• Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 11,000 members today

    Register Log In

Trinity

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:13)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Member
All right I caved in. I know what little you would have to say anyway.

Titus 2:13 While we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

A better translation is the NASB...
Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God AND Savior, Christ Jesus.

Can you see the difference?
Do you ever look any of this up or do you just read a version of the bible and quote a verse, fire from the hip, and say, see, "Jesus is God?"

You do know that the most translators were Trinitarian so they added their Trinitarian slant to the translation, riiiiiight?

You must also keep in mind ALL the tenets/precepts of the trinity doctrine, which most trinitarians don't do. In other words, is Titus 2:13 really saying Jesus IS co-equal to - (100%) God? Some translations do have it right. The verse is saying we are looking for the "glory" of God which is clearly "Jesus Christ.

This is how it's worded in the interlinear.

"Anticipating the happy expectation the appearing of the glory of the great God AND our Savior Jesus Christ."

Just like Luke 9:26 and Mathew 16:27 says...

"Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."

"For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done."

In other words. We are in "expecting the appearance of the glory of God AND our Savior Jesus Christ." I don't expect you can see the difference. NOTHING in Titus 2:13 is promoting a co-equal trinity.

It's clear that from other scriptures, this is referring to Christ’s coming and NOT that it's portraying God and Christ as one God. The glory of God that we are waiting for is Jesus Christ.

The context of Titus 2 also helps us understand. The context is ungodliness and worldly lust. Christ is "the glory of God" exhorting us to deny ungodliness and worldly lust in light of the coming of the Lord.
_____________________________________________________________
2 Peter 1:1b
To those who through the righteousness of our God AND Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours: (NIV)

To translate this verse as some translations do, "Our God and Savior Jesus Christ" is incorrect. The correct translation is, "God and our Savior Jesus Christ." KJV

There is no reason to force this verse to make Jesus Christ into God. Look at the following verse where there is a clear distinction between God and Jesus.

Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
 
Active
That's what I dislike about Trinitarian's. They're judgmental. They teach that if a person claims to be a Christian but doesn't believe in a trinity, they are not saved. Is that true?

Trinitarians love to prop up the trinity doctrine by condemning others. The evidence in Scripture is that a person can be saved without even knowing about the Trinity. Most Trinitarians only know they believe in it but little knowledge of what the doctrine actually teaches. The most astounding and incoherent teaching is that Jesus is 100% God and 100% man AT THE SAME TIME. And the holy spirit is 100% God and 100% Jesus. God is 100% Jesus and 100% the holy Spirit. ETC.

The tenet of trinitarianism is one must believe in order to be saved when the Bible never says that believing Jesus is both 100% God and 100% man is necessary for salvation. It's all made up! Many Trinitarians admit that the Trinity is not revealed in the Old Testament, and now say that during the ministry of Jesus, and afterward, a person had to believe in the Trinity to be saved. There is no record that Jesus or his disciples ever taught the doctrine of the Trinity to anyone in order to get him or her saved.

There is not one single account of Jesus rebuking anyone who said he was a human Messiah. He rebuked the Pharisees for saying he was equal to God the Father! Never did he or anyone else allude to or ever say he was part of the Trinity, or that a person had to believe in the Trinity to be saved.

Mathew 9:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Answer - Read it - Chapter 19 in Mathew! Mark 10:21.

If the Trinity were a true, especially if a person has to believe it to be saved, it would be clearly outlined in scripture. Jesus would have said something about it in his teachings especially at the sermon on the Mount.

Well -- it's probably true that a person doesn't need to understand the Godhead / trinity in order to be saved. But to Disbelieve it -- that Jesus Christ is Not the Son of God -- that's the basis Of our salvation.

Jesus Christ / while on earth / was 100 % deity And 100% human. He Had to be. If He hadn't been -- His dying would have meant nothing because If He'd been only human -- just another religious teacher of that day -- He would have died just like everyone else. And there would be no Christianity.

The Godhead = God the Father, Jesus Christ His Son and the Holy Spirit. Three distinct parts of the Godhead.

It is hearing about it but Not believing it that is very problematic.

It was Jesus who claimed to be the Promised Messiah that got Him crucified. "I and the Father are One".

How about turning to 1 Corinthians 15: 1-3 ".... I declare to you the Gospel ....... by which also you are saved....... that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures vs 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures...."

