• 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!

When did God tell the Israelites that He was three persons?

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
The story of Lazarus, the rich man, and the poor man, is a metaphorical story meant to illustrate that no one should believe anything that is claimed to have come from the dead!

You really think a dead person requires water to cool their lips?

You think the dead are concerned with the living… concerned with the FREE living while they are being TORTURED?

You are not really thinking things through, are you? But then again why would you want to, since you already know that you are in grave error in what you are doing and saying!
Let me get this straight: you think Jesus just made up an entire spiritual realm in order to tell a story? That would surely make him something other than the Truth. No I'm not in error, you are. Your claims don't even make sense.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
That's your incorrect opinion.
No, it’s my correct fact.

‘Hell’ as a place of the living dead is a pagan concept.

It conceives of a place in some kind of ‘netherworld’ where the BODY and SPIRIT of a dead wicked person is tortured eternally typically by a ‘Satan’-like living person and his cohort.

But since “the dead know nothing”, what purpose would there be for torturing ‘them’?

‘Flogging a dead horse’ is an idiom worth considering!

And how would it be that the very SATAN, that mis-led the wicked, is the one taking great pleasure in ‘torturing’ those who carried out HIS WORKS?

It seems that Satan is REWARDED for his wickedness!
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Let me get this straight: you think Jesus just made up an entire spiritual realm in order to tell a story? That would surely make him something other than the Truth. No I'm not in error, you are. Your claims don't even make sense.
No! Jesus used the ideas that people knew of as a way of illustrating things he wanted to inform them off.

Jesus knew that there were concepts and ideas that were wrong concerning an after-life. These were pagan ideas since no one actually knew what happened to a dead person.

You know that the Romans and Greeks believed in an Elysian field as the equivalent of an idyllic place (Paradise) for heroes and good people but in a ‘Hades’ for bad ones.

In Hades, the individual was perpetually and eternally tortured and their BODIES would cry out for relief….

These afterlife zones ideas were primarily aimed fighting men, soldiers, so as to encourage them to try to win a place in Elysian for doing great deeds in battle.

So, this is what Jesus was saying: That the No one should believe that the dead can communicate with the living - the claims from such persons (witches, wizards, charlatans, spiritualists, palmistrists, etc., should be treated with ridicule:
  • [father] Lazarus said, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ (Luke 16:31)
The virtual story continues with a stark warning:
  • “Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come.” (Luke 17:1)
If you cannot understand that this illustration then you will fall into the trap Jesus warned of in Luke 17:1. We see again the warning from the apostles who encountered Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 8:9.
Today because of the over-liberal nature of humanity in regard to Christian belief, we have even those claiming to be Christian’s who practice sorcery, palmistry, spiritism, ouiji board stuff, etc.. It’s a seduction for those who desire ‘information from the dead’… the only person profiting from such debauched practices is the sorcerers themselves
 
Last edited:

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
No! Jesus used the ideas that people knew of as a way of illustrating things he wanted to inform them off.
And in doing so he showed them the real afterlife. I agree that dead people don't talk to us, although God can certainly communicate through our thoughts about our departed loved ones.
But Jesus confirmed heaven and hell existing. If they didn't exist he would have told a different version of the events.
 

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
No, it’s my correct fact.

‘Hell’ as a place of the living dead is a pagan concept.

It conceives of a place in some kind of ‘netherworld’ where the BODY and SPIRIT of a dead wicked person is tortured eternally typically by a ‘Satan’-like living person and his cohort.

But since “the dead know nothing”, what purpose would there be for torturing ‘them’?

‘Flogging a dead horse’ is an idiom worth considering!

And how would it be that the very SATAN, that mis-led the wicked, is the one taking great pleasure in ‘torturing’ those who carried out HIS WORKS?

It seems that Satan is REWARDED for his wickedness!
If the dead know nothing there's no afterlife at all. That's not biblical.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
There's some people who are alive who "know nothing", and they are called "MAGA Republicans".:p
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
If the dead know nothing there's no afterlife at all. That's not biblical.
The ‘DEAD’ will be resurrected BY the Father of Spirits: Almighty God. The proof is that He resurrected Jesus Christ: The first from the dead!
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
And in doing so he showed them the real afterlife. I agree that dead people don't talk to us, although God can certainly communicate through our thoughts about our departed loved ones.
But Jesus confirmed heaven and hell existing. If they didn't exist he would have told a different version of the events.
You are losing so badly that making ludicrous claims is all you have left.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Where in any of that verse is there an indication that Jesus is God and/or that God is in Jesus?

