Brother Chad

I think I asked this already, but I didn't expect so much commentary from all of you. I also first want to commend everyone for making this such a good debate. Everyone has behaved as far as I can see (me included). So here goes my question again. I have heard over and over again that the word "trinity" is not to be found in the Bible. The thing that puzzles me is not this word in the Bible but all the other words used to explain the trinity that are not found in the Bible: Three in One; God the Son; God the Holy Ghost; eternally begotten; three distinct but co-equal and co-eternal; three separate but united in power and purpose; persons in the Godhead; the person of the Holy Ghost; the person of the Father; three but not three but One; One expressed as three, triune God and there are more. So why would God say over and over again that there is one God and no others and not put anyone of these simple phrases into His masterpiece to show that He is essentially tri-une? -The 3-in-1 phrase in I John 5:7 was added by an editor in the early 1500's. You might say that is speculative but remember that Martin Luther rejected this verse and he was a Trinitarian. -God the Son: We know that God is eternal (the first and last) and we know that the word son means "offspring". When you say this about God, you are saying that our God is a being that is eternal and an offspring? This seems to me to be an utter impossibility, how about you? Hebrews 1:5 says plainly, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." We know that before Jesus, God was a Spirit because John 4:24 says such. So basically and without much confusion we have the Spirit of God shown in the flesh that was not God. Jesus' humanity was not God, it was His Spirit that was God! The Spirit of the Father. Alright, we all know that God is eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Let's see if Jesus is all these? I have shown how God Himself said that His Son Jesus was begotten or was born on a certain day. The "son of man" is used by Jesus to describe Himself. God cannot be the offspring of his own creation. Was Jesus all knowing (omniscient)? -Mark 8:17, "And when Jesus knew [it], he saith unto them, Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye your heart hardened?" The word knew meaning: to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of, perceive, feel. Mark 13:32, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." Now consider whether Jesus was all-powerful or all-present? -In the tomb, Jesus could not have opened one eye. Jesus was only physically in one place at any given time. So how do we account for the fact that Jesus spoke and did miracles as God Himself? -I Timothy 3:16, "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." -John 14:10, "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." -Colossians 2:9, "For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." So if the Son were indwelt by the Father what might we find in Scripture? Jesus as the Christ or "saturated with the Spirit of God" would be able to speak equally as the Eternal Spirit and as a temporal or finite creation. -John 8:58, "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I Am." This shows the fact that Jesus is described as Eternal and having a beginning: eternal in Spirit and begotten in the flesh. Jesus as the Christ would be omniscient in the Spirit but not all the knowledge of the Spirit was imparted to the flesh. The Spirit would retain the fullness of the Godhead while being able to selectively restrict the attributes of the Godhead in flesh. The flesh would call the Spirit God: -John 20:17, "Jesus saith unto her, touch me not; 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." This shows how the flesh could be completely subject to the Spirit: -Isaiah 42:1, "Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, [in whom] my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles." The Spirit in the flesh would still be fully God: -Matthew 8:26-27, "And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. But the men marveled, saying, What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!" -Numbers 23:19, "God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? Or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" This says that God is not the son of man, a term Jesus used for Himself many times. So in closing, Jesus the son of man and the Son of God after the flesh and Christ the anointed or saturated by and of the Spirit!

Here is something I found from a trinitarian website called carm.org: So the author in the beginning shows a passage on God being one from the Bible, then says there are three persons that God consists of with no passage. Why? So these three persons are "one" God yet they are distinct "persons". So by this each person of the Godhead should be God, correct? In fact, I have seen many times when trinitarians say God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The only difference here that I see is in the triad you switch it around and say the Father is a God, the Son is a God, adn the Holy Spirit is a God. I only say this because the author states at the front of this excerpt that they are three persons.

you are still trying to seperate the "Son of Man" from the "Son of God". You can't do that. We see from Stephen's testimony that Jesus in Heaven is called "The Son of Man". Jesus is still fully man in heaven. And yet he never ceased to be fully God either. Jesus is called "The Son of Man" even in the Old Testament. Here we see God sitting on the throne, and Jesus comes on the scene. Although I don

