Scriptural evidence for the Trinity

kjw47 · Jul 19, 2014

it's just me said:
Sorry, Mr. Jehovah's Witness, but your C,T. Russell was a mere man, and you have elevated him to prophet status when in reality, if he had lived in OT times and made so many false prophecies he would have been stoned to death, so don't talk about Athanasius.

I explained this in the OP, had you bothered to read it. Jesus himself said he was God, if you had ever read a Bible that hadn't been butchered you would know that.

I gave you several scriptural examples from which you could have deduced that God is a Trinitarian being, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and you claim to tell me there is no Biblical support?

Also, had you bothered to read the Church fathers you would know that belief in the Trinity existed long before the council of Nicea and was arrived at independently by most of the Bishops at the council - they didn't just make it up on the spot. Your post is so error filled and historically challenged it's hard to read through it.

No cigar.

JW,s don't look at C.T. Russell as a prophet---you made that up all by your lonesome. Mr Russell just saw the disunified mass of confusion trying to tell others they serve God--but Jesus brought--LOVE,PEACE,UNITY- proving they are the opposite so correctionds had to be made.
Gods word teaches anyways---the great apostasy had to come first or truth wouldn't come at all. But it has thanks to men like C.T.Russell.

The true God= John 4:22-24--the God the true worshippers worship.

it's just me · Jul 19, 2014

upsideguy said:
Sorry, I am not a Jevohiah's Witness. I have no idea who CT Russell is. I agree he is a man; as was Athanasius (who you seemed to elevate to a New Testament author... but let me not commit the same mistake as you in defining who you are without knowing diddly about you). I elevate no-one to prophet class, especially someone who I have no idea who he is.

I am merely a Bible reading, God Fearing, Jesus Loving sinner who seeks a clear understanding of God. I am merely pointing out that the concept of the Trinity as sold to and then by the "Church" (defined here as the organized institution the the Church, which was rooted in the Roman Catholic Church and ultimately divided some 3000 times over various issues of doctrine .... as opposed to the Church that Christ spoke of, which was a community of believers) lacks the Biblical foundation that the "Church" implies it (yet, it has successfully sold it as essential doctine for 20 some centuries).

The Trinity is a creation of man. It was created to define God, Christ and the Holy Spirit and the interrelationships thereof in a manner that seemed comprehensible. It is not, in and of itself Biblical. No where in the Bible is the Trinity defined as the Church has defined. Instead, it was created and supported by Biblical argument. While the argument is a good argument; there are good arguments against certain aspects of the Trinity as defined by man; most notably that Christ WAS God on earth.

If Christians were intellectually honest and not subject to Church doctrine such that they have taken the Trinity as axiomatic, they would be bit more discerning (and, I argue have a much higher appreciation of Jesus and his time on earth) then they are. I argue that calling Christ God (as opposed to the Son of the Living God) diminishes his time on earth (ie, God can not be tempted by Satan; God resurrecting himself is pretty silly, really... he's God... are you suggesting God died?).

Given that the Trinity was not explicitly set forth in the Bible, its OK to challenge it. I realize the Church has so fully indoctrinated this concept in most that its probably borderline blasphemy to say its ok to challenge the Trinity... but Jewish rabbis often took an intellectual approach to the Word and argued with one another for the sole purpose of better understanding God. I will further argue that if the Trinity was nothing but Biblical scholars trying to explain the nature of God, then challenging man's teaching is not only acceptable; its required of a discerning Christian.

Again... to be clear I believe the Bible is clear there is a God, there is a son, Jesus, who was came to earth to die for our sins and our salvation; there is a Holy Spirit. I believe the Bible to also be clear that Jesus is the Messiah, he is of divine nature; and that Salvation is gained by grace with the recognition (of my sin nature -- knowing I need a savior), confession and repentance of sin and the acceptance of Jesus as Savior. I "question", because the Bible is not clear, the concept of the Trinity that suggests Jesus was God on earth.

