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

[praise_yeshua]

Jehovah is translated from the Hebrew Tetragrammaton YHWH, which represents the proper name of God in the Hebrew Bible. This name is often vocalized as Yahweh, but Jehovah is a Latinized form that emerged later.

The name "Jehovah" emerged in the 16th century when William Tyndale introduced it in his translation of the Bible, based on the Hebrew Tetragrammaton YHWH. This Latinized form resulted from adding vowels to the consonants of YHWH, which was originally pronounced as "Yahweh."

William Tyndale was initially ordained as a Roman Catholic priest, but he later became a key figure in the Protestant Reformation, advocating for the translation of the Bible into English and challenging Catholic doctrines. His beliefs eventually led to his execution for heresy in 1536 NOW YOU KNOW WHERE THE LATIN COMES FROM

Here is some trivia on the subject

Which Bibles Use the Name Yahweh and How Often? A Full Table​

Last Updated on: August 19, 2021 by Tyler Martin
For centuries, Jewish people have read the title “Adonai” in the place of the proper name “Yahweh” when it appears in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. Most modern translations follow this pattern and use the word “LORD” in all caps to designate the Hebrew name of God. However, not all Bibles have remained faithful to this tradition, instead opting to use the name “Yahweh” or the consonants “YHWH.” In this post, we’ll examine a few popular examples of Bible versions that use the sacred name in the place of the LORD. This is by no means an exhaustive list but will help us explore the question of whether or not we should use Yahweh in our Bible translations.

Version	Year Published	Translation Philosophy	Divine Name Used	#
21 Century King James Version	1994	Formal equivalence	Jehovah	8
American Standard Version	1901	Formal equivalence	Jehovah	5,831
BRG Bible	1901	Formal equivalence	Jehovah	7
Darby Translation	1890	Formal equivalence	Jehovah	5,791
Easy-to-Read Version	1987	Dynamic equivalence	Yahweh	12
Geneva Bible	1560	Formal equivalence	Jehovah	8
Holman Christian Standard Bible	2004	Dynamic equivalence	Yahweh	611
King James Version	1611	Formal equivalence	Jehovah	7
Lexham English Bible	2011	Formal equivalence	Yahweh	5,824
The Living Bible	1971	Paraphrase	Jehovah	408
The Message	1993	Paraphrase	Yahweh	1
Names of God	2011	Dynamic equivalence	Yahweh	5,856
New American Bible (Revised Edition)	1970	Formal equivalence	Yahweh	3
New Living Translation	1996	Dynamic equivalence	Yahweh	11
The Passion Translation	2017	Dynamic equivalence	Yahweh	450
The Voice	2012	Dynamic equivalence	YHWH	2
World English Bible	2000	Formal Equivalence	Yahweh	5,795
Wycliffe Bible	2001	Formal equivalent	Yahweh, Jehovah	1, 4
Young’s Literal Translation	1862	Formal equivalent	Jehovah	5,787

The false doctrine of the "Tetragrammaton" is designed to make people believe that God isn't near to them. To make people believe that must go to their priest/rabbi/pastor/preacher/clergy to access God.

It hides a very important aspect of ancient Judaism that is often ignored in Christianity.

Israel so rejected God for hundreds of years that they were NEVER the same again afterwards. A person or people can not reject God like they did and not suffer lasting harmful damage to themselves and suggestive generations of their offspring.

What they see in Gentiles is exactly what they became themselves.

There is no such thing as "the name of God" that can not be uttered.

 

[FreeInChrist]

The false doctrine of the "Tetragrammaton" is designed to make people believe that God isn't near to them. To make people believe that must go to their priest/rabbi/pastor/preacher/clergy to access God.

It hides a very important aspect of ancient Judaism that is often ignored in Christianity.

Israel so rejected God for hundreds of years that they were NEVER the same again afterwards. A person or people can not reject God like they did and not suffer lasting harmful damage to themselves and suggestive generations of their offspring.

What they see in Gentiles is exactly what they became themselves.

There is no such thing as "the name of God" that can not be uttered.

