The Diety of Jesus

[bdavidc]

Instead of this stupid back and forth why don't you stop calling Jesus a liar!

Can you not read?

'for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.'

Jesus is not GOD and GOD is not Jesus.

I disagree with your interpretation of John 20:17. This verse does not deny the deity of Christ but rather reflects His unique role as the incarnate Son who, in His humanity, was in submission to the Father. Throughout Scripture, Jesus is consistently identified as God. John 1:1 declares, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." In John 8:58, Jesus says, "Before Abraham was, I AM," directly using the divine name revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14. Additionally, Thomas worshiped Jesus, calling Him "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28), and Jesus affirmed his declaration rather than correcting him.

Philippians 2:6-8 explains that while Jesus was "in the form of God," He humbled Himself and took on human nature to accomplish salvation. His reference to the Father as "my God" reflects His role as the perfect, obedient Son within the Trinity, not a denial of His divinity. Hebrews 1:8 quotes the Father Himself saying of Jesus, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever." The full testimony of Scripture makes it clear that Jesus is fully God and fully man, and denying this truth contradicts the foundation of the gospel.

 

[Butch5]

The argument presented here misunderstands the biblical use of the term "God" and the doctrine of the Trinity. Scripture does not limit the word "God" to a singular person but instead reveals that the one true God exists as three distinct persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—who share the same divine essence. While the Bible often refers to the Father as "God" in a specific sense, it also clearly applies the term to Jesus (John 1:1; John 20:28; Titus 2:13) and the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4). The assertion that the term "God" must always refer to a singular being or person is an oversimplification that does not account for the full biblical revelation.

The argument here doesn't misunderstand the Biblical use of the word God? The word is used of those who rule. You claim that the Scriptures do not limit the use of the word God to a single person. Then you claim that the word reveals the true God as three distinct persons. I did take notice that you didn't post anything from Scripture showing what you've claimed. There is nothing in Scripture that reveals God as a single entity that exists as three distinct persons. On the contrary, Paul tells us that there is one God, the Father. The job we have as Christians is to reconcile how there is one God when Jesus is also called God at times, in a manner consistent with reason. The manner that has been proposed since the fifth century, that there is this entity called God that consists of three persons is not consistent with reason.

Well, since we have no multipart beings as the Trinity suggests, I would submit that yes, the Bible does apply the word God to a single person.

Furthermore, while it is true that Scripture primarily refers to God in a personal sense, it also speaks of His divine nature (or essence). For example, Colossians 2:9 states that in Christ "the fullness of deity dwells bodily," indicating that divinity is something shared rather than confined to one person alone.

Scripture may refer to the divine nature, however, the word God does not. Perhaps we could understand Colossians 2:9 differently than you've proposed. Instead of a shared divinity we could also understand this as Jesus being indwelled by the Father.

Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake. King James, Jn 14:9–11.

According to Jesus the Father was in Him. If the Father was in Him then yes, the fullness of Deity dwelled in Him bodily. The Deity was the Father, not a shared Deity. How do we know this? We know it from the words of Paul.

5 Think this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,

6 who, existing in the form of God,
did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped,
7 but emptied himself
by* taking the form of a slave,
by* becoming in the likeness of people.
And being found in appearance like a man,
8 he humbled himself
by* becoming obedient to the point of death,
that is, death on a cross.

The Lexham English Bible, Php 2:5–8.

According to Paul Christ was in the form of God, then He emptied Himself of the form of God and took the form of man. Man is not deity as such Christ couldn't be deity. However, with the Father dwelling in Him Deity dwelled in Him.

Additionally, John 1:1 makes a distinction between "the Word" (Jesus) and "God" (the Father) while affirming that the Word is also fully God. The doctrine of the Trinity does not require redefining "God" but rather acknowledges how Scripture reveals Him—as one divine being eternally existing in three persons.

Actually, John said the Word "was" God, not "is" God. John 1:1 is affirming that at some time in the past the word was God. He is not affirming that the Word "is" God.

The doctrine of the Trinity does not acknowledge how Scripture reveals God, because the Scriptures do not reveal God as one being consisting of three persons. Rather that is one illogical conclusion that has come from men trying to understand Scripture.

The claim that calling God an "essence" would also apply to pagan gods misunderstands biblical language. The Bible calls idols "gods" (1 Corinthians 8:5) not to affirm their divinity but to recognize that they are worshiped as such by people, even though they are false. The one true God is unique and incomparable (Isaiah 46:9), and His divine essence is not something shared with idols or demons.