I think you have no idea what the verse is saying. For instance, the term, ‘God’, just means ‘Ruler’. This is a FUTURE event as indicated by ‘WILL BE’ and ‘SHALL BE’ (‘Shall’ is more affirmative than ‘Will’)

‘Will / Shall Be’ suggests ‘IS CURRENTLY NOT’.

Jesus ‘BECOMES’ RULER over CREATION … after he judges the world and is made King over creation AT THE END OF TIME:
  • ‘and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve HIS God and Father…’ (Rev 1:5-6)

I suppose you missed the "everlasting Father" part?
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
I suppose you missed the "everlasting Father" part?
No, ‘Everlasting Father’ is part of the ‘Shall Be Called’… a future title.

At the end of time, at the judgement seat, Jesus Christ will “GIVE EVERLASTING LIFE” to those he judged as worthy for his kingdom.

‘Father’ means: “He who gives life to…”, therefore ‘Everlasting Father’ means ‘He who give everlasting life to…’

“He shall be called everlasting Father” to those whom he grants everlasting life at the judgement seat at the end of time.
 
Jesus was a man on earth who left His Godly powers behind to be humble Himself and become man and servant of God, which He was before He became a man. (see Phil 2:6-9)
The fullness of the trinity teaching is one of those things that His disciples could not accept while He was with them. That was left to the Holy Spirit to guide them into all the truth. His disciples were struggling with whom He was, that is clear but it is also clear that in the end they knew the truth, that He was their Lord and God, just as Thomas said.
There are plenty of places in the NT that point back to the OT and where it is speaking about Jesus while using the word YHWH. But in the OT the main thing for the Jews was to know that there is just one God. It was hard enough for them to know that, imagine the confusion that would have been wreaked if they have to try to understand how one God could be 3 in some way. People still have difficulty with that and it seems some refuse to believe it for that reason.
When it comes to the origins of the trinity doctrine you and the Watch Tower sound like those who claim that the gospel story of Jesus was copied from other religions that predate the gospels.
The truth is that having your ears tickled by the Watch Tower and their take on the origins of the trinity teaching has probably helped lead you into believing their deceptions.


T

I have always been interested in the Trinity doctrine.

I’d heard about it many times before I read some information in the JWlibrary.

It’s interesting what The New Encyclopaedia Britanica says:

“Neither the word Trinity,nor the explicit doctrine as such,appears in the New Testament ,nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict what is said in the OT:

“Hear, O Israel, the Lord our Gods One Lord (Deut.6:4)

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies…By the end of the 4th century…the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since “—(1976),Micropedia,Vôl.10,p.126

It seems there is no proof for you.
You are strongly convinced you are right . But it’s ok.we all have free will and should respect it.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
The Greek text does not say anything about Jesus being born. That is just injected text that the translators were forced to add into the translation in an attempt to force a trinitarian rendering.

Such deceitful ness just underlines the fact that trinity cannot stand on its own merit from the scriptures but has to be supplemented by falsehoods and deceit…. Jesus warned there would be such things and stated that there would be severe punishment did those who carried out such unscrupulous acts as it literally undermined the truth of God: ‘Grieves the spirit of truth’!
No, no, no! ‘Fifty years old’ was the ‘age of maturity’ for scribes etc. They were pointing out that Jesus was not, in their view, qualified to teach them about Abraham.

John 8:48The Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?” 49Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 50“But I do not seek My glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 51“Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he will never see death.” 52The Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon. Abraham died, and the prophets also; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word, he will never taste of death.’ 53“Surely You are not greater than our father Abraham, who died? The prophets died too; whom do You make Yourself out to be?54Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’; 55and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word. 56“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” 57So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.

