My take on Trinity

[Free]

And, it's a misunderstanding. It's illogical. Three persons cannot be one person. That's simply impossible.

Exactly, Which is why the doctrine of the Trinity teaches no such thing.

If we're going to try to understand what's in the Bible we should consider Paul's words to the Corinthians, 'to us there is one God, the Father.' That's a pretty clear statement how does anyone get three persons in one God out of that statement? It clearly says there is one God who is one person, the Father.

Since you like logic, let's look at that verse and consider what it says:

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

First, some theologians, such as N.T. Wright, see it as Paul's expansion of the Shema. Compare:

Deu 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (ESV)

Second, if you want the verse to say that "one God, the Father" precludes Jesus from being God, then it necessarily follows that "one Lord, Jesus Christ" precludes the Father from being Lord. Yet that would contradict what Paul writes in many passages, such as1 Tim. 6:15. It would also contradict numerous other passages in the NT, such as Luke 10:21.

Third, if "of whom are all things" speaks of the Father's absolute existence and his nature as God, then it necessarily follows that "by whom are all things" speaks of the Son's absolute existence and nature as God. We cannot say that in relation to the Father "all things" means absolutely everything that has come into existence but that it means something different in relation to the Son. And this is confirmed in John 1:1-3, Col 1:16-17, and Heb 1:2, 8-12, 2:10.

So, simple, sound logic leads to the only conclusion that Jesus, or rather the Son, is also God in nature. Yet, he clearly is distinct from the Father.

However, as I've pointed out there's nothing to indicate the Spirit is a third person.

On the contrary. First, consider what Jesus calls the Holy Spirit:

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
...
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. (ESV)

Joh 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. (ESV)

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. (ESV)

"Another helper" strongly implies one that is similar to Jesus but different. It immediately brings to mind another person. If I have a piece of cake for dessert and someone asks if I want another, I fully expect another piece of the same cake; not a piece of pie, not a plate of spaghetti, or whatever. But more importantly, "Helper" is the Greek word paraklētos, which means "called to one's aid." It's better thought of as "advocate" or "intercessor."

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. (ESV)

Those are the five times that paraklētos is used in the NT. Advocacy is only done by persons on behalf of other persons.

Second, the Holy Spirit:

Acts: Matt 4:1; Acts 8:39, 16:7
Listens: John 16:13
Speaks: John 16:13-15; Acts 1:16, 10:19, 11:12, 11:28, 13:2, 15:28; 1 Tim 4:1; Heb 3:7
Can be lied to: Acts 5:3, which is the same as lying to God (5:9)
Bears witness: Rom 8:16; Heb 10:15; 1 John 5:6
Helps, intercedes, and searches: John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7; Rom 8:26-27; 1 Cor 2:10
Teaches: Luke 12:12; John 16:13; 1 Cor 2:13
Gives gifts: 1 Cor 12:11; Heb 2:4
Leads: John 16:13; Gal 5:18, Heb 9:8
Can be grieved: Eph 4:30
Can be outraged: Heb 10:29
Can be blasphemed: Matt 12:31-32
Convicts: John 16:8-11

And on it goes. These are actions of personal agency.

 

[Free]

Supernature and divenature are the same thing.

They are different and need to be kept distinct. Supernatural refers to those beings that are spirit and their actions, including angels, demons, and the devil. Divine nature is a sub-category of supernatural and refers only to God, those whom he allows to be partakers of his nature, and his actions. That is, only things that relate directly to God in some way.

 

[Butch5]

Exactly, Which is why the doctrine of the Trinity teaches no such thing.

Interesting, because that's what I've heard from many a Christian. But please feel free to explain what it actually is.

Since you like logic,

Since I like logic? Shouldn't we all? Without logic we make ourselves susceptible to error.

let's look at that verse and consider what it says:

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

First, some theologians, such as N.T. Wright, see it as Paul's expansion of the Shema. Compare:

Deu 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (ESV)

Second, if you want the verse to say that "one God, the Father" precludes Jesus from being God, then it necessarily follows that "one Lord, Jesus Christ" precludes the Father from being Lord. Yet that would contradict what Paul writes in many passages, such as1 Tim. 6:15. It would also contradict numerous other passages in the NT, such as Luke 10:21.

Not at all. In context Paul is comparing the Christians with the pagans. Let's step back a few verses.

Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. 2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. 3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him. 4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. 5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 1 Co 8:1–6.

