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

[Peterlag]

Again, your opinion is noted. But since it disagrees with the way Jesus used it, and since the way He used it agrees with the rest of Scripture demonstrating His deity, your opinion will be ignored.

Even if he did and I'm wrong. That is still not a teaching on the doctrine of the trinity. It's just once again one of those bits and pieces of words and half verses along with your own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as you pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there.

 

[TomL]

TomL: Below are four TRUE or FALSE questions. You are ONLY to respond to each question as either TRUE or FALSE. If you include anything other than TRUE or FALSE, you are out of here. There are also four YES or NO questions where you will have the opportunity to expression your opinion.


QUESTION #1 to TomL: At no time in the above scriptural quotation did Jesus himself say he was God. TRUE or FALSE?

He affirmed it here
John 20:28–29 (NASB 95) — 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”

QUESTION #2 to TomL: At John 5:19--after the rebellious Jews claimed Jesus was making himself equal to God, simply by Jesus telling them God is his Father--Jesus made it clear there was no equality by stating: "the Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing." TRUE or FALSE?

He can do what the Father does

John 5:19 (NASB 95) — 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

QUESTION #3 to TomL: At John 5:30, Jesus again said: "I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative." TRUE or FALSE?

John 5:25–32 (NASB 95) — 25 “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; 27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. 30 “I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

by his own will he sought the will of the Father

He by his own authority layed out his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.

QUESTION #4 to TomL: At John 5:30, Jesus said: "I seek, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me." TRUE or FALSE?

Answered above

QUESTION #5 to TomL: Can someone who cannot do a single thing of his own initiative but has to wait for instructions from someone else be considered to be on equal levels with that other person (as opposed to being subordinate to the person from whom he awaits instructions)? YES or NO? (If you answer is "YES," explain your reasoning.)

It was his own will by which he

because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

He by his own authority layed his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.

QUESTION #6 to TomL: Can someone who cannot do a single thing of his own initiative but has to wait for instructions from someone else also be combined into one entity with the person from who he awaits instructions because they are both equal? YES or NO? (If you answer is "YES," explain your reasoning.)

But he can/did by his own authority

because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

He by his own authority layed his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.

QUESTION #7 to TomL: Can someone who has a different will but has to submit to the will of another person be considered to be equal to the very person to whom he must submit? YES or NO? (If you answer is "YES," explain your reasoning.)

Again Christ choose as we see above

TomL: Below is a verse of scripture followed by a bonus question.


"But when you pray, go into your inner room, shut your door, and pray to your Father, who is unseen. And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. (Matthew 6:6 -- Berean Standard Bible)

https://biblehub.com/bsb/matthew/6.htm

QUESTION #8 to TomL: According to Matthew 6:6, Jehovah God is everyone's Father. YES or NO? (If you answer is "NO," explain your reasoning.)

N o

1 John 3:10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.

Matt 13:38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one;

John 8:42–47 (NASB 95) — 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”

Rom 9:8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

 

[Alter2Ego]

He affirmed it here
John 20:28–29 (NASB 95) — 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”



He can do what the Father does

John 5:19 (NASB 95) — 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.



John 5:25–32 (NASB 95) — 25 “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; 27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. 30 “I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

by his own will he sought the will of the Father

He by his own authority layed out his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.






Answered above


It was his own will by which he

because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

He by his own authority layed his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.








But he can/did by his own authority

because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

He by his own authority layed his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.





Again Christ choose as we see above









N o

1 John 3:10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.

Matt 13:38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one;

John 8:42–47 (NASB 95) — 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”

Rom 9:8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

TomL:

Since you refuse to play by the rules I set for the TRUE or FALSE questions, guess what? You are now on permanent Ignore. Nothing that you post from this point onward will be visible to me.

 

[TomL]

TomL:

Since you refuse to play by the rules I set for the TRUE or FALSE questions, guess what? You are now on permanent Ignore. Nothing that you post from this point onward will be visible to me.

Utter nonsense

TomL said:


He affirmed it here
John 20:28–29 (NASB 95) — 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”

Christ affirmed his Godhood



He can do what the Father does

John 5:19 (NASB 95) — 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.



John 5:25–32 (NASB 95) — 25 “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; 27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. 30 “I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

by his own will he sought the will of the Father

He by his own authority layed out his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.

Answered above

It was his own will by which he

because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

He by his own authority layed down his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.

But he can/did by his own authority

because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31 “If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true.