Of course the Jews were speaking about 50 years old as being an age of maturity, but so?
There is a word in the Greek text that is translated "born". I think literally it means "came into being".
That being the case, it appears that Jesus was speaking about at least existing before Abraham came into existence.
But there is another question also that Jesus was answering with His answer "I am", it is the question in verse 53 in green.
Jesus may have been speaking in Aramaic but the scriptures they used were the Septuagint in which God said to Moses (as far as I know) "Tell them I am has sent you" (Ex 3:14) This of course does not come out in the Greek of John's Gospel but Jesus could have used "ego eimi" in His Aramaic speech and that would have made it plain whom Jesus was claiming to be.
It would be illegal and no doubt murder for them to stone Jesus for claiming to exist before Abraham did.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
T

I have always been interested in the Trinity doctrine.

I’d heard about it many times before I read some information in the JWlibrary.

It’s interesting what The New Encyclopaedia Britanica says:

“Neither the word Trinity,nor the explicit doctrine as such,appears in the New Testament ,nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict what is said in the OT:

“Hear, O Israel, the Lord our Gods One Lord (Deut.6:4)

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies…By the end of the 4th century…the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since “—(1976),Micropedia,Vôl.10,p.126

It seems there is no proof for you.
You are strongly convinced you are right . But it’s ok.we all have free will and should respect it.

Yes the JWs have their ideas of the trinity and you have absorbed them as many people do and as I also was on my way to do.
There are many words used in theology and by the JWs which do not appear in the Bible. That means nothing. We make up words for theological concepts....................... just as the Watch Tower made up where to translate "Lord" as "Jehovah" in the New Testament and where not to do that. Now that means something.
The word for "one" at Deut 6:4 can be used as a compound one, meaning that there might be more than one (something) in the one LORD. So the trinity does not contradict the OT.
The doctrine of the trinity developed over time and was forced to take form more substantially in the 4th century when Arius, who had no previously existing group with the same doctrine, decided to challenge the teaching of the Church since the first century concerning Jesus. Jesus was never a created being in the Bible or early Church.
Jesus did say that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth and that there were some things that the disciples would not be able to accept while He was alive with them on earth.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Yes the JWs have their ideas of the trinity and you have absorbed them as many people do and as I also was on my way to do.
There are many words used in theology and by the JWs which do not appear in the Bible. That means nothing. We make up words for theological concepts....................... just as the Watch Tower made up where to translate "Lord" as "Jehovah" in the New Testament and where not to do that. Now that means something.
The word for "one" at Deut 6:4 can be used as a compound one, meaning that there might be more than one (something) in the one LORD. So the trinity does not contradict the OT.
The doctrine of the trinity developed over time and was forced to take form more substantially in the 4th century when Arius, who had no previously existing group with the same doctrine, decided to challenge the teaching of the Church since the first century concerning Jesus. Jesus was never a created being in the Bible or early Church.
Jesus did say that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth and that there were some things that the disciples would not be able to accept while He was alive with them on earth.
The word for "one" at Deut 6:4 can be used as a compound one, meaning that there might be more than one (something) in the one LORD. So the trinity does not contradict the OT.
So what makes it a certainty that ‘One’ means ‘Three’ such that it became a doctrine? Where was that established in the scriptures?

I searched through Deuteronomy 5 and 6 and found that God is only ever addressed as ‘I’, ‘He’, ‘Him’, ‘His’, ‘Me’, ‘My’… all of which point to a single being.

But the Israelites are addressed as ‘We’, ‘Them’, ‘They’… a multiplicity of beings:
  • “…But you stay here with me so that I may give you all the commands, decrees and laws you are to teach them to follow in the land I [YHWH God] am giving them to possess.” (Deut 5:30)
  • “Fear the LORD [YHWH] your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name.” (Deut 6:13)
Why is a trinity God addressed as ‘We’, ‘Us’, ‘Our’. Is there an example in humanity of a three person committee addressing itself as ‘I’, ‘Me’, ‘Mine’, etc.?… afterall, humanity is supposed to be:
  • ‘image of the three person YHWH God’
Point of fact, was Jesus a three human persons as well as a three person God? And, if if he was God, was he therefore: ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’ ar the same time….

