The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning

[Gatekeeper]

Faith in the deity of Christ is necessary to being a Christian. It is an essential part of the New Testament gospel of Christ. Yet in every century the church has been forced to deal with people who claim to be Christians while denying or distorting the deity of Christ. I hope they see the Light.

 

[civic]

yep even my grandkids can read the bible and see it says Jesus is God.

As Jesus says: " out of the mouth of babes "

 

[Alter2Ego]

The portion of John 1:1 (the second independent clause) where it says "the Word was with God" is telling the reader that there were two entirely different spirit persons present. Unless you're going to tell all those reading this thread that God was with himself.

Oops. I'm not familiar with your spiritist interpretation. I have no idea what you mean by your post here.

Of course everyone reading this thread can tell that you know perfectly well what I mean. You are the one who introduced the last two portions of John 1:1 (clause #2 and clause #3) at Post 487; remember? Below is the weblink to your post.

M

Post in thread 'The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning'

Nov 13, 2025

Where, at John 1:1, does it say anything about the Word existing "from time before time"? Please quote that verse of scripture and show it to the rest of us.

What do you think "the Word was with God; the Word was God" means? The verse for this is John 1:1

Are you trying to say God did not exist before time?

• mikesw

 

[praise_yeshua]

yep even my grandkids can read the bible and see it says Jesus is God.

As Jesus says: " out of the mouth of babes "

Men learn to reject God from other men. Like some of the men in this Trinity forum.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Faith in the deity of Christ is necessary to being a Christian. It is an essential part of the New Testament gospel of Christ. Yet in every century the church has been forced to deal with people who claim to be Christians while denying or distorting the deity of Christ. I hope they see the Light.

I do believe that a person can be confused by the topic but there is little doubt that a true Christian will NOT treat Jesus Christ like these evil Unitarians are doing here.

 

[civic]

Men learn to reject God from other men. Like some of the men in this Trinity forum.

Exactly

 

[civic]

Exactly

Not many study on their own or are taught by God

 

[mikesw]

Of course everyone reading this thread can tell that you know perfectly well what I mean. You are the one who introduced the last two portions of John 1:1 (clause #2 and clause #3) at Post 487; remember? Below is the weblink to your post.

Really? I am supposed to know what you mean by "there were two entirely different spirit persons present"? I have never heard anything like that when discussing John 1 but somehow I am supposed to be a mindreader. Is this a Jehovah Witness interpretation that I just have not encountered before?

 

[Alter2Ego]

mikesw:

The portion of John 1:1 (the third independent clause) where it says "the Word was God" is a manipulation of scripture by Trinitarian translators. That third clause of John 1:1 should actually say "the Word was a god." That's right. Lower case "god" preceded by the indefinite article "a."

Of course, like all Trinitarians, you deliberately ignored the first independent Clause of John 1:1, which debunks the manipulation at Clause #3.

oh wow. I should ask what your religion is. Did you say you are of the Jehovah's Witness cult?

I wonder where you got your expertise on Greek. Which university do you teach at? You offer a counter view to the all the teaching on Greek that I have viewed.

Your view would mean in John 1:18 that Jesus is the one and only "a god" who is in the Father's Bosom.
You would also have to say that John 3:16 that Jesus is the one and only son of many sons of God. Is that what you actually want us to believe?

By definition, all religions are cults. So what point are you trying to make with your above comment?

Notice definition #3 from Merriam-Webster Dictionary.



3 : a system of religious beliefs and rituals

Definition of CULT

a group (such as an organization or religious sect) with tenets and practices regarded as coercive, insular, or dangerous —often used before another noun; great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (such as a film or book)… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[mikesw]

By definition, all religions are cults. So what point are you trying to make with your above comment?

Notice definition #3 from Merriam-Webster Dictionary.



3 : a system of religious beliefs and rituals

Definition of CULT

a group (such as an organization or religious sect) with tenets and practices regarded as coercive, insular, or dangerous —often used before another noun; great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (such as a film or book)… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Is your answer a yes or no? Can you explain that point about "there were two entirely different spirit persons present"?

 

[Alter2Ego]

mikesw:

The portion of John 1:1 (the third independent clause) where it says "the Word was God" is a manipulation of scripture by Trinitarian translators. That third clause of John 1:1 should actually say "the Word was a god." That's right. Lower case "god" preceded by the indefinite article "a."

Of course, like all Trinitarians, you deliberately ignored the first independent Clause of John 1:1, which debunks the manipulation at Clause #3.

Your view would mean in John 1:18 that Jesus is the one and only "a god" who is in the Father's Bosom.
You would also have to say that John 3:16 that Jesus is the one and only son of many sons of God. Is that what you actually want us to believe?

You shot yourself in the foot in two places when you bought up John 1:18. You weren't doing that well with John 1:1 to start with, but to make matters worse for your Trinitarian argument, you introduced John 1:18 which debunks the Trinitarian claim that Jesus is God. Notice below where I bolded the words in red and in blue.