This is a reply to post #225: Jesus was speaking through his humanity. He showed both aspects of Himself many times. I feel like I am running around in circles here. Jesus thirsted; did he do this as a human or as God? Obviously it is a human who thirsts and not God. When Jesus prayed did he pray as a man or as God? Well we know that God does not need to pray, so Jesus prayed as a man. Now when Jesus says,

Bro. EricH, The Father turned His back on the Son when he took the punishment for sin upon Himself. I believe I covered this one with my last post. The Father did not turn His back because the Son

Brother ErichH, The Son suffered on the cross, not the Father. Once again this is very true. Matthew 27:46,

Brother EricH, The Son sent the Spirit. Well, this is true. Acts 2:4 says,

Bro. Eric, I agree there are other instances where distinctions arise. However, all the examples you have shown are what I have been trying to get across. I will try to further explain these again for you: The Father sent the Son into the world. Galatians 4:4 says,

Dear John, The only distinction I have shown between the Father and the Son is that the Father is Spirit and the Son is flesh. This is the key to unlocking the door. You really seem to like that egg thing and the husband and wife theory but notice I didn't need anything to show my points other than the Bible itself. There is a distinction between the Father and the Son. Your way is by making the Son subordinate to the Father in the Godhead. My way is by saying that the Son (humanity) is subordinate to the Father (Spirit of God). When you see this truth for what it is you will see what the Scriptures are trying to tell you. I understand that it is hard to believe that what you believe could be wrong. We all think we are right. I truly have come to this conclusion without any prior knowledge of what the trinity or the oneness actually meant. The Bible was written by very strict monotheistic Jews who saw nothing wrong with there being one God. They never use the word persons or hold God to the number three because to do so would demean who He is. Jesus said it best when HE said, "I Am", not "We are".

This argument does not hold water. by the same reasoning, all of the Bible is based on paganism, because the Epic of Gilagamesh, and its account of a great flood, was written down long before the Bible was written down by man. Since the Fall, Satan has always had counterfiets. Both before and after Jesus there were false christs. Both before and after the Ten Commandments, there were false gods. Did you know that the Pre-Exodus Egyptians even had "arks" which they carried certain of their gods around in, just like the Ark of the Covenant? Your example does not undermine the Trinity, but in fact is just an illustration of Satan's attempts to sow confusion throughout the ages by offering "other religions" that have vague similarities to certain Biblical events or concepts. I was just trying to show the similarities between the trinitarian doctrine and those of pagan religions which God vehemently opposed by saying such things as, Exodus 20:3, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me". Or Deuteronomy 32:39, when God said there is no other god with him. It was just to prove that God never meant for our understanding of His true nature to be that of those religions which had more than one God. Trinitarianism leads to tritheism no matter how you slice it.

How about the obvious ties trinitarianism has to the pagan religions of its days. The Babylonians worshipped one god in three persons and used the equilateral triangle as a symbol of this trinity. Trinities exist in other pagan religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism. Hinduism has a trinity that is represented by a statue of one god with three heads. Buddhists worship three-headed statues of Buddha. Taoism has an official trinity of supreme gods- the Jade Emperor, Lao Tzu, and Ling Pao- called the three purities. The idea of a trinity did not originate with Christendom. It was a significant feature of pagan religions and philosophies before the Christian era, and its existence today in various forms suggests an ancient, pagan origin.