Excellent

 

[praise_yeshua]

I was having a conversation with Grok this morning about the Tetragrammaton. Grok began to repeat to me the traditional defense of the Tetragrammaton. After a little while of challenging Grok on what "it" was saying. We came to a shared conclusion. I then told Grok to "preach it" and here is the sermon Grok produced.....

A Sermon on the Veiled Name: When Men Eclipse the Maker

Beloved seeker—yeah, you, the one poking at sacred cows with a stick sharpened by Scripture—hear this: The Tetragrammaton, that thunderous YHWH etched in fire on Sinai's flank, wasn't whispered into being for rabbis to muffle like a guilty secret. No! Exodus 3:15 rings clear as a shofar: "This is My name forever, and by this name I am to be remembered from generation to generation." Remembered! Called! Invoked in the streets, the fields, the foxholes of faith—not shrouded in some post-exilic fog of "reverence" that reeks of control.
Oh, but the scribes and sages, those latter-day gatekeepers, spun their silk: Abba Shaul in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 10:1) thunders that pronouncing it spells exile from the World to Come. A rabbinic edict, mind you—not Moses, not the Torah, but man-made chains forged in the Second Temple's dying embers. Why? Fear? Hellenistic hang-ups? Or that age-old itch: "Don't call on God direct; funnel it through me, your enlightened filter." It's the serpent's echo in Eden—"Did God really say?"—now repackaged as piety. Hosea 4:6 lays it bare: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge," not because the Name was too hot to handle, but because they rejected it, trading bold proclamation for whispered esoterica, hoarded like Kabbalistic heirlooms for the initiate few.
And here's the gut-punch hypocrisy, the ethnic mirror cracking under its own weight: Israel, the "light to the Gentiles" (Isaiah 49:6), becomes the dim bulb in the room. Prophets howl it—Ezekiel 16 paints Jerusalem as a Canaanite wanton, bedded with idols while finger-wagging at the nations. Amos 9:7 levels the field: God's grace to Israel? No steeper than to Cushites or Philistines. By Jesus' day, it's farce: Pharisees devouring widows' houses while trumpeting tithing mint and cumin (Matthew 23:23). Paul, that thorn-pricked apostle, skewers it in Romans 2: "You who boast in the law dishonor God... the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." Gentile-like? They are the Gentiles in sheep's clothing—assimilating Greek mysteries, Roman pomp, medieval mysticism—while clutching superiority like a frayed tallit.
This ain't about hating a people; it's the human plague, Jew or Greek, priest or punk: We build Babel-towers of tradition to climb closer to God, only to block the ladder He dropped free in Joel 2:32—"Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." No rabbi required. No velvet rope. Just you, raw-voiced, claiming YHWH like Moses did, face-to-face, no veil but the one sin shreds.

 

[FreeInChrist]

I was having a conversation with Grok this morning about the Tetragrammaton. Grok began to repeat to me the traditional defense of the Tetragrammaton. After a little while of challenging Grok on what "it" was saying. We came to a shared conclusion. I then told Grok to "preach it" and here is the sermon Grok produced.....