"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18 -- King James Bible)

John 1 KJV

1. "No man hath seen God at any time," says scripture at John 1:18. So there goes the Trinitarian claim--up in smoke--that Jesus is God. That's the first shot to your foot.

2. Jesus is "the only begotten Son," says scripture at John 1:18. Anyone who was begotten is a created being. The Trinitarian claim is that Jesus aka the Word has always existed. Scripture says the exact opposite. That's the second shot to your foot.

 

[Alter2Ego]

mikesw:

The portion of John 1:1 (the third independent clause) where it says "the Word was God" is a manipulation of scripture by Trinitarian translators. That third clause of John 1:1 should actually say "the Word was a god." That's right. Lower case "god" preceded by the indefinite article "a."

Oops. I missed how you have taken on a polytheist view of Israel gods. How many gods do you think exist?

According to scripture, literally thousands.

 

[mikesw]

You shot yourself in the foot in two places when you bought up John 1:18. You weren't doing that well with John 1:1 to start with, but to make matters worse for your Trinitarian argument, you introduced John 1:18 which debunks the Trinitarian claim that Jesus is God. Notice below where I bolded the words in red and in blue.


"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18 -- King James Bible)

John 1 KJV

1. "No man hath seen God at any time," says scripture at John 1:18. So there goes the Trinitarian claim--up in smoke--that Jesus is God. That's the first shot to your foot.

Since Jesus has seen God, that indicates he is not mere man. But the logic of scripture escapes you., Instead, you should read scripture as not contradicting itself.

2. Jesus is "the only begotten Son," says scripture at John 1:18. Anyone who was begotten is a created being. The Trinitarian claim is that Jesus aka the Word has always existed. Scripture says the exact opposite. That's the second shot to your foot.

you should read more of the posts. the use of "begotten," though not removing the discounting of One of the Trinity being born into a human, is better to be omitted from the translation.

In the Gospel of John monogenēs is used in three other places and in each case it is used in relation to Jesus as God’s Son. In 1:18 we are told that ‘No-one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only (monogenēs), who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.’ And in 3:16 we find, ‘For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only (ton monogenē) Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.’ Finally, in 3:18 we read, ‘whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only (monogenous) Son’. In each case monogenēs denotes not that the Son was ‘begotten’ of the Father but rather his uniqueness as the ‘One and Only’ Son of God.
Colin G. Kruse, John: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 4, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 72.

 

[FreeInChrist]

mikesw:

The portion of John 1:1 (the third independent clause) where it says "the Word was God" is a manipulation of scripture by Trinitarian translators.

Prove it. You are a Polytheist... Shame on you

That third clause of John 1:1 should actually say "the Word was a god." That's right. Lower case "god" preceded by the indefinite article "a."

Of course, like all Trinitarians, you deliberately ignored the first independent Clause of John 1:1, which debunks the manipulation at Clause #3.

 

[Alter2Ego]

101G:
. . .
Below are two Trinitarian Bibles where the translators at least had the decency to give a more accurate translation.

"God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him." (John 1:3 -- New Living Translation)

John 1 NLT

"All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being." (John 1:3 -- Berean Literal Bible)

John 1 Berean Literal Bible

There's a vast difference between "made by him" and "made through him." Jehovah is the power behind everything that was created. Isaiah 44:24 (which you erroneously apply to Jesus) confirms that. Almighty God simply allowed Jesus--his created son--the privilege of being the person through whom he, Jehovah, did the creating.

@Alter2Ego,
GINOLJC, to all.
First, get an old English bible like the Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary of American English and LEARN the Difference between "by" and "through", which apparently you do not understand.

Second, the made up name "Jehovah" is not God personal name...... which by the way is Idolatry. the Name of God is "Yeshua" and transliterated into English "Jesus".

please study further

101G.

First: Apparently, you have an "old English bible" already, but it's not helping you considering your insistence that Jesus created everything. Never mind the fact that Isaiah 44:24 says Jehovah alone is Creator.

Second, the made up name "Jehovah" is not God personal name...... which by the way is Idolatry. the Name of God is "Yeshua" and transliterated into English "Jesus".

please study further

101G.

Second: You told me that already, and I responded by suggesting that you to do a Google search online so that you will see for yourself that Jehovah is the most commonly accepted English translation of the Divine Name. In case I didn't suggest it before, I now suggest you follow go ahead and search for the name Jehovah on the Internet.

 

[FreeInChrist]

Not many study on their own or are taught by God

That is truly sad.

And doubly so because being on most forums today and running against the tide of all the proofs that are provided
would you not think you just might want to do a little study if for no other reason then to shore up your own side?

 

[Alter2Ego]

101G:

You are getting it twisted. Isaiah 44:24 does not say "God was alone" during creation and that nobody else was present. It says he alone is Creator. Those are two different things.

