• 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: Was Athanasius Scripturally Right?

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
But I thought you could, because the trinity is your concept. So according to the trinity, you can obviously go to God directly.
May I ask why you say the trinity is my concept? Please allow me to say I do not believe that God is a trinity.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Oh, sorry I said your concept.

Yet, according to the Trinitarian concept, you could go to God without going through the son.
Also, please let me add what Jesus said. He said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Also, please let me add what Jesus said. He said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6.
So, let me get this straight: Jesus isn't divine, which means he is human. Those are the choices -- Jesus is either human or divine. There are no other options. Given that you think Jesus is human, please tell me what theological tenet says that human beings can be gatekeepers for God?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
In that case, the trinity is not complying with the Bible verse you quoted.
So far, that's how I see it. I do not see the trinity teaching complying with any verses in the Bible.
 
Last edited:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So, let me get this straight: Jesus isn't divine, which means he is human. Those are the choices -- Jesus is either human or divine. There are no other options. Given that you think Jesus is human, please tell me what theological tenet says that human beings can be gatekeepers for God?
I'll discuss this point now. Jesus knew who he was. He came from heaven.
The Bible does not say that Jesus was God-on-earth in human flesh equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit. When he was on the earth, he was human, not equal to God.
If you look at Psalm 82:6,7, which Jesus referenced, you will see that mortals are referred to as gods.
I have said, You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High. But like mortals you will die, and like rulers you will fall.”
Please also look at John 16:23. "At that time you won’t need to ask me for anything. I tell you the truth, you will ask the Father directly, and he will grant your request because you use my name."
John 14:6 helps to understand this:
"Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
So far, that's how I see it. I do not see the trinity teaching complying with any verses in the Bible.

Right. So I am not talking about the Bible. I am talking from the Trinity point of view, you can go to God without going through the sun.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Right. So I am not talking about the Bible. I am talking from the Trinity point of view, you can go to God without going through the sun.
Oh, ok. I think I understand what you are saying. Hopefully we'll learn more about the other's viewpoint as time goes by. I am still learning.
The Bible shows that the Israelites had a high priest that could offer for the nation sacrifices for composite sin of the nation. This was superseded by Jesus' sacrifice.
(Hebrews 2:17) - "For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people."
 

SLPCCC

Active Member
Monotheism vs. Henotheism

Henotheism is the worship of a single God while not denying the existence or possible existence of other gods. This is the belief of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. A Jehovah’s Witness with a henotheistic bias of the Trinity would interpret every Scripture calling Jesus “God” as a reference to Him being a secondary divine Being or lesser “god,” rather than accept the historic, monotheistic viewpoint of Biblical Christianity that regards Jesus as the same “God” They believe that Jehovah is God and Jesus is a god. They also believe that other gods exist such as evil gods and the belief of men being called gods. Here is a summary:

JWs Henotheism (non-Trinitarian) View
  • Jehovah – YHWH, Almight God, God of gods, The God (Rev 1:8, Duet 10:17, John 1:1
  • Jesus – Mighty God, a god (Isa 9:6, Jn 1:1)
  • Angels – gods lower than Jesus, Jesus is Michael, highest angel (Jude 9)
  • Humans – gods lower than angels, Moses, judges (Jn 10:34, 2 Peter 2 11, Heb 2:7)
  • False gods – Devil, Demons (2 Cor 4:4)
  • Idols – Gold, wood, stone (Ps 96:5)

Monotheism does not allow for the existence and worship of more than one God.