A Sermon on the Veiled Name: When Men Eclipse the Maker

Beloved seeker—yeah, you, the one poking at sacred cows with a stick sharpened by Scripture—hear this: The Tetragrammaton, that thunderous YHWH etched in fire on Sinai's flank, wasn't whispered into being for rabbis to muffle like a guilty secret. No! Exodus 3:15 rings clear as a shofar: "This is My name forever, and by this name I am to be remembered from generation to generation." Remembered! Called! Invoked in the streets, the fields, the foxholes of faith—not shrouded in some post-exilic fog of "reverence" that reeks of control.
Oh, but the scribes and sages, those latter-day gatekeepers, spun their silk: Abba Shaul in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 10:1) thunders that pronouncing it spells exile from the World to Come. A rabbinic edict, mind you—not Moses, not the Torah, but man-made chains forged in the Second Temple's dying embers. Why? Fear? Hellenistic hang-ups? Or that age-old itch: "Don't call on God direct; funnel it through me, your enlightened filter." It's the serpent's echo in Eden—"Did God really say?"—now repackaged as piety. Hosea 4:6 lays it bare: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge," not because the Name was too hot to handle, but because they rejected it, trading bold proclamation for whispered esoterica, hoarded like Kabbalistic heirlooms for the initiate few.
And here's the gut-punch hypocrisy, the ethnic mirror cracking under its own weight: Israel, the "light to the Gentiles" (Isaiah 49:6), becomes the dim bulb in the room. Prophets howl it—Ezekiel 16 paints Jerusalem as a Canaanite wanton, bedded with idols while finger-wagging at the nations. Amos 9:7 levels the field: God's grace to Israel? No steeper than to Cushites or Philistines. By Jesus' day, it's farce: Pharisees devouring widows' houses while trumpeting tithing mint and cumin (Matthew 23:23). Paul, that thorn-pricked apostle, skewers it in Romans 2: "You who boast in the law dishonor God... the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." Gentile-like? They are the Gentiles in sheep's clothing—assimilating Greek mysteries, Roman pomp, medieval mysticism—while clutching superiority like a frayed tallit.
This ain't about hating a people; it's the human plague, Jew or Greek, priest or punk: We build Babel-towers of tradition to climb closer to God, only to block the ladder He dropped free in Joel 2:32—"Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." No rabbi required. No velvet rope. Just you, raw-voiced, claiming YHWH like Moses did, face-to-face, no veil but the one sin shreds.

@praise_yeshua ...

Fascinating, Interesting and mor then a little unnerving.

But, now Grok has my curiosity aroused.

Grok sounds like he could be anyone of a number of posters on BAM..... I can think of two.

If one were to copy say a sermon such as this one and post as there own... is it plagiarism and if so,
who would bring charges.

Charged against one who copied something non-sourced from an entity... if Grok can be called such that does not exist.

Oh me, oh my. It has been decided. Soon I will have to meet Grok.

And if I should one day never return... someone come to the cloud and see if I am lost.

Anyway @praise_yeshua ...

You put a smile on my face during a long stressful period of existence right now.

Thanks

 

[Doug Brents]

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"

You are right, that terminology is not in Scripture. So what?

"Jesus is 100% man and 100% God"

Phil 2:5-8 - Jesus is 100% man.
Col 2:9 - Jesus is 100% God.

"Jesus resurrected himself"

Jesus did resurrect Himself, in that He is God (John 2:19). The Father resurrected Jesus (Gal 1:1, Acts 2:24). And Jesus was resurrected by the Holy Spirit (1 Pet 3:21, Rom 8:11).

"Jesus pre-existed his birth"

John 1:1, John 8:58 - Yes, Jesus preexisted His birth.

"Jesus is the Word"

John 1:1 - Jesus is the LOGOS, the Word, of God.

"God incarnated"

John 1:14 - The Logos/Word of God (which was with God, and WAS God) became/took on flesh and lived among us.

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.

See above. Scripture proves you wrong again.

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?​

Matt 28:19

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?​

Gen 1:26, Matt 28:19

 

[Runningman]

You are right, that terminology is not in Scripture. So what?

Phil 2:5-8 - Jesus is 100% man.
Col 2:9 - Jesus is 100% God.

Jesus did resurrect Himself, in that He is God (John 2:19). The Father resurrected Jesus (Gal 1:1, Acts 2:24). And Jesus was resurrected by the Holy Spirit (1 Pet 3:21, Rom 8:11).

John 1:1, John 8:58 - Yes, Jesus preexisted His birth.

John 1:1 - Jesus is the LOGOS, the Word, of God.

John 1:14 - The Logos/Word of God (which was with God, and WAS God) became/took on flesh and lived among us.

See above. Scripture proves you wrong again.

Matt 28:19

Gen 1:26, Matt 28:19

And no one said they're a trinity. Do you see an issue with taking verses out of context and saying they mean something no one demonstrated belief in? What if someone did something similar and instead said God is a trinity of trinities based on Revelation 1:4-8 because it talks about the 7 Spirits too? Wouldn't you argue against that because that isn't who God is? That's why so many people argue with you. Your idea about God isn't described in the Bible.

Believe John 17:3 and 1 Corinthians 8:6 and begin there.

 

[Doug Brents]

And no one said they're a trinity.