I am not here to tell Christians they are wrong in their belief and faith. I am here for good intelligent dialogue on a matter of doctrine that I believe has been "sold" to Christians such that they never have really thought about it. Again, the Trinity is not Biblical; its a creation of Man based upon Biblical argument. I believe Christians should challenge everything they are told in matters of doctrine to the Word... it is their duty.

BTW, your cites supported the existence of the God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost as well as the nature of the Holy Ghost and the nature of Jesus as the Christ. They do not support the fundamental Trinitarian concept of Jesus being God. Other than John 1:1, which is a compelling argument for Jesus being God (but can be refuted when you deal with its translation)... there is no Biblical support of Jesus being God and Jesus never said he was God. All traditional Trinitarian cites for Jesus supposedly saying he was God are based on a Tritartian assumptions, which make the argument circular.

Also, I took particular note to your argument that ..." ... was arrived at independently by most of the Bishops at the council ..." that it wasn't arrived at by "all" and was merely settled by majority. Again, its a creation of man, subject to the errors on the thinking and politics of man.

Well, I apologize once again, Mr. "Bible reading, God Fearing, Jesus Loving sinner", you are all wet. Belief in the Trinitarian God dates back to antiquity, it is not an invention of the Church, it is a discovery of the Church.

I'll borrow a phrase from you: if you were intellectually honest and not so anti-Church, you might see the benefit of the Church's teachings on this matter. I am going to guess that you are one of those people who never sets foot inside of a church for fear that you might hear something you don't want to hear, correct me if I am wrong. I came to that conclusion since most churches, Protestant and Catholic, follow the three historic creeds of the faith, and there aren't many other places you can hide. The reason I ask is because I have run into many, many people who are anti-Church yet claim to be "God-fearing". You will find somewhere in your Bible that the Church is indeed the body of Christ. To despise and disparage the body of Christ based on your own prejudices is the height of arrogance. The very same Church you speak of as the body of believers still exists today, to divorce her from the hundreds of communities who worship God in His church because you don't like their name is not only illogical but wrongheaded.

You can challenge the Trinity but you're not one of us. Arius was excommunicated centuries ago for that.

Also, I took particular note to your argument that ..." ... was arrived at independently by most of the Bishops at the council ..." that it wasn't arrived at by "all" and was merely settled by majority. Again, its a creation of man, subject to the errors on the thinking and politics of man.

Only three were on Arius' side initially, and unless I am very much mistaken they finally accepted the Creed. This didn't happen overnight; over a century earlier the use of the term "Trinity" could be found in the writings of Origen (185-254) and Tertullian (160-220), and a general notion of a "divine three", in some sense, was expressed in the second century writings of Polycarp, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr. "Political", you say. I suggest that if everyone you meet is wrong, it's not them.

There are no Lone Ranger Christians. Christians without the Church have no meaning. How could a self proclaimed "Christian" disagree with the teachings of the body of Christ?

it's just me · Jul 19, 2014

kjw47 said:
JW,s don't look at C.T. Russell as a prophet---you made that up all by your lonesome. Mr Russell just saw the disunified mass of confusion trying to tell others they serve God--but Jesus brought--LOVE,PEACE,UNITY- proving they are the opposite so correctionds had to be made.
Gods word teaches anyways---the great apostasy had to come first or truth wouldn't come at all. But it has thanks to men like C.T.Russell.

The true God= John 4:22-24--the God the true worshippers worship.

Did Russell make a bunch of prophecies that turned out to be false, yes or no?

(Answer: yes)

kjw47 · Jul 19, 2014

it's just me said:
Did Russell make a bunch of prophecies that turned out to be false, yes or no?

