Christendom's Trinity: Where Did It Come From?

[amazing grace]

Jesus is the ONLY Lord, the One Lord

Jesus is the One Lord ---- There is one God, the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ TWO separated individuals NOT collapsed INTO ONE being.

The reason we know that Romans 10:13, although quoted from the OT in reference to YHWH, now refers to the Lord Jesus Christ is because Romans 10:11, also quoted from the OT Isaiah 28:16 which reads:

therefore thus says the Lord GOD (Adonai Yahweh), "Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: 'Whoever believes will not be in haste (ashamed)." [Isaiah 28:16]

"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” (1 Peter 2:4-6)

'So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone' [Ephesians 2:19,20]

Who is the cornerstone? none other than Jesus Christ so these OT scriptures in Romans 10 are in reference to the Lord Jesus Christ - those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - (1 Cor. 1:2)

So according to the context, who do we call upon to be saved? 'call upon the name of the Lord', i.e. Jesus Christ.

 

[FreeInChrist]

Jesus is the One Lord ---- There is one God, the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ TWO separated individuals NOT collapsed INTO ONE being.

Look at 1 Cor 8:6 is being used.

When Paul writes: "one God , the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ he is NOT saying that the Father alone is God in nature, and
Jesus is merely a non-divine lord.

Paul is doing something much stronger..... he is redefining monotheism christologically by splitting the Shema (Deut 6:4
which states, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one!" between the Father and Jesus.

A first-century Jew could not do that unless Jesus was included within the identity of the one God.

---

2. “Not collapsed into one being” is a red flag phrase​

The Bible never uses “being” language. That phrase comes from later metaphysical debates, and here it is being used defensively to rule out Jesus’ deity.


In Scripture:

• Jesus is distinct from the Father ✔
• Jesus shares in what only God is and does ✔

Denying His deity requires explaining away:

• Creation through Him (John 1:3)
• Worship of Him (Rev 5:13–14)
• Divine titles (Isa 45 → Phil 2)
• Preexistence (John 1:1)

That author’s wording avoids those issues by redefining the terms upfront.

 

[amazing grace]

Look at 1 Cor 8:6 is being used.

When Paul writes: "one God , the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ he is NOT saying that the Father alone is God in nature, and
Jesus is merely a non-divine lord.

Paul is doing something much stronger..... he is redefining monotheism christologically by splitting the Shema (Deut 6:4
which states, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one!" between the Father and Jesus.

A first-century Jew could not do that unless Jesus was included within the identity of the one God.

I see how it is being used - Paul is saying that although there are many gods and many "lords" - BUT TO US or FOR US there is but ONE God --- who is that one God? Paul tells us it is the Father.....there is but ONE God, the Father!
and there is ONE Lord --- who is that one Lord? Paul again tells us it is the Lord Jesus Christ - one Lord, Jesus Christ.
Now I see no differentiated nature mentioned . . . so that would have to read into the scripture!

No there is no reason for Paul to be redefining monotheism christologically! There is no reason for Paul to redefine the Shema of Deut. 6:4 or to redefine the Shema which Jesus said was the first and great commandment in Mark 12.

A first century Jew could not do what? Redefine the Shema????
No first century Jew WOULD WANT TO redefine the Shema!!!

2. “Not collapsed into one being” is a red flag phrase​

The Bible never uses “being” language. That phrase comes from later metaphysical debates, and here it is being used defensively to rule out Jesus’ deity.
In Scripture:

• Jesus is distinct from the Father ✔
• Jesus shares in what only God is and does ✔

Correct, scripture never uses the word "being" in reference to God but a being is just something that has existence and we know that God exist so there is nothing untoward in calling God a being.

Denying His deity requires explaining away:

• Creation through Him (John 1:3)
• Worship of Him (Rev 5:13–14)
• Divine titles (Isa 45 → Phil 2)
• Preexistence (John 1:1)

That author’s wording avoids those issues by redefining the terms upfront.

Creation was through the word - John 1:3 (him is being used because of the masculine tense of the noun "word" and it is also used in the sense of personification of God's word; just as 'wisdom' is a feminine noun requires a feminine pronoun 'she' is God's wisdom personified)

We can worship the Messiah as the Son of God but NOT as OUR GOD ---- that's when the worship becomes idolatry.

