• 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!

Clear Challenges to the Trinity Doctrine

tigger2

Active Member
Let's examine, one by one, what should be found in scripture (if the trinity were true):

(A) Please carefully and thoroughly search to find a vision, dream, or clear description in scripture wherein God is shown as more than one person.

Here is what I have found when searching the scriptures for visions of God:

Even though God has caused a representation of himself to be "seen" in dreams and visions, we still don’t know exactly what he "physically" looks like. Still, we should get some idea of the essential knowledge he wants us to know about himself from these inspired visions. We know that he always represents himself as a single person seated on a throne.

For example, at Ezekiel 1:5, 6, 26-28 we see God as he showed himself to Ezekiel in a vision.

"and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was that of a man, but each of them had four faces..." - Ezek. 1:5-6, NIV.

Now if this had actually been the description of God, "multiple-oneness God" fans would have had the best proof ever for their passion: we would finally have some real evidence for a multiple-oneness God: a four-in-one God (a "Quadrinity")! But these four persons, each with four faces, represent God’s attendants (cherubim), not God. Each one represents 4 different aspects by its 4 faces. Can you imagine what would be said by trinitarians if God were similarly described as three persons each with three faces?!

The point is that God could (and did) show a clear representation of "multiple-oneness" in vision to his inspired prophet, but he never represented himself in such a manner!

Notice that each of these living creatures was in appearance like a man. And every aspect that differed from that of "a man" was carefully described.

Now notice the rest of the vision:

"Above the expanse over their heads was what looked like a [single] throne of sapphire, and high above on the throne was a [single] figure like that of a [single] man. I saw that from what appeared to be his waist [singular] up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of [Jehovah]." - Ezek. 1:26-28, NIV.

Remember, we just had a description of spirit persons each of whom looked like a man (except for having four faces). Now we have a description of another person who looks like a man. The differences from the appearance of a man are also noted but do not include anything that would make us think he was, in any way, anything more than a single person! Not three persons, not three heads, not three faces, etc. (In fact, nowhere in the entire Bible is the word "three" associated with a description of God! This simply would not be if God were truly three persons!)

God is a single person, the Father alone, Jehovah.

Now let’s see Daniel’s vision of God:

"the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head [singular] was white like wool. His throne [singular] was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze." - Dan. 7:9, NIV.

Notice that, again, he looks like a single person.

And then,

"one, like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days [seated on the throne] and was led into his presence." - Dan. 7:13, NIV.

So we see a single person seated on God’s throne and another person (the Messiah) being led into God’s presence.

Now let’s see the Apostle John’s vision which parallels Daniel’s vision:

"At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it. And the one who sat there had the appearance of jasper.... In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures.... Day and night they never stop saying: ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty...’ [and] ‘You are worthy, our Lord and God, ... for you created all things, and by your will they were created....’ Then I saw in the right hand of Him who sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides.... Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain.... He came and took the scroll from the right hand of Him who sat on the throne." - Rev. 4:2, 3, 6, 8, 11; 5:1, 6, 7, NIV.

Again we see a single person on the throne who is God Almighty (Jehovah). And, again, we see the Christ approach God on his throne. And we see this one on the throne again at Rev. 19:4.

"The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: ‘Amen, Hallelujah! ["praise Jehovah "]’" - NIV.

Another important vision of God is that of Stephen.

"But Stephen, full of Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. ‘Look,’ he said, ‘I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.’" - Acts 7:55, 56, NIV.

Again we see God (not "God the Father," or "the Father," but God) as a single person and Jesus as another person (not God, however). And never (in any vision, dream, etc.) do we see the "person" of the Holy Spirit! God is the Father alone - a single person - Jehovah.

God simply has not revealed himself in clear, undisputed scripture as anything but a single person, the Father. The Jews never understood him in any other way. Jesus did not reveal him in any other way. The NT writers did not reveal him in any other way (other than through generalizations, "mystery" solving, and allegorical interpretations which allow a reader to find whatever he is looking for). And the very first Christians (up into the second century at least) did not understand God in any other way.