By his own will he became man

He by his own authority layed down his own life

John 10:17–18For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.

Again Christ choose as we see above

N o

1 John 3:10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.

Matt 13:38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one;

John 8:42–47 (NASB 95) — 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”

Rom 9:8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

 

[FreeInChrist]

@Peterlag

Even if he did and I'm wrong. That is still not a teaching on the doctrine of the trinity. It's just once again one of those bits and pieces of words and half verses along with your own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as you pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there.

I sent to you, I believe yesterday , and I am certain it was to you, there is no :"Trinity Doctrine" but there in reply 895 I said to you. You named it.... The bible is not to promote God, Jesus or the Trinity, solely..... It is our handbook and we are given nuggets of the Trinity from beginning to end.... so we can see what is being done for us. The Bible was not written to promote a later theological system. It is God’s revelation to mankind. Scripture does not give us vague “nuggets” or scattered hints that require assembly by human imagination. What it teaches, it teaches clearly and consistently from beginning to end.That does not prove the Trinity is not in the Bible—it proves it is not taught the way biblical doctrine is taught.Actually, a biblical “mystery” is something once hidden but now revealed (Rom. 16:25–26; Eph. 3:3–6).Just because God’s plan or full revelation wasn’t always known doesn’t make it false—it only means it was gradually revealed in His timing, exactly as Scripture shows. What is hidden temporarily is not the same as false, and what is revealed clearly is what we are meant to know. So @Peterlag ... Do you have a need to know? Maybe God says you don't. After all you cannot see the Trinity in The Great Commission and it is right there in front of your eeyes ------------------------------------------

If you cannot see and identify the Father, Son and Holy Spirit that are the Trinity in the Great Commission after it was specified by Jesus.... you need to ask yourself why He would have said that.It is not His fault it took another century before the church would start with it..... They basically said no to Jesus....believing he did not know what he was saying, most likely, meaning that they did not believe who he was.There is a reason that God does not put all out there for any Tom, Dick or Atheist to read and understand becausethat would fight the one most important thing to God and that is faith. So dribbles and pieces and a word here or they makes the puzzle complete. You cannot see it because you do not want to see it.To me it is crystal clear.NOW PLEAASE PAY ATTENTION! yOU ARE SO HUNG UP ON ONE THING YOU DO NOT SEE OR CANNOT UNDERSTAND.....BUT
There are many core Christian doctrines that are considered essential, yet are not laid out in a single, explicit, “systematic” statement in the Bible, just like the Trinity. Christianity has always recognized doctrine by the total witness of Scripture, not by one verse spelling everything out.

Here are several major examples:

1~ Nowhere does the Bible give an inspired table of contents.

.............There is no verse listing the 27 books of the New Testament

.............No verse says, “These and only these books are Scripture”

Yet every Christian relies on this decision. The canon was recognized by the church through consistency, apostolic origin, and widespread use — not by an explicit verse.

If someone accepts the New Testament, they already accept a doctrine not spelled out in Scripture.

2 ~The Bible clearly teaches:

...........Jesus is God (John 1:1; John 20:28; Titus 2:13)

...........Jesus is human (John 1:14; Luke 2:52; John 19:28)

But the phrase “one person with two natures” never appears.

That language was developed later to protect what Scripture already taught, not to invent something new. Rejecting the formulation doesn’t make the biblical data disappear.

3~ The Bible never says, “All humans inherit Adam’s guilt.” (THIS IS A HUGE ONE) Yet Christians infer it from:

..........Romans 5:12–19

..........Psalm 51:5

.........Ephesians 2:3

Even groups that deny Augustine’s formulation still accept that humanity is fallen in Adam .... a doctrine derived from multiple texts, not one explicit sentence.


4~ There is no command that says: "The Sabbath is now Sunday"

Yet most Christians accept:

..........The resurrection occurred on the first day of the week

..........The church gathered on the first day (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2)

The practice comes from apostolic pattern, not an explicit command.

5~ The word is not in the bible.

---

The teaching absolutely is (John 1:14; Phil 2:6–8).

Christian doctrine often names what Scripture reveals, using theological language to safeguard meaning.

Meaning:
What is not in the Bible is the theological label “Incarnation.”

Here’s the distinction​

..........Biblical text: “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14)

.........Theological term: “Incarnation” (a later Latin word meaning enfleshment)

The church didn’t invent a new idea..... it gave a name to what John already taught.