Paul states a theological truth, there is one God. Then he acknowledges "so called" gods. The pagans see them as gods. Then he says, 'to us there is one God, the Father'. So, when comparing the gods of the pagans and the God of the Christians, Paul concludes that to the Christian there is only one God, and that God is the Father. He also says we have one Lord Jesus Christ. But again, the context is the gods of the pagans and the true God. A god is a sovereign. He is sovereign over a particular domain. The pagans had a god of the sun, a god of the moon, they had a god of hades etc. The domain of the True God is all of creation. However, there is a kingdom that belongs to the True God and the True God has given His Son dominion over that. Therefore He is the sovereign, God or Lord, over that domain. The Son, however, also has a Lord, that is the Father. On the other hand, the Father has no God or Lord. So, it stands to reason that if the Son is our Lord and He has a Lord, that Lord would also be Lord over us. However, that Lord has given dominion to His Son, thus making His Son our Lord. We're not going to be judged by the Father, We're going to be judged by the Son. Thus, He is our Lord.

The reason the analogy breaks down is because, the Son has a God and a Lord. The Father does not. He is the ultimate God and Lord.

Third, if "of whom are all things" speaks of the Father's absolute existence and his nature as God, then it necessarily follows that "by whom are all things" speaks of the Son's absolute existence and nature as God. We cannot say that in relation to the Father "all things" means absolutely everything that has come into existence but that it means something different in relation to the Son. And this is confirmed in John 1:1-3, Col 1:16-17, and Heb 1:2, 8-12, 2:10.

So, simple, sound logic leads to the only conclusion that Jesus, or rather the Son, is also God in nature. Yet, he clearly is distinct from the Father.

I agree. The Son, prior to the incarnation, is the very nature of God, the Father. Paul acknowledges this in Philippians 2 when he says, 'being in the form of God He emptied Himself. However, nature and Authority are to very different things.

On the contrary. First, consider what Jesus calls the Holy Spirit:

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
...
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. (ESV)

Joh 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. (ESV)

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. (ESV)

"Another helper" strongly implies one that is similar to Jesus but different. It immediately brings to mind another person. If I have a piece of cake for dessert and someone asks if I want another, I fully expect another piece of the same cake; not a piece of pie, not a plate of spaghetti, or whatever. But more importantly, "Helper" is the Greek word paraklētos, which means "called to one's aid." It's better thought of as "advocate" or "intercessor."

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. (ESV)

Those are the five times that paraklētos is used in the NT. Advocacy is only done by persons on behalf of other persons.

Second, the Holy Spirit:

Acts: Matt 4:1; Acts 8:39, 16:7

I agree. However, there is nothing here to indicate that this is a third person. If you continue reading in John 16 you'll find that when Jesus speaks of the helper, the Spirit of Truth, He says He is speaking figuratively of the Father. Thus, the Helper, the Spirit of Truth is the Father. There is nothing about a third person.

Listens: John 16:13
Speaks: John 16:13-15; Acts 1:16, 10:19, 11:12, 11:28, 13:2, 15:28; 1 Tim 4:1; Heb 3:7
Can be lied to: Acts 5:3, which is the same as lying to God (5:9)
Bears witness: Rom 8:16; Heb 10:15; 1 John 5:6
Helps, intercedes, and searches: John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7; Rom 8:26-27; 1 Cor 2:10
Teaches: Luke 12:12; John 16:13; 1 Cor 2:13
Gives gifts: 1 Cor 12:11; Heb 2:4
Leads: John 16:13; Gal 5:18, Heb 9:8
Can be grieved: Eph 4:30
Can be outraged: Heb 10:29
Can be blasphemed: Matt 12:31-32
Convicts: John 16:8-11

And on it goes. These are actions of personal agency.

Yes, they speak of the Father.

 

[Free]

Interesting, because that's what I've heard from many a Christian. But please feel free to explain what it actually is.

What it's always been: three divine, coeternal, coequal, consubstantial persons within the one Being that is God. It's worded specifically to avoid three persons in one person or three Gods in one God, as those are contradictions.

Since I like logic? Shouldn't we all? Without logic we make ourselves susceptible to error.

I agree.

Not at all. In context Paul is comparing the Christians with the pagans. Let's step back a few verses.

Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. 2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. 3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him. 4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. 5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 1 Co 8:1–6.