Misunderstands Biblical language? Has Biblical language taken to explaining God? No. That my friend is the logical fallacy of reification. Language doesn't communicate. People use language to communicate. People interpret the language that others use. People interpret the language they read in Scripture. The simple fact is that the definition of the word God must account for all of its uses in Scripture. So, if one claims it's an essence, (even though Scripture does not use the word that way) and one claims it can be used to the True God but not false gods, one is going to have to make a case from Scripture showing that. Good luck with that!

The doctrine of the Trinity remains firmly rooted in Scripture, not in philosophical speculation, and faithfully represents the full biblical teaching on God's nature.

It's not rooted in Scripture. It's not even mentioned in Scripture. However, it is definitely read into Scripture.

It seems to me my friend that you're reading your theology into the Scriptures.

 

[bdavidc]

It seems to me my friend that you're reading your theology into the Scriptures.

My beliefs are not based on personal theology imposed onto Scripture but on the entire truth of God's Word as revealed in the Bible. Scripture, when taken in its full context, clearly teaches that Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Father is God—yet there is only one God. This is not a man-made doctrine, nor is it derived from any specific translation, but it is the consistent teaching of both the Old and New Testaments.

Your argument implies that my understanding is influenced by external theology rather than the Bible itself. However, I have provided direct scriptural evidence, not from a twisted interpretation, but from the inspired Word of God. John 1:1 explicitly states, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This is supported by John 8:58, where Jesus applies the divine name "I AM" to Himself, and by John 20:28, where Thomas worships Jesus, declaring, "My Lord and my God!"

If I were imposing theology onto the text, I would be ignoring passages that contradict my view. Instead, I am embracing the entirety of Scripture, which consistently reveals that the one true God has made Himself known as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This understanding is not based on later theological constructs but on the direct teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Paul affirms Christ’s deity in Titus 2:13: "Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." Hebrews 1:8 records the Father Himself saying of the Son, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever."

It is not my theology that dictates my understanding, but rather the clear teaching of Scripture. The Bible warns against twisting the Word of God to fit human reasoning (2 Peter 3:16), and I encourage you to consider all of Scripture rather than dismissing verses that do not align with your viewpoint. If we are to remain faithful to God's Word, we must accept His revelation as He has given it, not as we wish it to be.

 

[bdavidc]

Your interpretation does not align with the full counsel of Scripture concerning the nature of God and the deity of Christ. While you argue that the word God is only applied to a single person, the Bible presents a deeper and more complex revelation—one God who exists eternally as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Jesus Is God According to Scripture​

Your argument that "God" is always used for a single person ignores key passages where Jesus is explicitly called God.

1. John 1:1 – "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This passage affirms both the distinction between the Word (Jesus) and God (the Father) and their shared divine nature. The Greek construction does not imply a past tense "was God" in a temporary sense, but rather that Jesus has always been God.
2. John 8:58 – Jesus declares, "Before Abraham was, I AM." Here, Jesus applies the divine name I AM (Exodus 3:14) to Himself, clearly identifying as God. The Jews understood this claim, which is why they picked up stones to kill Him for blasphemy (John 8:59).
3. John 10:30 – Jesus says, "I and the Father are one." The Jewish leaders immediately sought to stone Him “because you, being a man, make yourself God” (John 10:33).
4. John 20:28 – Thomas worships Jesus, saying, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus does not correct him, because Thomas' declaration is true.
5. Titus 2:13 – "Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." This verse unambiguously calls Jesus God.
6. Hebrews 1:8 – Speaking of Jesus, the Father Himself says: "But of the Son He says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.'" God the Father calls the Son God!

Jesus Did Not "Empty Himself" of Deity​

You argue that Jesus "emptied Himself" of deity, but Philippians 2:6-8 does not teach that Christ ceased to be God:

• Philippians 2:6 – "Who, though He was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped." This affirms that Jesus existed as God before taking human form.
• Philippians 2:7 – "But emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant." The emptying was not a loss of deity but a humbling—a voluntary lowering of status by taking on human flesh.
• Colossians 2:9 – "For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily." Jesus never lost His divine nature; He remained fully God while being fully man.

The Holy Spirit Is Also God
If the word God always refers to a single person, then how do you explain the Holy Spirit being called God?