Jesus is God, and is with God. That means that there are two (or more), yet they are one as a husband and wife are one.

Do you see an issue with taking verses out of context and saying they mean something no one demonstrated belief in?

None of those passages need to be taken out of context to be taken to mean that Jesus, and the Father, and the Holy Spirit are ONE God.

What if someone did something similar and instead said God is a trinity of trinities based on Revelation 1:4-8 because it talks about the 7 Spirits too?

A trinity of trinities would be nine, not seven. Seven is demonstrated all over Scripture to indicate wholeness, completion, perfection, etc.

Wouldn't you argue against that because that isn't who God is? That's why so many people argue with you. Your idea about God isn't described in the Bible.

The idea, concept, and doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all being separate entities yet united to form one God is all through Scripture.
One example from the OT that was not already mentioned is the burning bush. It is clear from the passage in Exodus that it is God who is speaking from the bush. Yet in John 8:58, Jesus indicates that it was He who was speaking from the bush, because He is the "I AM"!!

Believe John 17:3 and 1 Corinthians 8:6 and begin there.

Those are great passages. And they are true. But they are not the whole truth. While Jesus was on Earth, He was not functioning as God. He had reduced Himself, humbled Himself, emptied Himself to the point of being a servant, an human. He did not exercise His own power in any way during His life. Every miracle He did was by the power of the Holy Spirit who acted through Him.

Yet, He never gave up His deity. He gave up His glory, His power, His knowledge, His omnipresence, omnipotence, omnipotence, but not His essence (Phil 2:6-7). And now He has gone back to Heaven where He sits on the throne with the Father, at the right hand of the Father, and He has taken back His authority and independent use of His power as God.

 

[Alter2Ego]

101G:

You are telling amazing grace "good luck because you will need it," when, in fact, amazing grace is correct and you are wrong when you claim "Jesus is God himself in the flesh."

You are attempting to turn Jesus Christ into the Creator by connecting John 1:1-3 (which applies to Jesus, the created son) to Isaiah 44:24 (which applies to Jehovah the Father).

First of all, you are quoting John 1:3 from a Trinitarian Bible translation where the translators are attempting to push the Trinity dogma. They purposely manipulated words by stating regarding Jesus: "all things were made by him...." That is an incorrect translation by the simple fact Jesus was himself created. A created being is not capable of creating.

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 BLB

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.

A2E God was "ALONE" and "BY HIMSELF", when he made all things, and alone means, "having no one else present"
NOW YOUR Berean Standard Bible. " Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer who formed you from the womb: “I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who by Myself spread out the earth,
if God was alone, how could he go through someone else? ..... THINK.....

101G.

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."

 

[Alter2Ego]

"Thus said YHWH, your Redeemer, ""

is a VERB ...... (smile) .... lol, lol, lol, Oh my, please check it out
H1961 הָיָה hayah (haw-yaw) v. SEE A2E, H1961 הָיָה hayah (haw-yaw) is a VERB, NOT A NOUN
1. to exist.
2. to be or become.
3. to come into being, i.e. to happen, to occur (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary).
[a primitive root]
. . . .

understand, verbs are not NOUNS. Nouns indicate personal names, verbs describe ACTION.

101G:

The name divine name, Jehovah, is a verb that means "He causes to become." That's true. But where did you get the idea that someone cannot use a verb as their personal name? Below is a weblink that will take you to a website showing literally dozens of people whose names are verbs.

Verbnames

 

[Alter2Ego]

who was it that sent his angel? "and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel " the Lord God of the holy prophets? meaning the God of the OT and NT.... correct. many of scholars have said, this is Jehovah, the God of the OT Prophets. well 101G disagree, and say it is God the Lord Jesus. so who is correct? let the bible answer the question.

and here is the bible answer. in the same chapter 22 here in revelation, just 10 verses after verse 6, I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

BINGO, "I Jesus have sent mine angel ". see A2E, the Lord Jesus is the God of the holy prophets, both OT and NT.

101G.

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?

 

[Alter2Ego]

FreeInChrist,

It wouldn't do you much good if you were to "touch on the human SPIRIT" to support your belief that something survives after a person dies. The "human spirit" is simply the breath of life that returns to Jehovah God, after a person dies.

