translation?
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
As someone who understands the Greek of the NT your argument is weak.
The interpretation of what a word means is all in the context.
John 1:1-16 unequivocally teaches that the Word is/was eternal, the Word is God, and the Word became flesh, and the Word is identified as Jesus Christ.
Neither the grammar nor the vocabulary of John is complicated (1st year Greek students are often given passages out of John to translate) - no eisegesis is required to come to the conclusions above.
It is what it is!