Your Views on The Trinity

[Peterlag]

I don’t teach Trinity.

I haven’t mentioned Trinity.

All you have is denial.

But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10

Trinity, Oneness or the idea that Jesus is God is all the same to me. And like I already posted in detail... Hebrews is not saying Jesus is God or calling him God. It's a quote from the Old Testament referring to God and when it's quoted in Hebrews it's referring to Jesus using that throne. What you see that is not there is beyond me.

 

[mikesw]

Trinity, Oneness or the idea that Jesus is God is all the same to me. And like I already posted in detail... Hebrews is not saying Jesus is God or calling him God. It's a quote from the Old Testament referring to God and when it's quoted in Hebrews it's referring to Jesus using that throne. What you see that is not there is beyond me.

The interesting thing is that scriptures never challenge your incorrect beliefs

 

[Runningman]

The scripture plainly and clearly says…

But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;

Who does He refer to?

Answer: the Father of the Son.

What does He say to the Son?

Your throne O God is forever.

The only part that is to the Son is Hebrews 1:8,9, but in the original context of Psalm 45:6,7 it's not about the Son. It's most likely about king Solomon, though he isn't named explicitly, it would make sense. King Solomon isn't God is he? Hebrews 1:8,9 actually become powerful proofs against the deity of Jesus, and Trinitarianism in a general sense, when the context is taken into consideration.

 

[Runningman]

Trinity, Oneness or the idea that Jesus is God is all the same to me. And like I already posted in detail... Hebrews is not saying Jesus is God or calling him God. It's a quote from the Old Testament referring to God and when it's quoted in Hebrews it's referring to Jesus using that throne. What you see that is not there is beyond me.

I think they don't care about that. The king in Psalm 45 was a married man who loved to look at women. Rather than understanding that is not who Jesus is, I saw a Trinitarian actually adopt the belief that Jesus was either married or will get married later, contrary to Jesus explicitly teaching that those who are resurrected, such as Jesus himself, don't get married or re-marry if they were married prior to their resurrection.

 

[Peterlag]

We cannot approach the Bible with wisdom and “reason together” if we must invent and use non-biblical phrases to support our theology. The Bible calls Jesus the “Son” of God for the simple reason that he had a beginning. Jesus had been part of God’s plan since the foundation of the world, but he began his actual life when God “fathered” him and Mary conceived him in her womb.

There are many verses where Jesus and God are portrayed as two separate beings and there are too many examples to list, but just to mention a few we can look at when Jesus told the rich young ruler that he was not good, but “God” was good. Also Jesus grew in favor with “God” and with men, and he told his disciples“ Believe in God; believe also in me."

 

[JLB]

Trinity, Oneness or the idea that Jesus is God is all the same to me.

I didn’t mention Trinity ore Oneness. You did.


But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10


“He” the Father calls the Son, God.

“He” the Father calls the Son, LORD (YHWH).

“He” the Father says the Son, … in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of Your hands.


If you choose to deny what the scriptures so plainly says, then that is your choice.


Have it your way.

 

[JLB]

The only part that is to the Son is Hebrews 1:8,9, but in the original context of Psalm 45:6,7 it's not about the Son. It's most likely about king Solomon, though he isn't named explicitly, it would make sense. King Solomon isn't God is he? Hebrews 1:8,9 actually become powerful proofs against the deity of Jesus, and Trinitarianism in a general sense, when the context is taken into consideration.

But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10


“He” the Father calls the Son, God.

“He” the Father calls the Son, LORD (YHWH).

“He” the Father says the Son, … in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of Your hands.


If you choose to deny what the scriptures so plainly says, then that is your choice.


Have it your way.

 

[Runningman]

But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10


“He” the Father calls the Son, God.

“He” the Father calls the Son, LORD (YHWH).

“He” the Father says the Son, … in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of Your hands.


If you choose to deny what the scriptures so plainly says, then that is your choice.


Have it your way.

Not a convincing argument since Hebrews 1:8-10 says the human is a man who was anointed above his companions. God doesn't have companions to be anointed above. YHWH also isn't a man with a God.