1. Acts 5:3-4 – Peter tells Ananias, "You have lied to the Holy Spirit," then states, "You have not lied to man but to God." This equates the Holy Spirit with God.
2. 2 Corinthians 3:17 – "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom."
3. Matthew 28:19 – Jesus commands baptism "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." This places the Holy Spirit alongside the Father and the Son, equally divine.

One God in Three Persons
While you claim the Trinity is not biblical, Scripture affirms that God is one while also revealing three distinct persons:

1. Deuteronomy 6:4 – "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one."
2. Matthew 3:16-17 – At Jesus’ baptism, the Father speaks from heaven, the Son is baptized, and the Spirit descends like a dove—three persons, one God.
3. Matthew 28:19 – Jesus commands baptism "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
4. 2 Corinthians 13:14 – "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

Conclusion
The doctrine of the Trinity is not something “read into” Scripture; it is the only way to reconcile the full biblical witness. The Father is God (1 Corinthians 8:6), the Son is God (John 1:1, John 20:28), and the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4), yet there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). While the term Trinity may not be explicitly in the Bible, the concept is woven throughout Scripture.

To deny the Trinity is to ignore the overwhelming biblical evidence that God has revealed Himself as one being in three persons. Rather than relying on human reasoning to define God, we must submit to the full revelation of Scripture, even when it surpasses our understanding (Isaiah 55:8-9).

 

[bdavidc]

Again, I disagree with your conclusions, as they do not align with the full testimony of Scripture concerning the nature of God and the deity of Christ. While the word "God" is often used to refer to those in authority, as you mentioned, Scripture goes beyond merely using "God" as a title for rulers. The Bible explicitly teaches that the one true God exists eternally as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—three distinct persons who share the same divine essence.

Your argument that the Bible only applies "God" to a single person ignores key passages where Jesus is called God in the same way as the Father. John 1:1 clearly states that "the Word was God," meaning that Jesus was, is, and always will be divine. The claim that "was" God means only a past state is a misreading of the Greek text, which affirms the eternal nature of the Word. Furthermore, Jesus directly claims divinity in John 8:58 when He says, "Before Abraham was, I AM," using the divine name revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14. Thomas also calls Jesus "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28), and Jesus does not correct him but affirms his statement.

Your interpretation of Colossians 2:9 and Philippians 2:6-8 misses the biblical teaching that Jesus did not cease to be God when He took on human flesh. Philippians 2 does not say that Christ emptied Himself of divinity but rather that He humbled Himself by taking the form of a servant. Colossians 2:9 states that "the fullness of deity dwells bodily" in Christ, not merely as an indwelling of the Father but as an affirmation of His divine nature.

Regarding the Trinity, while the word itself is not explicitly mentioned in Scripture, the concept is clearly taught throughout. The Father is called God (1 Corinthians 8:6), the Son is called God (John 1:1; Titus 2:13), and the Holy Spirit is called God (Acts 5:3-4). All three persons are distinct yet fully God, and Scripture repeatedly affirms that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). The Trinity is not a philosophical construct imposed on Scripture but rather a faithful representation of what the Bible reveals about God's nature.

Dismissing the Trinity as "illogical" imposes human reasoning on divine revelation. God’s nature surpasses human comprehension (Isaiah 55:8-9), but Scripture gives us all we need to know about Him. To reject the doctrine of the Trinity is to reject the full revelation of God's Word.

 

[Butch5]

The mystery of Jesus being fully God and fully man is a profound truth revealed in Scripture, though it surpasses human understanding. The Bible teaches that Jesus, the eternal Son of God, took on human nature while remaining fully divine (John 1:1, 14; Colossians 2:9). This is known as the hypostatic union, meaning that in one person, Christ has two distinct natures—divine and human—without mixture, confusion, or division. Just as God’s ways are higher than human ways (Isaiah 55:8-9), this truth cannot be fully grasped by human reasoning alone but is accepted by faith. Jesus’ divine nature means He possesses all the attributes of God—eternality, omniscience, and omnipotence—while His human nature allowed Him to experience hunger, fatigue, and even death (Hebrews 4:15; Philippians 2:6-8). Though difficult to comprehend, this dual nature was necessary for salvation; only a sinless man could be the perfect sacrifice for sin, and only God could bear the weight of humanity’s sin and conquer death (2 Corinthians 5:21; Hebrews 2:14-17). Therefore, while the concept is beyond human experience, it is entirely possible because it is a work of God, and with Him, all things are possible (Luke 1:37).

