Why The Trinity is Wrong: Juxtaposition

[101G]

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/why-the-trinity-is-wrong-juxtaposition.347/page-6#post-7152

so we can take this as a NO?

Mar 16:19 Then indeed, after speaking to them, the Lord was taken up into Heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

I don't know what people sit on at your house but people usually sit on something tangible.

You forget that if God the Father is seen by mortal man then he will die. So only the Word of God can be seen by mortal man and so John only sees the Word of God.

that was not the question, but, John 14:7 "If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him." John 14:8 "Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us." John 14:9 "Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; (READ THAT AGAIN YIKES!) and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"

so, we can take this as you neither agree with the Lord Jesus statement in Matthews 19 that God is a "he", and not them..... that's all I need to KNOW from both of you. Good day

101G.

 

[synergy]

Is proof that God he IS not. Because he is OF God.

You're not reading the verses I mentioned. John 1:1 contains the phrase "Word was God". I'm giving you verses and you're giving me just your opinion. Sorry, the Bible wins always and everywhere.

 

[Wrangler]

You're not reading the verses I mentioned. John 1:1 contains the phrase "Word was God".

Right. And I explained that is god in sense 3, not sense 1 since words are not Beings.

 

[synergy]

Wrong. The EXACT OPPOSITE is the case. Pretending there are 3 Creators is dismissing the Creator Himself.

You just cannot abuse language this way and get away with it. Singular pronouns do not refer to a threesome.

Now you're falsely accusing me of "pretending there are 3 Creators" so that you can save face. I never said or even hinted of "Creators" in the plural sense. I have always refered to the Word of God as the sole Creator (John 1:2).

Again, you're not reading the verses I mentioned. I'm giving you verses and you're skipping them and only giving me your opinion. Sorry, the Bible wins always and everywhere.

 

[Wrangler]

Now you're falsely accusing me of "pretending there are 3 Creators" so that you can save face. I never said or even hinted of "Creators" in the plural sense. I have always refered to the Word of God as the sole Creator (John 1:2).

Again, you're not reading the verses I mentioned. I'm giving you verses and you're skipping them and only giving me your opinion. Sorry, the Bible wins always and everywhere.

So many word games. 1 <>3 - no matter how you spin it.

Words are not a Being and are therefore not a Creator. Words are the means by which the Creator created. Big difference.

I agree the Bible always wins and that is why trinitarianism always loses. All you got is eisegesis. Coming up with this ridiculous back end around the fact that the trinity is not in the Bible. Jesus did not teach the trinity. Why do you?

 

[synergy]

Right. And I explained that is god in sense 3, not sense 1 since words are not Beings.

Wrong. The Word of God is not just a word. Read Rev 19:13:

(Rev 19:13) And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

 

[synergy]

So many word games. 1 <>3 - no matter how you spin it.

I use the rules of Algebra which takes into consideration that units need to be considered.
For example, does 1 apple + 1 orange = 2 apples? No, units need to be considered.

Trinitarianism says the following:
1 Person + 1 Person + 1 Person = 3 Persons.
1 Divine Nature = 1 Divine Nature (i.e.: there is only 1 Divine Nature).
Notice how I add items of the same units.

So, that's today's Algebra class.

Words are not a Being and are therefore not a Creator. Words are the means by which the Creator created. Big difference.

Wrong. The Word of God is not just a word. Read Rev 19:13:

(Rev 19:13) And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

I agree the Bible always wins and that is why trinitarianism always loses. All you got is eisegesis. Coming up with this ridiculous back end around the fact that the trinity is not in the Bible.

You are so hell-bent against Trinitarianism that for sure you would have come up with many verses that disprove Trinitarianism by now. Where are those bible verses where "trinitarianism always loses"? Prove your point.

 

[Fred]

so we

You are not a we.

 

[101G]

To all,
Why did God say "US" and "OUR" in Genesis 1:26 when in the very next verse he said, "his", and "he?". and on top of that the Lord Jesus who cannot LIE said God is a "he" single person who made man male and female in the beginning.

well, that put an end to any trinity. but the question remains, "Why say "US", and "OUR", when God is a "HE" and a "HIM?" ... (smile), Oh my this is JUST TO EASY.... not to grasp the true understanding.

the floor is open to suggestions.

101G.

 

[synergy]

To all,
Why did God say "US" and "OUR" in Genesis 1:26 when in the very next verse he said, "his", and "he?". and on top of that the Lord Jesus who cannot LIE said God is a "he" single person who made man male and female in the beginning.

well, that put an end to any trinity. but the question remains, "Why say "US", and "OUR", when God is a "HE" and a "HIM?" ... (smile), Oh my this is JUST TO EASY.... not to grasp the true understanding.

the floor is open to suggestions.

101G.

It's all explained here by @civic in the only possible way, the Trinitarian way:

Loading…

berean-apologetics.community.forum

 

[101G]

It's all explained here by @civic in the only possible way, the Trinitarian way:

Loading…

berean-apologetics.community.forum

the link took me no where

 

[synergy]

the link took me no where

Sorry. I'm still learning the system. This should be it:

Loading…

berean-apologetics.community.forum

Enjoy!

 

[Wrangler]

You're not reading the verses I mentioned. John 1:1 contains the phrase "Word was God".

Agreed. It's just that you incorrectly suppose that is referring to a person rather than to literal words.

You're stuck on this because there is no trinity verse in Scripture. This is why you are stuck on Rev 19:11-16 in the other thread. It makes the same point. "Word of God" = Title of a person. God's word = literal words of God. Not the same thing.

You cannot admit this basic truth because then your IDOL collapses. So, you have to perform trinitiarian eisegesis onto monotheist text.

 

[synergy]

Agreed. It's just that you incorrectly suppose that is referring to a person rather than to literal words.

What is God literally to you? Explain yourself.

 

[Wrangler]

What is God literally to you? Explain yourself.

God literally created Jesus and everything else. Simple explanation.

 

[Fred]

God literally created Jesus and everything else. Simple explanation.

Simple explanation, but zero biblical proof to back it up.

 

[Wrangler]

Simple explanation, but zero biblical proof to back it up.

All the Bible backs it up. A son is a created being, by definition. Jesus is a son. See Mark 1:1.

 

[Fred]

All the Bible backs it up.

Wrong.

A son is a created being, by definition.

Every person that is a father was created as well.
Your assertion proves nothing.

Jesus is a son. See Mark 1:1.

Jesus being the Son of God (John 20:31) is "my God" (John 20:28).

 

[synergy]

God literally created Jesus and everything else. Simple explanation.

Please forward all Bible verses that explicitly say that God created the Person Jesus (aka the Word of God). Thanking you in advance.

 

[Wrangler]

Please forward all Bible verses that explicitly say that God created the Person Jesus (aka the Word of God). Thanking you in advance.

Look for ‘son’