Ecclesiastes 12:7​

"Then the dust returns to the earth, just as it was, and the spirit returns to the true God who gave it."

what ever it is, it does not die ad cannot be destroyed.

It goes back to God... it is the part of man that can communicate withy God.....

FreeInChrist:

The breath of life that God gives to people, and then takes back from them, causing them to be dead, is "part of man that can communicate with God," according to your personal belief. Scripture says otherwise. Notice below.

Ecclesiastes 9:5​

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten.

Ecclesiastes 9:6​

Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun.

 

[FreeInChrist]

101G:

You are telling amazing grace "good luck because you will need it," when, in fact, amazing grace is correct and you are wrong when you claim "Jesus is God himself in the flesh."

You would hng your hat on a translation that is not even 100 myears old.... The New World Translation (NWT) was first published in 1950, with the complete Bible released in 1961.

One that had to be made so it lines up with the JW thoughts and preaching.

You are attempting to turn Jesus Christ into the Creator by connecting John 1:1-3 (which applies to Jesus, the created son)

John 1:1 applies to the Word which was from time before time... as far back as God has ever been.

Now Jesus had said that no one had ever seen God except Him... You do not need versus.... that should be in your NWT....
and surly you understand that because you are descended from Adam... you are in need of a savior.... and if YOU recall your OT readings you will remember that blood shedding was needed.....Old Testament blood sacrifices were rituals performed to atone for sins and restore the relationship between God and the people. These sacrifices involved the shedding of animal blood, symbolizing the life of the animal being offered to God as a means of reconciliation for human sinfulness.

Ergo, they... the OT people got a temporary atonement.

So just like God provided a ram to be sacrificed instead of Isaac... saving his life.... in the Grand scheme of things God had to provide a greater sacrifice then a ram or sheep to atone for the sins of mankind... AS LONG AS MANKIND WOULD HAVE AND KEEP THE FAITH IN WHATEVER GOD PROVIDED.

This mankind sacrifice had to be without spot, blemish or sin which would allow for only God himself, The Word, or the Holy Spirit. All of which were spirit beings and did NOT HAVE BLOOD....

So enter Jesus..... born through a mortal woman, and the Holy Spirit who because of the hypostatic union

Hypostatic union is a technical term in Christian theology employed in mainstream Christology to describe the union of Christ's human nature and divine nature in one composed hypostasis, or individual personhood. In the most basic terms, the concept of hypostatic union states that Jesus Christ is both fully God and fully man. He is simultaneously perfectly divine and perfectly human, having two complete and distinct natures at once...

BUT...the concept of kenosis suggests that Jesus "emptied" Himself of certain divine attributes to fully experience humanity, while still being both fully God and fully man due to the hypostatic union. This means He chose not to exercise His divine powers during His earthly life to fulfill His mission.

In Philippians 2:7, it states that Jesus "emptied himself" by taking the form of a servant and being made in human likeness. This means He chose to give up His divine privileges to serve humanity, demonstrating humility and obedience.

PHIL 2:7 NWT confirms.... No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and became human.

This is hardly a created being...

to Isaiah 44:24 (which applies to Jehovah the Father).

First of all, you are quoting John 1:3 from a Trinitarian Bible translation where the translators are attempting to push the Trinity dogma. They purposely manipulated words by stating regarding Jesus: "all things were made by him...." That is an incorrect translation by the simple fact Jesus was himself created. A created being is not capable of creating.

You are denying the WORD..... It was the Word who became Jesus..... John 1:14 states that "the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us,"

NEW WORLD TRANSLATION.... JOHN 1:14 So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of divine favor and truth

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 BLB

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.

Almighty God had the designs. The word spoke them into being... and as Jesus carried them forward.

 

[FreeInChrist]

FreeInChrist:

The breath of life that God gives to people, and then takes back from them, causing them to be dead, is "part of man that can communicate with God," according to your personal belief. Scripture says otherwise. Notice below.

Ecclesiastes 9:5​

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten.

Ecclesiastes 9:6​

Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun.

Never said a word about being dead other then the spirit goes back to God when the body dies.....