Let's take a look at the trinitarian doctrine from its conception: Tertullian, the first prominent exponent of Trinitarianism, taught that the Son was subordinate to the Father and that the trinity is not eternal. He held that the distinction of persons would cease in the future. He was the 1st person in history to use the words trinity, substance, and person in relation to God. He was the first to speak of three persons in one substance. Tertullian equated the Logos with the Son. He believed the Father brought the Logos into existence for the creation of the world and the Logos was subordinate to the Father. By his own admission the majority of believers in his day rejected his doctrine on two premises: Their Rule of Faith prohibited polytheism, and his doctrine divided the unity of God. It is clear that in Tertullian's day Oneness believers saw his doctrine as sharply opposed to their own, which was the majority belief at the time. Tertullian was eventually excommunicated along with the rest of the Montanist's. Origen was Trinitarianism first major proponent in the East. He attempted to fuse Greek philosophy and Christianity into a system of higher knowledge that historians describe as Christian Gnosticism. He taught that the Son or Logos was a separate person from all eternity. He said the Son was begotten from all eternity and is eternally being begotten. He retained a subordination of the Son to the Father in existence or origin, but moved closer to the later doctrine of co-equality. Origen also denied the necessity for the redemptive work of Christ, and believed in the ultimate salvation of the wicked, including the devil. He was excommunicated from the church. Novatian was one of the first to emphasize the Holy Spirit as a third person. He also taught subordination of the Son to the Father, saying the Son was a separate person, but had a beginning and came from the Father. Cornelius excommunicated Novatian for believing that a number of serious sins could not be forgiven if committed after conversion. All these men who started the trinity doctrine in its infancy were eventually excommunicated. Even if it wasn't for this teaching, their ideas about God had to be somewhat lacking in understanding so maybe their lack of knowledge helped them come up with a trinity?

Actually, I did read some of it, but its totally erroneous. It is not man who authored the terms "Father" and "Son" and "Holy Spirit", but God. Remember, Jesus referred to the Father as "My Father in Heaven". Hence "Father" is not a man-made term for God. Recall also the voice from heaven which said, "This is my (Beloved) Son..." So the Father used the terminology "Son". Read the opening statements of Peter's epistles, and as well James. How can you deny the fact that the Father and the Son are two seperate persons? And that the Holy Spirit is a third person? To read these passages any other way is just absurdity. Paul's letters are teh same way. Over and over he uses terminology which makes a distinction between the person of Christ, and the person of the Father. The person of the Son and the person of the Father. Why is there an "and" in these passages if there is only one person being spoken of? If you were right, they should all read. God our Father the Lord Jesus Christ... but actually they all read. "God our Father AND the Lord Jesus Christ" and in some cases the two persons are even seperated by a preposition. "FROM God our Father AND FROM the Lord Jesus Christ" etc. I never said that the terms Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are man-made terms. They do not however support a claim of a triune God. I have already spoken of the voice from heaven and why it came into being. See the answer above for further clarification. Now we get into another arena with the Greetings of the Epistles: As you have stated most of them contain God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Why if it is a trinity, is there no mention of the Holy Ghost in these greetings? Surely a co-equal partner in the fold would not be left out. Are you sure you are not binitarian? To me this would have to relegate the Holy Ghost to a junior role in the trinity? To me, these two roles are emphasized and they show the importance of accepting Him in both roles. Not only must we believe in God as our Creator and Father, but we must accept Him as manifested in the flesh through Jesus Christ. It was unnecessary to mention the Holy Ghost because the concept of God as a Spirit was wrapped up in the title of God the Father, especially to the Jewish mind. Remember the doctrine of the trinity did not develop until much later in church history.

Bro. John, 5. We see Jesus with the Father in Acts 7:55 and 56 "But he being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God." Once again, we clearly see the trinity. Jesus is on the right hand of God the Father in heaven, and Stephen is full of the Holy Ghost, the comforter sent into this world by Jesus to lead us into all truth. While the word "trinity" is not found in scripture, the fact is, the trinity is clearly seen. Like an egg has three parts, yet it is one egg, so God is one God, but in three persons: The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father is in heaven on his throne with his Son Jesus Christ by his side. The Holy Spirit is in this world in the hearts of believers. Concerning the question of baptism and why Jesus said to baptise in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and the accounts of baptism by the disciples in Acts are in Jesus name, I would make the following comments. First, Jesus told us how to baptise. If what he said is wrong, then he lied to us, causing confusion. Secondly, what you read in acts are mearly accounts of the activities of the disciples. They do not say how to baptise. It just records they did baptise in Jesus name. Based on that, I prefer the method taught by the Lord, but do not think it really is that important, since the Father, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are all one. The apostolic church is making an issue out of this that is really of no consequence. If baptism was so essential to salvation, and we must practive a precise formula to be saved, why did Paul make the following statement? 1 Corinthinans 1:17 "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." If it were necessary as apostolics teach to be baptised in Jesus name to be saved, then Paul most certainly would have been called to baptize and to do so immediately upon the conversion of a new believer. He couldn't take a chance that they might die before they found someone willing to baptize them. I will first reiterate my previous discussion about Jesus actually being the Holy Ghost. In John 14:16, Jesus promised to send another Comforter. (Holy Ghost) In verse 17, Jesus tells them that they knew the Comforter already, because He dwelt with them and would be in them. So who dwelt with the disciples at that time? Jesus did. So when we have the Spirit in us, we have Christ in us (Ephesians 3:16-17). A physical interpretation of