Acts 16:30 - 31 "And He brought them out and said ,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 "So they said , "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, "


The point of the Matthew passage -- He was asked "what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" He was willing to Do most everything -- except -- to give everything he had to the poor -- Everything. -- he wasn't willing to do that.
The one more 'good work' that he was asked to do and Then he could follow Jesus Christ -- was more than he was willing To do. It's impossible to do enough good works to earn our own salvation. No one can live a perfect life.
 
Member
Well -- it's probably true that a person doesn't need to understand the Godhead / trinity in order to be saved. But to Disbelieve it -- that Jesus Christ is Not the Son of God -- that's the basis Of our salvation.
I never said or denied Jesus wasn't the Son of God - get it right!
Jesus Christ / while on earth / was 100 % deity And 100% human. He Had to be. If He hadn't been -- His dying would have meant nothing because If He'd been only human -- just another religious teacher of that day -- He would have died just like everyone else. And there would be no Christianity.
He died sinless, that's what counts. If he was 100% God that makes Jesus a fraud because God cannot sin or be tempted. That makes the cross a hoax because there's no way Jesus could have sinned anyway!
The Godhead = God the Father, Jesus Christ His Son and the Holy Spirit. Three distinct parts of the Godhead.
The word 'godhead' isn't even in the original manuscripts. It's the word divine or deity. That word is also used of pagan gods.

It is hearing about it but Not believing it that is very problematic.
Hearing does nothing for me. I study - and confirm - to show myself approved.

It was Jesus who claimed to be the Promised Messiah that got Him crucified. "I and the Father are One".
One doesn't mean they are the same person - yet different person, and it doesn't mean they are co-equal. It means they are on the same page. one in though, feeling, and purpose.

How about turning to 1 Corinthians 15: 1-3 ".... I declare to you the Gospel ....... by which also you are saved....... that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures vs 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures...."
Yep, I believe that.

Acts 16:30 - 31 "And He brought them out and said ,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 "So they said , "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved,
"
I believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. So what are you getting at? That I don't because I see the scriptures debunk a Trinity?

The point of the Matthew passage -- He was asked "what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" He was willing to Do most everything -- except -- to give everything he had to the poor -- Everything. -- he wasn't willing to do that.
The one more 'good work' that he was asked to do and Then he could follow Jesus Christ -- was more than he was willing To do. It's impossible to do enough good works to earn our own salvation. No one can live a perfect life.
I agree with that too.
 
Active
@saginon -- the difference between 'Jesus Christ and Christ Jesus' = Jesus is His earthly name / Christ is His divine title. One is denoting his humanity -- the other his deity.
 
Loyal
[NASB] Tit 2:13; looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,

I notice the comma isn't between God and Savior, but after. Our great God and Savior... (comma)... Christ Jesus.
It is NOT our great God, and Savior Christ Jesus.
 
Active
You seem to have a problem with Jesus being God incarnate when He was here on earth. Jesus was born -- the 1st son of Mary. But Mary had never known a man -- she was a virgin. Biologically it was Not possible for Mary To be pregnant. But it as the Holy Spirit who 'came upon her'. Thus -- Jesus was both human by Mary and deity (Christ) by the Holy Spirit. And it can be hard to comprehend -- to wrap our mind around -- Jesus Christ being God - in the flesh -- God is spirit and can't be seen. So -- God was Here in the form of a man -- Jesus Christ the Son of God.
 
Active
Top Poster Of Month
He died sinless, that's what counts. If he was 100% God that makes Jesus a fraud because God cannot sin or be tempted. That makes the cross a hoax because there's no way Jesus could have sinned anyway!
His Spirit could not sin. His body/soul was in theory capable of it, else it was no use to tempt Him.
Now when we get born again we also get a spirit that can't sin, but He is our Example and we (our spirit) has to tell our soul and body to shut up and serve God.
If it was an angel who did not sin, it would be no use. You cannot be crucified with an angel to get a new spirit. Then we would be born from an angel. We're born from God. If He was also a slave to sin, He could not save us. I said once: God it's unfair. It was easier for You, cause You were never a slave to sin. It's easier to say no to a cigarette if you never smoked. And then I thought: but that's just what we need. Else He could not have saved us from sin.
Jesus became human. He had a human soul. He had to give up his ego. He as a human did not want to die, but He gave up His own will, from the flesh that wanted to stay alive.
 
Member
@saginon -- the difference between 'Jesus Christ and Christ Jesus' = Jesus is His earthly name / Christ is His divine title. One is denoting his humanity -- the other his deity.
The difference is insignificant. Jesus Christ puts his earthly name first, Christ Jesus puts 'the anointed one' first' - his divinity, which does not mean he is God.
 