Paul states a theological truth, there is one God. Then he acknowledges "so called" gods. The pagans see them as gods. Then he says, 'to us there is one God, the Father'. So, when comparing the gods of the pagans and the God of the Christians, Paul concludes that to the Christian there is only one God, and that God is the Father. He also says we have one Lord Jesus Christ. But again, the context is the gods of the pagans and the true God. A god is a sovereign. He is sovereign over a particular domain. The pagans had a god of the sun, a god of the moon, they had a god of hades etc. The domain of the True God is all of creation. However, there is a kingdom that belongs to the True God and the True God has given His Son dominion over that. Therefore He is the sovereign, God or Lord, over that domain. The Son, however, also has a Lord, that is the Father. On the other hand, the Father has no God or Lord. So, it stands to reason that if the Son is our Lord and He has a Lord, that Lord would also be Lord over us. However, that Lord has given dominion to His Son, thus making His Son our Lord. We're not going to be judged by the Father, We're going to be judged by the Son. Thus, He is our Lord.

Didn't you just imply that you liked logic--"Shouldn't we all?"? And didn't you just say that "Without logic we make ourselves susceptible to error."? So, why did you completely sidestep the logic I gave?

I agree that Paul was comparing the "so-called gods" of the pagans, which are not gods at all, with the one true, living God. But that has nothing to do with the logic of verse 6. You say that "Paul concludes that to the Christian there is only one God, and that God is the Father," but then ignore the logical conclusion that Jesus is then the only Lord. It cannot be otherwise; yet, Paul, and probably every other NT writer, states the Father is Lord, even the Lord of lords.

That is, if referring to the Father as "one God" absolutely excludes Jesus from being God, then "one Lord" necessarily and absolutely excludes the Father from being Lord. Ever. It's very simple logic that is found in all the additional passages I have given.

So, yes, the Son is our Lord, but so is the Father. They are both Lord in the very same way, just as they are both God in the very same way.

The reason the analogy breaks down is because, the Son has a God and a Lord. The Father does not. He is the ultimate God and Lord.

First, I haven't given an analogy; I've given Scripture. Second, you haven't at all shown how the reasoning breaks down. There is no verse in the NT that excludes Jesus from being God. Everything must be taken in context as a whole, not piecemeal, which is what every anti-Trinitarian does, and is why they come to wrong conclusions.

I agree. The Son, prior to the incarnation, is the very nature of God, the Father. Paul acknowledges this in Philippians 2 when he says, 'being in the form of God He emptied Himself. However, nature and Authority are to very different things.

If the Son is in nature God, as Paul states in Phil 2, then he is just as much God as the Father is and is coequal with him. If you want to say that the Son is somehow a lesser God (god), then you're venturing into Gnosticism.

I agree. However, there is nothing here to indicate that this is a third person. If you continue reading in John 16 you'll find that when Jesus speaks of the helper, the Spirit of Truth, He says He is speaking figuratively of the Father. Thus, the Helper, the Spirit of Truth is the Father. There is nothing about a third person.

Nowhere does he say he is speaking figuratively about the Father in regards to the Helper, the Spirit of Truth. If he was saying the Holy Spirit is actually the Father, then much of the NT is nonsense, since the Holy Spirit and the Father are always kept distinct, just as it is with the Son and the Father. It would be meaningless to keep them distinct if they were one and the same.

Most notably, your argument ignores the context:

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, (ESV)

Just as "another Helper" means one like Jesus, who is not the Father, "another" cannot be referring to the Father; it distinguishes the Helper from both Son and Father. If you still want to say that the Father is the Helper, then why wouldn't Jesus just say he'll ask the Father to come? Why refer to the Father, whom he has just mentioned, as "another Helper"? Reason would dictate that we are talking about three distinct persons here.

Joh 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. (ESV)

If the Father is the Helper, how is it that the Helper comes "from" and "proceeds from" the Father? That is meaningless talk if they are one and the same. Again, why wouldn't Jesus just say that the Father was going to come? And, speaking to your previous argument about authority, how is it then, that Jesus was going to send the Father, who somehow proceeds from himself, if the Father is the one with the authority as the only God?

Take Matt 28:19, for instance. It would be pointless at best, and incredibly misleading at worst, to make the Holy Spirit distinct from the Father if the Father was the Holy Spirit. Same with Jesus's conception and baptism. They are always, always spoken of as distinct from one another.

You might want to rethink your understanding of those verses.

Yes, they speak of the Father.