(Answer: yes)

What he did was put a date on a real prophecy of Gods-Harmageddon--the date was wrong, it was the war in heaven that began--he said many years before 1914--peace will be taken from the earth in 1914, he thought it was Harmageddon, but it was satan and his angels being cast to the vicinity of the earth, after Michael defeated them.
It was wrong putting a date on a real prophecy that only the Father knows the day and hour. That was years ago--he has died--light has grown very bright-Daniel 12:4

it's just me · Jul 20, 2014

kjw47 said:
What he did was put a date on a real prophecy of Gods-Harmageddon--the date was wrong, it was the war in heaven that began--he said many years before 1914--peace will be taken from the earth in 1914, he thought it was Harmageddon, but it was satan and his angels being cast to the vicinity of the earth, after Michael defeated them.
It was wrong putting a date on a real prophecy that only the Father knows the day and hour. That was years ago--he has died--light has grown very bright-Daniel 12:4

:roll:

gilbertc1908 · Jul 20, 2014

brothern said:
What an odd thought that has struck me today.

Isn't it funny how Christianity can't even figure out the nature of their own god(s)?

That there are large dissenting branches and strong words between them, which is a result of their archaic/confusing instruction materials.

It's ... kinda laughable.

What is even more odd is finding odd that billions of human beings in an attempt to understand the source of love, reason, time, matter, the universe and life would have a tough time agreeing on every point?

I am always amused when the atheists point out the "vast" differences between the believers in God as if to make some larger point, talk about laughable.

kjw47 · Jul 20, 2014

it's just me said:
:roll:

John 4:22-24--- The true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for its the Father who is searching for such to worship him in spirit and truth, and the hour is now.

it's just me · Jul 20, 2014

kjw47 said:
John 4:22-24--- The true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for its the Father who is searching for such to worship him in spirit and truth, and the hour is now.

I see you are still waiting for both the Spirit and the truth.

upsideguy · Jul 20, 2014

it's just me said:
Well, I apologize once again, Mr. "Bible reading, God Fearing, Jesus Loving sinner", you are all wet. Belief in the Trinitarian God dates back to antiquity, it is not an invention of the Church, it is a discovery of the Church.

Let us recap, shall we? You are the original poster to this thread. You set forth the proposition that your some 25 verses posted some 25 verses were "Scriptural Evidence for the Trinity". I acknowledged, that certainly as those verses set forth the notion that there is a Father and a Son and a Holy Spirit (more than one being)... those verses do, indeed point that out. They also articulate the nature of the Holy Spirit and define Jesus as the Son of the Living God. We are in complete agreement as to these facts.

I pointed out that the notion within the Trinity that Jesus was God Incarnate is not explicitly set forth in the Bible (other than John 1:1 is often interpreted as this) and that particular aspect of the Trinity is fundamentally a "creation of man" in trying to explain the relationship of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

I never said the Trinity was wrong; I said it wasn't necessarily correct. It exists based upon Biblical argument built on Biblical interpretation. (and almost any supporting arguments for the Trinity that you will find on the Internet have scriptural quotes that require side commentary (someone has to tell you what the verse said) to make the argument. Its just an unbelievably shallow argument for such an important concept.

Thus far, you have been unable to defend the notion of Jesus being God with Biblical support. You have consistently produced evidence from Biblical scholars rather than the Word itself. As a result, you are continuing to affirm my original proposition that this concept was created (discovered... really?) by man.

Again, I am not stating its false, but I am stating the concept does not raise itself to essential doctrine (understanding required for salvation) because it is not explicit in the Bible. After all, 2 Timothy 3:16 tells us .... "
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work...

If the concept of Jesus being God incarnate is so important, why isn't it be explicit? If this is something God insists that we know about his character, why is in not as clear as all other essential doctrine? [Perhaps you want to insert a Calvinist response here?] This is a particularly interesting question given substantially all scripture makes it clear that Jesus is the Son of the Living God, and much of it amplifies the distiction.

it's just me said:
I'll borrow a phrase from you: if you were intellectually honest and not so anti-Church, you might see the benefit of the Church's teachings on this matter. I am going to guess that you are one of those people who never sets foot inside of a church for fear that you might hear something you don't want to hear, correct me if I am wrong. I came to that conclusion since most churches, Protestant and Catholic, follow the three historic creeds of the faith, and there aren't many other places you can hide. The reason I ask is because I have run into many, many people who are anti-Church yet claim to be "God-fearing". You will find somewhere in your Bible that the Church is indeed the body of Christ. To despise and disparage the body of Christ based on your own prejudices is the height of arrogance. The very same Church you speak of as the body of believers still exists today, to divorce her from the hundreds of communities who worship God in His church because you don't like their name is not only illogical but wrongheaded.