God is infinitely greater than humanity in every way, possessing perfect wisdom, power, and sovereignty that far exceed human limitations. Scripture reminds us that His ways and thoughts are higher than ours (Isaiah 55:8-9), and He alone has the authority to govern all things according to His perfect will. Unlike human beings, who are finite, fallible, and dependent, God is eternal, all-knowing, and completely self-sufficient (Psalm 90:2; Romans 11:33-36). He created and sustains all things, while we, as His creation, are entirely reliant on Him for life, breath, and purpose (Acts 17:25-28). Acknowledging this truth leads to humility and trust, recognizing that He alone is worthy of worship, obedience, and faith.

That was kind of a long way to not answer the question. How can someone be fully two different things? The answer is they can't be, at least not at the same time. Jesus did have two natures, just not at the same time. In the beginning He had the nature of God, He put that off and took the nature of man. When we start talking about mysteries and things beyond human understanding it's a clear sign that people can't explain what they're claiming. That's probably why when the doctrine was codified, they made a declaration that if people didn't believe what they said they couldn't' be saved.

The opening line of the Athanasian Creed.

"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith."

This is the closing line of the same creed.

"This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved."

It begins and ends with the threat of a loss of salvation. Unless you believe what these guys said, you can't be saved. Well, who are these guys? Who knows? No one knows who wrote the creed. We have a doctrine that comes from a bunch of guys no one knows. We assume they were Christians, but who knows. They say unless you believe the catholic faith you can't be saved. Now, the word Catholic here does not mean the Roman Catholic Church. The word simply means universal. The problem is that what they wrote was not the catholic or universal faith. They had strayed far from what was written in the Nicene Creed of 325 and they were far from what updated Nicene Creed of 381 stated. These guys were out in left field in regard to the catholic or universal faith.

So why would they make a threat that if people didn't believe it they couldn't be saved? The most obvious answer is that the Athanasian Creed is illogical, and any reasoning person would see that the creed is illogical. So, they had to force it on people with the threat of a loss of salvation. This does kind of lead one to think that whoever these guys were, maybe they had some authority. If they were just nobodies the people would likely have written them off as off base.

It does amaze me that people will accept the most bazaar things when it comes to God. If I were to come on this forum and tell people that I have a neighbor with two natures, he's fully human and He's fully canine. I'd be the laughingstock of the forum. People would think I was crazy. No one, and I mean, no one, on this forum would believe that for one second. Yet, when someone says something outrageous like that about God suddenly it's OK. It's stunning. If we took these things said about God and put them in the world, no one would buy it for a second. I've used the analogy before of someone on this forum working for me. To make the numbers easy let's say they make $900 a week. at the end of the week, they come to get paid. I hand them 300 one-dollar bills as their pay. They count out the bills and tell me I still owe them $600. To which I reply, each of those one dollar bills I gave you is a trinity. So, each bill is actually three dollars. There is not a person on this forum or probably in the world that would accept that. Everyone on this forum would be telling me that I owe them $600. That begs the question, if they won't accept it of something as trivial as money, why in the world would the accept it about something as important as God? If I did that, they would be telling me my "math doesn't math." Yet, when it comes to God somehow the math maths? Seriously? It's just amazing.

 

[Butch5]

My beliefs are not based on personal theology imposed onto Scripture but on the entire truth of God's Word as revealed in the Bible. Scripture, when taken in its full context, clearly teaches that Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Father is God—yet there is only one God. This is not a man-made doctrine, nor is it derived from any specific translation, but it is the consistent teaching of both the Old and New Testaments.

Your argument implies that my understanding is influenced by external theology rather than the Bible itself. However, I have provided direct scriptural evidence, not from a twisted interpretation, but from the inspired Word of God. John 1:1 explicitly states, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This is supported by John 8:58, where Jesus applies the divine name "I AM" to Himself, and by John 20:28, where Thomas worships Jesus, declaring, "My Lord and my God!"

If I were imposing theology onto the text, I would be ignoring passages that contradict my view. Instead, I am embracing the entirety of Scripture, which consistently reveals that the one true God has made Himself known as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This understanding is not based on later theological constructs but on the direct teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Paul affirms Christ’s deity in Titus 2:13: "Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." Hebrews 1:8 records the Father Himself saying of the Son, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever."