They are things the Father does, as well as the Son, because that is what persons do, which is rather the point, but each of those passages is clearly speaking about the Holy Spirit.

 

[BeyondET]

Actually, you've failed to prove it is a third person. As I've pointed out, nothing in Scripture suggests any such thing. I also notice you completely disregarded what Paul said. There is one God who is one person. Show me something in scripture that says there is one God who is three persons.
According to Jesus, the Comforter or Spirit of Truth is a figurative (here we have figurative and spirit together again) way of speaking of the Father.

John 16:7 (NKJV): 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.

John 16:12–15 (NKJV): 12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.

John 16:25 (NKJV): 25 “These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father.

And the rest of the verses, even Jesus disciples believed He came from God. When Jesus entered the world, heaven wasn't absent of God.

The figure of speech.
John 16
21A woman, when she is in labor, has sorrow because her hour has come; but as soon as she has given birth to the child, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that a human being has been born into the world.

The disciples believed.
John 16
26 In that day you will ask in My name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf.

27 For the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me and have believed that I came from God.

28 I came from the Father and entered the world. In turn, I will leave the world and go to the Father.”

29 His disciples said, “See, now You are speaking plainly and without figures of speech.

30 Now we understand that You know all things and that You have no need for anyone to question You. Because of this, we believe that You came from God.”

 

[Who Me]

Actually, you've failed to prove it is a third person. As I've pointed out, nothing in Scripture suggests any such thing. I also notice you completely disregarded what Paul said. There is one God who is one person. Show me something in scripture that says there is one God who is three persons.
According to Jesus, the Comforter or Spirit of Truth is a figurative (here we have figurative and spirit together again) way of speaking of the Father.

John 16:7 (NKJV): 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.

John 16:12–15 (NKJV): 12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.

John 16:25 (NKJV): 25 “These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father. The Spirit has the characteristics of a person

Yes God is one, so who and what is Jesus identified by God as his beloved Son?
The Spirit has the characteristics of a person so is more than just a force.

 

[BeyondET]

Divine is what is not understood naturally. Your distinction is unnecessary.

I bought it up because you think supernatural beings are a god.

 

[7thMoon]

I bought it up because you think supernatural beings are a god.

They are gods. There is no distinction other than there is a most high.

 

[BeyondET]

They are gods. There is no distinction other than there is a most high.

There's a distinction and your making the wrong choice.

Exodus 20:3
Do not have other gods besides me.

 

[Free]

They are gods. There is no distinction other than there is a most high.

They can’t be other gods; God himself says he is the only one and that there never will be another.

Deu 32:39 "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Isa 43:10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.

Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
…
Isa 44:8 Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any."

Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me,
...
Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.
Isa 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.

Isa 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

(All ESV.)

So, if God says he is the only one, that he knows of no other god, and that there never will be another, why do you say there are other gods?

 

[Butch5]

What it's always been: three divine, coeternal, coequal, consubstantial persons within the one Being that is God. It's worded specifically to avoid three persons in one person or three Gods in one God, as those are contradictions.

Like I thought, it's three persons in one person. Person is a synonym for being. It's one being that consists of three other beings. That is completely illogical. It doesn't avoid contradictions, it is one.

I agree.


Didn't you just imply that you liked logic--"Shouldn't we all?"? And didn't you just say that "Without logic we make ourselves susceptible to error."? So, why did you completely sidestep the logic I gave?

I agree that Paul was comparing the "so-called gods" of the pagans, which are not gods at all, with the one true, living God. But that has nothing to do with the logic of verse 6. You say that "Paul concludes that to the Christian there is only one God, and that God is the Father," but then ignore the logical conclusion that Jesus is then the only Lord. It cannot be otherwise; yet, Paul, and probably every other NT writer, states the Father is Lord, even the Lord of lords.

That is, if referring to the Father as "one God" absolutely excludes Jesus from being God, then "one Lord" necessarily and absolutely excludes the Father from being Lord. Ever. It's very simple logic that is found in all the additional passages I have given.

So, yes, the Son is our Lord, but so is the Father. They are both Lord in the very same way, just as they are both God in the very same way.

It's not logic, it's grammar. Paul's statement about God excludes Christ because there is only one God, and that God has no God. There is one Lord Jesus Christ, because He is ruler of the Kingdom. He is our king while He rules the Kingdom. That doesn't mean that the Father isn't the ultimate ruler who is above our ruler Christ, making the Father our ruler also. It's about context. That Paul excludes Christ in the one God statement shows that the Father is the only God. However, Paul isn't the only who does. John likewise tells us about God while excluding Christ.