You can challenge the Trinity but you're not one of us. Arius was excommunicated centuries ago for that.

Rather than defend the doctrine, as you have been unable to do, you are resorting to defending the Church and suggesting I have no right to challenge the church. Further, you cite the institutionalized nature of this doctrine (the fact it has existed in the Church for 16 to 20 centuries) as a point of validation. OK. Lets try another long-standing doctrine of the Church that most Protestants no longer buy into... the Immaculate Conception.

The Immaculate Conception, which many people do not know, is not so much about Mary being a virgin at her conception by God (I think substantially Christians get that), but extends to Mary's mother being a virgin at Mary's conception. (something about being sin free, implying that sex even inside marriage is a sin???).

Why Catholics Believe in the Immaculate Conception

Here is another piece of doctrine that dates back to the 4th century, that the Church believes it true based upon some type of flimsy Biblical argument that requires a lot of interpretation even of the supporting verses. Now, if you are Catholic (Father Guido Sarducci), I just doubled down. But for non-Catholics following this argument, I just set forth a Church doctrine worthy of challenge, which according to you we have no right to do.

The Church is the Bride of Christ. While Christ is a good spouse and loves the Church unconditionally, as any good spouse should, the Church is often unfaithful. The Church is comprised of men and men have a sin nature. The Church has a long history of corruption, including bad doctrine. Fortunately, God gave us the Word from which we all can (and should) challenge the teachers, lest we be led astray. To NOT challenge everything you hear in church against the word is to not be vigilant in protecting your relationship with God (my doctrine). We have a duty to challenge the Church and not blindly accept what you hear. In that context, the Trinity if fair game.

it's just me said:
Only three were on Arius' side initially, and unless I am very much mistaken they finally accepted the Creed. This didn't happen overnight; over a century earlier the use of the term "Trinity" could be found in the writings of Origen (185-254) and Tertullian (160-220), and a general notion of a "divine three", in some sense, was expressed in the second century writings of Polycarp, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr. "Political", you say. I suggest that if everyone you meet is wrong, it's not them.

Sorry, it makes point about it being political and arrived at by vote, fundamentally akin to a supreme court decision; rather than axiomatic, which is what the Church portrays it as. This argument existed for several centuries before being determined , by vote, at the Council of NIcea. No reason to have to agree the issue is settled.

it's just me said:
There are no Lone Ranger Christians. Christians without the Church have no meaning. How could a self proclaimed "Christian" disagree with the teachings of the body of Christ?

Excellent question for Martin Luther and the leaders of at least 2,000 movements within the Church that led to the creation of more than 3,500 flavors on Christian thinking.

BTW. In more than one occasion you chose to question whether I was Christian. At one point, you decided I was arrogant to because I had the temerity to question an aspect about church doctrine. Let me say that, scripturally speak, adjudging my relationship with God is the ultimate of arrogance, as that is the domain of God. Moreover, you continue in this rather condescending tone, which I don’t find particularly becoming of someone who purports to be Christian, not mention is usually a sign that one know’s they cannot compete in the debate. Let me point out that you posted this on Debate Politics.. so, you subjected the topic to debate. Debate like a man or go home.

kjw47 · Jul 20, 2014

it's just me said:
I see you are still waiting for both the Spirit and the truth.

Actually pointing out a major truth of Jesus'.

it's just me · Jul 20, 2014

kjw47 said:
Actually pointing out a major truth of Jesus'.