Brother John, 4. John 16:12-15 "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot hear them now: Howbeit, when HE the Spirit of truth is come, HE will guide you into all truth: For HE SHALL NOT SPEAK OF HIMSELF: BUT WHATSOEVER HE SHALL HEAR, THAT SHALL HE SPEAK, and will shew you things to come. HE SHALL GLORIFY ME, FOR HE SHALL RECEIVE OF MINE, AND SHALL SHEW IT UNTO YOU. All things THE FATHER HATH, are mine: therefore said I that HE shall take of MINE, and shew it unto you." (Capitols added for emphasis.) Notice again the language Jesus uses here. Jesus clearly says he has things he would like to teach his disciples but they are not able to bear it. He then says the Spirit of Truth will come and guide us into all truth. The Spirit of truth is the Holy Ghost. I am assuming you will acknowledge the Spirit is God. Notice the Spirit (God) will not speak of himself, but of those things he shall hear. Hear of who? Obviously Jesus, whom he will glorify. I am going to take this opportunity to show you how the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all one. God is Father, is holy, and is a Spirit? If this is correct then the titles of Father and Holy Spirit describe the same being. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost and was born the Son of God as a result. That would make the Holy Ghost the Father of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. In Joel 2:27-29: The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the one Jehovah God of the Old Testament. Since we know that there is only one Spirit, certainly the Spirit of Jehovah must be the Holy Spirit. Here are a few passages that further reveal this truth: Acts 2:24 to Romans 8:11, John 14:26 to II Corinthians 1:3-4, and Matthew 10:20 to Mark 13:11 to name a few. Father and Holy Ghost are two different descriptions of the one God. They describe the same being but emphasize different aspects, roles, or functions that He possesses. Now since I have shown how the Father and Holy Spirit are one in the same and not two distinct persons, lets show how Jesus Christ is the Holy Ghost. The Spirit that is residing in Jesus Christ is the Holy Spirit: Romans 8:11, But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. This says that the Spirit of God raised Christ from the dead and that He would do the same for us by the Spirit that dwells in us. We know that the Holy Ghost is that Spirit in us. Yet in John 6:40, Jesus tells us that He will raise us up at the last day. This clearly shows that the Holy Ghost is Jesus Christ and vice versa. Otherwise we must call Jesus a liar and we know that He is not. As long as Jesus was present with them in the flesh He would not be present spiritually in their hearts, but after He physically departed He would send back His own Spirit to be with them. Believers are filled with the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:4, 38), yet it is Jesus who dwells in us (Colossians 1:27). In Mark 13:11, Jesus tells them not to worry about what they will say because the Holy Ghost will help them and then in Luke 21:15, Jesus says that He will give them wisdom in what to say. I believe these all show a clear picture that Jesus Christ (deity) is the Holy Ghost. Finally, the titles of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit describe God