Member
You seem to have a problem with Jesus being God incarnate when He was here on earth. Jesus was born -- the 1st son of Mary. But Mary had never known a man -- she was a virgin. Biologically it was Not possible for Mary To be pregnant. But it as the Holy Spirit who 'came upon her'. Thus -- Jesus was both human by Mary and deity (Christ) by the Holy Spirit. And it can be hard to comprehend -- to wrap our mind around -- Jesus Christ being God - in the flesh -- God is spirit and can't be seen. So -- God was Here in the form of a man -- Jesus Christ the Son of God.
Jesus was here representing God, he wasn't God. You also must remind yourself that the trinity is a multi-faceted belief.

Mary didn't get pregnant by a nameless 'third person' of a man made Trinity. She conceived by the power of God...

"And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

God was here only in the sense that Jesus came from the Father and represented the Father. Jesus affirmed that maybe a dozen times to the Pharisees. When the Pharisees accused him of being God or equal to the Father, he rebuked them, even saying, "Are ye not gods?"

John 10:33-37
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
 
Active
Top Poster Of Month
If someone here has a pic from em as their avatar, is that them?
No. Its a pic.
Yes.
 
Active
Jesus was here representing God, he wasn't God. You also must remind yourself that the trinity is a multi-faceted belief.

Mary didn't get pregnant by a nameless 'third person' of a man made Trinity. She conceived by the power of God...

"And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

God was here only in the sense that Jesus came from the Father and represented the Father. Jesus affirmed that maybe a dozen times to the Pharisees. When the Pharisees accused him of being God or equal to the Father, he rebuked them, even saying, "Are ye not gods?"

John 10:33-37
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.


Saginon -- the trinity is NOT man-made. It's Deity / Scripture. The Godhead. We accept it on/ by Faith. We see the results Of a Godhead existing. Trinity = tri / 3 parts / unity = those 3 parts working together for a Purpose.

that verse that says "I and My Father are One" John 10: 26-30

That 'nameless third-person' was the Holy Spirit with the power of God. It IS Scripture.

You are quoting that one phrase that, yes, Is Scripture and stated by Jesus , Himself To contradict everything else. He was using some sarcasm with those people.
 
Active
Saginon -- the trinity is NOT man-made. It's Deity / Scripture. The Godhead. We accept it on/ by Faith. We see the results Of a Godhead existing. Trinity = tri / 3 parts / unity = those 3 parts working together for a Purpose.

that verse that says "I and My Father are One" John 10: 26-30

That 'nameless third-person' was the Holy Spirit with the power of God. It IS Scripture.

You are quoting that one phrase that, yes, Is Scripture and stated by Jesus , Himself To contradict everything else. He was using some sarcasm with those people.

I agree with Sue

But add if I may. In the OT the Jews came to G-d, they didn't recognise the Son as they were waiting the promised Messiah, the Holy Spirit was as Sue says, the nameless third person. We know Jesus was there in the beginning John 1:1 is very clear about this. But it wasn't until the NT, that all three became clear, The Father, Jesus the Son, and the helper, the counsellor at Pentecost, the Holy Spirit. All things are revealed in God's timing, the Trinity being one of them
 
Active
Top Poster Of Month
Jesus was here representing God, he wasn't God.
Jesus is the Representation of the Father, like He always was as the Angel of the Lord. That is how God always talked to man, cause God dwells in an unapproacjable Light and you die when you see Him.
 
Active
Top Poster Of Month
I agree with Sue

But add if I may. In the OT the Jews came to G-d, they didn't recognise the Son as they were waiting the promised Messiah, the Holy Spirit was as Sue says, the nameless third person. We know Jesus was there in the beginning John 1:1 is very clear about this. But it wasn't until the NT, that all three became clear, The Father, Jesus the Son, and the helper, the counsellor at Pentecost, the Holy Spirit. All things are revealed in God's timing, the Trinity being one of them
I read that before Jesus' time Jews didn't understand it and translated the texts differently. When the text said he saw YHWH, they turned it to he saw the glory of YHWH or the Word, memra of YHWH with the Angel of the Lord.
 
Member
Saginon -- the trinity is NOT man-made. It's Deity / Scripture. The Godhead. We accept it on/ by Faith. We see the results Of a Godhead existing. Trinity = tri / 3 parts / unity = those 3 parts working together for a Purpose.

that verse that says "I and My Father are One" John 10: 26-30

That 'nameless third-person' was the Holy Spirit with the power of God. It IS Scripture.