6~ The term isn't biblical. Yet no one argues the Bible doesn’t exist.

Why this matters (and this is the key point)​

The real question is not: Is the doctrin stated in one verse?"

But rather: “Does Scripture, taken as a whole, require this conclusion?”

That is how every major Christian doctrine is formed, including ones nearly all Christians agree on.

If someone rejects the Trinity because it is not explicitly spelled out, they must also reject:

..........The New Testament canon

..........Sunday worship

...........Original sin

............The two-natures-of-Christ doctrine

Most people do not which exposes the inconsistency.

Always remember.​

“The Trinity is no more ‘extra-biblical’ than the New Testament canon, Sunday worship, or the doctrine that Christ is fully God and fully man. Christianity has always recognized doctrine from the total witness of Scripture, not from a single proof-text. Rejecting that method collapses far more than the Trinity.”


“If a doctrine must be stated in one explicit verse to be true, then Christians would have to reject the New Testament canon, Sunday worship, original sin, and even the doctrine that Christ is fully God and fully man — none of which are spelled out in a single passage. Christianity has always formed doctrine from the total witness of Scripture, not from isolated proof-texts. The Trinity follows that same biblical method. To reject it on that basis is not biblical rigor ~ it’s inconsistency.”

 

[Doug Brents]

Even if he did and I'm wrong. That is still not a teaching on the doctrine of the trinity. It's just once again one of those bits and pieces of words and half verses along with your own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as you pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there.

That is the way Scripture is with a lot of things; a snippet here, and a hint there. But it doesn't take that to understand the deity of Christ. There are several explicit statements of the deity of Jesus that have been shared with you repeatedly. But you ignore them, pass them off as meaning something else, or are think they are being taken out of context. But I am thankful that you admit that you may be wrong. That is a first step in the direction of learning the truth.

 

[amazing grace]

@Peterlag


I sent to you, I believe yesterday , and I am certain it was to you, there is no :"Trinity Doctrine" but there in reply 895 I said to you. You named it.... The bible is not to promote God, Jesus or the Trinity, solely..... It is our handbook and we are given nuggets of the Trinity from beginning to end.... so we can see what is being done for us. The Bible was not written to promote a later theological system. It is God’s revelation to mankind. Scripture does not give us vague “nuggets” or scattered hints that require assembly by human imagination. What it teaches, it teaches clearly and consistently from beginning to end.That does not prove the Trinity is not in the Bible—it proves it is not taught the way biblical doctrine is taught.Actually, a biblical “mystery” is something once hidden but now revealed (Rom. 16:25–26; Eph. 3:3–6).Just because God’s plan or full revelation wasn’t always known doesn’t make it false—it only means it was gradually revealed in His timing, exactly as Scripture shows. What is hidden temporarily is not the same as false, and what is revealed clearly is what we are meant to know. So @Peterlag ... Do you have a need to know? Maybe God says you don't. After all you cannot see the Trinity in The Great Commission and it is right there in front of your eeyes ------------------------------------------

If you cannot see and identify the Father, Son and Holy Spirit that are the Trinity in the Great Commission after it was specified by Jesus.... you need to ask yourself why He would have said that.It is not His fault it took another century before the church would start with it..... They basically said no to Jesus....believing he did not know what he was saying, most likely, meaning that they did not believe who he was.There is a reason that God does not put all out there for any Tom, Dick or Atheist to read and understand becausethat would fight the one most important thing to God and that is faith. So dribbles and pieces and a word here or they makes the puzzle complete. You cannot see it because you do not want to see it.To me it is crystal clear.NOW PLEAASE PAY ATTENTION! yOU ARE SO HUNG UP ON ONE THING YOU DO NOT SEE OR CANNOT UNDERSTAND.....BUT
There are many core Christian doctrines that are considered essential, yet are not laid out in a single, explicit, “systematic” statement in the Bible, just like the Trinity. Christianity has always recognized doctrine by the total witness of Scripture, not by one verse spelling everything out.

Here are several major examples:

1~ Nowhere does the Bible give an inspired table of contents.

.............There is no verse listing the 27 books of the New Testament

.............No verse says, “These and only these books are Scripture”

Yet every Christian relies on this decision. The canon was recognized by the church through consistency, apostolic origin, and widespread use — not by an explicit verse.

If someone accepts the New Testament, they already accept a doctrine not spelled out in Scripture.

