Was the Trinity included in Jesus’ gospel?

[John Zain]

Oh, Asy, Asy, how I am tiring over thee …

You keep sayin’ you don’t know what I’m talkin’ about.

There were several reasons why Jesus kept who He was hidden.
Do I have to go over them again?

I’ve been sayin’ … the Trinity never was part of da gospel.

I’ve been sayin’ … it’s basically a later revelation to believers.

1 Cor. 1:18 … You’re correct.
I shouldn’t have included the Trinity, or I shouldn’t have included the ref.

Asy … Asy …
If Jesus had NOT made His comments to His disciples about His Deity, etc.
how would they have later been recalled … and written in da Bible … for you?

There are several verses about the Holy Spirit bringing to the remembrance
of God's people re: STUFF ... that needed to be remembered, written down, etc.

Over and out (please),

 

[Asyncritus]

Oh, Asy, Asy, how I am tiring over thee …

You keep sayin’ you don’t know what I’m talkin’ about.

There were several reasons why Jesus kept who He was hidden.
Do I have to go over them again?

I’ve been sayin’ … the Trinity never was part of da gospel.

I’ve been sayin’ … it’s basically a later revelation to believers.

1 Cor. 1:18 … You’re correct.
I shouldn’t have included the Trinity, or I shouldn’t have included the ref.

Asy … Asy …
If Jesus had NOT made His comments to His disciples about His Deity, etc.
how would they have later been recalled … and written in da Bible … for you?

There are several verses about the Holy Spirit bringing to the remembrance
of God's people re: STUFF ... that needed to be remembered, written down, etc.

Over and out (please),

OK. I'll take that on board.

 

[teddy trueblood]

John Z:

If Jesus had NOT made His comments
to His disciples about His Deity, etc.
how would they have later been
recalled … and written in da Bible … for you?

But Jesus didn't make any comments to his disciples about being Deity.

Even the last Gospel writer, John (around 90 A.D.) summed up his entire Gospel by saying it was written "that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God"! - ASV.

If he were aware that Jesus had said anything about being equally God with the Father, this is where it would certainly be. But it isn't!

 

[Free]

John Z:



But Jesus didn't make any comments to his disciples about being Deity.

At the very least, he implied it, although I would argue that he more than implied it. Not to mention certain things he did implied that he was God and his disciples worshiped him as God on more than one occasion.

Even the last Gospel writer, John (around 90 A.D.) summed up his entire Gospel by saying it was written "that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God"! - ASV.

This assumes that "Son of God" is not a claim to deity. Regardless, no one is disagreeing that Jesus is the Son of God and it would be begging the question to think that that means he could not also be God in nature.

If he were aware that Jesus had said anything about being equally God with the Father, this is where it would certainly be. But it isn't!

But John certainly shows throughout his gospel that he thought Jesus was God. Why would this certainly be where he would have said something? Again, not a good argument against the deity of Christ.

 

[teddy trueblood]

"It does not compute."

 

[Asyncritus]

Inasmuch as John’s Gospel is the one most beloved of the Trinitarians, it seemed good to me, most excellent Free, to put in hand this little treatise which starteth at the beginning, and in which I have traced throughout John’s gospel, 78 passages which expressly or by implication, state that Jesus is subordinate to His Father: that thou mightest know the certainty of the things I believe.

There was, in the days of Jesus the King, the concept that every son was inferior to his father, and that subordination is implied in every use of the word ‘Son’. “ If David then calleth him Lord, how is he his son?” (Mt 22:45) This verse establishes that fact.

Now here are the 78 verses. Handy, I trust that you will accept the ultra-plain message of these verses, because they take a lot of ignoring.