Yeah, Nebuchadnezzar was called king of kings in Daniel 2:37 You, O king, the king of kings, to whom , God of heaven the kingdom, the power, and the might and the glory. and King Artaxerxes was also called king of kings in Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes, king of kings, to Ezra the priest the scribe of the Law of God of heaven, Peace. And of course - He shares the titles King of Kings and Lord of Lords with his Son. (1 Tim. 6:15 and Rev. 17:14)
So I guess God can and does share His titles with whomever He pleases - they are HIS titles after all.

Jesus did not preexist ---- the word, the logos - God's word, God's spoken word was in the beginning - God's logos, God's thoughts were with God in his foreknowledge and plans for mankind.
Jesus had a source, an origin, a beginning - Matthew 1:1 tells of his beginning through 'the book of the genealogy/generation of Jesus Christ' . . . the book of the genesis of Jesus Christ. God was not the son of David, the son of Abraham - God was not 'begat'. -----

 

[synergy]

Of course it does, synergy, and you know it. That's why you are stalling for time now that I've asked you to start posting your first three set of supposed Trinity verses.

Again, you did 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.”

Quit stalling and quote your first three set of verses so that I can direct you to scriptural context (surrounding words, verses, and chapters).

Don't tell me you can't find the verses that speak about the Incarnation, one of many Theophonies of God. Hop to it.

 

[Grace ambassador]

"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on The Name Of The LORD [ Jehovah God ?]
Shall Be Delivered..." (Joel 2:32 AV) =

For whosoever shall call upon The Name Of The Lord ( Jesus Christ ? ) Shall Be Saved."
(Romans 10:13 AV)

Still for the Many and @amazing grace , Because ( Just In Case you Missed It! ) Of:

Concerning the Undiluted Wrath of God, we humbly and kindly ask:

And, what will the 'dead' unbelievers have? - "For excuse" at:

The Great White Throne Judgment, When Three Books Are Opened:

(1) The Word Of God, Which Plainly And Clearly Shows:

A) Only "God Is The Righteous Judge"
(Romans 2:3, 5; Hebrews 12:23, 13:4; Revelation 18:8 AV)

B) All Judgment Was Committed To The SON! (John 5:22-23 AV)
Why? = To Honor The SON!!

C) Revelation 20:11-12 Clearly And Plainly Teaches This Warning:

"And I saw a Great White Throne, and Him That Sat On It, from Whose Face the
earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw
the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another
book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were Judged out of those
things which were written in the books, according to their works."

(2) the book "of their life" which shows: 'works' of Denial Of all the above,
refusing "Grace Through faith" Redemption By God's OWN BLOOD
(Ephesians 2:5-9; Acts 20:28 AV) For Eternal Life?

(3) The Lamb's (God, The SON's) Book Of Life Is Opened Showing "they were Blotted Out"?

Will, they, "being cast Into The Lake Of Fire" (v 15) At That Time, still continue to "Deny His Deity,
As The Almighty God" still "Dishonoring The Father Whom they claimed they worshipped on earth"?:

Still praying that God's Grace, Peace, Mercy And Love Prevails For All To "Believe!"

While It Is Still Today = The Day Of God's Salvation Which Is The Undiluted Grace Of God!

Amen.

 

[amazing grace]

"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on The Name Of The LORD [ Jehovah God ?]
Shall Be Delivered..." (Joel 2:32 AV) =

For whosoever shall call upon The Name Of The Lord ( Jesus Christ ? ) Shall Be Saved."
(Romans 10:13 AV)

Post #201:

The reason we know that Romans 10:13, although quoted from the OT in reference to YHWH, now refers to the Lord Jesus Christ is because Romans 10:11, also quotes from the OT Isaiah 28:16 which reads:

therefore thus says the Lord GOD (Adonai Yahweh), "Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: 'Whoever believes will not be in haste (ashamed)." [Isaiah 28:16]

"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” (1 Peter 2:4-6)

'So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone' [Ephesians 2:19,20]

Who is the cornerstone? none other than Jesus Christ so these OT scriptures in Romans 10 are in reference to the Lord Jesus Christ - those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - (1 Cor. 1:2)

So according to the context, who do we call upon to be saved? 'call upon the name of the Lord', i.e. Jesus Christ.

Still for the Many and @amazing grace , Because ( Just In Case you Missed It! ) Of:

Concerning the Undiluted Wrath of God, we humbly and kindly ask:

And, what will the 'dead' unbelievers have? - "For excuse" at:

The Great White Throne Judgment, When Three Books Are Opened:

(1) The Word Of God, Which Plainly And Clearly Shows:

A) Only "God Is The Righteous Judge"
(Romans 2:3, 5; Hebrews 12:23, 13:4; Revelation 18:8 AV)

B) All Judgment Was Committed To The SON! (John 5:22-23 AV)
Why? = To Honor The SON!!

