Christendom's Trinity: Where Did It Come From?

[mikesw]

synergy:

I find it curious that no Trinitarian has been able to quote a single verse of scripture--without ignoring context--that confirms the nonsense you stated above (enlarged and bolded in blue). By the way, context refers to surrounding words, verses, and chapters.

Now, suppose you quote your first three supposed Trinitarian verses for the rest of us to see. Quote those first three, and I will show you the context that will enable people with reading-comprehension skills to get the correct understanding of what they're reading.

If you quote more than "Trinitarian" scriptures at a time, I will only respond to the first three.


Ready, set, go!

all that is needed against the JWs is the verses that show Jesus is God or that he pre-exists as God.

The JWs present a different "Jesus" who is only an arch-angel. So there is nothing for the JW to argue in the trinity discussions.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Capbook:

Anything that does not agree with what's in the Judeo-Christian Bible is not an authority that I will consider. None of the publications that you listed above are acceptable because none of them were written by inspiration of Jehovah God. They were written by imperfect humans spewing their personal philosophy in printed form.

Alter2Ego, what a misunderstanding, I said Bible lexicon not just lexicon.
You know what is a "strawman argument" is?
That is what you are doing, misrepresenting what I said.

Capbook:

It matters not that the word "lexicon" is preceded by a descriptive word such as "Bible." The same rule applies for all lexicons.

"Dictionary vs. Lexicon — What's the Difference?
A dictionary provides definitions, spellings, and pronunciations of words in a language, whereas a lexicon is a collection of words and phrases in a language, often for specific fields."

Dictionary vs. Lexicon — What’s the Difference?

A dictionary provides definitions, spellings, and pronunciations of words in a language, whereas a lexicon is a collection of words and phrases in a language, often for specific fields.

www.askdifference.com

See that? Whereas a dictionary provides definitions, a "Bible" lexicon is nothing more than words strung together by the people who published it, and--get this--it was not written by inspiration of Jehovah God. If that were the case, it would be contained withing the Judeo-Christian Bible.

Any writing not found within the Bible itself--if it contradicts scripture--is demonic. The Judeo-Christian Bible is always the final authority. Below is the reason why:

2 Timothy 3:16​

All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,

2 Timothy 3:17​

so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.


The fact that you're relying on uninspired writings that contradict scripture says a lot about your supposed Christian faith. It's a red flag that you don't want to have things set straight by relying upon what the Bible says.


Prove me wrong.

 

[mikesw]

Capbook:

It matters not that the word "lexicon" is preceded by a descriptive word such as "Bible." The same rule applies for all lexicons.

"Dictionary vs. Lexicon — What's the Difference?
A dictionary provides definitions, spellings, and pronunciations of words in a language, whereas a lexicon is a collection of words and phrases in a language, often for specific fields."

Dictionary vs. Lexicon — What’s the Difference?

A dictionary provides definitions, spellings, and pronunciations of words in a language, whereas a lexicon is a collection of words and phrases in a language, often for specific fields.

www.askdifference.com

See that? Whereas a dictionary provides definitions, a "Bible" lexicon is nothing more than words strung together by the people who published it, and--get this--it was not written by inspiration of Jehovah God. If that were the case, it would be contained withing the Judeo-Christian Bible.

Any writing not found within the Bible itself--if it contradicts scripture--is demonic. The Judeo-Christian Bible is always the final authority. Below is the reason why:

2 Timothy 3:16​

All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,

2 Timothy 3:17​

so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.


The fact that you're relying on uninspired writings that contradict scripture says a lot about your supposed Christian faith. It's a red flag that you don't want to have things set straight by relying upon what the Bible says.


Prove me wrong.

Translations from the Hebrew or Greek to English use Lexicons. The Lexicons provide the meaning and instances of words. Without the studies on words from the lexicons, people would have to guess what each word in the language means --at least in a generic sense. Each word would be a puzzle or symbol with no communicative relevance. Maybe the alternative is to use the translating devices the used the Joseph Smith to translate the golden tablets.

Please try to be a little more logical in the issues you raise.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Capbook:

You are confused. There's nothing healthy or good about a conversation with people who claim they are Christian but refuse to be corrected by scripture. Jesus Christ set the example when he instructed his First Century disciples as follows:

I just believe that topics about spiritual food is a healthy topic than worldly topics Alter2Ego.
Or it is just your "ego" that negates spiritual topics and felt onion skinned.
By the way, why you suffix "ego" in your forum name?

That's how you ended up believing in a non-existent trinity god, Capbook, because you won't accept that anybody can claim they are Christian but their belief in dogma not supported by scripture is, in reality, nothing more than paganism.

 

[mikesw]

That's how you ended up believing in a non-existent trinity god, Capbook, because you won't accept that anybody can claim they are Christian but their belief in dogma not supported by scripture is, in reality, nothing more than paganism.

Your argument against God is that he is identified, in your eyes, as pagan? Or are you syaing God simply does not exist?