1. “ No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (Joh 1:18 )

2. “ And I saw and bore testimony, that this is the Son of God.” (Joh 1:34 )

3. “ Nathanael answered and said to him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.” (Joh 1:49 )

4. “ And said to them that sold doves, Take these things hence: make not my Father’s house a house of merchandise.” (Joh 2:16 )

5. “ The same came to Jesus by night, and said to him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.” (Joh 3:2 )

6. “ For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (Joh 3:16 )

7. “ He that believeth on him, is not condemned: but he that believeth not, is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God.” (Joh 3:18 )

8. “ For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him may be saved.” (Joh 3:17 )

9. “ For he whom God hath sent, speaketh the words of God: for to him God giveth not the Spirit by measure.” (Joh 3:34 )

10. “ The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.” (Joh 3:35 )

11. “ The woman saith to him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.” (Joh 4:19 )

12. “ Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship, for salvation is from the Jews.” (Joh 4:22 )

13. “ Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.” (Joh 5:18 )

14. “ Then answered Jesus, and said to them, Verily, verily, I say to you, The Son can do nothing by himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for whatever things he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (Joh 5:19 )

15. “ For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth: and he will show him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the Father raiseth the dead, and reviveth them; even so the Son reviveth whom he will.” (Joh 5:20-21 )

16. “ For the Father judgeth no man; but hath committed all judgment to the Son:” (Joh 5:22 )

17. “ Verily, verily, I say to you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but hath passed from death to life.” (Joh 5:24 )

18. “ Verily, verily, I say to you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.” (Joh 5:25-27 )


19. “ I can of my own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who hath sent me.” (Joh 5:30 )

20. “ But I have greater testimony than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear testimony concerning me, that the Father hath sent me.” (Joh 5:36 )

21. “ And the Father himself who hath sent me, hath borne testimony concerning me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” (Joh 5:37 )

22. “ And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.” (Joh 5:38 )

23. “ I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.” (Joh 5:43 )

24. “ And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes, as much as they would.” (Joh 6:11 )

25. “ Labor not for the food which perisheth, but for that food which endureth to everlasting life, which the Son of man will give to you: for him hath God the Father sealed.” (Joh 6:27 )

26. “ Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” (Joh 6:29 )

27. “ Then Jesus said to them, Verily, verily, I say to you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.” (Joh 6:32 )

28. “ All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me; and him that cometh to me, I will in no wise reject.” (Joh 6:37 )

29. “ For I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will who hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” (Joh 6:38-39 )

30. “ And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one who seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Joh 6:40 )

31. “ No man can come to me, except the Father who hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Joh 6:44 )

32. “ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught from God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned from the Father, cometh to me.” (Joh 6:45 )

33. “ Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he who is from God, he hath seen the Father.” (Joh 6:46 )

34. “ As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.” (Joh 6:57 )
35.
36. “ And we believe, and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.” (Joh 6:69 )
37.
38. “ And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.” (Joh 8:16 )

39. “ I am one that testifieth concerning myself; and the Father that sent me, testifieth concerning me.” (Joh 8:18 )

 

[Asyncritus]

40. “ Then said Jesus to them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.†(Joh 8:28 )

41. “ Jesus said to them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.†(Joh 8:42 )


42. “ But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard from God: this did not Abraham.†(Joh 8:40 )


43. “ And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.†(Joh 8:29 )

44. “ Jesus answered, If I honor myself, my honor is nothing: it is my Father that honoreth me, of whom ye say, that he is your God:†(Joh 8:54 )

45. “ Jesus heard that they had cast him out: and when he had found him, he said to him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?†(Joh 9:35 )

46. “ No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received from my Father.†(Joh 10:18 )

47. “ My Father, who gave them to me, is greater than all; and none is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.†(Joh 10:29 )

48. “ Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?†(Joh 10:36 )

49. “ Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shown you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?†(Joh 10:32 )
50.
51. “ But I know that even now, whatever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee.†(Joh 11:22 )

52. “ Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me: And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people who stand by, I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.†(Joh 11:41-42 )

53. “ For I have not spoken from myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.†(Joh 12:49 )

54. “ And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatever I speak therefore, even as the Father said to me, so I speak.†(Joh 12:50 )

55. “ Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God, and was going to God;†(Joh 13:3 )

56. “ Therefore when he had gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.†(Joh 13:31 )

57. “ If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and will immediately glorify him.†(Joh 13:32 )