2 ~The Bible clearly teaches:

...........Jesus is God (John 1:1; John 20:28; Titus 2:13)

...........Jesus is human (John 1:14; Luke 2:52; John 19:28)

But the phrase “one person with two natures” never appears.

That language was developed later to protect what Scripture already taught, not to invent something new. Rejecting the formulation doesn’t make the biblical data disappear.

3~ The Bible never says, “All humans inherit Adam’s guilt.” (THIS IS A HUGE ONE) Yet Christians infer it from:

..........Romans 5:12–19

..........Psalm 51:5

.........Ephesians 2:3

Even groups that deny Augustine’s formulation still accept that humanity is fallen in Adam .... a doctrine derived from multiple texts, not one explicit sentence.


4~ There is no command that says: "The Sabbath is now Sunday"

Yet most Christians accept:

..........The resurrection occurred on the first day of the week

..........The church gathered on the first day (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2)

The practice comes from apostolic pattern, not an explicit command.

5~ The word is not in the bible.

---

The teaching absolutely is (John 1:14; Phil 2:6–8).

Christian doctrine often names what Scripture reveals, using theological language to safeguard meaning.

Meaning:
What is not in the Bible is the theological label “Incarnation.”

Here’s the distinction​

..........Biblical text: “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14)

.........Theological term: “Incarnation” (a later Latin word meaning enfleshment)

The church didn’t invent a new idea..... it gave a name to what John already taught.

6~ The term isn't biblical. Yet no one argues the Bible doesn’t exist.

Why this matters (and this is the key point)​

The real question is not: Is the doctrin stated in one verse?"

But rather: “Does Scripture, taken as a whole, require this conclusion?”

That is how every major Christian doctrine is formed, including ones nearly all Christians agree on.

If someone rejects the Trinity because it is not explicitly spelled out, they must also reject:

..........The New Testament canon

..........Sunday worship

...........Original sin

............The two-natures-of-Christ doctrine

Most people do not which exposes the inconsistency.

Always remember.​

“The Trinity is no more ‘extra-biblical’ than the New Testament canon, Sunday worship, or the doctrine that Christ is fully God and fully man. Christianity has always recognized doctrine from the total witness of Scripture, not from a single proof-text. Rejecting that method collapses far more than the Trinity.”


“If a doctrine must be stated in one explicit verse to be true, then Christians would have to reject the New Testament canon, Sunday worship, original sin, and even the doctrine that Christ is fully God and fully man — none of which are spelled out in a single passage. Christianity has always formed doctrine from the total witness of Scripture, not from isolated proof-texts. The Trinity follows that same biblical method. To reject it on that basis is not biblical rigor ~ it’s inconsistency.”

This is not addressed specifically to me but since I'm on ignore - I didn't think it would hurt for me to insert myself here!

Here is an excerpt from an article regarding what is considered extrabiblical 'outside the Bible' or 'beyond the biblical canon' ---The New Testament canon is considered Biblical ---- the Creeds not so much!

Extrabiblical is a term that means “outside the Bible” or “beyond the Bible.” Any literature that is not contained within the biblical canon is considered extrabiblical. Noncanonical is a similar term describing extrabiblical books “outside of” the canon of Scripture.

Extrabiblical sources have varying degrees of reliability. The Bible is authoritative, but any idea, principle, or doctrine that comes from an extrabiblical source is not. The Bible’s historical narratives are inerrant and therefore utterly reliable; extrabiblical histories may be very accurate but, being noncanonical, may contain errors.

It’s good to keep in mind the distinction between biblical and extrabiblical. If someone says, “God wants you to love your neighbor as yourself,” we can do a quick check with the Bible and see the statement is thoroughly biblical (Mark 12:33; James 2:8). We are obligated to love our neighbors. But if someone says, “God wants you to wear red on Fridays,” we can search the Bible cover to cover and never find support for that claim. We are free to wear red on Fridays, but we are also free to ignore the rule. It goes beyond what the Bible instructs.

We sometimes encounter ideas that may or may not be true, but are not explicitly found in the Bible: the idea of the three wise men, for example, is extrabiblical (the Bible never says how many magi traveled to see Jesus in Matthew 1). The concept of seven deadly sins is likewise extrabiblical; it comes from Catholic tradition, not from Scripture. Bromides such as moderation in all things, cleanliness is next to godliness, and God helps those who help themselves may contain a grain of truth but are still extrabiblical.