The first point to disprove the JW view as having any debate standing in the discussion is that the Jesus of JWs is only an arch-angel, Michael. That view is without any substantiation.

The other element that disproves the JW view is John 1, which shows Jesus pre-exists as God, not an angel.

 

[Peterlag]

The get out of jail free card... "that was his human side..."

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100% man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

For example, in his God nature he would not have been tempted by anything (James 1:13), and his human part would not have been tempted either since his human nature had access to that same knowledge and assurance. It is written he was tempted in every way like we all are (Hebrews 4:15). Furthermore, God does not have the problems, uncertainty, and anxieties that humans do, and Jesus would not have had those either if he knew he was God. Also, Luke 2:52 says Jesus grew in wisdom, but his human part would have had access to his God part, which would have given him infinite and inherent wisdom. Hebrews says Jesus “learned obedience” by the things that he suffered, but again, the human part of Jesus would have accessed the God part of him and he would not have needed to learn anything.

Kenotic Trinitarians claim that Jesus put off or limited His God nature, but that theology only developed to try to reconcile some of the verses about what Christ experienced on the earth. The idea that God can limit what He knows or experiences as God is not taught or explained in Scripture, and Kenotic Trinitarianism has been rejected by orthodox Trinitarians for exactly that reason. The very simple way to explain the “difficult verses” that Kenotic Trinitarians are trying to explain about Christ’s human experiences is to realize that Jesus was a fully human being, and not both God and man at the same time. Some assert we have to take the Trinity “by faith” but that is not biblical either.

 

[synergy]

synergy:

I find it curious that no Trinitarian has been able to quote a single verse of scripture--without ignoring context--that confirms the nonsense you stated above (enlarged and bolded in blue). By the way, context refers to surrounding words, verses, and chapters.

Your response does nothing to address what I stated. So, instead of engaging my comments, you simply diverted away from it, thereby proving the very point I made about the non-Trinitarian habit of refusing to address the comprehensive biblical evidence of Divine Multi-Person Manifestations (Theophanies) unless it is reduced to a single proof-text containing the word “Trinity.”

Now, suppose you quote your first three supposed Trinitarian verses for the rest of us to see. Quote those first three, and I will show you the context that will enable people with reading-comprehension skills to get the correct understanding of what they're reading.

If you quote more than "Trinitarian" scriptures at a time, I will only respond to the first three.

Ready, set, go!

Address my point first and then I'll be more than happy to address yours.

 

[mikesw]

The get out of jail free card... "that was his human side..."

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100% man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

Peterlag assumes that God could not send the one John notes as logos so as to be incarnate among humanity. Peterlag assumes that God doing this would have to violate the laws of nature without any basis. I suppose Peterlag is simply denying the virgin birth because there would be not father. In doing so, Peterlag denies the obvious reading of the text. Secondly, how does Peterlag guess how the laws of nature have been violated by Jesus being incarnate of the One identified by logos? That is just a wild guess.

For example, in his God nature he would not have been tempted by anything (James 1:13), and his human part would not have been tempted either since his human nature had access to that same knowledge and assurance. It is written he was tempted in every way like we all are (Hebrews 4:15). Furthermore, God does not have the problems, uncertainty, and anxieties that humans do, and Jesus would not have had those either if he knew he was God. Also, Luke 2:52 says Jesus grew in wisdom, but his human part would have had access to his God part, which would have given him infinite and inherent wisdom. Hebrews says Jesus “learned obedience” by the things that he suffered, but again, the human part of Jesus would have accessed the God part of him and he would not have needed to learn anything.

That argument against temptation is so weak that it is amazing that unitarians would repeat it ad nauseum

Kenotic Trinitarians claim that Jesus put off or limited His God nature, but that theology only developed to try to reconcile some of the verses about what Christ experienced on the earth. The idea that God can limit what He knows or experiences as God is not taught or explained in Scripture, and Kenotic Trinitarianism has been rejected by orthodox Trinitarians for exactly that reason.

We are told that Jesus humbled himself to come as a servant. This likely indicates kenosis. So your rejection of the idea being in scripture is rather weak. The issue can remain that orthodox Trinitarians have misconstrued some concepts. Any view about Christ has to begin with the recognition that he was with God and was God. Unitarians just try to use some uncertainties of Trinitarian discussions to simply dismiss who Jesus is.

The very simple way to explain the “difficult verses” that Kenotic Trinitarians are trying to explain about Christ’s human experiences is to realize that Jesus was a fully human being, and not both God and man at the same time.

That does not explain away how Jesus was with God and was God. You have to reject a major point in order to give room for your idea that Jesus is mere human.

Some assert we have to take the Trinity “by faith” but that is not biblical either.

If you are not following Christ, you have no need to take anything by faith. A quote I shared mentions that details about Christ beyond our human understanding have to be accepted as true despite being beyond the limits of what humanity can know