You've already been shown that Psalm 45 doesn't transfer the idea of deity, that you seem to think it does, to Hebrews 1:8-10. Why you are running into issues with your claims is because they don't actually support what your conclusions are. Read Hebrews 1 and Psalm 45 again. Read it closely.

 

[Peterlag]

I didn’t mention Trinity ore Oneness. You did.


But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10


“He” the Father calls the Son, God.

“He” the Father calls the Son, LORD (YHWH).

“He” the Father says the Son, … in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of Your hands.


If you choose to deny what the scriptures so plainly says, then that is your choice.


Have it your way.

Again, it makes no difference if you say Trinity or Oneness or Jesus is not God. It all comes from the same devil. You keep quoting Hebrews like if Paul was calling Jesus God. He was not. He's quoting the Old Testament that called "God" God.

 

[Peterlag]

There's no such creature in all of Scripture known as the "Word" who is God. No examples of the "Word" being God in the Old Testament or the New Testament. My advice to you is don't just camp out in John 1:1 and pretend like it stands alone while ignoring the rest of the Bible.

cc: @Runningman

 

[Keiw1]

The scripture plainly and clearly says…

But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;

Who does He refer to?

Answer: the Father of the Son.

What does He say to the Son?

Your throne O God is forever.

Your throne O God= error by Catholicism translating.

 

[Peterlag]

Folks keep telling me Genesis 1:1 is Plural so Jesus must be God.​

The word elohim is always found in the plural form and is often called a uniplural noun. A uniplural noun is a word that appears in the plural form but is used for singular and plural subjects alike. “Deer” and “fish” are examples of uniplural nouns in English. As with many Hebrew words, elohim carries more than one definition. When it is being used in a plural sense, it refers to “gods” or “men with authority.” When it is used in its singular sense, it can refer to “God” or “a god” or “a man with authority, such as a judge.” The Hebrew lexicon by Brown, Driver, and Briggs is considered to be one of the best available and it has as its first usage for elohim: “rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power, divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels, gods.

 

[mikesw]

Folks keep telling me Genesis 1:1 is Plural so Jesus must be God.​

The word elohim is always found in the plural form and is often called a uniplural noun. A uniplural noun is a word that appears in the plural form but is used for singular and plural subjects alike. “Deer” and “fish” are examples of uniplural nouns in English. As with many Hebrew words, elohim carries more than one definition. When it is being used in a plural sense, it refers to “gods” or “men with authority.” When it is used in its singular sense, it can refer to “God” or “a god” or “a man with authority, such as a judge.” The Hebrew lexicon by Brown, Driver, and Briggs is considered to be one of the best available and it has as its first usage for elohim: “rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power, divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels, gods.

I'm not sure how the one word controls anything when the actual distinctions are the mention of the Spirit of God in v 2 and the plural use in v26. The elaboration on the word elohim then has, at best, a lesser role than these other two points. Then the worst usage is "rulers, judges" but we know it is not multiple gods nor angels behind creation. Most importantly the wording of Gen 1:2,26 allow for (and even favors) the later revelation of the Triune essence of God.
The other options offered for the plurals -- such as plural of majesty or God's court -- could be considered but those seem weak with the possibility that such wording may not be used again in the OT about God.

 

[Peterlag]

The word "elohim" in Genesis 1:1 does not prove that Jesus is God or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

The word "elohim" is indeed grammatically plural, but in Hebrew it often functions as a singular title, especially when referring to the one true God. This is called a plural of majesty, and not a numerical plural of persons. The verb created "bara" is singular, showing that only one acted. So while "elohim" can function like "police" sometimes singular and sometimes plural the verb form makes it clear: a single God created. The one true God acted alone through His own spiritual body often referred to as His "logos" and not through multiple divine persons. There is no trinity here and no conversation between separate minds. Just one God expressing Himself. Here's how a friend of mine wrote it... The word "elohim" is always found in the plural form and is often called a uniplural noun. A uniplural noun is a word that appears in the plural form, but is used for singular and plural subjects alike. Words like “deer” and “fish” are examples of uniplural nouns in English. The word "elohim" as with many Hebrew words carries more than one definition. When it's being used in a plural sense, it refers to “gods” or “men with authority.” When it's used in its singular sense, it can refer to “God” or “a god” or “a man with authority, such as a judge.”