Too bad you don't know who he is.

upsideguy · Jul 20, 2014

... I guess you weren't very concise when you need a summary of your post... but here goes:

To reinforce my major point: The concept of the Trinity is not self evident in the Bible (I'm not sure if anyone really disagrees with that ). It requires humans' to sting together a series of verses, none of which stand on their own, to create an argument, which IMHO, is very flimsy. Yet, some within the Church will argue this "biblical argument" is essential doctrine (you must believe for salvation).

Given how weak the argument actually is, I reject the notion that it is essential as, I believe that 2 Timothy 3:16 suggests (again, this me) that essential doctrine is self-evident within the Word.

I do find rather shocking just how ingrained it is in the minds of Christians the concept of the Trinity is. Many go through life with out even thinking about it, much less questioning it. Very, very few can explain it. They just take it as axiomatic.

Again, I am not making the argument that it is wrong; just making the argument that questioning it is right.

Logicman · Jul 20, 2014

upsideguy said:
If the concept of Jesus being God incarnate is so important, why isn't it be explicit? If this is something God insists that we know about his character, why is in not as clear as all other essential doctrine? [Perhaps you want to insert a Calvinist response here?] This is a particularly interesting question given substantially all scripture makes it clear that Jesus is the Son of the Living God, and much of it amplifies the distiction.

Scripture may not be overloaded with examples of Jesus being God incarnate, but I think it is sufficient. Philippians 2:5-8:

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.

8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

Additionally, Jesus claimed to be God during his incarnation:

Did Jesus Claim to Be God? Even if He did Make the Claim, Why Should I Believe it? | Josh.org

Jesus also claimed to be the Jewish Messiah and ancient Jewish rabbis understood that the Messiah would be God:

Jeremiah 23:5-6 - The Messiah as God

Here's Jesus as Jehovah:

Jesus Must be Jehovah « The Righter Report

And there's a trail of evidence that it's no less than Jesus in the Burning Bush, speaking as God.

Angel of the LORD

Don't know if any of that helps you out but there it is for your perusal.

Logicman · Jul 20, 2014

upsideguy said:
If the concept of Jesus being God incarnate is so important, why isn't it be explicit? If this is something God insists that we know about his character, why is in not as clear as all other essential doctrine? [Perhaps you want to insert a Calvinist response here?] This is a particularly interesting question given substantially all scripture makes it clear that Jesus is the Son of the Living God, and much of it amplifies the distiction.

Scripture may not be overloaded with examples of Jesus being God incarnate, but I think it is sufficient. Philippians 2:5-8:

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.

8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

Additionally, Jesus claimed to be God during his incarnation:

Did Jesus Claim to Be God? Even if He did Make the Claim, Why Should I Believe it? | Josh.org

Jesus also claimed to be the Jewish Messiah and ancient Jewish rabbis understood that the Messiah would be God:

Jeremiah 23:5-6 - The Messiah as God

Here's Jesus as Jehovah:

Jesus Must be Jehovah « The Righter Report

And there's a trail of evidence that it's no less than Jesus in the Burning Bush, speaking as God.

Angel of the LORD

Don't know if any of that helps you out but there it is for your perusal.

it's just me · Jul 20, 2014

upsideguy said:
... I guess you weren't very concise when you need a summary of your post... but here goes:

To reinforce my major point: The concept of the Trinity is not self evident in the Bible (I'm not sure if anyone really disagrees with that ). It requires humans' to sting together a series of verses, none of which stand on their own, to create an argument, which IMHO, is very flimsy. Yet, some within the Church will argue this "biblical argument" is essential doctrine (you must believe for salvation).

Given how weak the argument actually is, I reject the notion that it is essential as, I believe that 2 Timothy 3:16 suggests (again, this me) that essential doctrine is self-evident within the Word.

I do find rather shocking just how ingrained it is in the minds of Christians the concept of the Trinity is. Many go through life with out even thinking about it, much less questioning it. Very, very few can explain it. They just take it as axiomatic.

Again, I am not making the argument that it is wrong; just making the argument that questioning it is right.

That's kinda why God gave you a brain, to read the Bible thoughtfully instead of with the wooden literalism that is so prevalent among cultists and others.