C) Revelation 20:11-12 Clearly And Plainly Teaches This Warning:

"And I saw a Great White Throne, and Him That Sat On It, from Whose Face the
earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw
the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another
book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were Judged out of those
things which were written in the books, according to their works."

(2) the book "of their life" which shows: 'works' of Denial Of all the above,
refusing "Grace Through faith" Redemption By God's OWN BLOOD
(Ephesians 2:5-9; Acts 20:28 AV) For Eternal Life?

(3) The Lamb's (God, The SON's) Book Of Life Is Opened Showing "they were Blotted Out"?

Will, they, "being cast Into The Lake Of Fire" (v 15) At That Time, still continue to "Deny His Deity,
As The Almighty God" still "Dishonoring The Father Whom they claimed they worshipped on earth"?:

Still praying that God's Grace, Peace, Mercy And Love Prevails For All To "Believe!"

While It Is Still Today = The Day Of God's Salvation Which Is The Undiluted Grace Of God!

Amen.

@ Grace ambassador ........... Yes, I saw it and responded in case you didn't see Post #194:

Yes, there is Judgment coming ........ Just a few verses about being saved.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. [John 3:16-18]

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. [John 5:24]

because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance .” [Acts 17:31]

And the jailer called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” [Acts 16:29-31]

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. [2 Corinthians 5:10] Even every believer must appear before the judgment seat of Christ.

There is not a scripture in the whole of the Bible that says one must believe in a Triune God or a Trinity in order to be saved and I am talking about a CLEAR SUCCINCTLY STATED VERSE not something inferred, nor something ambiguous in meaning.

Thanks for your prayers. I am also that others may come to the knowledge of the truth - that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the only true God.

 

[Capbook]

Thanks for your prayers. I am also that others may come to the knowledge of the truth - that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the only true God.

And also to know what Jesus said, "no one comes to the Father but through Him," the life (eternal life.) (1John 5:11,12,20)

 

[mikesw]

Post #201:


@ Grace ambassador ........... Yes, I saw it and responded in case you didn't see Post #194:

Thanks for your prayers. I am also that others may come to the knowledge of the truth - that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the only true God.

It is odd how you show that Jesus is the Lord God in Rom 10:13 but then state the opposite as your conclusion. Missing that obvious evidence when you make your conclusion may explain why you do not understand who Christ Jesus is.

Anyhow, I may have to copy post #201 for my notes to use against others who hold the unitarian view.

 

[amazing grace]

It is odd how you show that Jesus is the Lord God in Rom 10:13 but then state the opposite as your conclusion. Missing that obvious evidence when you make your conclusion may explain why you do not understand who Christ Jesus is.

Anyhow, I may have to copy post #201 for my notes to use against others who hold the unitarian view.

I will have to keep up with it too to ensure that you do not make what I have said into something I have not said which you have already done here in your first sentence - I did not 'show' that Jesus is the Lord God in Romans 10:13. I said that it did reference YHWH in the OT but here it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 10:11 also being in the same context .......

<snip>
The reason we know that Romans 10:13, although quoted from the OT in reference to YHWH, now refers to the Lord Jesus Christ is because Romans 10:11, also quoted from the OT Isaiah 28:16 which reads:


therefore thus says the Lord GOD (Adonai Yahweh), "Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: 'Whoever believes will not be in haste (ashamed)." [Isaiah 28:16]

"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” (1 Peter 2:4-6)

'So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone' [Ephesians 2:19,20]

Who is the cornerstone? none other than Jesus Christ so these OT scriptures in Romans 10 are in reference to the Lord Jesus Christ - those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - (1 Cor. 1:2)

So according to the context, who do we call upon to be saved? 'call upon the name of the Lord', i.e. Jesus Christ.

Yep, according to the context - we are to call upon the name of the Lord, Jesus Christ.

 

[mikesw]

I will have to keep up with it too to ensure that you do not make what I have said into something I have not said which you have already done here in your first sentence - I did not 'show' that Jesus is the Lord God in Romans 10:13. I said that it did reference YHWH in the OT but here it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 10:11 also being in the same context .......