You are quoting that one phrase that, yes, Is Scripture and stated by Jesus , Himself To contradict everything else. He was using some sarcasm with those people.
Let me remind you again. The Trinity is a completely man-made doctrine devised by the Bishops of Rome. It originated because of the decline of the Roman Empire. The Trinity is a pagan doctrine emerged for political reasons. Christianity was the state religion of Rome and Rome was falling apart because of the trinitarian argument between Athanasius and Arius. Constantine knew he had to do something to ensure Rome remained solidified and in power. It most certainly emerged by the Bishops of Rome over the course of 100 years. The trinity doctrine was shot down at least three times over that 10 years and then when it finally did pass it did so by a very narrow margin of votes.

The word "Godhead" is a Trinitarian invention. The word does NOT exist in any of the original NT documents.
I keep telling that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" in no way proves a co-equal Trinity. They are one in the way they think, the way they feel, and most certainly in 'purpose'. No co-equal trinity of person's is implied whatsoever.

The holy spirit has no name because it's the power of God demonstrated by and through a multitude of beings like angels and Jesus himself, etc.

I believe Jesus when he said the 'Father is greater'. I believe him when he said he 'doesn't know' the day or hour of his return. Either he DOESN'T KNOW or he forgot maybe??? I believe him when he says he can do nothing on his own proving his subordination to the Father. I also believe him when he said blasphemy against him will be forgiven but blasphemy against the holy spirit will not. If they were the same person blasphemy against one would be blasphemy against the other. Other issues I have with Trinity is IF the holy spirit is a separate person "why doesn't the holy spirit have a name, and why isn't this 'un-named person found in or around the Throne of God?"

Everyting about the Trinity is contradictory. That's ONE reason why so many of us don't believe it and why 'some' of us are willing to admit we reject it.
 
Active
Let me remind you again. The Trinity is a completely man-made doctrine devised by the Bishops of Rome. It originated because of the decline of the Roman Empire. The Trinity is a pagan doctrine emerged for political reasons. Christianity was the state religion of Rome and Rome was falling apart because of the trinitarian argument between Athanasius and Arius. Constantine knew he had to do something to ensure Rome remained solidified and in power. It most certainly emerged by the Bishops of Rome over the course of 100 years. The trinity doctrine was shot down at least three times over that 10 years and then when it finally did pass it did so by a very narrow margin of votes.

The word "Godhead" is a Trinitarian invention. The word does NOT exist in any of the original NT documents.
I keep telling that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" in no way proves a co-equal Trinity. They are one in the way they think, the way they feel, and most certainly in 'purpose'. No co-equal trinity of person's is implied whatsoever.

The holy spirit has no name because it's the power of God demonstrated by and through a multitude of beings like angels and Jesus himself, etc.

I believe Jesus when he said the 'Father is greater'. I believe him when he said he 'doesn't know' the day or hour of his return. Either he DOESN'T KNOW or he forgot maybe??? I believe him when he says he can do nothing on his own proving his subordination to the Father. I also believe him when he said blasphemy against him will be forgiven but blasphemy against the holy spirit will not. If they were the same person blasphemy against one would be blasphemy against the other. Other issues I have with Trinity is IF the holy spirit is a separate person "why doesn't the holy spirit have a name, and why isn't this 'un-named person found in or around the Throne of God?"

Everyting about the Trinity is contradictory. That's ONE reason why so many of us don't believe it and why 'some' of us are willing to admit we reject it.

You are right in what you say regarding the origin of the term TRINITY was from the Romans/RCC

I add the link below for interesting reading on this topic.


Although I am a strong believer of telling people to 'go back to the early church, go back to Acts' and compare the church then to now, mainly as a reason of highlighting the difference between the church today and the early church, and of cutting out any RCC changes which there are many. The first being what is the Church, the ekklesia, the body of Christ not the building.

I do believe in the Trinity, and as explained in a previous post, the Jews worshipped G-d, their Messiah had not come and the Holy Spirit was the un-names third member. But it is clear in the NT, look at John 1:1, Jesus was there in the beginning, He was born of Mary, He ministered, He died, He rose again 'by the Power of the Holy Spirit'. And the disciples were told to wait for the helper, The Holy Spirit which came at Pentecost.