58. “ Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak to you, I speak not from myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.†(Joh 14:10 )

59. “ And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;†(Joh 14:16 )

60. “ But the Comforter, who is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatever I have said to you.†(Joh 14:26 )

61. “ Ye have heard that I said to you, I go away, and come again to you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go to the Father: for my Father is greater than I.†(Joh 14:28 )

62. “ But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.†(Joh 14:31 )
63.
64. “ If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.†(Joh 15:10 )

65. “ But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he will testify concerning me.†(Joh 15:26 )
66.
67. “ I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.†(Joh 16:28 )

68. “ These words spoke Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:†(Joh 17:1 )

69. “ As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.†(Joh 17:2 )

70. “ And this is life eternal, that they may know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.†(Joh 17:3 )

71. “ And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thy ownself, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.†(Joh 17:5 )

72. “ I have given to them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.†(Joh 17:14 )

73. “ And the glory which thou gavest to me, I have given to them; that they may be one, even as we are one.†(Joh 17:22 )

74. “ Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given to me be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory which thou hast given to me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.†(Joh 17:24 )

75. “ Then said Jesus to Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?†(Joh 18:11 )

76. “ The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.†(Joh 19:7 )

77. “ Jesus saith to her, Touch me not: for I have not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.†(Jo 20:17 )

78. “ But these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye may have life through his name.†(Joh 20:31 )

 

[Free]

I'm not sure what you're trying to show but if you think you have shown the Trinity false, or at least the deity of Christ, you have not done so. There is nothing you have posted that disagrees with Trinitarianism.

 

[Asyncritus]

I'm not sure what you're trying to show but if you think you have shown the Trinity false, or at least the deity of Christ, you have not done so. There is nothing you have posted that disagrees with Trinitarianism.

I thought it was obvious enough, Free.

If God the Father is no 1 (and He is), then Jesus is no 2.

Simple enough, isn't it?

 

[Free]

I thought it was obvious enough, Free.

If God the Father is no 1 (and He is), then Jesus is no 2.

Simple enough, isn't it?

It is simple if things are taken in context and understood in the way the Bible reveals them.

 

[Former Christian]

Asyncritus

Now that Vic shut down the other Trinitarian thread, I’m even more of the opinion that Trinitarianism shouldn’t be considered an essential. I don’t mind if people want to hold tightly to a doctrine that’s more Tradition than Bible. But I do mind when these same people decide that I must believe it to be saved. And Vic even said that their wasn’t a question pending on that thread. He apparently didn’t notice that I had a question pending with TheLords.

Do you think that if I reposted my question on this thread, that TheLords would care to come here to answer it? But more important, would Vic come here and close this thread down also? I don’t want to mess up what you’ve got going here. Besides, I find your version of the matter intriguing. There appear to be similarities and differences in relation to the doctrine of the leading Arian group of today, the JW’s.

What Church do you go to? Does it agree with your version of the matter?

FC

 

[Asyncritus]

Asyncritus

Now that Vic shut down the other Trinitarian thread, I’m even more of the opinion that Trinitarianism shouldn’t be considered an essential. I don’t mind if people want to hold tightly to a doctrine that’s more Tradition than Bible. But I do mind when these same people decide that I must believe it to be saved. And Vic even said that their wasn’t a question pending on that thread. He apparently didn’t notice that I had a question pending with TheLords.

I think it is a really essential doctrine - chiefly because it does take away the glory from God.

He is extremely explicit on the point:

Isa 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

Jesus is NOT a graven image - but to make Him 'equal to' God (and I am still not entirely certain what Free and Drew mean by that), is quite near the mark set in the verse above.

But more important, would Vic come here and close this thread down also? I don’t want to mess up what you’ve got going here. Besides, I find your version of the matter intriguing. There appear to be similarities and differences in relation to the doctrine of the leading Arian group of today, the JW’s.

Do you think that if I reposted my question on this thread, that TheLords would care to come here to answer it?

You can but try. He is a very sensible person, and will not act irrationally.

I don't know abut theLords question, though, but she is not backward about coming forward with her responses.