18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 1:18.

John says that no man has seen God at any time. Then he says the Son has made Him known. Whoever this God is that John is speaking of it's certainly not Jesus. John says Jesus has made Him known. Also, many people saw Jesus. And, that John said, the "Son" has made Him known strongly implies that this God is the Father. This aligns with Paul's statement, 'to us there is one God, the Father.' Paul also tells us this.

13 I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; 14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, adwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 1 Ti 6:13–16.

Here, Paul, the same person who wrote to the Corinthians, says when Jesus comes, He will show who is the "Only" potentate, or sovereign. He is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The Lord of Jesus. Then He says of this one, no man has seen nor can see Him. So, this one that no man has seen is the only Potentate. Paul didn't say He was one of three coequal potentates. And one can't claim, oh this is God, in the sense of the three persons, because Paul specifically says of this one, no man has seen nor can see Him. This excludes the Jesus.

From this we can see that when Paul says, there is one God, the Father, he is not including the Son. It also shows that when he said, 'and one Lord Jesus Christ' he wasn't saying that to the exclusion of the Father. So, Paul sees one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ, while still acknowledging that the Father is the ultimate Lord.

First, I haven't given an analogy; I've given Scripture. Second, you haven't at all shown how the reasoning breaks down. There is no verse in the NT that excludes Jesus from being God. Everything must be taken in context as a whole, not piecemeal, which is what every anti-Trinitarian does, and is why they come to wrong conclusions.

See above. Both John and Paul exclude Him

If the Son is in nature God, as Paul states in Phil 2, then he is just as much God as the Father is and is coequal with him. If you want to say that the Son is somehow a lesser God (god), then you're venturing into Gnosticism.

Paul said,

who, though he existed in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be grasped,
7 but emptied himself
by taking on the form of a slave,
by looking like other men,
and by sharing in human nature.


Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible, Second Edition. (Denmark: Thomas Nelson, 2019), Php 2:6–7.

Paul said he was in the form of God and emptied Himself. He emptied Himself of the form of God. He took on the form of man.

Also, even though He was in the form of God, that doesn't necessitate that He was equal with God.

Nowhere does he say he is speaking figuratively about the Father in regards to the Helper, the Spirit of Truth. If he was saying the Holy Spirit is actually the Father, then much of the NT is nonsense, since the Holy Spirit and the Father are always kept distinct, just as it is with the Son and the Father. It would be meaningless to keep them distinct if they were one and the same.

He does even if you don't admit it.
Distinct? It's called the Spirit "of" God. When is wind or breath a distinct living being?

 

[Butch5]

Most notably, your argument ignores the context:

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, (ESV)

Just as "another Helper" means one like Jesus, who is not the Father, "another" cannot be referring to the Father; it distinguishes the Helper from both Son and Father. If you still want to say that the Father is the Helper, then why wouldn't Jesus just say he'll ask the Father to come? Why refer to the Father, whom he has just mentioned, as "another Helper"? Reason would dictate that we are talking about three distinct persons here.

Joh 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. (ESV)

If the Father is the Helper, how is it that the Helper comes "from" and "proceeds from" the Father? That is meaningless talk if they are one and the same. Again, why wouldn't Jesus just say that the Father was going to come? And, speaking to your previous argument about authority, how is it then, that Jesus was going to send the Father, who somehow proceeds from himself, if the Father is the one with the authority as the only God?

Take Matt 28:19, for instance. It would be pointless at best, and incredibly misleading at worst, to make the Holy Spirit distinct from the Father if the Father was the Holy Spirit. Same with Jesus's conception and baptism. They are always, always spoken of as distinct from one another.

You might want to rethink your understanding of those verses.


They are things the Father does, as well as the Son, because that is what persons do, which is rather the point, but each of those passages is clearly speaking about the Holy Spirit.

Nothing I've said ignores the context. You're just interpreting those passages from your perspective. Firstly, another helper doesn't necessitate it be like Jesus. If someone's car breaks down and I say I'll send you another vehicle I can send a truck. It's a vehicle, but it's not a car. When the Helper came, was it human like Jesus? Could they sit down and eat and converse with it?

Luke gives us a good picture of the Holy Sprit.