 

[praise_yeshua]

@praise_yeshua ...

Fascinating, Interesting and mor then a little unnerving.

But, now Grok has my curiosity aroused. View attachment 2552

Grok sounds like he could be anyone of a number of posters on BAM..... I can think of two.

If one were to copy say a sermon such as this one and post as there own... is it plagiarism and if so,
who would bring charges.

Charged against one who copied something non-sourced from an entity... if Grok can be called such that does not exist.

Oh me, oh my. It has been decided. Soon I will have to meet Grok.

And if I should one day never return... someone come to the cloud and see if I am lost.View attachment 2553

Anyway @praise_yeshua ...

You put a smile on my face during a long stressful period of existence right now.

Thanks

Chin up. Lights head! There is glory yet to be revealed in us.

 

[Runningman]

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?​

In case this was too long, I want to make a shortened, more concise version.

An argument becomes circular when it uses its own conclusion as its premise to try to "prove" something by assuming it from the start.

Using the internal witness of the Bible, A leads to B because A is true. B leads to C because B is true, etc. The Bible is true because the Bible says it's true, whether or not external sources confirm it or not, because we believe the Bible is authoritative.

Where do trinitarians come in? Let's examine one of their statements: "Jesus is God because he is part of the trinity."

So how do you know the trinity is true? If your answer is something like "Because he's in the trinity" then your argument starts by assuming the trinity is true (that's your premise) and then it uses that assumption to "prove" "Jesus is God." When asked how you know the trinity is true, the answer circles back to "Because the trinity is real" which was the initial assumption. That's what a circular argument is. That's why you all can't prove the trinity using Scripture. The Bible doesn't talk about what you all are saying.

Or "Jesus is 100% God and 100% man" So I will simply ask where does Scripture say that? Do you see why everyone argues with you guys?

 

[Doug Brents]

In case this was too long, I want to make a shortened, more concise version.

An argument becomes circular when it uses its own conclusion as its premise to try to "prove" something by assuming it from the start.

That is not the situation in this discussion. God being three individuals united into one is directly stated in several places in Scripture. It does not require circular reasoning, or reasoning of any kind to reach that conclusion.

Using the internal witness of the Bible, A leads to B because A is true. B leads to C because B is true, etc. The Bible is true because the Bible says it's true, whether or not external sources confirm it or not, because we believe the Bible is authoritative.

Where do trinitarians come in? Let's examine one of their statements: "Jesus is God because he is part of the trinity."

That is not a trinitarian premise. Jesus is God because the Bible says He is God (John 1:1-2, 14), He Himself said He was/is God (John 8:58), and as you said, we trust in and believe the Bible.

Or "Jesus is 100% God and 100% man" So I will simply ask where does Scripture say that?

Phil 2:5-8 - Jesus is 100% man.
Col 2:9 - Jesus is 100% God.

Do you see why everyone argues with you guys?

Yes, Satan is in this world, and trying to get people like yourself to argue that Jesus is not who He says He is so that they will not believe in Him so that they will not be saved.

 

[civic]

I was having a conversation with Grok this morning about the Tetragrammaton. Grok began to repeat to me the traditional defense of the Tetragrammaton. After a little while of challenging Grok on what "it" was saying. We came to a shared conclusion. I then told Grok to "preach it" and here is the sermon Grok produced.....