If God were three persons, it would have been revealed clearly and repeatedly from the beginning. This is essential knowledge of God, and all worshipers of the true God have needed such knowledge from the beginning. God would not have withheld it from his chosen people throughout the thousands of years of his Prophets and inspired scripture writers.
……………………………..

The second point :

(B) Please show where in scripture God is ever described using the word "three."

Using Concordances for the KJV (Strong's and Young's Concordances) and the NASB (New American Standard Concordance of the Bible, Lockman Foundation 1981) I have found absolutely no scriptures which use the word "three" in describing God. But notice how important the use of the word 'three' is in the very definition of the trinity concept (see definition of 'trinity' at the beginning of this study.).

Isn't the word "three" at least as important as the word "one' (which is used for God in scripture) for the knowledge of the God whom we must worship in truth (Jn 4:24) - -that is, if the trinity doctrine were actually true?

Not only is the word "three" never used in conjunction with God anywhere in the Holy Scriptures (which simply could not be if God were really a "trinity"!), but it isn’t even as scripturally important as many other numbers ("one," "seven," "twelve," for example)!

There are "very few traces of ‘three’ in the cultus and the religious conceptions of the Israelites .... This relative rarity of a connexion between ‘three’ and religious notions, which prevails in the OT, should not be [supplied] from other sources. The thunder call, ‘Hear, O Israel, Jahweh (the?) one’ (Dt 6:4, cf. Is 41:4 44:6 48:12 ), drowns the voice of those who refer us to the triads of gods that were adored by the Babylonians, Assyrians, (Anu, Bel, and Ea, etc. ...), and other nations of antiquity. .... But the original meaning of the OT text must not be modified to suit either heathen parallels or later stages in its own development." - pp. 565, 566, Vol. 3, A Dictionary of the Bible, Hastings (trinitarian), ed., Hendrickson Publ. (trinitarian), 1988 printing.

"Although three has widely been thought a sacred number [by trinitarians, of course], specifically religious uses of it in the Bible seem to be relatively few." - p. 687, Vol. 2, The New International Dictionary of the New Testament (trinitarian), Zondervan Publ. (trinitarian), 1986.

If there were even hints of a trinity to be found in Scripture, the one word we would regularly see with religious significance would be "three." The fact that it is relatively insignificant throughout Scripture is enough in itself to refute any idea of a trinity!

(to be continued)
………………………………
 

tigger2

Active Member
(to be continued)
………………………………

(C) Please find a clear, direct, undisputed scriptural statement equivalent to clear, undisputed scriptures) which declares:

'YHWH is the Son,' or 'YHWH is the Firstborn,' or, 'YHWH is the Messiah (or "Christ"), or any other equally clear, undisputed statement (or personal name) that 'Jesus is YHWH' (the only God according to scripture).

In challenge (A) above we find that All the visions and dreams in all scripture which show God, show him as one person only, and in challenge (B) we discover that the word "three" is never used in describing God anywhere in clear, undisputed scripture.

The next challenge, (C) above, is mostly confined to the OT Scriptures, since it requires use of the only personal name of God: YHWH (transliterated ‘JEHOVAH’ – Ps. 83:18, KJV or "Jehovah" - Ex. 3:15, ASV; NEB; MLB; LB; KJIIV and MKJV; Byington; Young’s; and Darby or ‘Yahweh’ – Ex. 3:15, AT; JB; NJB; World English Bible).

God is named YHWH, which is improperly rendered in most English Bibles as "LORD" (all capitals). 'Yahweh,' and/or 'Jehovah' are used more properly as transliteraions into English in some Bibles. The KJV uses 'JEHOVAH' at Ps. 83:18, but 'LORD 'in nearly all the other 6000+ places it is found in the Hebrew manuscripts.

There is no other God but YHWH (Is. 45:5, 45:21; 46:9; Ps. 83:16-18).

There are clear direct, undisputed statements that YHWH is the Father (e.g., Isaiah 64:8 "But now, O Jehovah, thou art our Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." - ASV). There are a number of personal names in scripture which mean "God is YHWH" (Elijah); "YHWH is God" (Joel).