You wrote:

I pointed out that the notion within the Trinity that Jesus was God Incarnate is not explicitly set forth in the Bible (other than John 1:1 is often interpreted as this) and that particular aspect of the Trinity is fundamentally a "creation of man" in trying to explain the relationship of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

If that's the way you want it, the whole Bible is a "creation of man". We say it was inspired by God but we know bloody well it was written by men, and often we even know who those men were.

I never said the Trinity was wrong; I said it wasn't necessarily correct.

Now that's a distinction without a difference...

It exists based upon Biblical argument built on Biblical interpretation. (and almost any supporting arguments for the Trinity that you will find on the Internet have scriptural quotes that require side commentary (someone has to tell you what the verse said) to make the argument. Its just an unbelievably shallow argument for such an important concept.

Refer back to my first comment. Where, for example, is the Biblical mandate that we have a Bible in the first place? Or how many books are in it? Or what books are in it? Do you know where you got your Bible from? That's right, the Church that gave us the Trinity doctrine. If the Church can't be trusted to give us Trinitarian theology, then it can't be trusted to give you a Bible.

Thus far, you have been unable to defend the notion of Jesus being God with Biblical support. You have consistently produced evidence from Biblical scholars rather than the Word itself. As a result, you are continuing to affirm my original proposition that this concept was created (discovered... really?) by man.

The scripture I quoted IS scripture, and teachers are a very Biblical concept. What do you have against teachers of the Word? Try reading the book of Acts some time.

If the concept of Jesus being God incarnate is so important, why isn't it be explicit?

It IS explicit. Do I have to post scripture where Jesus said he is God, too?

Just how is it that you expect to be saved by a mere man, or an angel?

Rather than defend the doctrine, as you have been unable to do, you are resorting to defending the Church and suggesting I have no right to challenge the church.

So you want to challenge the Church on the Incarnation but not on her authority to compile a Bible? Not very consistent.

To NOT challenge everything you hear in church against the word is to not be vigilant in protecting your relationship with God (my doctrine). We have a duty to challenge the Church and not blindly accept what you hear. In that context, the Trinity if fair game.

That is not Biblical. Jesus himself said this:

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.

In other words, the Scribes and Pharisees knew whereof they spoke on matters of the law, even if they didn't follow it themselves. Your argument falls on it's face.

Sorry, it makes point about it being political and arrived at by vote, fundamentally akin to a supreme court decision; rather than axiomatic, which is what the Church portrays it as.

Again, if everyone you meet is wrong, it's not them.

Excellent question for Martin Luther and the leaders of at least 2,000 movements within the Church that led to the creation of more than 3,500 flavors on Christian thinking.

Martin Luther didn't question the Trinity, and neither do those Protestant denominations.

BTW. In more than one occasion you chose to question whether I was Christian. At one point, you decided I was arrogant to because I had the temerity to question an aspect about church doctrine. Let me say that, scripturally speak, adjudging my relationship with God is the ultimate of arrogance, as that is the domain of God. Moreover, you continue in this rather condescending tone, which I don’t find particularly becoming of someone who purports to be Christian, not mention is usually a sign that one know’s they cannot compete in the debate. Let me point out that you posted this on Debate Politics.. so, you subjected the topic to debate. Debate like a man or go home.

Well, I like to cut to the chase rather than spend five pages to cajole you only to learn that you are just gaming me. If you have the authority to question the Church, I have the authority to question you. Now how about telling me who you are - unbeliever, Jehovah's Witness, lapsed Catholic, what? Just so I know whether or not to waste any more time on you.

Personally, I think you are a JW shill.

calamity · Jul 20, 2014

it's just me said:
OT:

a. Plurality of persons

Genesis 1:26 "Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;"

Genesis 3:22 "Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us"

Genesis 11:7 "Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language,"

Psalm 45:6-7 "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of joy above Your fellows." (A picture of Jesus)

Isaiah 6:8 'Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I. Send me!”' (Notice that the author uses both singular and plural)

Psalm 110:1'"The Lord says to my Lord: “Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.”' (Clearly an indication of the Messiah to come)

Hosea 1:7 "But I will have compassion on the house of Judah and deliver them by the Lord their God, and will not deliver them by bow, sword, battle, horses or horsemen.”