Even when certain Bible translations use the expression "who was with me?" it does not change the declaration by Jehovah himself when he declared that he alone "stretched out the heavens, who by myself spread out the earth."

You just contradicted yourself, you said, "Even when certain Bible translations use the expression "who was with me?" it does not change the declaration by Jehovah himself when he declared that he alone "stretched out the heavens, who by myself spread out the earth."
if what you say is true, answer 101G this..... Hebrews 1:10 "And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:" NOW THIS, Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." beside the "LORD" there is no GOD, right, NOW THIS, Zechariah 12:1 "The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him."

LISTEN Closely, "WHO laid the foundation of the earth?" remember you said your Jehovah "ALONE" is creator.

101G.

No, I didn't contradict myself. I simply informed you that some Bibles end the verse at Isaiah 44:24 with the question "who was with me?". Below is are two examples.


"This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer and Creator: “I am the LORD, who made all things. I alone stretched out the heavens. Who was with me when I made the earth?" (Isaiah 44:24 -- New Living Translation)

Isaiah 44 NLT

"Thus said Jehovah, thy redeemer, And thy framer from the womb: 'I am Jehovah, doing all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, Spreading out the earth -- who is with Me?" (Isaiah 44:24 -- Young's Literal Translation)

Isaiah 44 YLT

"This is what Jehovah says, your Repurchaser, Who formed you since you were in the womb: “I am Jehovah, who made everything. I stretched out the heavens by myself, And I spread out the earth. Who was with me?" (Isaiah 44:24 -- New World Translation)

https://www.jw.org/en/search/?q=Isaiah+44%3A24&link=%2Fresults%2FE%2Fbible%3Fsort%3Drel%26q%3DIsaiah%252044%253A24

That question actually drives the point home that Jehovah alone did the creating and that when scripture at Colossians 1:15-16 says everything was created through Jesus, it was Jehovah's power involved.

 

[Alter2Ego]

101G:

You are ignoring the fact that Jehovah gave the resurrected Jesus authority over the other angels.

"Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me." (Matthew 28:18 -- New International Version)


QUESTION #1 to 101G: If Jesus is also Jehovah, why did Jesus need authority from Jehovah God?

Answer, because as the Diversity, or the EQUAL SHARE of himself, or the Ordinal Last, he laid down his attributes in order to give that "NATURAL LIFE" ... "BLOOD" while in flesh as the propitiation for our sins. supportive scripture, 1 John 2:2 "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

next question.

101G.

101G:

Your above answer doesn't make sense even to YOU. How long did it take you to dream that up?

The Trinitarian claim is that Jesus the son and Jehovah the Father have the same POWER. Matthew 28:18 debunks that claim. It says Jesus had to get authority from Jehovah, indicating Jehovah is superior.

 

[FreeInChrist]

101G:

Your above answer doesn't make sense even to YOU. How long did it take you to dream that up?

The Trinitarian claim is that Jesus the son and Jehovah the Father have the same POWER. Matthew 28:18 debunks that claim. It says Jesus had to get authority from Jehovah, indicating Jehovah is superior.

Just like a wife should get authority from her husband......~~!!!

 

[Alter2Ego]

The portion of John 1:1 (the second independent clause) where it says "the Word was with God" is telling the reader that there were two entirely different spirit persons present. Unless you're going to tell all those reading this thread that God was with himself.

Oops. I'm not familiar with your spiritist interpretation. I have no idea what you mean by your post here.

Of course everyone reading this thread can tell that you know perfectly well what I mean. You are the one who introduced the last two portions of John 1:1 (clause #2 and clause #3) at Post 487; remember? Below is the weblink to your post.

Really? I am supposed to know what you mean by "there were two entirely different spirit persons present"? I have never heard anything like that when discussing John 1 but somehow I am supposed to be a mindreader. Is this a Jehovah Witness interpretation that I just have not encountered before?

mikesw:

Are you telling those reading this thread that you don't know that Almighty God Jehovah is a spirit person and that the resurrected Jesus Christ aka "the Word" returned to heaven as a spirit person? John 1:1 has three independent clauses. You introduced Clause #2 and Clause #3 at Post 487 to support your Trinitarian claim; remember?

M

Post in thread 'The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning'

Nov 13, 2025

Where, at John 1:1, does it say anything about the Word existing "from time before time"? Please quote that verse of scripture and show it to the rest of us.

What do you think "the Word was with God; the Word was God" means? The verse for this is John 1:1

Are you trying to say God did not exist before time?

• mikesw

I then informed you that Clause #2 where it says "the Word was with God" is announcing there are two different spirit persons. The Trinitarian claim is that Jesus/the Word is also God. Clause #2 of John 1:1 would equate to God is with himself based upon the Trinitarian belief. See what I'm saying?