It is not my theology that dictates my understanding, but rather the clear teaching of Scripture. The Bible warns against twisting the Word of God to fit human reasoning (2 Peter 3:16), and I encourage you to consider all of Scripture rather than dismissing verses that do not align with your viewpoint. If we are to remain faithful to God's Word, we must accept His revelation as He has given it, not as we wish it to be.

My apologies if I upset you. I didn't mean to. I have no doubt that you believe your beliefs are based in Scripture. I think all of those who are arguing for the Trinity believe that. The point of my posts is to show that the position is not possible. Let me ask a question. If the Trinity doctrine is what the Bible teaches, why does the very first creed that deals with the relation of the Father to the Son contradict the Trintiy doctrine?

I've acknowledged that the Bible refers to Jesus as God. It also refers to the pagan deities as gods. However, that doesn't prove the Trinity doctrine. We need to find a way to understand this in a way that makes sense. One being consisting of three persons doesn't make sense. If I were to write a history of America since the year 2000, the book would contain presidents, Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden. Yet, American only has one present. Do you suppose that anyone on planet earth reading this would assume that the President was a being who consisted of these four men? Not a single sane person would come to that conclusion. They would understand that these men were president at different times, even though we still call all of them president. So, why wouldn't we consider something like this as being a way to understand the uses of the word God as opposed to something that is utterly impossible?

You've mentioned "the clear teaching of Scripture." However, there is nothing in the clear teaching of Scripture that mentions a Trinity, or a being called God who consists of three persons. Since there is nothing that states that there is one God who consists of three persons in Scripture, we are forced to conclude that this idea has formed in the mind of man. Albeit he got the idea from looking at Scripture, but that doesn't necessitate that the idea is actually in Scripture. It's just what men have concluded from their reading of Scripture.

 

[Christ4Ever]

I have no doubt that you believe your beliefs are based in Scripture. I think all of those who are arguing for the Trinity believe that.

As do you! lol

 

[Butch5]

Your interpretation does not align with the full counsel of Scripture concerning the nature of God and the deity of Christ. While you argue that the word God is only applied to a single person, the Bible presents a deeper and more complex revelation—one God who exists eternally as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Jesus Is God According to Scripture​

Your argument that "God" is always used for a single person ignores key passages where Jesus is explicitly called God.

Let's keep it in context. When I said it only applies to one person that was in contrast to a being who consisted of three persons. I've already acknowledged that the word god is used of Jesus and the pagan deities.

1. John 1:1 – "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This passage affirms both the distinction between the Word (Jesus) and God (the Father) and their shared divine nature. The Greek construction does not imply a past tense "was God" in a temporary sense, but rather that Jesus has always been God.

You said you didn't impose on the text. We can't change what John said to make it say something else.

1. John 8:58 – Jesus declares, "Before Abraham was, I AM." Here, Jesus applies the divine name I AM (Exodus 3:14) to Himself, clearly identifying as God. The Jews understood this claim, which is why they picked up stones to kill Him for blasphemy (John 8:59).

Was He claiming that? I know many claim that but is it so? Jesus often said "I am."

1. John 10:30 – Jesus says, "I and the Father are one." The Jewish leaders immediately sought to stone Him “because you, being a man, make yourself God” (John 10:33).

Yes, they are one, in unity.

1. John 20:28 – Thomas worships Jesus, saying, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus does not correct him, because Thomas' declaration is true.

Jesus didn't correct him? How do you know that? This is an argument from silence. We only know the little of Jesus words that were recorded. John says there was much more.

1. Titus 2:13 – "Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." This verse unambiguously calls Jesus God.

If you accept Sharps rule. Not all do. However, by this time Jesus could be called God as He had already received all power from the Father.

1. Hebrews 1:8 – Speaking of Jesus, the Father Himself says: "But of the Son He says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.'" God the Father calls the Son God!

Yes, in relation to a kingdom. That's what makes Him God.

Jesus Did Not "Empty Himself" of Deity​

You argue that Jesus "emptied Himself" of deity, but Philippians 2:6-8 does not teach that Christ ceased to be God:

• Philippians 2:6 – "Who, though He was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped." This affirms that Jesus existed as God before taking human form.
• Philippians 2:7 – "But emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant." The emptying was not a loss of deity but a humbling—a voluntary lowering of status by taking on human flesh.
• Colossians 2:9 – "For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily." Jesus never lost His divine nature; He remained fully God while being fully man.

You can claim that but the passage is very clear. Being in the form of God He emptied Himself and took the form of man. It's unambiguous.