Malachi 3:1 "Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming,” says the Lord of hosts."

b. The Holy Spirit as God

Genesis 16:13 "Then the angel of the Lord said to her, “Return to your mistress, and submit yourself to her authority.” Moreover, the angel of the Lord said to her, “I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they will be too many to count...Then she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, “You are a God who sees”; for she said, “Have I even remained alive here after seeing Him?"

Ex 23:20-22 "Behold, I am going to send an angel before you to guard you along the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. 21 Be on your guard before him and obey his voice; do not be rebellious toward him, for he will not pardon your transgression, since My name is in him.."

Numbers 22:35 "But the angel of the Lord said to Balaam, “Go with the men, but you shall speak only the word which I tell you.”

Judges 2:1-2 "Now the angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim. And he said, “I brought you up out of Egypt and led you into the land which I have sworn to your fathers; and I said, ‘I will never break My covenant with you, and as for you, you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall tear down their altars."

Judges 6:11, 14 "Then the angel of the Lord came and sat under the oak that was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite as his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the wine press in order to save it from the Midianites."

Proverbs 8:22 "“The Lord possessed me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old. “From everlasting I was established, From the beginning, from the earliest times of the earth. “When there were no depths I was brought forth, When there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills I was brought forth; While He had not yet made the earth and the fields, Nor the first dust of the world. “When He established the heavens, I was there, When He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep, When He made firm the skies above, When the springs of the deep became fixed, When He set for the sea its boundary. So that the water would not transgress His command, When He marked out the foundations of the earth; Then I was beside Him, as a master workman; And I was daily His delight, Rejoicing always before Him, Rejoicing in the world, His earth,And having my delight in the sons of men." (A description of the eternal Jesus)

Isaiah 48:16 “Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord God has sent Me, and His Spirit.” (A clear picture of the Trinity)
Isaiah 63:10 "But they rebelled And grieved His Holy Spirit; Therefore He turned Himself to become their enemy" (The Holy Spirit as God)
Isaiah 61:1 "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, Because the Lord has anointed me"

NT

Matt. 3:16-17 "After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and [j]lighting on Him, 17 and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.” (A picture of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)

Matt. 28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," (The Great commission, which tells us in whose name we go forth)

1 Cor. 12:4-6 "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons." (God and the Holy Spirit)

2 Cor. 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." (Self explanatory)

1 Pet. 1:1-2 "To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure."

Jude 20:21 "So Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you."

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you."

Romans 8:27 "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

And before someone asks why Jesus appears to be talking to himself at times, it's because he is a distinct person from the Father. Athanasius tells us that the Son is not the Father but equal to the Father, The Holy Spirit is not the Son, but is equal to the Son, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, but is equal to the Holy Spirit, for all are God, yet distinct from one another. Jehovah's Witnesses will say "We don't hold to the words of Athanasius, he is a mere man". Yet their creator, Charlie Russel, was a mere man, and will lead them into the hell they don't believe exists.

God's Law

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_make_unto_thee_any_graven_image

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Click to expand...

That's pretty clearly stated.

It does not say, "I am three." It does not say, "Feel free to model me after or combine me with a human being." And, it certainly does not say, "It's ok to pretend I sent my son down to thee so you can worship him too."

it's just me · Jul 20, 2014

calamity said:
God's Law

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's pretty clearly stated.

It certainly does not say, "I am three." It does not say, "Feel free to model me after or combine me with a human being." And, it certainly does not say, "It's ok to pretend I sent my son down to thee so you can worship him too."