But if he is God, and he is the son in God, then he must also be a recursive entity:
  • ‘God’: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
  • ‘Son’: Jesus
  • ‘Jesus’: God
  • ‘Jesus’: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
  • ‘Jesus’: Man
  • ‘Man’: Image of God
  • ‘Man’: father, son, holy spirit
  • ‘Jesus’: father, son, holy spirit
  • ‘Jesus’: God and Man
  • ‘Jesus’: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, father, son, holy spirit
  • ….
So, was Jesus GREATER THAN the Father since the Father is only God BUT Jesus is BOTH god and man?

Or, is Jesus LESS THAN the Father since Jesus is ALSO FLESH which is a weakness to a God??

QUESTIONS, Questions, questions…. Nothing but questions when it comes to trinity ideology….

Questions …. But never any valid answers!!!
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
So what makes it a certainty that ‘One’ means ‘Three’ such that it became a doctrine? Where was that established in the scriptures?

I searched through Deuteronomy 5 and 6 and found that God is only ever addressed as ‘I’, ‘He’, ‘Him’, ‘His’, ‘Me’, ‘My’… all of which point to a single being.

But the Israelites are addressed as ‘We’, ‘Them’, ‘They’… a multiplicity of beings:
  • “…But you stay here with me so that I may give you all the commands, decrees and laws you are to teach them to follow in the land I [YHWH God] am giving them to possess.” (Deut 5:30)
  • “Fear the LORD [YHWH] your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name.” (Deut 6:13)
Why is a trinity God addressed as ‘We’, ‘Us’, ‘Our’. Is there an example in humanity of a three person committee addressing itself as ‘I’, ‘Me’, ‘Mine’, etc.?… afterall, humanity is supposed to be:
  • ‘image of the three person YHWH God’
Point of fact, was Jesus a three human persons as well as a three person God? And, if if he was God, was he therefore: ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’ ar the same time….

But if he is God, and he is the son in God, then he must also be a recursive entity:
  • ‘God’: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
  • ‘Son’: Jesus
  • ‘Jesus’: God
  • ‘Jesus’: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
  • ‘Jesus’: Man
  • ‘Man’: Image of God
  • ‘Man’: father, son, holy spirit
  • ‘Jesus’: father, son, holy spirit
  • ‘Jesus’: God and Man
  • ‘Jesus’: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, father, son, holy spirit
  • ….
So, was Jesus GREATER THAN the Father since the Father is only God BUT Jesus is BOTH god and man?

Or, is Jesus LESS THAN the Father since Jesus is ALSO FLESH which is a weakness to a God??

QUESTIONS, Questions, questions…. Nothing but questions when it comes to trinity ideology….

Questions …. But never any valid answers!!!

You have your questions which I answer to the best of my ability and I have questions for you about the Bible and what it says and you cannot answer them.
I started to waste my time answering your silly questions in this post but have decided most of them are too silly to bother about and others have already been answered before.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
John 8:48The Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?” 49Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 50“But I do not seek My glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 51“Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he will never see death.” 52The Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon. Abraham died, and the prophets also; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word, he will never taste of death.’ 53“Surely You are not greater than our father Abraham, who died? The prophets died too; whom do You make Yourself out to be?54Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’; 55and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word. 56“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” 57So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.

Of course the Jews were speaking about 50 years old as being an age of maturity, but so?
There is a word in the Greek text that is translated "born". I think literally it means "came into being".
That being the case, it appears that Jesus was speaking about at least existing before Abraham came into existence.
But there is another question also that Jesus was answering with His answer "I am", it is the question in verse 53 in green.
Jesus may have been speaking in Aramaic but the scriptures they used were the Septuagint in which God said to Moses (as far as I know) "Tell them I am has sent you" (Ex 3:14) This of course does not come out in the Greek of John's Gospel but Jesus could have used "ego eimi" in His Aramaic speech and that would have made it plain whom Jesus was claiming to be.
It would be illegal and no doubt murder for them to stone Jesus for claiming to exist before Abraham did.
What do you mean by “Tell them ‘I Am’ has sent you’…

It would not have read that way to the HEBREWS. It would have read: “Tell them ‘YHWH’ has sent you”!

You have injected the MEANING of ‘YHWH’ and not the NAME itself. That is invalid scripting.