But more important, there are a number of personal names in scripture which mean "YHWH is the Father" (e.g., Abijah; Abia; Joab). These names are also clear, direct undisputed statements of who YHWH, the only God, is: the Father.

So my scriptural challenge here, (C), is to

Please find a clear, direct, undisputed scriptural statement which is equivalent to 'Jesus is the Christ' or 'YHWH is the Father' (which really are found repeatedly in clear, undisputed scriptures) which declares:

'YHWH is the Son,' or 'YHWH is the Firstborn,' or, 'YHWH is the Messiah (or "Christ"), or any other equally clear, undisputed statement (or personal name) that 'Jesus is YHWH' (the only God according to scripture).

Yes, it would most likely be found in the OT, but that is where the scriptures are which we have referred to! The OT is, of course the largest part of the Bible and was the only scripture known to Jesus and his followers during his lifetime on earth.

Nevertheless, it could still be found in personal names in the NT (as it was in the OT), since the only uses of God’s personal name found in still-existing NT manuscripts are in personal names and the phrase ‘Hallelujah’ (‘Praise Jehovah.’):

Some of the names in the NT which contain God's personal name: Uriah; Abijah ('The Father is Jehovah') NKJV, ASV; RSV, NRSV, JB, etc.; Jehoshaphat; Jehoram; Uzziah; Hezekiah; Josiah; Jeconiah; Ananias ['Jehovah is Gracious'] - "a common Jewish name, the same as Hananiah." - Today's Dictionary of the Bible, (Ananias, 'high priest at Jerusalem, A.D. 60' - Young's) - Acts 23:2; 24:1. So people (including a high priest) were still being given personal names which had YHWH's personal name as part of their meaning in NT times. Also 'Elijah' (which means ‘God is Jehovah’ is used 30 times in the NT);

And in Luke 1:5 Zechariah; and Abijah NKJV, ASV; NASB; RSV; NRSV; JB; etc. This is the name of one of the 24 priestly divisions and named by Luke as such in the NT in connection with Zechariah the priest, John the Baptist's Father. This priestly division of Abijah (which means 'The Father is Jehovah') existed until the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.).

Therefore, there is no reason why personal names, even in the NT, should not have had the meaning of "The Son is YHWH" or the "Holy Spirit is YHWH" (just as so many were named "The Father is YHWH"). Except of course, the obvious one:

No Christian or Jew believed such a thing!

There are no such statements or meanings of personal names in any of the scriptures!

The one true Most High God simply has not revealed himself in any scriptural vision, representation, or dream as anything but a single person, the Father. The Jews never understood him in any other way. Jesus did not reveal him in any other way. The NT writers did not reveal him in any other way (other than by generalizations, "mystery" solving, allegorical interpretations, or disputed translating of trinitarian theologians). And the very first Christians (up to the second century A.D. at least) did not understand God in any other way.

If God were truly three persons, it would have been revealed clearly and repeatedly from the beginning. This is essential knowledge of God, and all worshipers of the true God have needed such knowledge from the beginning. God would not have withheld it from his chosen people throughout the thousands of years of his prophets and inspired scripture writers.
 
Last edited:

tigger2

Active Member


The fourth request for clear undisputed evidence of a trinity (or Jesus being 'equally God') asked for in part #1 above:

"Since the Father is clearly, directly, and indisputably called "God, the Father," many, many times, and the Son and Holy Spirit are said by trinitarians to be equally the one God (in ‘three distinct persons’):

"(D) Please give equally clear, undisputed scriptures where Jesus is called "God the Son," (equal to those declaring "God, the Father" – Ro. 15:6; 1 Cor. 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; 2 Cor. 11:31; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 4:6; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:2; etc.)"

You could add "God, the Christ," "God, the Messiah," "God, the Firstborn," or any other term used exclusively for Jesus. But, surely, if the trinity were true, we would find the term "God, the Son" used equally with "God, the Father"!