I don't think Vic has anything to fear, because he has very powerful stalwarts on their side, who can handle nearly anything. And as Drew said a while back, if the doctrine cannot stand some searching examination, then it isn't worth holding on to, really.

I'm not a JW, but I'd prefer to PM you with the answer to your question, in case it makes me even more persona absolutely non grata with the board team! (And members!)

Async

 

[John Zain]

John Z said: But Jesus didn't make any comments to his disciples about being Deity.
Even the last Gospel writer, John (around 90 A.D.) summed up his entire Gospel by
saying it was written "that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God"! - ASV.
If he were aware that Jesus had said anything about being equally God with the Father,
this is where it would certainly be. But it isn't!

Theodore,

I refer you to the new John 17:3 thread.

P.S. Are you aware that God in the OT said He would NOT
heal the Jews of their spiritual blindness and deafness?
Instead, He said He would scatter them all over the world,
and then later gather them back together again (1948).

 

[John Zain]

If God the Father is no 1 (and He is), then Jesus is no 2.

It's obvious from Scripture that the Three are in absolute perfect UNITY of purpose
(and of everything else).

But, it also appears that there is some sort of agreed heirarchy. My take on it is ...

Father = CEO ......... Son = Administrator ......... Holy Spirit = Work-horse

 

[Asyncritus]

It's obvious from Scripture that the Three are in absolute perfect UNITY of purpose
(and of everything else).

But, it also appears that there is some sort of agreed heirarchy. My take on it is ...

Father = CEO ......... Son = Administrator ......... Holy Spirit = Work-horse

I can't disagree with that John.

The word 'hierarchy' is a very accurate description too.

 

[teddy trueblood]

I, too, am reluctant to post anything here concerning the trinity for the very same reasons Async mentioned above. I've been shut out in various ways from posting most places here and would hate to lose this one.

But, then again, what good does it do me if I can't post about Jesus and God? That's all I came here to discuss as I have said over and over from the beginning.

And as Drew said a while back, if the doctrine cannot stand some searching
examination, then it isn't worth holding on to, really.

I wish this were true on this forum.

Theodore,

I refer you to
the new John 17:3 thread.

I haven't found it yet. Where is it?

 

[Former Christian]

Asyncritus

“I think it is a really essential doctrine - chiefly because it does take away the glory from God.
He is extremely explicit on the point:
Isa 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.â€

You’re certainly not alone in believing the matter is essential. In Christianity, the matter is the most essential of matters. To the point that it determines one’s status in the denominational community, and determines one’s status as a true believer or not. I’ve always questioned both sides of the question. And you know where that leaves me. One reason I’m a Former Christian.

I don’t agree that it’s an essential doctrine. Because there is more than one “orthodox†version of the Trinity, as well as other Trintarian type ideas such as Modalism. And the vast majority of Trinitarians don’t believe in the original formulation exactly. Only one Christian denomination adheres to that original formulation today.

But especially because the thinking of Jesus was so in tune with God so as to be virtually identical. This must be accepted whether one is Trinitarian or not.

John 14:
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
(KJV)

I hardly think that Jesus in saying that takes away from the glory of God. If God’s glory is at stake, I don’t think that Paul could have written this,

1 Corinthians 1:
1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

But I agree that Jesus may not actually be God or related to God in the sense that the Trinitarians say.

John 17:
1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
(KJV)

One can have a share in the nature of God without being God,

2 Peter 1:
1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

That Jesus is called the only begotten Son of God, doesn’t necessarily mean that he is God or a part of God. But that he shares the same nature. So also, Jesus is called the son of man through sharing the same nature as his mother Mary. Again, doesn’t mean that he is only human. It appears to me that Jesus has two natures that is unified within one person. The uncreated nature of God his Father, and the created nature of Mary his mother. It made him more than just human and less than God. The Son of God is the only possible mediator, not only because he shares in the Divine nature, but mainly because he also took on a human nature connecting us to God in himself and making it possible for us to also share in the Divine nature as he does.