The Trinity is clear in the NT, it was there but not obvious in the OT, but a lot of things were not obvious in the OT. In the NT it is very clear.

So I feel the topic which won't lie down is not if there was a Trinity, but that the Bible doesn't mention it as the Trinity.

Would that be a reasonable assumption?
 
Member
You are right in what you say regarding the origin of the term TRINITY was from the Romans/RCC

I add the link below for interesting reading on this topic.


Although I am a strong believer of telling people to 'go back to the early church, go back to Acts' and compare the church then to now, mainly as a reason of highlighting the difference between the church today and the early church, and of cutting out any RCC changes which there are many. The first being what is the Church, the ekklesia, the body of Christ not the building.

I do believe in the Trinity, and as explained in a previous post, the Jews worshipped G-d, their Messiah had not come and the Holy Spirit was the un-names third member. But it is clear in the NT, look at John 1:1, Jesus was there in the beginning, He was born of Mary, He ministered, He died, He rose again 'by the Power of the Holy Spirit'. And the disciples were told to wait for the helper, The Holy Spirit which came at Pentecost.

The Trinity is clear in the NT, it was there but not obvious in the OT, but a lot of things were not obvious in the OT. In the NT it is very clear.

So I feel the topic which won't lie down is not if there was a Trinity, but that the Bible doesn't mention it as the Trinity.

Would that be a reasonable assumption?
The 'term' Trinity originated from Tertullian late in the 2nd century or early in the third.
I've read the link you posted several times. I'm a member of the 'Beyond Today' community.

John 1:1 is a complete trinitarian mistranslation. The WORD is SPEECH. In the beginning was God's SPEECH....NOT Jesus. He's mentioned as, "and the SPEECH became flesh. The Trinity is far from 'clear' in the NT. It has to be compiled from a host of Trinitarian mistranslations. The bible doesn't mention a trinity, omnipotence, omnipresence, or omniscience. The bible, and the very words of Jesus clearly debunk a Trinity.

To say Jesus is God takes away from his humanity. It makes him someone he is NOT, and makes his sacrifice significantly "insignificant!" God didn't die at the cross, the man Jesus Christ did. To say God was crucified invalidates the sinless sacrifice of Jesus Christ because God cannot be tempted to sin!

The bible does not support even ONE precept of the Trinity doctrine.
 
Active
The WORD

John 1:1 (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

WORD -
Greek Word:
λόγος
Transliteration: logos
Root: from <G3004>

English Words used in KJV:
word 218
saying 50
account 8
speech 8
Word (Christ) 7
thing 5
not tr 2
miscellaneous translations 32
[Total Count: 330]

from <G3004> (lego); something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty or motive; by extension a computation; specially (with the art. in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ) :- account, cause, communication, × concerning, doctrine, fame, × have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, × speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.

Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary.
 
Member
The WORD

John 1:1 (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

WORD -
Greek Word:
λόγος
Transliteration: logos - Interlinear = "saying word." saying word
Root:
from <G3004>

English Words used in KJV:
word 218
saying 50
account 8
speech 8
Word (Christ) 7 (Trinitarian invention) Show me where. John 1???
thing 5
not tr 2
miscellaneous translations 32
[Total Count: 330]

from <G3004> (lego); something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty or motive; by extension a computation; specially (with the art. in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ) :- account, cause, communication, × concerning, doctrine, fame, × have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, × speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.

Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary.
 
Active
The 'term' Trinity originated from Tertullian late in the 2nd century or early in the third.
I've read the link you posted several times. I'm a member of the 'Beyond Today' community.

John 1:1 is a complete trinitarian mistranslation. The WORD is SPEECH. In the beginning was God's SPEECH....NOT Jesus. He's mentioned as, "and the SPEECH became flesh. The Trinity is far from 'clear' in the NT. It has to be compiled from a host of Trinitarian mistranslations. The bible doesn't mention a trinity, omnipotence, omnipresence, or omniscience. The bible, and the very words of Jesus clearly debunk a Trinity.

To say Jesus is God takes away from his humanity. It makes him someone he is NOT, and makes his sacrifice significantly "insignificant!" God didn't die at the cross, the man Jesus Christ did. To say God was crucified invalidates the sinless sacrifice of Jesus Christ because God cannot be tempted to sin!

The bible does not support even ONE precept of the Trinity doctrine.

I just Googled "Beyond Today" ministries -- also Wikipedia -- World Wide Church of God == Armstrongism. Non-Biblical. that explains a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top