Christian Monotheism (Trinitarians) View
  • There can only exist one God at a time, not even a god. Isaiah 43:10-11 - Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me. Even I am the LORD, and apart from me, there is no savior. (Jesus is called God, Lord, and Savior. He must be God.)
  • Jehovah is “Lord of Lords” (Deut. 10:17). Jesus is “Lord of Lords” (Revelation 17:14; 19:16). The Father is “Lord of all” (Matthew 11:25; Acts 17:24). Jesus is “Lord of all” (Acts 10:36). There is only one Lord (Jude 4).
  • Jehovah God is the only one who can forgive sins (Mark 2:7; Daniel 9:9). Jesus forgives sins (Mark 2:10-11; Luke 24:46-47). Jehovah is called the “Savior” (Isaiah 45:21-22). Jesus is the “Savior” (Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1). There is only one Savior (Isaiah 43:11).
  • Jehovah is called the “first and last” (Isaiah 44:6; 48:12). Jesus is called the “first and last” (Revelation 1:17-18; 22:12-13, 20). There is only one first and last God because God says that no God was formed before Him or after Him (Isaiah 43:10).
  • Romans 8:9 states that the “Spirit of Christ” is“God’s Spirit,” Jesus cannot be a lesser divine being or a separate “God” from the Father because the “same Spirit” is the “same God” (1 Corinthians 12:4-6) who performs all things.
  • According to John 17:3, there exists only one true God. Any additional beings “called” “gods” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6) must be regarded as false “gods” (Galatians 4:8). JWs say Jesus was a god but that would make him a false god; thus, he must be God the only true God.
In ol d Testament history, Monotheism (the belief in only one God) was the unique religion of the Jews. Adhering to the Hebrew Shema, Deuteronomy 6:4: “Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!” faithful Jews tenaciously threatened to stone anyone who would dare to commit blasphemy by claiming to be God (Leviticus 24:16). This is why the Jews on several occasions endeavored to stone Jesus, for He was claiming to have the attributes of the one and only true God—thus declaring Himself to be God. The Jews realized that since there is only one “true God” (John 17:3), all other “so-called” gods are, in reality, only false gods. The "Word" at Jn 1:1 could have never been "a god" because that would make him a false god. instead, he was given a capital "G" when called God. But there cannot be two Gods. There is only one God; therefore Jesus is God.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Right. So I am not talking about the Bible. I am talking from the Trinity point of view, you can go to God without going through the sun.
Yes, and please keep in mind that the words God, god or gods, extends beyond the almighty who has no equal, and it is depending on sense or use of word. Jesus was born to Mary and before he was killed and resurrected, was not God on earth in human form, but reflected the personality of his heavenly father.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Yes, and please keep in mind that the words God, god or gods, extends beyond the almighty who has no equal, and it is depending on sense or use of word. Jesus was born to Mary and before he was killed and resurrected, was not God on earth in human form, but reflected the personality of his heavenly father.

Well, Im talking about today, not when Jesus was alive. And I am not talking about my view, I am just reiterating the Trinitarian view.
 

SLPCCC

Active Member
John 1:1 - "The word was a god"?

At John 1:1, in the Jehovah's Witness Bible, The New World Translation, it reads:
  • In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
The JWs assumption is that Jesus is not God in flesh but Michael the archangel who became a man. They deny that Jesus is divine, so they have altered the Bible in John 1:1 so that Jesus is not divine in nature. The New World Translation has added the word "a" to the verse so that it says, " . . . and the Word was a god." The correct translation of this verse is,

  • "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God." This is how it is rendered in the NASB, NIV, KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, etc.
The New World translation is incorrect in its translation of this verse for several reasons. First of all, the Bible teaches a strict monotheism.
  • Isaiah 43:10 "...Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me."
  • Isaiah 44:6 "... the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
To say that Jesus is "a god" is to suggest that there is another god besides YHWH, which is contrary to scripture (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6, 8, etc.). The Greek words “kai theos en ho logos” are mistranslated as “the Word was a god,” instead of “the Word was God.” This is a distortion of the text as the word “a” is not in the Greek, but was added by the New World Translators to make the Word (Jesus) “a” second “god” who is separate from God the Father.

Jehovah's Witnesses' response is that Jesus is the mighty God, not the Almighty God, as is referenced in Isaiah 9:6,
  • "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us, and the government will rest on His shoulders, and His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace."

The immediate problem with this explanation is that Jesus is also called the Almighty (Rev 1:8) and YHWH is also called the Mighty God in Jeremiah 32:18 and Isaiah 10:21. In all three verses, including Isaiah 9:6, the Hebrew word for "mighty" (gibbor) is used.

Furthermore, how many actual gods are there in scripture? The obvious answer is that there is only one God in existence. Though there are others who have been falsely called gods (1 Cor. 8:5-6) or even said to be "as God" like Moses (Ex. 4:16; 7:1), there is only one real God (Gal. 4:8-9; Isaiah 44:6, 8). Also, Moses was not called a god. Rather, he would be "as God."(Exodus 4:16) Was Moses really a god? Being "as God" with regard to the power given to perform miracles over Egypt is not the same thing as being called "a god" that was in the beginning with God. (John 1:1)

John was a strict Jew, a monotheist. Does the Jehovah's Witness really think that John would be saying that there was another God besides Jehovah even if it were Jesus? Being raised a good Jew, the Apostle John would never believe that there was more than one God in existence. Yet, he compared the word with God, said the word was God, and that the word became flesh (John 1:1, 14).

In a literal translation, it reads:
  • "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word."
Is there suddenly a new god in the text of John 1:1? How do the Jehovah's Witnesses maintain that the word had somehow become a god in this context since there is only one God mentioned? Remember, the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus was Michael the Archangel. But is there any place in the Bible where an angel is called "a god" besides Satan being called the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:3-4 )?