What should be essential doctrines are those things about which there is no question. The existence of God and his eternal existence. Jesus as the Son of God and the son of man. The simple things. Instead, in Christianity, that which is considered essential are those things that divide us. The Trinity the chief of all. Really, are we to keep the unity of the Spirit or the unity of doctrines? The only way we can be one in doctrines is denominationally. That Christianity believes that we must be one in doctrines, and worse that it believes that to keep the one is synonymous with keeping the other, is another reason I’m a Former Christian.


“Jesus is NOT a graven image - but to make Him 'equal to' God (and I am still not entirely certain what Free and Drew mean by that), is quite near the mark set in the verse above.â€

Since most Protestants are Trinitarian in the Protestant sense, I have to think they are basing their response from that viewpoint. Three persons in one God. They are equal to each other and to God in nature. Which brings up the problem I have. In the Old Testament (Psalms 100 specifically), God is referred to as a person. Which means, if God is Trinitarian in nature, that God is insane by human standards. TheLords claimed that Jehovah in the Old Testament is Jesus in the New Testament. A common understanding according to the internet. But if Jesus is Jehovah, then who is the Father? From my reading of the New Testament, I had always thought that the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Father of the New Testament.

Francisdesales said that the term person is a little too precise and the Greek word originally used doesn’t have the same connotation as we understand person in English. Eastern Orthodoxy adheres to the original Trinitarian formulation today. And they say something similar. I talked to my Orthodox friends about it after Francisdesales mentioned that. What we think of as persons doesn’t correlate with the original idea formulated. Which leaves me out in the cold until I can understand what it was they were actually referring to.


“You can but try. He (Vic) is a very sensible person, and will not act irrationally.â€

Always seemed so to me. The question I had in my mind relates to my not understanding why he closed the other thread.


“I don't know abut theLords question, though, but she is not backward about coming forward with her responses.â€

So it would seem.


“I don't think Vic has anything to fear, because he has very powerful stalwarts on their side, who can handle nearly anything. And as Drew said a while back, if the doctrine cannot stand some searching examination, then it isn't worth holding on to, really.â€

I quite agree.


“I'm not a JW, but I'd prefer to PM you with the answer to your question, in case it makes me even more pesona absolutely non grata with the board team! (And members!)â€

I understand.

FC

 

[Free]

I think it is a really essential doctrine - chiefly because it does take away the glory from God.

On the contrary, it best reveals the glory of God.

Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (ESV)

He is extremely explicit on the point:

Isa 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

Jesus is NOT a graven image - but to make Him 'equal to' God (and I am still not entirely certain what Free and Drew mean by that), is quite near the mark set in the verse above.

Certainly you are not suggesting that believing the Son is God in nature, equal to the Father, is close to making Jesus a graven image, are you?

Not to mention: Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. (ESV)

Which is true: Will the Father not share his glory with another (and this statement obviously made after the world was created), or will he once again share his glory with the Son? From your position, both verses cannot be true.

Note that John 17:5 also hints at the Son's existence prior to creation.

I wish this were true on this forum.

It is true. This is precisely why I believe that there is only one God and that Jesus is in nature God, equal to the Father but not the Father. I have yet to see a single substantial reason to believe otherwise.

Three persons in one God. They are equal to each other and to God in nature. Which brings up the problem I have. In the Old Testament (Psalms 100 specifically), God is referred to as a person. Which means, if God is Trinitarian in nature, that God is insane by human standards.

You are erroneously concluding that personal pronouns, when used of God, indicate that there is no plurality (for lack of a better term) within the one being that is God.

Could it not be the case that God is merely speaking as the one true God? Or could it not also be the case that the Father is speaking on behalf of the Godhead? So clearly the use of personal pronouns by God does not at all indicate whether or not he is triune.

TheLords claimed that Jehovah in the Old Testament is Jesus in the New Testament. A common understanding according to the internet. But if Jesus is Jehovah, then who is the Father? From my reading of the New Testament, I had always thought that the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Father of the New Testament.