The Holy Spirit Is Also God
If the word God always refers to a single person, then how do you explain the Holy Spirit being called God?

1. Acts 5:3-4 – Peter tells Ananias, "You have lied to the Holy Spirit," then states, "You have not lied to man but to God." This equates the Holy Spirit with God.
2. 2 Corinthians 3:17 – "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom."
3. Matthew 28:19 – Jesus commands baptism "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." This places the Holy Spirit alongside the Father and the Son, equally divine.

One God in Three Persons
While you claim the Trinity is not biblical, Scripture affirms that God is one while also revealing three distinct persons:

1. Deuteronomy 6:4 – "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one."
2. Matthew 3:16-17 – At Jesus’ baptism, the Father speaks from heaven, the Son is baptized, and the Spirit descends like a dove—three persons, one God.
3. Matthew 28:19 – Jesus commands baptism "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
4. 2 Corinthians 13:14 – "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

The Spirit is the Father's manifestation and or power. Ananias lied to the Father. In John chapter 16, after telling the apostles about the helper and the Spirit of Truth, Jesus tells them that He has been speaking to them in figurative language about the Father. thus, the Father is the helper and the Spirit of Truth. There are other passages that confirm this also.

Conclusion
The doctrine of the Trinity is not something “read into” Scripture; it is the only way to reconcile the full biblical witness. The Father is God (1 Corinthians 8:6), the Son is God (John 1:1, John 20:28), and the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4), yet there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). While the term Trinity may not be explicitly in the Bible, the concept is woven throughout Scripture.

Actually, it is something read into Scripture. There's not a single passage of Scripture that says God is three persons. one the contrary we have several passages that say God is one. Paul tells us that there is one God, the Father. Jesus, when praying to the Father, said the Father is the only True God.

To deny the Trinity is to ignore the overwhelming biblical evidence that God has revealed Himself as one being in three persons. Rather than relying on human reasoning to define God, we must submit to the full revelation of Scripture, even when it surpasses our understanding (Isaiah 55:8-9).

Please reread what you wrote here and ponder on it. You said, "rather than relying on human reasoning." My friend, we have no other reasoning to rely on. You said, "we must submit to the full revelation of Scripture." How do we know the full revelation of Scripture without reason? You keep saying that God has revealed Himself as one being in three persons. If God has done that, please point out that passage in Scripture. I mean, if God did reveal that it'll be stated in Scripture as that's God's revealed word to man. What passage is that? It's not there. That means God hasn't revealed it. That claim only gives a false sense of authority to the claim that there is one God in three persons.

When we talk about the Trinitty doctrine, we are not talking about what God has revealed. This is a point I keep trying to get across to people. What we are talking about is man's understanding of what he sees in the text of Scripture. The conclusion drawn from what he reads must be valid.

 

[Christ4Ever]

the word god is used of Jesus and the pagan deities.

Are you associating Jesus with pagan deities?
Think very carefully how you decide to communicate that thought and reply back to what I am asking. Very carefully.
In fact, for your sake and your continued staying on TJ, if you decide to answer this, please do so via PM.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Butch5]

Are you associating Jesus with pagan deities?
Think very carefully how you decide to communicate that thought and reply back to what I am asking. Very carefully.
In fact, for your sake and your continued staying on TJ, if you decide to answer this, please do so via PM.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

Why a pm?

 

[Butch5]

Are you associating Jesus with pagan deities?
Think very carefully how you decide to communicate that thought and reply back to what I am asking. Very carefully.
In fact, for your sake and your continued staying on TJ, if you decide to answer this, please do so via PM.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

You know better than that, Nick!

 

[Christ4Ever]

Why a pm?

Because I'm more forgiving as a Moderator in them and they don't derail the thread.

 

[Butch5]

Because I'm more forgiving as a Moderator in them and they don't derail the thread.

I think you already know the answer to that.

 

[Butch5]

Because I'm more forgiving as a Moderator in them and they don't derail the thread.

I'm actually offended that you would suggest such a thing.

 

[KingJ]

The biggest problem in this debate is people equivocating concerning the word god. At times the same person uses the word god in two different senses. This is also one of the reasons why it's hard to nail down a person's belief. It's because when something doesn't fit one's theology they simply jump to the other definition of God.