The designation extrabiblical generally refers to background or source material that is not part of the biblical canon of Christianity as a whole. But extrabiblical can also describe writings that are outside of the authoritative canon of a specific Christian tradition or group. For instance, Protestant churches identify the Deuterocanonical books as extrabiblical, even though some other Christian traditions accept them as authoritative.

Different types of writings are described as extrabiblical. Early texts, like those of historians Flavius Josephus and Eusebius of Caesarea, are extrabiblical: they provide cultural insight as well as historical and contextual background to parts of Scripture, but the secular histories themselves are not inspired............https://www.gotquestions.org/extrabiblical.html

 

[Peterlag]

That is the way Scripture is with a lot of things; a snippet here, and a hint there. But it doesn't take that to understand the deity of Christ. There are several explicit statements of the deity of Jesus that have been shared with you repeatedly. But you ignore them, pass them off as meaning something else, or are think they are being taken out of context. But I am thankful that you admit that you may be wrong. That is a first step in the direction of learning the truth.

I don't ignore them. I show you are either...

1.) Using a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Using a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Or not understanding how the words were used in the culture they were written in.

And basically, that's all you have. And I mean 100 percent of what you have. You have nothing else.

 

[dwight92070]

I am sure all of you trinitarians have noticed by now, but the Trinity doctrine and all of its supporting doctrines are entirely circular in reasoning.

Did you ever notice how you all always begin with a presumption of a trinity god, you list all of your reasons why, but it always circles back to the beginning, all the way to square one, when asked where there is a working example of the trinity in action or someone at least defining the God of the Bible as three, a they, or them? Yet no one in all of history has been able to find that.

Consider the following common arguments produced by trinitarians, just to name a few:
"Jesus is a God-Man"
"Jesus is 100% man and 100% God"
"Jesus resurrected himself"
"Jesus pre-existed his birth"
"Jesus is the Word"
"God incarnated"

Yet the Bible doesn't say any of those things. There is no example of anyone saying Jesus is a God-Man, no examples of Jesus resurrecting himself or anyone saying he did, no examples of him pre-existing in the Old Testament either saying or doing anything. he was never called the Word, and the Bible never says Jesus incarnated.

Everything the trinitarian says begs the question: Why does the Bible never say what you say???

So what happened to all of these trinitarian people? What are they seeing that God, Jesus, the prophets, the disciples, and the early church didn't even talk about?

Can any one answer one or more of these questions:

Where in the Bible does anyone ever define God as three persons in one God?​

​

Trinitarians claim the Trinity is central to Christianity. Why is it that there is not one example of it being taught to anyone in Acts or elsewhere in the New Testament? Why not the Old Testament?​

​

Why do the inspired writers everywhere speak of God like a single person, i,e,. He, Him, His, but never as a they or them?​

​

Why does terminology, or something similar, that says "Jesus is 100% God and 100% man" never appear in the Bible?​

​

Why did no one say Jesus resurrected himself after he died?​

​

If Jesus pre-existed as either the Word, or God, or a member of the trinity, why does the Bible never say that and why are there no examples of such in the Old Testament?​

​

Why did the apostles always call Jesus "the man" (1 Tim. 2:5), "the Son of Man," or "the Son of God," but never "God the Son?"​

​

If the early church really did believe in a Trinity then why were the early centuries filled with disputes regarding who Jesus was with the result not being codified into the Catholic church until the mid-to-late 4th century?​

​

Why did they not agree the Holy Spirit is a 3rd member of the trinity until the late 4th century?​

​

Why do Trinitarians rely heavily on extra-biblical words/phrases (Trinity, hypostatic union, God-man, incarnate, consubstantial, etc) instead of just using the words/phrases the Bible uses?​

The only thing circular going on here is: We present the truth of Scripture, they twist it and reject it - then we present more truth from the Scripture and they twist and reject that - then we again present even more evidence and truth from the Scripture - and once again, they reject even that. Do you see the "circle" here?
The truth is: "They don't want to be confronted with the truth of Scripture."

 

[mikesw]

I don't ignore them. I show you are either...

1.) Using a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Using a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Or not understanding how the words were used in the culture they were written in.

And basically, that's all you have. And I mean 100 percent of what you have. You have nothing else.

Hmmm. Still waiting for the evidence of Peterlag showing his superiority of translations and contexts beyond all other Christians and especially beyond scholars. If he can show that, then maybe people will have to accept his arguments. Otherwise, this post just reflects repeated unitarian propaganda.

 

[Peterlag]

Son of God is clearly defined and repeated in 48 verses...