Using a Bible concordance (Strong's, Young's, or an on-line concordance will do) and looking under "Son," you will find exactly zero uses of "God the Son."

Jesus is never called "God, the Son"!

……………………………………………..
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Let's examine, one by one, what should be found in scripture (if the trinity were true):

(A) Please carefully and thoroughly search to find a vision, dream, or clear description in scripture wherein God is shown as more than one person.

Here is what I have found when searching the scriptures for visions of God:

Even though God has caused a representation of himself to be "seen" in dreams and visions, we still don’t know exactly what he "physically" looks like. Still, we should get some idea of the essential knowledge he wants us to know about himself from these inspired visions. We know that he always represents himself as a single person seated on a throne.

For example, at Ezekiel 1:5, 6, 26-28 we see God as he showed himself to Ezekiel in a vision.

"and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was that of a man, but each of them had four faces..." - Ezek. 1:5-6, NIV.

Now if this had actually been the description of God, "multiple-oneness God" fans would have had the best proof ever for their passion: we would finally have some real evidence for a multiple-oneness God: a four-in-one God (a "Quadrinity")! But these four persons, each with four faces, represent God’s attendants (cherubim), not God. Each one represents 4 different aspects by its 4 faces. Can you imagine what would be said by trinitarians if God were similarly described as three persons each with three faces?!

The point is that God could (and did) show a clear representation of "multiple-oneness" in vision to his inspired prophet, but he never represented himself in such a manner!

Notice that each of these living creatures was in appearance like a man. And every aspect that differed from that of "a man" was carefully described.

Now notice the rest of the vision:

"Above the expanse over their heads was what looked like a [single] throne of sapphire, and high above on the throne was a [single] figure like that of a [single] man. I saw that from what appeared to be his waist [singular] up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of [Jehovah]." - Ezek. 1:26-28, NIV.

Remember, we just had a description of spirit persons each of whom looked like a man (except for having four faces). Now we have a description of another person who looks like a man. The differences from the appearance of a man are also noted but do not include anything that would make us think he was, in any way, anything more than a single person! Not three persons, not three heads, not three faces, etc. (In fact, nowhere in the entire Bible is the word "three" associated with a description of God! This simply would not be if God were truly three persons!)

God is a single person, the Father alone, Jehovah.

Now let’s see Daniel’s vision of God:

"the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head [singular] was white like wool. His throne [singular] was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze." - Dan. 7:9, NIV.

Notice that, again, he looks like a single person.

And then,

"one, like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days [seated on the throne] and was led into his presence." - Dan. 7:13, NIV.

So we see a single person seated on God’s throne and another person (the Messiah) being led into God’s presence.

Now let’s see the Apostle John’s vision which parallels Daniel’s vision:

"At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it. And the one who sat there had the appearance of jasper.... In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures.... Day and night they never stop saying: ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty...’ [and] ‘You are worthy, our Lord and God, ... for you created all things, and by your will they were created....’ Then I saw in the right hand of Him who sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides.... Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain.... He came and took the scroll from the right hand of Him who sat on the throne." - Rev. 4:2, 3, 6, 8, 11; 5:1, 6, 7, NIV.

Again we see a single person on the throne who is God Almighty (Jehovah). And, again, we see the Christ approach God on his throne. And we see this one on the throne again at Rev. 19:4.

"The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: ‘Amen, Hallelujah! ["praise Jehovah "]’" - NIV.

Another important vision of God is that of Stephen.

"But Stephen, full of Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. ‘Look,’ he said, ‘I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.’" - Acts 7:55, 56, NIV.

Again we see God (not "God the Father," or "the Father," but God) as a single person and Jesus as another person (not God, however). And never (in any vision, dream, etc.) do we see the "person" of the Holy Spirit! God is the Father alone - a single person - Jehovah.

God simply has not revealed himself in clear, undisputed scripture as anything but a single person, the Father. The Jews never understood him in any other way. Jesus did not reveal him in any other way. The NT writers did not reveal him in any other way (other than through generalizations, "mystery" solving, and allegorical interpretations which allow a reader to find whatever he is looking for). And the very first Christians (up into the second century at least) did not understand God in any other way.