 

[Peterlag]

Somebody needs to make me a poster that says...

• I can of mine own self do nothing (John 5:30).

• My Father is greater than I (John 14:28).

• Not my will, but thine, be done (Luke 22:42).

• There is but one God, the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6).

• I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God (John 20:17).

• There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5).

 

[dwight92070]

Things that are not mentioned in the Bible...

There's no cars
There's no television
There's no computers
Jesus is not God is also not mentioned

You are right. "Jesus is not God" is also not mentioned in the Bible. What is mentioned is "Jesus IS God".

 

[Runningman]

You are right. "Jesus is not God" is also not mentioned in the Bible. What is mentioned is "Jesus IS God".

The text, "Jesus is God" actually does not appear in the Bible, but many are actually called a god, or god, in the Bible. They didn't mean to say everyone is God Almighty in the same way the Father is. For example, Jesus is never called "the only true God" like the Father is. There is a difference.

 

[Peterlag]

You are right. "Jesus is not God" is also not mentioned in the Bible. What is mentioned is "Jesus IS God".

I cannot find one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. A teaching... a whole paragraph or chapter. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. Trinitarians piece together statements that are scattered all over the Bible. They basically use bits and pieces of words and half verses along with their own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as they pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there, and then they construct their "own God" which is the product of their own human thinking. This is why they cannot present one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

 

[Runningman]

I cannot find one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. A teaching... a whole paragraph or chapter. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. Trinitarians piece together statements that are scattered all over the Bible. They basically use bits and pieces of words and half verses along with their own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as they pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there, and then they construct their "own God" which is the product of their own human thinking. This is why they cannot present one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

Well, you are right. You aren't imagining things, contrary to what the trinitarains may tell you. The reason for all of the fussing is because we are of two different schools of thought.

Unitarians take a mostly more literal approach to Scripture and let the words and ideas of the Bible define themselves. That doesn't mean we are entirely opposed to non-literal concepts, it's just that if a literal approach isn't the best then something may be explained better with theology. It's also ok to say "I don't know" if that's the case. As a result, we get the Father is the only true God as Scripture explicitly teaches from Genesis to Revelation. This is the only conclusion if one simply reads what the Bible says without trying to interpret it.

Trinitarians take a more liberal approach and define words and concepts around a theological framework. While the doctrine of the Trinity defies conventional logic and reason (often said to be an incomprehensible mystery by Trinitarian theologians) the Trinity does make sense if you play by the rules the Trinitarians provide you to play by. The only problem is that it is not intuitive and needs to be explained. For example, in Trintiarianism, the statement about the Father being the only true God isn't literal and they have to teach people not to believe in the exclusive deity of the Father. They have plenty of apologetics websites that make every effort to explain the Bible away, GotQuestions is one of them.

 

[Peterlag]

Well, you are right. You aren't imagining things, contrary to what the trinitarains may tell you. The reason for all of the fussing is because we are of two different schools of thought.

Unitarians take a mostly more literal approach to Scripture and let the words and ideas of the Bible define themselves. That doesn't mean we are entirely opposed to non-literal concepts, it's just that if a literal approach isn't the best then something may be explained better with theology. It's also ok to say "I don't know" if that's the case. As a result, we get the Father is the only true God as Scripture explicitly teaches from Genesis to Revelation. This is the only conclusion if one simply reads what the Bible says without trying to interpret it.

Trinitarians take a more liberal approach and define words and concepts around a theological framework. While the doctrine of the Trinity defies conventional logic and reason (often said to be an incomprehensible mystery by Trinitarian theologians) the Trinity does make sense if you play by the rules the Trinitarians provide you to play by. The only problem is that it is not intuitive and needs to be explained. For example, in Trintiarianism, the statement about the Father being the only true God isn't literal and they have to teach people not to believe in the exclusive deity of the Father. They have plenty of apologetics websites that make every effort to explain the Bible away, GotQuestions is one of them.

The trinity folks have a couple of get out of jail free cards...

They use them on me whenever I corner them. I think my count is now up to three.

1.) That was Jesus acting in his human side.
2.) It's a mystery and God is to difficult to understand.

And the new one whenever I ask for Scripture to back up what they said...

3.) God does not need to write the Bible the way you think it should be written.