[sarcasm]Now the atheists are going to weigh in on Christian theology. God knows, Christians are the least qualified to speak on Christian doctrine. [/sarcasm]

calamity · Jul 20, 2014

it's just me said:
[sarcasm]Now the atheists are going to weigh in on Christian theology. God knows, Christians are the least qualified to speak on Christian doctrine. [/sarcasm]

I'm not atheist.

Feel free to ignore the First. I certainly will not. If god exists, he's made himself perfectly clear. Better to worship nothing than a man we defined as god or as part of a "Trinity."

it's just me · Jul 20, 2014

calamity said:
I'm not atheist.

Feel free to ignore the First. I certainly will not. If god exists, he's made himself perfectly clear. Better to worship nothing than a man we defined as god or as part of a "Trinity."

Thank you, I will ignore it.

calamity · Jul 20, 2014

it's just me said:
Thank you, I will ignore it.

You started a thread looking for permission to ignore it is my view. In fact, you went so far as to post a dozen pieces of scripture which you believe justifies your position. I posted the one which refutes it.

Your choices are not my problem. Me? I'll stick to the clearest statement of the bunch.

tosca1 · Jul 20, 2014

calamity said:
You started a thread looking for permission to ignore it is my view. In fact, you went so far as to post a dozen pieces of scripture which you believe justifies your position. I posted the one which refutes it.

That didn't refute anything. Your quoted verses simply stated the truth - that there is only One God.

The Trinity is one God existing in three Persons. Understand that this is not in any way suggesting three Gods. Keep in mind when studying this subject that the word “Trinity” is not found in Scripture.

This is a term that is used to attempt to describe the triune God—three coexistent, co-eternal Persons who make up God.

Of real importance is that the concept represented by the word “Trinity” does exist in Scripture. The following is what God’s Word says about the Trinity:

1) There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5).

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for “us” is used. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun “us” are plural forms, definitely referring in the Hebrew language to more than two. While this is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote the aspect of plurality in God.

The Hebrew word for "God," "Elohim," definitely allows for the Trinity.

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking.

Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this passage is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of three distinct Persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “LORD” is distinguished from “Lord” (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4).
The Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10-12).
God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9).
In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17).
This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit.

MORE EXPLANATIONS.....

Read more: What does the Bible teach about the Trinity?

calamity · Jul 20, 2014

tosca1 said:
That didn't refute anything. Your quoted verses simply stated the truth - that there is only One God.

The Trinity is one God existing in three Persons. Understand that this is not in any way suggesting three Gods. Keep in mind when studying this subject that the word “Trinity” is not found in Scripture.

This is a term that is used to attempt to describe the triune God—three coexistent, co-eternal Persons who make up God.

Of real importance is that the concept represented by the word “Trinity” does exist in Scripture. The following is what God’s Word says about the Trinity:

1) There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5).

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for “us” is used. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun “us” are plural forms, definitely referring in the Hebrew language to more than two. While this is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote the aspect of plurality in God.

The Hebrew word for "God," "Elohim," definitely allows for the Trinity.

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking.

Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this passage is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of three distinct Persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “LORD” is distinguished from “Lord” (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4).
The Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10-12).
God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9).
In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17).
This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit.

MORE EXPLANATIONS.....

Read more: What does the Bible teach about the Trinity?

GOd does not become a person, and he clearly states that we are not to make images of him as though he were a person. Hence, worshiping this.

Is not a good idea, and a clear violation.

nota bene · Jul 20, 2014

Orthodox Christians believe in the Incarnation.

calamity · Jul 20, 2014

nota bene said:
Orthodox Christians believe in the Incarnation.

The hypostatic union is subject to much debate. I side with those opposed.

nota bene · Jul 20, 2014

That's nice.

Scriptural evidence for the Trinity

Well-known member

Non Bidenary

Non Bidenary

Well-known member

Non Bidenary

Member

Well-known member

Non Bidenary

Pragmatic Idealist

Well-known member

Non Bidenary

Pragmatic Idealist

Non Bidenary

Privileged

Non Bidenary

Privileged

Non Bidenary

Privileged

Privileged

Privileged