• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Trinity in Luke 2:40-56

rrobs

Well-Known Member
Then why does He address His Son as "God"? The Son is not the Father's God; rather, the Father is the Son's God. But Jesus said (in John 15:16), "All things that the Father hath are mine." That would certainly include the title by which He is known.

Now I'm not a Trinitarian by any means, but Jesus Christ said that He and His Father were "one," too. You've either got to simply ignore those verses that appear to contradict each other or you've got to try to reconcile them, which often involves recognizing that words (such as "one") can be understood differently depending upon the context.
Your solution is perfect. The key is in fact understanding what is meant when Jesus said he and his father are one.

1Cor 3:6-8,

6 I (Paul) have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
8 Now he that planteth (Paul) and he that watereth (Apollos) are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
We can't assume that 2 things being called "one" means they are the same thing. A group of people being called "one" is a common phrase we use to mean they are united in purpose, they both work together for a common goal. In any case, Paul and Apollos were most certainly not the same person even though they were called "one."

Here's a prayer Jesus prayed to God (not himself);

John 17:22,

And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they (us) may be one, even as we are one:
We are one with God, but none of us are actually God.
If Jesus and God were literally one it would contradict many verses. Jesus asked God to take the cup away from him and said, "not my will, but thine be done." Either God has a split personality or Jesus is God's son (as the scriptures say 48 times) and therefore not God. Jesus was tempted, whereas God can not be tempted. Who did Jesus pray to? Himself? God knew things Jesus didn't know. Jesus said his father was greater than him. I could go on and on, but the best and simplest way to clear up the contradictions would be to simply say Jesus is not God. Problems solved!

Why in world is it imperative that he even be God? The story reads just fine if they are taken as a father and His son. Jesus was born, like Adam, with innocent blood. They both had the same free will you and I have. They were both tempted like you and I. Of course you and I, being descendants of Adam come into the world with tainted blood, so we haven't a prayer of living a sin free life. But both Jesus and Adam had a shot at living a sin free life because they both came into the world sin free. They did not have a sin nature like everybody since Adam. Jesus started out with innocent blood as did Adam. Adam sinned, whereas Jesus always did his father's will, even to the death of the cross, not a pretty way to die. If he were God, what's the big deal? But if he was a man like you and I, his accomplishment becomes monumental. Don't take that away from him. Give him the credit he deserves.

God had a plan, the logos of John 1:1 (study what the word logos really meant to the folks at the time that John was written, don't just substitute the word "Jesus" for it). God came up with that plan (logos) which required that a man (Jesus) get us out of the mess that another man (Adam) got us into. Otherwise why didn't he just come down right after Adam sinned and make things right?

The things God had to plan for are incredibly complex. He had to convince another man to follow His will in order to undo the mess the first man did by not following His will. It was an incredibly complex plan to somehow get some man to say, "not my will, but thine be done." He couldn't force Jesus into doing anything. He had to persuade him via the scriptures, the writings of the Old Testament. No human could ever conceive of such a plan, but thankfully God is not a human! Jesus was a human, but not God.

Making Jesus God not only robs God his due worship for coming up with the plan (logos) in the first place, but it also robs Jesus of the his accomplishment in following that plan to the letter, despite the great personal cost. Jesus could have sinned at any point in his life (unlike God). He could have easily taken the devil up on the offer of ruling over all the kingdoms of the world. The devil was quite correct when he told Jesus it was in his power to do just that, and Jesus knew that. Fortunately for us, he didn't. Other wise we'd still be waiting for redemption. All in all, the scriptures make a much better story if the 2 main characters are kept straight.
 

rrobs

Well-Known Member
I hope you realize that not everyone who does his own research with an open mind will necessarily come to the same conclusion you have.
Maybe and maybe not. The only way to find out would be to do the research. Otherwise it is pure speculation.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Agreed; but it is more than "some" - it are those who have received God's word.
What about when the "word of God" comes to specific people? It happens throughout the scriptures. This phrase "the word of God" and even more frequently "the word of YHVH" are used to describe specific prophecies received by various prophets throughout the Tanakh.

That's why I believe Psalm 82 is written to a specific group of beings. I'll get into why I believe they were angels later. But for now I'm focusing on what I believe Jesus meant by the phrase the "Word of God". He meant that specific prophecy in Psalm 82.

Here are 3 examples of "the Word of YHVH" among many others:
  • 1 Samuel 15:10,
  • Jeremiah 1:2
  • Ezekiel 1:3

And here are 3 examples of "the word of God" being used to describe specific prophecies rather than the scriptures as a whole.
  • 1 Kings 12:22
  • 1 Chronicles 17:3
  • 1 Samuel 9:27
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
I'm confused about what you are saying. You're saying that the logos was divine but that Jesus was not. But if the logos become flesh/mortal/human, then by what name was the logos known when in this state?
Before this Luke 1:31, and this John 1:14, and this John 3:16, and this Hebrews 10:5, the logos - the word - the only begotten son of God, was divine - like God or a god, in nature.