I think instead you just need to correct your conclusion to say Jesus also is Yahweh. It is easier to go with the message of scripture than to share it but then reject its meaning.

Yep, according to the context - we are to call upon the name of the Lord, Jesus Christ.

Yep. Jesus as Lord in the Godhead. That is a good point.

 

[amazing grace]

I think instead you just need to correct your conclusion to say Jesus also is Yahweh. It is easier to go with the message of scripture than to share it but then reject its meaning.

Yep. Jesus as Lord in the Godhead. That is a good point.

I can't correct my conclusion to say Jesus is Yahweh because that's not true.
I have to let the context lead me to my understanding and let the scripture interpret itself.
I don't want to fall into reading into the scripture what is not there.

Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's: [1 Cor. 1:2]

 

[mikesw]

I can't correct my conclusion to say Jesus is Yahweh because that's not true.
I have to let the context lead me to my understanding and let the scripture interpret itself.
I don't want to fall into reading into the scripture what is not there.

Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's: [1 Cor. 1:2]

I guess you can let your conclusion remain clashing with the passages you shared. That of course is your decision. I think we can recognize that is your decision for the present time.

 

[Alter2Ego]

You again skip my question in Post#114 and 115 Alter2Ego. Why?

Capbook:

I replied to the question you asked at Post 114 over a week ago. You will find my response at Post 163. Below is the weblink.

Post in thread 'Christendom's Trinity: Where Did It Come From?'

Dec 23, 2025

A question requiring a TRUE or FALSE answer does not provide for any "explanation with points" aka exceptions. The answer has to be either simply TRUE or FALSE and nothing else.

Below is an image of a scantron. Let me ask you this, Capbook: When taking exams in school and the answer is supposed to be either TRUE or FALSE on the scantron and you blot out the correct box that is either TRUE or FALSE, does that Scantron allow for an "explanation with points" for any of the answers?

Before I address your "scantron image," I noticed that you skip to answer my Post#80...

• Alter2Ego

BTW: Your claim at Post 115, that I ignore the scriptures you post, was worthy of being ignored by me. Your routine, and that of other Trinitarians, is to cherry-pick verses of scripture and ignore the context (surrounding words, verses, and chapters). When the context is shown to you (and other Trinitarians), you simply start using Trinitarian lingo not supported by scripture such as "eternal begotten," "Jesus died in the flesh but his deity didn't die," "relational subordination," etc.

Another thing: If you think I have time to respond to every false Trinity claim and every out-of-context scripture that you post, go ahead and hold your breath waiting for a reply. You will pass out from lack of oxygen. You are not special. You are not the only Trinitarian on this website arguing with me and other people who are trying to help you. If I were to respond to everything that every Trinitarian posted, I would be here all day. And why bother to respond to them anyway? That's what I ask myself all the time. Because no matter what my response is, the Trinitarians will continue to resist being corrected by scriptural context. That's why I send people on their way aka to my Ignore List. I do that after I get tired of their shenanigans. When I send people to Ignore, they usually stay there forever.


FOR ALL THOSE READING THIS THREAD: The Trinitarians that show up in threads like these are never interested in being corrected by scripture. I know this from experience. I have been debating Trinitarians for a number of years, and their behavior is always like what you're seeing here.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Capbook:

Your "resources," such as Bible Lexicons and Strong's Concordance, are books that were NOT written by inspiration of Jehovah God. That's why you need them as a crutch, to bolster your arguments about a 3-prong god.

I also believe that the NWT translation is not inspired by 'יהוה" as it was from F. Franz thoughts. Adding the word "other" in Col 1:16.

Neglecting Bible's original languages, Bible lexicons and Strong Concordance will bolster the belief that NWT was really just from the mind of Frederick Franz.
True or not Alter2Ego?

Capbook:

I've got news for you. None of the Bible translations that have ever existed--including the King James Version--were translated by inspiration of Jehovah God. Only the original writings of the Judeo-Christian Bible were penned by inspiration of God. And the original writings have long since disappeared and were replaced by copies, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The only requirement of a translation of ANY writing is that it relay the same sentiment found in the original writings so that someone reading it in a different language is able to get the exact same understanding, regardless of which language they are reading it in.


The fact that I've been able to quote from various Bible translations in many of my posts, including Trinitarian Bible translations, is evidence that ALL Bible translations are saying the same thing when CONTEXT is paid attention to. Unfortunately, Trinitarians consistently run from context because they do not want to be corrected by scripture.