Jesus as the Christ is clearly defined. Jesus died is clearly defined. God raised Jesus from the dead is clearly defined and mentioned many times by the Prophets, Jesus, and confirmed by witnesses not only in the book of Acts, but also referred to from Romans thru Revelation time and time again. But the mythical Trinity doctrine believed by the delusional is not found in Scripture.

 

[Doug Brents]

I don't ignore them. I show you are either...

1.) Using a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Using a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Or not understanding how the words were used in the culture they were written in.

And basically, that's all you have. And I mean 100 percent of what you have. You have nothing else.

You have yet to accurately demonstrate any of those things, even though you post that same "cut and past" nonsense over and over.

Please demonstrate how any of the passages I have cited/quoted have been mistranslated, or taken out of context, or are misunderstood from the culture in which they were written. I have yet to see you properly demonstrate any of that.

 

[Peterlag]

You have yet to accurately demonstrate any of those things, even though you post that same "cut and past" nonsense over and over.

Please demonstrate how any of the passages I have cited/quoted have been mistranslated, or taken out of context, or are misunderstood from the culture in which they were written. I have yet to see you properly demonstrate any of that.

Would it be better if I had handwritten the data taken from my own website instead of copying and pasting it?

 

[Doug Brents]

Would it be better if I had handwritten the data taken from my own website instead of copying and pasting it?

If what you have on your website is the same as what you would type, then no, it would make no difference, because it is completely contrary to Scripture.

Please accurately and properly demonstrate how any of the passages I have cited/quoted have been mistranslated, or taken out of context, or are misunderstood from the culture in which they were written. I have yet to see you properly demonstrate any of that.

 

[Peterlag]

If what you have on your website is the same as what you would type, then no, it would make no difference, because it is completely contrary to Scripture.

Please accurately and properly demonstrate how any of the passages I have cited/quoted have been mistranslated, or taken out of context, or are misunderstood from the culture in which they were written. I have yet to see you properly demonstrate any of that.

These are the Trinitarian verses that are mostly used on these sites to teach Jesus is God...
They all use either...

A verse from a bad translation.
A verse that is taken out of context.
A verse that is not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in.

1.) Isaiah 9:6
2.) Matthew 28:18
3.) John 1:1
4.) John 1:3
5.) John 1:14
6.) John 6:38
7.) John 8:58
8.) John 10:30
9.) John 10:33
10.) John 14:19
11.) John 20:28
12.) Philippians 2:6
13.) Colossians 1:16
14.) 1 Timothy 3:16
15.) Hebrews 1:8
16.) 1 John 5:7
17.) Revelation 1:8

 

[Doug Brents]

These are the Trinitarian verses that are mostly used on these sites to teach Jesus is God...
They all use either...

A verse from a bad translation.
A verse that is taken out of context.
A verse that is not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in.

1.) Isaiah 9:6
2.) Matthew 28:18
3.) John 1:1
4.) John 1:3
5.) John 1:14
6.) John 6:38
7.) John 8:58
8.) John 10:30
9.) John 10:33
10.) John 14:19
11.) John 20:28
12.) Philippians 2:6
13.) Colossians 1:16
14.) 1 Timothy 3:16
15.) Hebrews 1:8
16.) 1 John 5:7
17.) Revelation 1:8

You list verses, but you give no counter to what they say.
Which of them is taken out of context? And in what way?
Which is from a bad translation? And in what way?
Which is inaccurately understood? And in what way?

 

[Peterlag]

You list verses, but you give no counter to what they say.
Which of them is taken out of context? And in what way?
Which is from a bad translation? And in what way?
Which is inaccurately understood? And in what way?

Pick a verse and I will respond for each verse.

 

[Doug Brents]

Pick a verse and I will respond for each verse.

You gave the list, counter every one of them, if you can. But remember, you must do so accurately and with integrity without giving your opinions or personal bias.

 

[Peterlag]

This is not Rocket Science...

Jesus was born from a woman like every other human. God is Holy and He's also Spirit which is why He is often called The Holy Spirit. What part of this do you not understand?

 

[mikesw]

This is not Rocket Science...

Jesus was born from a woman like every other human. God is Holy and He's also Spirit which is why He is often called The Holy Spirit. What part of this do you not understand?

The part that I cannot understand is how you made up this stuff. That view shared here does not fit with scripture at all. Your writing also seems to flow from the same misconceptions. Unitarian gnostic thought just is not compelling to Christians.