Attempting to disprove the Deity of Christ that is so clearly articulated at John 1:1, the JWs set up a straw-man argument based on the preposition “with” found in this passage, and thus, they proceeded to knock that argument down. In the JW book, Should You Believe in the Trinity?, p. 27 it reads,
  • “Note, however, that here again the context lays the groundwork for accurate understanding. Even the King James Version says, ‘The Word was with God.’ (Italics ours.) Someone who is ‘with’ another person cannot be the same as that other person….The Koine Greek language had a definite article (‘the’), but it did not have an indefinite article (‘a’ or ‘an’)….So John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was ‘divine,’ ‘godlike,’ ‘a god,’ but not Almighty God.”

Notice that the WTS set up a straw-man argument based on the preposition “with” found in this passage, and thus, they proceeded to knock that argument down. This type of reasoning serves as a clever way to sidestep the key issue being addressed and to confuse people as to how the doctrine of the Trinity is defined. Since Trinitarians do not believe that God the Father and God the Son are the same person, this argument has no basis in reality. When one defines the doctrine of the Trinity as consisting of three separate and distinct persons who are one God, it is not inconceivable to comprehend how Jesus is “with” God the Father, and yet possesses the same power, authority, and Divine nature that God the Father possesses.

At Isaiah 44:24, the JWs' New World Translation states:
  • “I, Jehovah, am doing everything, stretching out the heavens by myself, laying out the earth. Who was with me?”
Since no one was “with” Jehovah when He created the earth, Jesus must be Jehovah God! At John 1:3 it states:
  • “All things came into being by Him [Jesus], and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”

John 1:1 supports the old Testament history of Monotheism not the Henotheism view of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
ICO (In Christ's Opinion) he was the son of God. Jn 3:18
Jews in general consider themselves to be "Sons of God", but what is a messianic reference is "Son of Man".

I am my father's son, but he and I are not exactly one and the same, and the same is true in regards to Jesus and God. But it is believed by many that Jesus is of the "essence" of God, which is what the Trinitarian concept basically says-- sorta.;)
 

eik

Active Member
Jews in general consider themselves to be "Sons of God", but what is a messianic reference is "Son of Man".

I am my father's son, but he and I are not exactly one and the same, and the same is true in regards to Jesus and God. But it is believed by many that Jesus is of the "essence" of God, which is what the Trinitarian concept basically says-- sorta.;)
To be pedantic, Jn 3:18 says "God's one and only Son." The inference is that the other "sons of God" were adopted, but Jesus was "begotten," which is by direct descent. Jesus was begotten at conception. He (the Word) came down from heaven, from the very throne of God, being subject to a "kenosis" (Phil 2:7).

This is the biblical understanding, but the Greeks could not grasp the Jewish simplicity, and insisted that he was begotten "before all ages," per the anicent Greek pagan trinity conception of gods begetting gods in heaven (the "trinity concept" predating Christianity by a long time and going back to Egypt). This in turn led to, or perhaps incorporated, the Arian and Sabellian "trinitarian heresies" which Athanasius spent his life immersed in and trying to extricate himself from.

Other constraints of philosophy taken from Greek paganism were that divinity and humanity could not be mixed, so that Christ was said to "assume" a human nature, rather than "be made a human," This in turn led to further heresies, cf. Apollinarism, being the idea that Christ did not have a human soul, but that the Word itself dwelled in Christ without a "kenosis," (i.e. an emptying) which tends to see Christ as "superhuman" rather than human, although this was repudiated by Athanasius.

Further restrictions on Christ's composition derived from the refusal to accept the idea that "God" could be subject to a kenosis at all (i.e. an emptying) so we end up with "God" being "united" with human nature, with human nature having a human soul, which is somehow "assumed" by Christ, which tends to suggest Christ is really two people, but which Trinitarians reduce to Christ having two natures.

Anyway the point is this: none of this had got anything to do with what Christ taught about himself, or about what the apostles taught about Christ, which is that he was a "man" who died and was resurrected to the right hand of God on God's throne, thence receiving from God "everything that belonged to the Father." This does suggest that Christ was subject to a "kenosis" on being conceived which the early church did not fully grasp the ramifications of.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Anyway the point is this: none of this had got anything to do with what Christ taught about himself, or about what the apostles taught about Christ, which is that he was a "man" who died and was resurrected to the right hand of God on God's throne, thence receiving from God "everything that belonged to the Father.
And personally, I really don't get into this except for just discussion's sake.

My only real interest is what he taught about morals that I can possibly apply to my life in today's world and pass on to others. His "love one another as I have loved you" really resonates with me. As far as the Trinitarian concept is concerned, it is what it is. I haven't a clue as to how accurate or inaccurate it is, nor do I lose any sleep over it.
 
Top