 

[mikesw]

Capbook:

I've got news for you. None of the Bible translations that have ever existed--including the King James Version--were translated by inspiration of Jehovah God. Only the original writings of the Judeo-Christian Bible were penned by inspiration of God. And the original writings have long since disappeared and were replaced by copies, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The only requirement of a translation of ANY writing is that it relay the same sentiment found in the original writings so that someone reading it in a different language is able to get the exact same understanding, regardless of which language they are reading it in.


The fact that I've been able to quote from various Bible translations in many of my posts, including Trinitarian Bible translations, is evidence that ALL Bible translations are saying the same thing when CONTEXT is paid attention to. Unfortunately, Trinitarians consistently run from context because they do not want to be corrected by scripture.

whoa. alter2ego is trying to get ready to make an argument against the testimony of scripture?

 

[Alter2Ego]

John 1:1 at Clause #1 is with reference to the beginning of creation. Jesus Christ aka "the Word," is a created being. John 1:1 at clause #1 informs the reader that Jesus/the Word had a beginning. This is confirmed at John 1:18 where it describes Jesus/the Word as "begotten."

Go to Post 167 for a fuller explanation where I provided scriptural quotations as well as the definition of the word "begotten" from Merriam-Webster's dictionary. Below is the link to that post.

Post in thread 'Christendom's Trinity: Where Did It Come From?'

Dec 23, 2025

atpollard:

John 1:1 has three independent clauses. Look at Clause #1. It says: "In the beginning was the Word...."

According to Christendom's Trinity, Jesus Christ aka "the Word" does not have a beginning.


Christendom's Trinity is defined as follows:
"There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things both visible and indivisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three persons, of ONE...

• Alter2Ego

In the beginning of creation who made creation happen?

NWT satys
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
. . . .
What you are saying is that He created Himself.

FreeInChrist:

John 1:1, at Clause #1, says point blank that the person referred to as "the Word" aka Jesus the son, had a beginning. It says:

"In the beginning was the Word...." That word applies specifically to Jesus Christ at John 1:1 and makes no mention of the Father.


Definition of beginning:
1. The act or process of bringing or being brought into being; a start: the beginning of the universe.
2.
a. The time when something begins or is begun: the beginning of June.
b. The place where something begins or is begun: at the beginning of the road.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/beginning

Scripture says Jehovah, the Father, does not have a beginning.

"Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God." (Psalm 90:2 -- New International Version)


Definition of everlasting:
1: lasting or enduring through all time : eternal

Definition of EVERLASTING

lasting or enduring through all time : eternal; continuing for a long time or indefinitely; having or being flowers or foliage that retain form or color for a long time when dried… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of eternal:
without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (temporal ).

eternal life.

ETERNAL Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com

ETERNAL definition: without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (temporal ). See examples of eternal used in a sentence.

www.dictionary.com

 

[Alter2Ego]

NWT satys
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
2  This one was in the beginning with God. 3  All things came into existence through him and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4  by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men.

Right here it says the Word was already in existence with God, In existence from the very beginning, all things came into existence through him......... apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

What you are saying is that He created Himself.

That's true, FreeInChrist. But you're ignoring the fact that scripture says in the book of Colossians that Jesus was created by Jehovah the Father before everything else was created.

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. (Colossians 1:15 -- New American Bible)

Colossians 1 New American Bible

 

[mikesw]

That's true, FreeInChrist. But you're ignoring the fact that scripture says in the book of Colossians that Jesus was created by Jehovah the Father before everything else was created.

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. (Colossians 1:15 -- New American Bible)

Colossians 1 New American Bible

I'm not sure why you just seek out passages to try to dismiss the deity of Christ. Also, you use an enigmatic verse to deny all other verses.

Even the Rev. is a little ambiguous, for we must carefully avoid any suggestion that Christ was the first of created things, which is contradicted by the following words: in Him were all things created. The true sense is, born before the creation. Compare before all things, ver. 17. This fact of priority implies sovereignty.
Marvin Richardson Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament, vol. 3 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1887), 468.

Not a good way to end 2025 (or start 2026) with such denials.

 

[mikesw]

the hyperliteralism of the unitarians only functions when they find verses they think deny the deity of Christ. That is quite an odd phenomena. When they find verses showing the deity of Christ, they deny it.

 

[mikesw]

The original question found in the title of this thread is backwards. The Triune God created Christianity, not the other way around. We should not enter the reverse world of the unitarians.