If God were three persons, it would have been revealed clearly and repeatedly from the beginning. This is essential knowledge of God, and all worshipers of the true God have needed such knowledge from the beginning. God would not have withheld it from his chosen people throughout the thousands of years of his Prophets and inspired scripture writers.
……………………………..

The second point :

(B) Please show where in scripture God is ever described using the word "three."

Using Concordances for the KJV (Strong's and Young's Concordances) and the NASB (New American Standard Concordance of the Bible, Lockman Foundation 1981) I have found absolutely no scriptures which use the word "three" in describing God. But notice how important the use of the word 'three' is in the very definition of the trinity concept (see definition of 'trinity' at the beginning of this study.).

Isn't the word "three" at least as important as the word "one' (which is used for God in scripture) for the knowledge of the God whom we must worship in truth (Jn 4:24) - -that is, if the trinity doctrine were actually true?

Not only is the word "three" never used in conjunction with God anywhere in the Holy Scriptures (which simply could not be if God were really a "trinity"!), but it isn’t even as scripturally important as many other numbers ("one," "seven," "twelve," for example)!

There are "very few traces of ‘three’ in the cultus and the religious conceptions of the Israelites .... This relative rarity of a connexion between ‘three’ and religious notions, which prevails in the OT, should not be [supplied] from other sources. The thunder call, ‘Hear, O Israel, Jahweh (the?) one’ (Dt 6:4, cf. Is 41:4 44:6 48:12 ), drowns the voice of those who refer us to the triads of gods that were adored by the Babylonians, Assyrians, (Anu, Bel, and Ea, etc. ...), and other nations of antiquity. .... But the original meaning of the OT text must not be modified to suit either heathen parallels or later stages in its own development." - pp. 565, 566, Vol. 3, A Dictionary of the Bible, Hastings (trinitarian), ed., Hendrickson Publ. (trinitarian), 1988 printing.

"Although three has widely been thought a sacred number [by trinitarians, of course], specifically religious uses of it in the Bible seem to be relatively few." - p. 687, Vol. 2, The New International Dictionary of the New Testament (trinitarian), Zondervan Publ. (trinitarian), 1986.

If there were even hints of a trinity to be found in Scripture, the one word we would regularly see with religious significance would be "three." The fact that it is relatively insignificant throughout Scripture is enough in itself to refute any idea of a trinity!

(to be continued)
………………………………
I believe that the Bible contains the truth about God but there is so much in the Bible that people can make it say what they want it to say so that they can believe what they want to believe. I believe that is what the Trinitarians have done. Obviously, you are a true seeker because you want to know the truth, which is why you have done this careful analysis.

The Baha'i scriptures state in a nutshell what you discovered above. God is one and alone sitting on His Throne of Glory.
God has no partners or associates.

“And now concerning thy reference to the existence of two Gods. Beware, beware, lest thou be led to join partners with the Lord, thy God. He is, and hath from everlasting been, one and alone, without peer or equal, eternal in the past, eternal in the future, detached from all things, ever-abiding, unchangeable, and self-subsisting. He hath assigned no associate unto Himself in His Kingdom, no counsellor to counsel Him, none to compare unto Him, none to rival His glory. To this every atom of the universe beareth witness, and beyond it the inmates of the realms on high, they that occupy the most exalted seats, and whose names are remembered before the Throne of Glory.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 192
 
Last edited:

tigger2

Active Member
The fifth request for undisputed, clear, repeated evidence of a trinity (or that a person other than the Father is equally God with him) as requested in part #1 was:

(E) Please give equally clear, undisputed scriptures where the Holy Spirit is called "God, the Holy Spirit."

Again, when one searches through a good concordance ("spirit" or "holy"), he finds that there is never an instance of 'God, the Holy Spirit' to be found in scripture! Nor any other clear, undisputed, repeated evidence that the HS is equally God.
……………………………………………

The final statement or challenge in part #1 was:

"Ro. 1:20, NASB - 'For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.'