When Mary did become pregnant, the above verses were fulfilled. The word became flesh, and eventually was born, and given the name Jesus - a fleshly being - a mortal - not a divine being - not a god, but a man.
Is it any clearer?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Are you insinuating that being Jesus is the same as being satan?

Please note carefully that Jesus cannot deny Himself. (2 Timothy 2:12-13) This we know of God Almighty; although He can do anything. He cannot deny Himself. So God cannot become satan. Satan is evil. God is good. But God can become Jesus because Jesus was always good.

2 Timothy 2
12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.
In answer to this...
He is the son of God. There is no way a son can be his own father.
You said:
You are saying that there is no way God cannot do it? You may want to check these verses. (Jeremiah 32:27, Luke 1:37)
So why can you use those verses to suggest that God can be the son, why can those verses not be used to suggest that God can become Satan?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Before this Luke 1:31, and this John 1:14, and this John 3:16, and this Hebrews 10:5, the logos - the word - the only begotten son of God, was divine - like God or a god, in nature.

When Mary did become pregnant, the above verses were fulfilled. The word became flesh, and eventually was born, and given the name Jesus - a fleshly being - a mortal - not a divine being - not a god, but a man.
Is it any clearer?
But, you see, the doctrine admits that Jesus was fully human.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Well maybe not. A human being has two aspects. One is the physical body and one is the spirit. A regular person has a human body and a human spirit. Jesu has a human body but his spirit was godly. That is how He was fully human ( in body) and fully divine (in spirit) at the same time. Jesus was God in human form because He had the spirit of God.
 

iam1me

Active Member
What about when the "word of God" comes to specific people? It happens throughout the scriptures. This phrase "the word of God" and even more frequently "the word of YHVH" are used to describe specific prophecies received by various prophets throughout the Tanakh.

That's why I believe Psalm 82 is written to a specific group of beings. I'll get into why I believe they were angels later. But for now I'm focusing on what I believe Jesus meant by the phrase the "Word of God". He meant that specific prophecy in Psalm 82.

Here are 3 examples of "the Word of YHVH" among many others:
  • 1 Samuel 15:10,
  • Jeremiah 1:2
  • Ezekiel 1:3

And here are 3 examples of "the word of God" being used to describe specific prophecies rather than the scriptures as a whole.
  • 1 Kings 12:22
  • 1 Chronicles 17:3
  • 1 Samuel 9:27

The word of God has come to specific individuals - but it has also been generally distributed. The prior case does not supersede the latter. This is especially the case when Jesus speaks of the word of God. He uses it generally, and speaks of the word of God being liberally shared amongst the people - as with the parable of the Sower

Luke 8:1-15
After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with him, 2 and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; 3 Joanna the wife of Chuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.

4 While a large crowd was gathering and people were coming to Jesus from town after town, he told this parable: 5 “A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path; it was trampled on, and the birds ate it up. 6 Some fell on rocky ground, and when it came up, the plants withered because they had no moisture. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up with it and choked the plants. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up and yielded a crop, a hundred times more than was sown.”

When he said this, he called out, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”

9 His disciples asked him what this parable meant. 10 He said, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that,

“‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand.’a]">[a]

11 “This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. 12 Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. 13 Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. 14 The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life’s worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. 15 But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop.​
 

iam1me

Active Member
Well maybe not. A human being has two aspects. One is the physical body and one is the spirit. A regular person has a human body and a human spirit. Jesu has a human body but his spirit was godly. That is how He was fully human ( in body) and fully divine (in spirit) at the same time. Jesus was God in human form because He had the spirit of God.

After Jesus ascended, he is said to be at the right hand of God (and thus not God himself)


Acts 2:33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.


Acts 5:31God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins.

Romans 8:34Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

Hebrews 10:12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

1 Peter 3:22 who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.​
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
NOPE! I started out a non before I even knew what that was. Then one day some fool told me that God and Jesus were one. I told the person that I didn't see it that way, and he said I did not have salvation. Who was he to say, is he God? Not ever planning to back down on this.
Before believing Jesus as God or God as Jesus, the Pauline Christianity people should decide which God had the wife named Mary of whom Jesus was born.

Regards
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
So you are saying there were two separate "beings"? One was called God and one was called Word. But it says the Word WAS God. So are they really the same "being"? And if the Word became flesh or human did it have another name? Did anyone ever report seeing this human named Word?
The text says the word was with the God, and the word was God.
To be with someone, means one with another. One and one make two.
The definite article on God, identifies the almighty God.
The word being God - without the definite article - identifies, not the almighty God, but a divine one - one like God, or a god.

The Greek text then reads that they are two beings - one the almighty, the other, a mighty one - a god.