Brother John, Number 3: 3. In John 16:25-28 "These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: the time commeth when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father. At that day ye shall ask in my Name: and I say not unto you that I will pray the Father for you: For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father." Notice that Jesus makes clear distinction between himself and the Father. He states he came "out from God." Jesus is God and came out from God. That is how they are one. Just like an egg has a shell, egg white, and a yolk, it is still one egg, God is one God, but in 3 parts, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Jesus says the Father loves us because we love Jesus. If there was not a distinction, why not simply say, "I love you because you love me?" He then says he is going back to the Father. Why not say, "I am returning to heaven to reclaim my throne?" If there is no trinity, then Jesus is causing the confusion by using such language. The clear distinction in this one is the humanity versus deity. Let

Alright Brother John, Here is my shot at number 2 on your list: 2. We see a clear example of the trinity at the baptism of Jesus in Matthew 3:16, 17 "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and loe, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him. And loe, a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." In this instance all three appeared in the same scene. The Holy Ghost came down to Jesus like a dove, and the Father spoke from his throne in heaven. To believe as you do, Jesus would have been acting as a ventiliquist. He literally would be breeding confusion by his actions, and the Bible says God is not the author of confusion. This is always a fun one to tackle. It can be quite confusing to say the least. So in this passage we have Jesus being baptized and the Spirit descending like a dove, and a voice speaking from heaven. Luke 3:22 adds,

Okay Brother John, I am going to take each one separately and try to explain them to you as best I can using the Bible alone. Here goes your number 1: 1. Jesus is God. On this we agree. As such he is all knowing. That would mean that he would fully understand if a "trinity" existed or not, even when he was in this world. It is ludacrous to me to believe that Jesus would pray to a god in heaven that did not exist. That would actually be an example of him praying to an idol or false god, which we are forbidden to do. If there were no Father in heaven, he would have had to pray to himself, which he clearly didn't do. First, yes we agree that Jesus is God, but I believe that He is God the Father manifested in flesh. I can prove this with I Timothy 3:16,

I will give it one more shot with you guys and then you are on your own. -There is one indivisible God (Deuteronomy 6:4). God is a Spirit (John 4:24) and therefore invisible to man (John 1:18; I Timothy 6:16). -God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent (Psalm 139; Revelation 19:6). -In the Old Testament, God manifested Himself in many ways called theophanies (Genesis 18:1; Exodus 33:22-23). -In the New Testament, God manifested Himself in human flesh as Jesus Christ, the Son of God (John 1:1, 14; I Timothy 3:16). -In the Old Testament God revealed Himself by the name Jehovah or Yahweh, which means the Self-Existing One or the Eternal One. -The New Testament often describes the one God as the Father (Romans 8:14-16; John 3:16). -The Bible uses the term Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit to refer to the one God. Describing what God is and emphasizes God in activity such as creation (Genesis 1:2) and regeneration, baptizing, filling, adn anointing (Acts 1:4-8; 2:1-4). -The Word refers to the one God, particularly to the thought, plan, or expression of God. -God manifested Himself in flesh in the person of Jesus Christ. This manifestation of God is called the Son of God because He was literally conceived in the womb of a woman by the miraculous operation of the Spirit of God (Matthew 1:18-20). The Son did not pre-exist the Incarnation except as a plan in the mind of God, namely as the Word. -Jesus has a dual nature-human and divine, or flesh and Spirit. Two complete natures are united inseparably in the person of Jesus Christ. In his human nature Jesus is the son of Mary. In His divine nature Jesus is the one God Himself (II Corinthians 5:19; Colossians 2:9; I Timothy 3:16). -Jesus is the Father (Isaiah 9:6; John 10:30; 14:6-11), Jehovah (Jeremiah 23:6), the Word (John 1:14), and the Holy Spirit (II Corinthians 3:17; Galatians 4:6; Ephesians 3:16-17). -The Bible clearly teaches the doctrine of the oneness of God and the absolute deity fo Jesus Christ. -Trinitarianism contradicts and detracts from important biblical teachings. It detracts from the Bible's emphasis on God's absolute oneness, and it detracts from Jesus Christs full deity. -The Bible does not speak of an eternally existing "God the Son"; for the Son refers only to the Incarnation. -The term "three persons in one God" is inaccurate because there is no distinction of persons in God. He has one visible body- the glorified human body of Jesus. The only number relevant to God is one.