"(F) Please show where in nature mankind would clearly see the three-in-oneness (or just threeness) of God from the beginning. (This would have to be something as clear and important as the single sun in the sky which has been recognized to support life from the beginning. Or the man made in God's image, was made with a single personality, a single body, a single head, a single heart.)"

There is nothing of consequence that clearly shows a threeness in God's creation which would be obvious to men from the beginning. There are a number of very important 'onenesses' in God's creation which have been very obvious to men from the beginning, but no threenesses.
 

tigger2

Active Member
The fifth request for undisputed, clear, repeated evidence of a trinity (or that a person other than the Father is equally God with him) as requested in part #1 was:

(E) Please give equally clear, undisputed scriptures where the Holy Spirit is called "God, the Holy Spirit."

Again, when one searches through a good concordance ("spirit" or "holy"), he finds that there is never an instance of 'God, the Holy Spirit' to be found in scripture! Nor any other clear, undisputed, repeated evidence that the HS is equally God.
……………………………………………

The final statement or challenge in part #1 was:

"Ro. 1:20, NASB - 'For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.'

"(F) Please show where in nature mankind would clearly see the three-in-oneness (or just threeness) of God from the beginning. (This would have to be something as clear and important as the single sun in the sky which has been recognized to support life from the beginning. Or the man made in God's image, was made with a single personality, a single body, a single head, a single heart.)"

There is nothing of consequence that clearly shows a threeness in God's creation which would be obvious to men from the beginning. There are a number of very important 'onenesses' in God's creation which have been very obvious to men from the beginning, but no threenesses.
 

tigger2

Active Member
Additional:

CLEAR CHALLENGES TO THE TRINITY DOCTRINE (G)

-------- Explain why those Jews who sought to have Jesus killed (and even found people to lie about him as witnesses - Matt. 26:59-60) never accused him of claiming to be God (or even fully equal with God)! If there were any idea among the Jews that Jesus claimed to be God, he would have been stoned to death for that reason alone. But they couldn’t find such knowledge and even their false witnesses didn’t try to make such an accusation at his last trial!

CLEAR CHALLENGES TO THE TRINITY DOCTRINE (H)

--------- Explain, if John really knew Jesus was God, why he summed up his entire Gospel with:

“John 20:30 Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is [not God, but] the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.”

How can anyone believe that John in summing up his Gospel, would absolutely ignore the most important knowledge of all (if the trinity were true): ‘Jesus is God’ (or ‘equally God with the Father’)?

CLEAR CHALLENGES TO THE TRINITY DOCTRINE (I)

----------- Explain how the NT Gospels written long before John’s Gospel (such as the Gospel of Mark – probably at least 20 years before John’s) do not come close to even hinting that Jesus (or the holy spirit) is God? If the trinity 'proofs' as interpreted/translated in John by trinitarians are actual proofs, how could Matthew Mark and Luke have possibly ignored such a mind-blowing discovery that Christ is God??

Surely they would have proclaimed this tremendous knowledge clearly and repeatedly!

CLEAR CHALLENGES TO THE TRINITY DOCTRINE (J)

-------- Explain how Jesus (and his disciples for many years after his death) were allowed to teach in the Temple and synagogues. If any Jews truly thought Jesus and his followers claimed that he was God, they would have been ejected (probably killed) at these times.
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
Star Trek would win in a battle against star wars. This is what discussions like this sound like to the atheist. We have this deity whose qualities are unknown, who's very existence remains unproven, guided only by contradictory and cryptic holy scriptures written thousands of years ago, yet we want to debate about it s characteristics.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Star Trek would win in a battle against star wars. This is what discussions like this sound like to the atheist. We have this deity whose qualities are unknown, who's very existence remains unproven, guided only by contradictory and cryptic holy scriptures written thousands of years ago, yet we want to debate about it s characteristics.

