Do Trinitarians really know their foundational core doctrines and their impact on their beliefs and others?

[Wrangler]

If you don't believe Jesus is God, how is HE worthy of ANY worship, much less THE SAME WORSHIP given to God?

You live asking the same questions that have been refuted over and over again.

That your only option is this back door approach is tacit admission that you got nothing in terms of explicit Scripture, like there is one God the Father. 1 Cor 8:6.

 

[APAK]

The "irrational, simplistic thinking" insult displays the works of the flesh, not the Spirit. So does the ridicule that if I was not joking, and I was NOT, that you got a great laugh about my belief that because Jesus did NOT worship the Father, like ALL CREATION DID, that that shows He is uncreated. Rational thinking shows exactly that.

Since Jesus "bowed down and worshiped the Father most of His life while on earth.", can you give me, let's say, ten Bible verses or passages that tell us that is what He did? I don't think that's asking for too many, if He did it His whole life? Sure He loved the Father and yielded His will to the Father - but that's not bowing down and verbally worshiping Him, as we see ALL CREATION did in Revelation 5. If He is not God, He should be right there with all the other created beings worshiping God. If He did, He would not "oddly" be justifying Himself. He would be behaving as ALL CREATED BEINGS should.

If you don't believe Jesus is God, how is HE worthy of ANY worship, much less THE SAME WORSHIP given to God? Isn't that idolatry? You ask "why again should he worship His Father with all the other creatures? How about this? ALL CREATION is commanded to, over and over again in the Bible. If He is part of creation, He doesn't get a free pass - allowing Him NOT to worship God.

Look, without all this complaining about insults and they were not (recommend getting a little thicker skin), try to look above what you wrote and let's cut through all this ridiculous argument(s) you have made. If Jesus was God, he would not have to show his worthiness to creation, angels and the elders and especially his Father. Got IT! It should be clear, I hope. Think about this 30k foot level view first without trying to go deep to the 100 foot level.

 

[Fred]

If you could only present actual Scripture that states this in no uncertain terms.

Your level of certainty in denying Jesus is God needs to be seriously reconsidered.

 

[Fred]

1 Cor 8:6.

The "Lord" in 1 Corinthians 8:6 refers to the same "Lord" (=YHWH) in 1 Corinthians 10:26 (cf. Psalm 24:1).

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/jesus-is-the-lord-yhwh-in-1-corinthians-10-26-psalm-24-1-cf-deuteronomy-6-4.216/

 

[Administrator]

Let's get back on track here guys. Please discuss your opinions about the post and not the posters.

 

[APAK]

The "Lord" in 1 Corinthians 8:6 refers to the same "Lord" (=YHWH) in 1 Corinthians 10:26 (cf. Psalm 24:1).

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/jesus-is-the-lord-yhwh-in-1-corinthians-10-26-psalm-24-1-cf-deuteronomy-6-4.216/

So you were laser-focused on the final phase of 1 Cor 8: 6 and made you stand and decision that the Lord (Jesus) is now YHWH. Really?! Narrow-focused indeed. It means nothing of the sort if you bothered to read in context and the entire verse once again.

What this verse 6 is actually saying is that all things came from God, Father THROUGH Jesus. It places Jesus in a lower or subordinate role to God. Further, this verse also speaks to the fact that Jesus is not Co-equal with the Father.

The context is the key to understanding what the phrase “all things came through him” means. There is no mention in either the immediate or the remote context about the creation of all things in the beginning. Therefore it would be unusual for this verse to mention God’s original creation of Genesis 1:1, which it is not. Rather, it is speaking of the Church. God provided all things for the Church via Jesus Christ. The whole of 1 Corinthians is taken up with Church issues, and Paul starts 8:6 with “for us,” i.e., for Christians. The very next two verses speak about the fact that, for the Church, there are no laws against eating food sacrificed to idols. Verse 8 says, “But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.” This revelation was new for the Church. The Old Testament believers did not have this freedom. They had dozens of food laws. The verse is powerful indeed, and states clearly that Christians have one God who is the ultimate source of all things, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, who is the way by which God provided all things to the Church.