Suppose it were to be done the way you are suggesting… then Peter would be Christ since is it not written:
  • ‘The Peter from which the children of Israel drank in the wilderness was Christ!’
  • ‘You are Stone, and upon this Peter I build my church’…
But Peter, we just learnt, is Christ…. And Christ is Jesus… so Jesus must be Peter… or Peter must be Jesus…

Oh, and since Peter is Jesus, and Jesus is God, then Peter must be God…

And since Peter is God then he is also the Father… and he is also the Spirit of God…!

Oh what a lovely mess doth trinity make
When the true gospel it doth forsake
‘Hear, o Israel, your only God is me’
But trinity says, ‘Nay, they are three!’
And one of these is God in image
To trinity this doth much damage
since God’s truth is immutable
But this mix makes god incomprehensible
‘He became man’, says the Catholic trinity
But surely this breaks a tri-way unity?
‘Oh no!’, the fallacy squeals
‘He remained God’, was their appeal
Hurummm…! Doesn’t Phil 2 say his godship he emptied
And even by the Devil was tempted?
But God cannot be tempted at all
for certainly all truth would fall
‘I was sent by the Father: in servancy’
‘He taught me to do; He taught me to say’
‘And I’ll be going to him one joyful day’
He said he is one with the Father
(This makes two as maths would gather)
‘On the cross I died, my spirit was given
God raised my up and to Heaven I was risen.
I sat down next to him: My Father and God
to rule for a period with Sceptre and Rod
to hold kings and princes under my feet
Till all evil is subdued, to make the defeat
Then I judge the risen reconstructed
The good to lasting life - the wicked destructed
Praise and glory, merriment and myrrh
When I take my seat: The throne of David over the earth
But if I’m ruler over earth, who is over Heaven?
Hmmm… better recheck check that spiritual Leaven
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
You have your questions which I answer to the best of my ability and I have questions for you about the Bible and what it says and you cannot answer them.
I started to waste my time answering your silly questions in this post but have decided most of them are too silly to bother about and others have already been answered before.
Oh Brian2…,

I know you ‘answered to the best of your ability’.

The problem is that ‘Your best ability’ is still LACKING CREDIBILITY AND TRUTH in scriptures.

And you are doing that trinity thing again: Run away when you realise what you are saying is in fact completely incorrect.

Why not just answer and be done with?

But you know: Arguing with Trinitarians is like a body builder…. Trinity is the resistance against which the body builder builds his strength….
Without the likes of you I wouldn’t have explored nor looked so deeply into the ‘deeper things of God’s word!’

So thank you!
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
You have your questions which I answer to the best of my ability and I have questions for you about the Bible and what it says and you cannot answer them.
I started to waste my time answering your silly questions in this post but have decided most of them are too silly to bother about and others have already been answered before.
Yes… God calls himself in the singular…
At no time does God call himself in the plural.

The suggestion that ‘ONE’ means ‘Three’ is so ridiculous that it’s not surprising that you want to run away from any response.

There is no scripture suggestion that there is UNITY of THREE PERSONS AS ONE GOD anywhere in scriptures except a close mis-view where Jesus says that he and the Father are one: which is TWO and actually only means ‘United on purpose and thought’.

Trinity declares that this means that Jesus is calling himself Almighty GOD… really? How so?

Trinity defines almighty God as three persons. But ‘I and the Father’ only makes TWO persons. Moreover, it is a fact that the saying ONLY MEANS that Jesus agrees with the Father… it is not an expression of a UNITY TWO God.

But what about this supposed ‘third’ that trinity doesn’t speak of as a unity? The Spirit of God is OF GOD… what does that mean, Brian2.

Does ‘OF’ mean ‘IS’?

Does ‘the Son of the Father’ mean that the Son IS the Father?

Even where trinity says Jesus is EQUAL to God… Does ‘EQUAL TO’ mean ‘IS’? Indeed, if it did then where is the need to say equal?

If x = y and y is changed, does still x remain equal to y?

But you will still continue to say that Jesus doesn’t change … really?

And PERSON… is GOD A PERSON?

I can see why you want to run away….!

Run away only to re-emerge with the same nonsense in another thread on another day trying to deceive another poster … You’ll have to change to another forum to do that unseen unless you are cowardly enough to go ‘invisible’.,., and that shows that you are not willing to be ‘in the light’!

And, indeed, who is it that desires to do their works in the dark (don’t say: a Photographic developer!! That’s just ….)
 
Last edited:
Top