Example. John is a doctor so you can go see him if you're sick. But actually, John is a Doctor of Philosophy. The word doctor is being used in two different senses. It's the same with this doctrine. At times the word God is used of Persons and other times it's used of essence. People jump back and forth between the two.

The problem with this is that the word God in the Bible isn't used of an essence. It's used of beings, persons. The word God/god always refers to a being. Whether it's the True God, Jesus, or false gods, which the Scriptures tell us are demons. But it doesn't refer to an essence or substance.
Whenever the Bible uses the word God without a qualification it is a reference to the Father. When the Bible say, God created the Heavens and the Earth, it's referring to the Father, a being.

Since the word God/god is not used of an essence in Scripture the Trintiy doctrine cannot be argued from Scripture. There are two options the doctrine has to explain itself. Either there is one being who consists of three other beings, which is impossible or there is one God essence that consists of the three persons. The first option is impossible, and the second option has two major problems. The first is that the Scriptures don't use the word God as an essence. The second one is that if God/god is an essence, then it must also include the pagan gods because the Bible calls them god too.

Butch, not sure why and how you think you can further discuss this topic when you have not explained how it does not incriminate God and mock Christianity. See post #34 to @Rhema and the four questions to @Rxlx in post #22.

You need to 'try' understand that discussion with you three feels exactly the same as discussion with flat earthers. I dare you any of you three to acknowledge and attempt to remove the elephant in the room. Be intellectually honest and stop evading simple questions.

Type a commonsensical reply in point form. KIngJ says X and Y in post 22, question 1. My reply to question 1 is ........

 

[bdavidc]

How is it possible to be fully God and fully man at the same time? How can someone be fully two different things at the same time?

The belief that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man at the same time is rooted in the biblical teaching of the Incarnation. Scripture affirms that Jesus possesses both a divine nature and a human nature without mixture, confusion, or contradiction. John 1:1 declares that "the Word was God," while John 1:14 states that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us," indicating that Jesus, who is eternally God, took on human nature without ceasing to be divine. Philippians 2:6-7 further explains that Christ, "being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness." This passage highlights that His divine status remained unchanged even as He humbled Himself to enter into human existence.


The ability for one person to have two distinct natures is not a contradiction because these natures exist in different ways. Being fully God means possessing the attributes of divinity—eternality, omniscience, omnipotence, and perfect holiness—while being fully man means possessing a true human body, mind, will, and emotions. These two natures coexist in the one person of Jesus Christ, not by blending into a single nature nor by one overpowering the other, but in perfect unity. This mystery, often called the Hypostatic Union, is beyond full human comprehension but is consistent with how God has revealed Himself in Scripture. Just as God’s nature is beyond human categories of limitation, so too is the way Christ’s divine and human natures exist together without contradiction. Hebrews 2:17 confirms that Jesus "had to be made like His brothers in every way" to be a true representative of humanity, yet Colossians 2:9 states that "in Christ, all the fullness of Deity lives in bodily form."

Ultimately, this union is necessary for salvation. If Jesus were only a man, His sacrifice would not be sufficient to atone for the sins of the world. If He were only God, He would not be a true representative of humanity. As both God and man, He is the perfect mediator (1 Timothy 2:5), able to bridge the gap between a holy God and sinful humanity. Though this concept is beyond full human explanation, it aligns with the biblical testimony and the nature of God, who is not limited by human logic but reveals the truth that calls for faith and worship.

Please don't respond with Jehovah's Witness teachings, as they are a distortion of biblical truth, crafted to fit what you want to change the bible to say, and it is idolatry.

 

[bdavidc]

Well, since we have no multipart beings as the Trinity suggests, I would submit that yes, the Bible does apply the word God to a single person.

The Bible consistently reveals that God is one being, yet exists in three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. While human experience does not include multipart beings in the way God exists, this does not mean such a reality is impossible. God’s nature is unique and beyond full human comprehension, as Isaiah 55:8-9 declares, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord." Scripture affirms the oneness of God (Deuteronomy 6:4) while also presenting three persons who share the divine nature. The Father is called God (John 6:27), the Son is called God (John 1:1, John 20:28, Colossians 2:9), and the Holy Spirit is identified as God (Acts 5:3-4). These three are not separate gods but the same divine essence in three persons.