This verse, when properly understood, is actually strong evidence that Jesus Christ is not God. Polytheism was rampant in Corinth, and Scripture is clear that “there is no God but one” (1 Cor. 8:4). Then the text continues with the statements that although there may be many gods and lords, for Christians there is but one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. If the doctrine of the Trinity is correct, then this text can only be construed as confusing. Here was the perfect opportunity to say, “for us there is only one God made up of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost,” or something similar, but, instead, Scripture tells us that only the Father is God. That should stand as conclusive evidence that Jesus is not God.

And of course Psalm 24:1 is about the LORD, YHWH, the same Father in 1 Corinthians and not his Son.

 

[Azriel]

Jesus is God!

 

[Traditional]

Jesus is God!

I agree, the fact that both the Scriptures and the church assume that salvation is provided by God alone as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, it is clear that all three must equally be this God; all three together must be a trinity. Why is this the case? The reason is the basic premise repeated throughout our discussion leading up to this chapter—namely, only God can save. There are no exceptions to this rule, for any assumption of a Savior besides God is idolatrous—plain and simple. Since only the one God can save, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit save in loving interaction, the one God must be a loving interaction of Father, Son, and Spirit. This is how we come to the understanding that “God Is a Trinity.”

Some, however, would still question this logic. Does the belief that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God lead necessarily to belief in the Trinity? Some would say, for example, that this logic could easily lead to a belief in three separate gods, which would not be Trinitarian (belief in one God who is three) but tritheistic (belief in three separate gods). Is this so? No way!

 

[Wrangler]

Your level of certainty in denying Jesus is God needs to be seriously reconsidered.

I am certain because no matter how you rationally look at it, he cannot be God. Scripture says Jesus is the son of god. That’s good enough for me. Why is it not good enough for you?

 

[APAK]

I agree, the fact that both the Scriptures and the church assume that salvation is provided by God alone as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, it is clear that all three must equally be this God; all three together must be a trinity. Why is this the case? The reason is the basic premise repeated throughout our discussion leading up to this chapter—namely, only God can save. There are no exceptions to this rule, for any assumption of a Savior besides God is idolatrous—plain and simple. Since only the one God can save, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit save in loving interaction, the one God must be a loving interaction of Father, Son, and Spirit. This is how we come to the understanding that “God Is a Trinity.”

Some, however, would still question this logic. Does the belief that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God lead necessarily to belief in the Trinity? Some would say, for example, that this logic could easily lead to a belief in three separate gods, which would not be Trinitarian (belief in one God who is three) but tritheistic (belief in three separate gods). Is this so? No way!

The basic premise of yours that God only saves is true. Although, I strongly believe your view and reason(s) for it is quite different than mine and if you do not mind me saying so, very simplistic and without any scripture analysis I surmise. And further, I believe you rely solely on pointing to the Trinity model as your only evidence and endpoint of discussion and not by studying scripture to find out why and how God is the only one who saves. It will reveal that the Father, the only true God, worked within his Son to the Cross and for our salvation. This is what it means concisely that God only saves in the word of God.

And hello and welcome from another relatively new member....

 

[Wrangler]

So you were laser-focused on the final phase of 1 Cor 8: 6 and made you stand and decision that the Lord (Jesus) is now YHWH. Really?! Narrow-focused indeed. It means nothing of the sort if you bothered to read in context and the entire verse once again.

They do not have eyes to see.

 

[APAK]

They do not have eyes to see.

It is apparently so W. They are very possessed and obsessed with their belief model as the foundation and fountain of spiritual truth, not found or ever suggested in the Bible. And when they begin to respond or attempt defend it, they speak and write of their Trinity by creating a false tare environment with delusional imaginations for and between themselves and then to others, for their consumption. They cannot believe that Jesus was truly a chosen son of man the 2nd and life giving human Adamic spirit and person of his God, his Father, who guided and directed his way to the Cross. Without his God there would be no Messiah, or redemption and salvation. That point is so critical in my view.