Of course the main problem here is once again presuming that God is only the Father. Mormons believe that Jehovah in the OT is Jesus in the NT, which is actually backwards to what they teach as to man attaining salvation and then godhood.



Just a reminder: if anyone has a problem with the staff and how the site is moderated, pm one of the staff to discuss it. Openly questioning moderator actions is strictly verboten as per the TOS.

 

[teddy trueblood]

TheLords claimed that Jehovah in the Old Testament is Jesus in the New
Testament

The Most High is Jehovah alone (Ps. 83:18) - see Luke 1:32, NRSV; NASB, where Jesus is called the Son of the Most High, NRSV.

Jehovah is called the Father (but he is never called the Son, the Firstborn, the Only-begotten, the Christ or Messiah, etc.). Even many personal names of Israelites in the Bible actually said “Jehovah is the Fatherâ€: ‘Abijah,’ ‘Abiah,’ ‘Joab,’ etc. or “The Father is Godâ€: ‘Abiel,’ ‘Eliab,’ etc. - but they never said anything remotely like ‘Jehovah is the Son’ (or the Messiah, the Firstborn, etc.)! - Deut. 32:6 ASV; Ps. 89:26, 27 (cf. Ps. 2:7 ASV and Acts4:26, 27); Is. 64:8; ASV.

The God of the Israelites has always been the Father alone (also known by his personal name of Jehovah or YHWH) as shown above. It is also shown in the NT when the Jews (whose God is Jehovah, of course) say to Jesus: “’we have one Father, even God.’ John 8:41

Examining Ps. 110:1, we see that only one person is named Jehovah - and he is not Jesus who sits at the right hand of Jehovah!:
“Jehovah saith unto my Lord [Jesus], Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.†- ASV.

Let’s look at the descriptions of the fulfillment of Ps. 110:1, ASV (Jesus is to sit at the right hand of Jehovah until his enemies are made his footstool):

(1) Jesus sat down at the right hand of God - Acts 2:33-36; Ro. 8:34; Heb. 10:12, 13; 1 Pet. 3:22.

(2) Jesus sat down at the right hand of the Father - Eph. 1:17, 20; Rev. 3:21.

Jesus is obviously not the same person whom he sat beside! He sat down at the right hand of a single individual who alone has the only personal name “Jehovah†and who also has the exclusive title “the Most High God†and is Jesus’ (and our) Father in heaven! Jesus is not even somehow equal to the person he sat beside. The popular (and trinitarian) The NIV Study Bible tells us in a footnote for Ps. 110:1,
“right hand....thus he [Christ] is made second in authority to God himself. NT references to Jesus’ exaltation to this position are many (see Mk 16:19...Acts 2:33-36; ...Heb. 10:12-13).†[Compare the NIVSB footnote for Mark 16:19] - “right hand of God. A position of authority second only to God’s.†- The NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985.
If Jesus is not Jehovah God (as all clear evidence proves he is not), and yet we continue giving “a sacrifice of praise†unto him as being Jehovah God, then we certainly do not know the only true God which is eternal life or everlasting destruction for us. (John 17:1, 3 - cf, Jer. 10:10, ASV 1 Thess. 1:9, 10; 2 Thess. 1:8, 9).

And we are not worshiping God in truth - John 4:23, 24.

 

[Asyncritus]

Asyncritus

But especially because the thinking of Jesus was so in tune with God so as to be virtually identical. This must be accepted whether one is Trinitarian or not.

There is no question about THAT point in my mind at all! As you rightly quote:

John 14:
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
(KJV)

I hardly think that Jesus in saying that takes away from the glory of God. If God’s glory is at stake, I don’t think that Paul could have written this,

1 Corinthians 1:
1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

But I agree that Jesus may not actually be God or related to God in the sense that the Trinitarians say.

That is my sticking point with them, I think.

John 17:
1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
(KJV)

There is a very simple explanation of that point, which I've put up on the Jn 17.3 thread.