26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth, 27 to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, a descendant of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel came to her and said, “Greetings, favored one, the Lord is with you!” 29 But she was greatly troubled by his words and began to wonder about the meaning of this greeting. 30 So the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God! 31 Listen: You will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David. 33 He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will never end.” 34 Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I have not been intimate with a man?” 35 The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called the Son of God.

Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible, Second Edition. (Denmark: Thomas Nelson, 2019), Lk 1:26–35.

Here Luke records what the angel told Mary. The angel equates the Holy Breath or Spirit with the power of the Highest. We know from Paul, that the Highest is the one that no man has seen nor can see. So, the Holy Breath or Spirit is the power of the one that no man has seen. We see this in other passages of Scripture. In the Gospels we see Jesus saying He casts out demons by the Holy Spirit and in the same event in another Gospel it says He casts out demons by the finger of God. If the Holy Spirit is a third person, how is it God's finger? If the Holy Spirit is a third person who is Jesus' Father? According to Scripture it's God Almighty. According to the Trinity it's the third person of the Trinity. If the Holy Spirit isn't the Father and/or His power, then He's not Jesus' father. Notice, the angel said that the child born of Mary would be the Son of God. He will be called the Son of God and the Son of the Highest. Thus, God and the Highest are one and the same. John said, 'no man has seen God at any time'.

 

[Butch5]

Yes God is one, so who and what is Jesus identified by God as his beloved Son?
The Spirit has the characteristics of a person so is more than just a force.

The "Son of" God.

Those characteristics are the Father's

 

[Butch5]

And the rest of the verses, even Jesus disciples believed He came from God. When Jesus entered the world, heaven wasn't absent of God.

The figure of speech.
John 16
21A woman, when she is in labor, has sorrow because her hour has come; but as soon as she has given birth to the child, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that a human being has been born into the world.

The disciples believed.
John 16
26 In that day you will ask in My name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf.

27 For the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me and have believed that I came from God.

28 I came from the Father and entered the world. In turn, I will leave the world and go to the Father.”

29 His disciples said, “See, now You are speaking plainly and without figures of speech.

30 Now we understand that You know all things and that You have no need for anyone to question You. Because of this, we believe that You came from God.”

25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father. 26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: 27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed cthat I came out from God. 28 dI came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 16:24–28.

I don't think "that day" was a few minutes later.

 

[7thMoon]

There's a distinction and your making the wrong choice.

Exodus 20:3
Do not have other gods besides me.

20:3 לֹֽא יִהְיֶֽה־לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים עַל־פָּנָֽיַ׃
The is no other gods on or as far as me.

I have put YHWH before the Christ. I am not making the wrong choice at all.

 

[7thMoon]

They can’t be other gods; God himself says he is the only one and that there never will be another.

Deu 32:39 "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Isa 43:10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.

Isa 43:11
I, even I, am the LORD,
And besides Me there is no savior.

Should I say this is a temporary condition, since even a man can be a savior.

Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
…

I am the first and the last, beyone me, there is no the God.

About his power, not his exclusivity.

Isa 44:8 Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any."

Is there the God ever apart from me? This is no Rock; I perceive none.

Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me
...

and there is no other YHWH, beyond him there is not God.

Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.

being a righteous God and a Savior. There is nothing out beyond me.

Isa 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.

No other what? For I am the God, and there is no in what way.

Isa 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

(All ESV.)

So, if God says he is the only one, that he knows of no other god, and that there never will be another, why do you say there are other gods?

Same here. God did not say there were not other gods; he said there were no other gods beyond or like in certain moments.

 

[7thMoon]

This is much the times when God said kill all the Canaanites in a city. Context is important. Kill them all doesn't mean kill every Canaanite, but rather certain areas.

 

[BeyondET]

20:3 לֹֽא יִהְיֶֽה־לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים עַל־פָּנָֽיַ׃
The is no other gods on or as far as me.

I have put YHWH before the Christ. I am not making the wrong choice at all.

You claim all supernatural beings are gods. That has nothing to do with putting YHWH before Christ.

 

[BeyondET]

25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father. 26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: 27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed cthat I came out from God. 28 dI came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 16:24–28.

I don't think "that day" was a few minutes later.

The day has nothing to do with Jesus came from the Father.

 

[BeyondET]

Like I thought, it's three persons in one person. Person is a synonym for being. It's one being that consists of three other beings. That is completely illogical. It doesn't avoid contradictions, it is one.

It's not illogical, in nature there are examples of that. Three hearts and nine brains in one being.