They cannot belief outright that Jesus is not God, because they do not belief that any human being and real person can be sinless and also be the sacrifice for our sins. They do not believe a lot more in scripture when its truth is staring at them face-on. They are blinded by their pagan model that fills their hearts and minds....

 

[JonC]

Well for starters, the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the concept. To avoid the inevitable Appeal to Strawman, there simply is no verse that reads something like The nature of God is a trinity - consisting of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit who are co-equal, co-substantial and co-eternal - and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved but are damned to hell forever. If there were such a verse, it would be the most quoted verse in Scripture by those who claim one’s salvation depends on believing it. The concept of the trinity is so important that in 66 books, it is not mentioned once!

When you and all the other JW'S are cast into second death, you will have all eternity to ponder how your rebellion has left you in permanent, ungodly, unbelief....but then you will know the truth despite not finding that one magic bullet trinity verse.

 

[Wrangler]

Without his God there would be no Messiah, or redemption and salvation. That point is so critical in my view.

It is not only critical but does not rely just on logic; reinforced with explicit Scripture, juxtaposing perfectly the destruction of the trinity.

God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ
Acts 2:36

It does not say “the Father” created Jesus but God - in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature made Jesus and he specifically made him both Lord and the Messiah. This explicit text directly opppses their gnostic Eisegesis of John 1:1 that God was made flesh. Wrong. It was God who made Jesus BOTH Lord and Christ - not God who became lord and Christ!

It is critical, with explicit Scripture and logical. Without Jesus’ God there would be no Messiah or redemption or salvation.

They cannot even admit that God is the one who gave Jesus his authority - even though Scripture explicitly states this is reality.

 

[Fred]

I am certain because no matter how you rationally look at it, he cannot be God. Scripture says Jesus is the son of god. That’s good enough for me. Why is it not good enough for you?

The Son of God (John 20:31) is "my God" (John 20:28).

 

[Fred]

So you were laser-focused on the final phase of 1 Cor 8: 6 and made you stand and decision that the Lord (Jesus) is now YHWH. Really?!

Yes. because He is the same "Lord" (YHWH) in 1 Corinthians 10:26.

The rest of your longwinded mess dodged this truth.

 

[Wrangler]

When you and all the other JW'S are cast into second death, you will have all eternity to ponder how your rebellion has left you in permanent, ungodly, unbelief

There it is again; trinitarianism does not bring forth the fruit of the Spirit.

Despite admitting there is no trinity verse in Scripture, despite knowing there is no doctrinal purity test for salvation, you STILL threaten me with hell fire.

Appeal to Force.

 

[Wrangler]

The Son of God (John 20:31) is "my God" (John 20:28).

Jesus’ God is the only true God. (John 17:1-3)

 

[Fred]

Jesus’ God is the only true God. (John 17:1-3)

You dodged John 20:28.

Try again.

 

[APAK]

It is not only critical but does not rely just on logic; reinforced with explicit Scripture, juxtaposing perfectly the destruction of the trinity.

God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ
Acts 2:36

It does not say “the Father” created Jesus but God - in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature made Jesus and he specifically made him both Lord and the Messiah. This explicit text directly opppses their gnostic Eisegesis of John 1:1 that God was made flesh. Wrong. It was God who made Jesus BOTH Lord and Christ - not God who became lord and Christ!

It is critical, with explicit Scripture and logical. Without Jesus’ God there would be no Messiah or redemption or salvation.

They cannot even admit that God is the one who gave Jesus his authority - even though Scripture explicitly states this is reality.

@civic just tried to sell me that YHWH, our one true God, the ultimate LORD and Savior is also Jesus because he sees it in the OT and NT. Should I cry or laugh. He forgets that in the OT as in Isaiah he spoke to an audience that were not familiar with the Son of God. YHWH did not explain it all to them. YHWH never did clearly explain that he would still be the only Saviour and use a human son to execute this salvation. So a simpleton just looks at both the OT and NT and see or reads into scripture that they are speaking of the same subject like in Phil and Isaiah and force equality in meaning and subjects without explanation or reasoning. This is getting beyond ridiculous.