John 1 Greek interlinear, parsed and per word translation, free online
Greek: ο ; English: the
εν in(to) αρχη to beginning ηνhe was ο the λογος word και and ο the λογος word ηνhe was προς toward τον the θεον God και and θεος God ηνhe was ο the λογος word

In Greek the definite article follows the gender, number and case of the noun it sits in front of, and that leads to a neat array of forms in which it occurs. The definite article, in all its many forms, is the most frequently occurring word in the New Testament, with 20,307 occurrences. That comes down to a little over 2.5 times per verse, so we understandably don't publish a concordance of this word.

Often the Greek article can be translated into English as "the", but frequently the Greek uses the article where English wouldn't (for instance in front of names: "Abraham begat the Isaac" (MATTHEW 1:2):
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Well first of all I don't believe the trinity doctrine! I'm oneness. A heretic according to many trinitarian theologians. And no one is denying Jesus is the Son. Doesn't it say so in Luke 1:35? Of course He is not equal with the Father. Do you know who is the Father? Luke 1:35 tells us the holy Spirit is the Father!

Jesus was born of the holy Spirit in the womb of Mary. So He was born flesh and blood. Flesh and blood cannot be equal with the holy Spirit. So of course He is subordinate(in the flesh) to the holy Spirit. Of course He is flesh. Of course He is the Son of God. But that doesn't mean His Spirit is not the same as the holy Spirit.

God is omnipresent and can send His Spirit. His Spirit can move upon things and act here or there. All without any limitations. So it's no surprise the holy Spirit inhabited a human body. Jesus the only begotten Son of God.
Luke 1:35 does not say the holy spirit is the father.
You do not see that anywhere in scripture. You are misinterpreting and misapplying the text.

Explain what you are saying, as none of is is scripture based. o_O
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
Fair enough. It strongly implies it rather than stating it out right.

On the other hand ... Matthew 1:18 is very clear about it. The holy Ghost/Spirit is the Father.

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew 1:18)

The holy Spirit is not separate from God the Father. The holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father. This is the only reasonable conclusion when you mesh together Matthew 10:20 and Mark 13:11.

Not to mention John 4:24

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.


Matt 1:18 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

No, I am not accepting your interpretation. God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are three different individuals.

I do not trust or accept your interpretation.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
So God the Father became Jesus Christ?
Yes definitely. Jesus was God manifest in the flesh.
Matt 1:18 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

No, I am not accepting your interpretation. God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are three different individuals.

I do not trust or accept your interpretation.
Why so hasty? (James 1:19) Pray about it. Study a bit into the scriptures to see if I'm right. Give it some thought at least.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Luke 1:35 does not say the holy spirit is the father.
You do not see that anywhere in scripture. You are misinterpreting and misapplying the text.

Explain what you are saying, as none of is is scripture based. o_O
Matthew 1:18
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
After Jesus ascended, he is said to be at the right hand of God (and thus not God himself)


Acts 2:33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.


Acts 5:31God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins.

Romans 8:34Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

Hebrews 10:12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

1 Peter 3:22 who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.​
Maybe that is where the problem occurs. Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father who is described as "God". That does not mean Jesus can't also be God.
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
It does say that, and you do have a compelling argument there. It's one, though that would only make sense to someone like you who believes that The Holy Spirit = the Father, a concept which too many other verses seem to refute. According to my belief, God is Jesus Christ's literal Father, conceived through the power of the Holy Ghost. I'm thinking this is one case of where we're simply going to have to agree to disagree. We do, however, agree that the doctrine of the Trinity is false.



Please do not be taken in. 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

I view God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as three different beings. (JS said personages).

I think I might be done talking to any JW because of the trickery.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
The text says the word was with the God, and the word was God.
To be with someone, means one with another. One and one make two.
The definite article on God, identifies the almighty God.
The word being God - without the definite article - identifies, not the almighty God, but a divine one - one like God, or a god.

The Greek text then reads that they are two beings - one the almighty, the other, a mighty one - a god.

John 1 Greek interlinear, parsed and per word translation, free online
Greek: ο ; English: the
εν in(to) αρχη to beginning ηνhe was ο the λογος word και and ο the λογος word ηνhe was προς toward τον the θεον God και and θεος God ηνhe was ο the λογος word

In Greek the definite article follows the gender, number and case of the noun it sits in front of, and that leads to a neat array of forms in which it occurs. The definite article, in all its many forms, is the most frequently occurring word in the New Testament, with 20,307 occurrences. That comes down to a little over 2.5 times per verse, so we understandably don't publish a concordance of this word.

Often the Greek article can be translated into English as "the", but frequently the Greek uses the article where English wouldn't (for instance in front of names: "Abraham begat the Isaac" (MATTHEW 1:2):
Sorry, I can't buy that there were two beings and one was God and the other something else. We can't blame everything on language differences.
 
Top