One can have a share in the nature of God without being God,

2 Peter 1:
1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Again, absolutely correct in my view.

That Jesus is called the only begotten Son of God, doesn’t necessarily mean that he is God or a part of God. But that he shares the same nature. So also, Jesus is called the son of man through sharing the same nature as his mother Mary. Again, doesn’t mean that he is only human. It appears to me that Jesus has two natures that is unified within one person. The uncreated nature of God his Father, and the created nature of Mary his mother. It made him more than just human and less than God. The Son of God is the only possible mediator, not only because he shares in the Divine nature, but mainly because he also took on a human nature connecting us to God in himself and making it possible for us to also share in the Divine nature as he does.

Again, in my view, perfectly correct - reconciling the 2 sides of His nature.

What should be essential doctrines are those things about which there is no question. The existence of God and his eternal existence. Jesus as the Son of God and the son of man. The simple things.

As I said a while ago, the Apostles Creed (the earlier versions of it) says what I believe to be the truth as clearly as it's humanly possible to be. I see you're in agreement with that.

Instead, in Christianity, that which is considered essential are those things that divide us. The Trinity the chief of all. Really, are we to keep the unity of the Spirit or the unity of doctrines? The only way we can be one in doctrines is denominationally. That Christianity believes that we must be one in doctrines, and worse that it believes that to keep the one is synonymous with keeping the other, is another reason I’m a Former Christian.

From what you've written here, I think the word 'Former' isn't correct at all. 'Non-denominational' is probably nearest the truth as far as you're concerned.

“Jesus is NOT a graven image - but to make Him 'equal to' God (and I am still not entirely certain what Free and Drew mean by that), is quite near the mark set in the verse above.â€

Since most Protestants are Trinitarian in the Protestant sense, I have to think they are basing their response from that viewpoint. Three persons in one God. They are equal to each other and to God in nature.

It does get quite confusing to me, I have to say.

Which brings up the problem I have. In the Old Testament (Psalms 100 specifically), God is referred to as a person. Which means, if God is Trinitarian in nature, that God is insane by human standards. TheLords claimed that Jehovah in the Old Testament is Jesus in the New Testament. A common understanding according to the internet. But if Jesus is Jehovah, then who is the Father? From my reading of the New Testament, I had always thought that the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Father of the New Testament.

I don't really see how that can be faulted. 1 Cor 8.6 is the clearest passage on the matter I can think of, except perhaps Mark 12.29ff:

29 Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one:
30 and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.
31 The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

32 And the scribe said unto him, Of a truth, Master, thou hast well said that he is one; and there is none other but he:
33 and to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.
34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.

I don't understand how the use of the highlighted pronouns doesn't faze Free, Drew and theLords. It would certainly bother me if I were in their position.

Francisdesales said that the term person is a little too precise and the Greek word originally used doesn’t have the same connotation as we understand person in English. Eastern Orthodoxy adheres to the original Trinitarian formulation today. And they say something similar. I talked to my Orthodox friends about it after Francisdesales mentioned that.

I don't know that Greek usage of terms is really relevant in scriptural discussions. Greek philosophy and Hebrew OT philosophy really have nothing in common - just as one would expect.

For that reason, I view all these 'mystical and pseudo-mystical' usages of the word logos with the deepest suspicion. The proper procedure is to look at the word usage first in the Hebrew texts and then the LXX: always treating the LXX with some degree of caution too.

What we think of as persons doesn’t correlate with the original idea formulated. Which leaves me out in the cold until I can understand what it was they were actually referring to.

I wouldn't bother too much about these - I don't quite know what polite term to use here - philosophical gyrations. Hebrew, which is the first language of the Bible, is an exceedingly concrete language.

It does not deal much in abstractions, as the Greeks were so fond of doing. And so, the theologians' attempts to foist Greek wool on Hebrew concrete can hardly come to anything else but confusion and disaster.

As I keep saying, let them alone, because your own canal is far better to fall into than theirs. And from what you've been saying, the waters in your own seem to run pretty clear to me, and free of theological mud.

“I'm not a JW, but I'd prefer to PM you with the answer to your question, in case it makes me even more persona absolutely non grata with the board team! (And members!)â€

I understand.

FC

Thought you would.