The idea that God must fit within human categories of single-person existence misunderstands the biblical revelation of His nature. The Bible never limits God to being a single person but instead demonstrates a complex unity. In Genesis 1:26, God says, "Let us make man in our image," indicating plurality within His being. Jesus Himself affirms this reality in Matthew 28:19, commanding baptism in the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, signifying one God in three persons. The Trinity is not a contradiction but a divine mystery that Scripture affirms. Just because human experience does not include a direct parallel to God’s nature does not mean it is untrue—God is not bound by human limitations but has revealed Himself as triune, and this truth is consistently upheld throughout the Bible.
Imagine if everything you thought was solid ground turned out to be sand. Would you be willing to seek the rock beneath?

and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. ~ 1 Corinthians 10:4

 

[bdavidc]

If you say Jesus is GOD then you are also saying Mary is the mother of GOD as the pagan Catholics do.

Jesus is not GOD and GOD is not Jesus.

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is God while also making a distinction between the persons of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. John 1:1 states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This Word, identified as Jesus in John 1:14, “became flesh and dwelt among us.” This shows that Jesus, who existed as God from eternity, took on human nature in the incarnation.

Jesus Himself affirmed His divinity. In John 8:58, He declared, “Before Abraham was, I AM,” using the very name God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14. This statement was so clear to His listeners that they attempted to stone Him for blasphemy. Thomas, one of His disciples, directly called Him “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28), and Jesus did not correct him but affirmed his faith. Colossians 2:9 states, “For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,” proving that Jesus was fully God even in His human form.

As for Mary, she was the mother of Jesus in His humanity, not in His divine nature. She gave birth to His physical body, but she did not bring His divine essence into existence, as He is eternal. God has no beginning (Psalm 90:2), and Jesus, being God, has existed eternally. Calling Mary the “Mother of God” can be misleading if misunderstood, but it does not change the fact that Jesus is both fully God and fully man.

The Bible makes it clear that Jesus is not a separate or lesser being from God but is one with the Father in divine essence (John 10:30). Denying the deity of Christ contradicts numerous scriptures that testify to His divine nature. He is the eternal Son, the Word made flesh, and the rightful object of worship alongside the Father and the Spirit.

You say, "as the pagan Catholics do" but you as a JW also write your own version of the bible and that is OK?

You are also one of the groups that distort Scripture to fit your beliefs, so the same standard must be applied consistently. Those who reject the full divinity of Christ often rely on altered translations of the Bible to support their views. For example, JW's have rewritten key passages, such as John 1:1, to deny that "the Word was god," despite the original Greek clearly affirming Christ’s divine nature. This is not a matter of faithfully interpreting Scripture but of reshaping it to align with what you want it to say,rather than God's revealed truth. If one criticizes others for modifying doctrine, they must also acknowledge when their own beliefs are upheld by Scripture that has been manipulated to say something it was never meant to say. The question is not about personal preference but about submitting to the unaltered Word of God as it was given.


According to the Bible, Mary is the mother of Jesus, but she is not the "Mother of God" in the sense that she gave birth to God's divine nature or brought God into existence. The title "Mother of God" can be misleading if misunderstood, as it may suggest that Mary is the origin of God's divine being, which is not biblical.

What the Bible Teaches About Mary’s Role​

1. Mary is the mother of Jesus in His humanity.
   • Luke 1:31 – "You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus."
   • Matthew 1:23 – "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means ‘God with us’)."
   • These passages confirm that Mary gave birth to Jesus, who is fully God and fully man.
     
     
     
2. Jesus existed before MaryJohn 1:1 – "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
   • John 1:14 – "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us."
   Jesus, as God the Son, existed eternally before Mary was even created. She was chosen to be the vessel through whom God took on human flesh, but she did not create or originate His divine nature.
   
   
3. Mary herself recognized God as her Savior
   • Luke 1:46-47 – "And Mary said: 'My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.'"
   Mary acknowledged that she needed a Savior, which means she was not divine or above God.

So, is Mary the "Mother of God"?​

• If by "Mother of God," one means the mother of Jesus in His humanity, then yes, she is the mother of the incarnate Christ.
• However, if by "Mother of God," one means that she is the origin of God or divine in any way, that is incorrect and unbiblical.
  
  Mary was a faithful servant of God, highly favored to bear Jesus, but she remains a human being—not the mother of God’s divine essence. The focus should always remain on Christ, who is eternal and above all creation.

 

[Christ4Ever]

I think you already know the answer to that.

Since it wasn't a question, I will take your reply as a confirmation/agreement with how I handle it.

You know better than that, Nick!

Better to hear it straight from you than it is to assume.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator/YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><