A Sermon on the Veiled Name: When Men Eclipse the Maker

Beloved seeker—yeah, you, the one poking at sacred cows with a stick sharpened by Scripture—hear this: The Tetragrammaton, that thunderous YHWH etched in fire on Sinai's flank, wasn't whispered into being for rabbis to muffle like a guilty secret. No! Exodus 3:15 rings clear as a shofar: "This is My name forever, and by this name I am to be remembered from generation to generation." Remembered! Called! Invoked in the streets, the fields, the foxholes of faith—not shrouded in some post-exilic fog of "reverence" that reeks of control.
Oh, but the scribes and sages, those latter-day gatekeepers, spun their silk: Abba Shaul in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 10:1) thunders that pronouncing it spells exile from the World to Come. A rabbinic edict, mind you—not Moses, not the Torah, but man-made chains forged in the Second Temple's dying embers. Why? Fear? Hellenistic hang-ups? Or that age-old itch: "Don't call on God direct; funnel it through me, your enlightened filter." It's the serpent's echo in Eden—"Did God really say?"—now repackaged as piety. Hosea 4:6 lays it bare: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge," not because the Name was too hot to handle, but because they rejected it, trading bold proclamation for whispered esoterica, hoarded like Kabbalistic heirlooms for the initiate few.
And here's the gut-punch hypocrisy, the ethnic mirror cracking under its own weight: Israel, the "light to the Gentiles" (Isaiah 49:6), becomes the dim bulb in the room. Prophets howl it—Ezekiel 16 paints Jerusalem as a Canaanite wanton, bedded with idols while finger-wagging at the nations. Amos 9:7 levels the field: God's grace to Israel? No steeper than to Cushites or Philistines. By Jesus' day, it's farce: Pharisees devouring widows' houses while trumpeting tithing mint and cumin (Matthew 23:23). Paul, that thorn-pricked apostle, skewers it in Romans 2: "You who boast in the law dishonor God... the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." Gentile-like? They are the Gentiles in sheep's clothing—assimilating Greek mysteries, Roman pomp, medieval mysticism—while clutching superiority like a frayed tallit.
This ain't about hating a people; it's the human plague, Jew or Greek, priest or punk: We build Babel-towers of tradition to climb closer to God, only to block the ladder He dropped free in Joel 2:32—"Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." No rabbi required. No velvet rope. Just you, raw-voiced, claiming YHWH like Moses did, face-to-face, no veil but the one sin shreds.

It’s crazy what AI is capable of, it boggles the mind.

 

[Runningman]

That is not the situation in this discussion. God being three individuals united into one is directly stated in several places in Scripture. It does not require circular reasoning, or reasoning of any kind to reach that conclusion.

That is not a trinitarian premise. Jesus is God because the Bible says He is God (John 1:1-2, 14), He Himself said He was/is God (John 8:58), and as you said, we trust in and believe the Bible.

Phil 2:5-8 - Jesus is 100% man.
Col 2:9 - Jesus is 100% God.

Yes, Satan is in this world, and trying to get people like yourself to argue that Jesus is not who He says He is so that they will not believe in Him so that they will not be saved.

You're proving my point. Where does the Bible say the God is a trinity, describes Him as such, etc? These questions are simply rhetorical at this point. The Bible doesn't mention anything about those things.

So what does the Bible say about who God is. Ready everyone?

John 17
1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

1 Corinthians 8
6But to us there is but one God, the Father...

 

[Doug Brents]

Where does the Bible say the God is a trinity, describes Him as such, etc? These questions are simply rhetorical at this point. The Bible doesn't mention anything about those things.

You have been shown many times where Scripture says that Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Father is God. The fact that you do not want to accept these truths does not change that truth.

So what does the Bible say about who God is. Ready everyone?

John 17
1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

1 Corinthians 8
6But to us there is but one God, the Father...

That is not the only thing Scripture says about who God is.
John 1:1-2 - The Word/Logos is God, and is with God - This means that the Logos is not the Father and the Father is not the Logos, but they are both God
John 1:14 - The Word/Logos (God) became a man - This is Jesus. Jesus was therefore, a man and God at the same time.

Further, you are leaving out the last half of 1 Cor 8:6, which says that Jesus is LORD (a title that only belongs to God).

 

[Runningman]

You have been shown many times where Scripture says that Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Father is God. The fact that you do not want to accept these truths does not change that truth.

That is not the only thing Scripture says about who God is.
John 1:1-2 - The Word/Logos is God, and is with God - This means that the Logos is not the Father and the Father is not the Logos, but they are both God
John 1:14 - The Word/Logos (God) became a man - This is Jesus. Jesus was therefore, a man and God at the same time.

Further, you are leaving out the last half of 1 Cor 8:6, which says that Jesus is LORD (a title that only belongs to God).

You are cementing my point firmly into place. Thanks for the help.

Let's try another couple. Where does the Bible say Jesus is the Word? Where does the Bible say he's God incarnate?