There ya go. In a nutshell.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
Star Trek would win in a battle against star wars. This is what discussions like this sound like to the atheist. We have this deity whose qualities are unknown, who's very existence remains unproven, guided only by contradictory and cryptic holy scriptures written thousands of years ago, yet we want to debate about it s characteristics.
75602161_154685459178570_7432125665090459517_n-6297744870.jpg
 

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
My God, that was lengthy.


My thoughts:


  1. That’s too complex for my simple brain.
  2. You don’t need to challenge the theory. It’s those who believe it that need to provide proof.
  3. God says in God’s own word, that God IS one. I’m not in the mood to argue with God. God should know whether God is one or not.
  4. If it was necessary for ‘salvation’ that one know this mysterious thing, then it would have been CLEARLY spelled out.

God did spell out what IS needed though:


“LOVE your neighbor as yourself “


“LOVE each other as I have LOVED you”


Pretty clear, no mystery involved.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
My God, that was lengthy.


My thoughts:


  1. That’s too complex for my simple brain.
  2. You don’t need to challenge the theory. It’s those who believe it that need to provide proof.
  3. God says in God’s own word, that God IS one. I’m not in the mood to argue with God. God should know whether God is one or not.
  4. If it was necessary for ‘salvation’ that one know this mysterious thing, then it would have been CLEARLY spelled out.

God did spell out what IS needed though:


“LOVE your neighbor as yourself “


“LOVE each other as I have LOVED you”


Pretty clear, no mystery involved.
Those things are noted in the Bible. However, God had prophets and they worked with and taught the nation, sometimes condemning them. But the history is long. As far as loving one's neighbor, part of that must be telling others what they have found in the jBible. Such as sins like adultery, homosexuality, stealing, murder and so forth. Things like that.
 

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
Those things are noted in the Bible. However, God had prophets and they worked with and taught the nation, sometimes condemning them. But the history is long. As far as loving one's neighbor, part of that must be telling others what they have found in the jBible. Such as sins like adultery, homosexuality, stealing, murder and so forth. Things like that.

I can see why that is important

It appears you’re a very good Christian

part of being a good Christian is telling other people what they are doing wrong
 

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
Those things are noted in the Bible. However, God had prophets and they worked with and taught the nation, sometimes condemning them. But the history is long. As far as loving one's neighbor, part of that must be telling others what they have found in the jBible. Such as sins like adultery, homosexuality, stealing, murder and so forth. Things like that.

ok, just for the fun of it:

let’s pretend I’m a long haired, pot smoking, adulterous homosexual, who likes to steal and murder, and I have no understanding of this concept of sin you speak of.

what would be your advice? If any.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
ok, just for the fun of it:

let’s pretend I’m a long haired, pot smoking, adulterous homosexual, who likes to steal and murder, and I have no understanding of this concept of sin you speak of.

what would be your advice? If any.
Advice? :) I will say that I know those that did those things and they were well aware they were not doing the right thing, even though they did not have a relationship with God until later, and then they changed. I might also mention that Jesus said the good news of God's kingdom would be preached. And if a person likes to steal and murder, I'll say that sometimes jail and/or psychiatric treatment may not help that person to change.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I can see why that is important

It appears you’re a very good Christian

part of being a good Christian is telling other people what they are doing wrong
We're not perfect, but it's kind of hard to tell someone what's wrong if the line is not clear. There are those claiming to be Christian ("saved," I suppose) that are set in ways that are condemned in the Bible. I do agree though that most societies believe stealing and adultery, for instance, is wrong, Christian or not.
Romans 2:14 helps to explain this: "for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;"
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
There is not nor ever has been the claim by the Church that the trinitarian 'formula', as later understood, was to be found anywhere in Christian Scripture, other than Mt's 'to baptize in the name of
the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit',
What you are referring to is the added the filioque clause.
“When He comes, however, being the Spirit of Truth, He will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on His own but will speak only what He hears, and will announce to you the things to come. In doing this He will give glory to me, because He will have received from me what He will announce to you. All that the Father has belongs to me. That is why I said that what He will announce to you He will have from me” (John 16:13-15). Given this basis in Scripture, the Church teaches that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.
 
Top