- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 11,541
- Reaction score
- 2,292
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
I don't feel the doctrine of the TRINITY is that complex; however, it is a mystery that GOD reveals and as such Christians strive to understand it more fully. JESUS says HE has seen the FATHER.Jesus also showed that he was separate from God. Jesus once said to opposers who challenged his authority: “In your own Law it is written, ‘The witness of two men is true.’ I am one that bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.” (John 8:17, 18) Jesus must be separate from Jehovah. How else could they be viewed as two witnesses?
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2012242#h=10:0-10:368
Was Jesus lower than God only while he was a man here on earth? No. Even after his death and resurrection, Jesus is described in the Bible as being subordinate to God. The apostle Paul reminds us that “God is supreme over Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:3, Today’s English Version) The Bible says that in the future “when all things have been placed under Christ’s rule, then he himself, the Son, will place himself under God, who placed all things under him; and God will rule completely over all.”—1 Corinthians 15:28, TEV.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2009083#h=11:0-11:521
The Trinity—Whose Teaching?
What, then, about the teaching that Jehovah and Jesus are, in effect, the same God, as the Trinity doctrine proclaims? In its issue of April-June 1999, The Living Pulpit magazine defined the Trinity this way: “There is one God and Father, one Lord Jesus Christ, and one Holy Spirit, three ‘persons’ . . . who are the same or one in essence . . . ; three persons equally God, possessing the same natural properties, yet really distinct, known by their personal characteristics.”
The Athanasian Creed, formulated a few hundred years after the death of Jesus, defined the Trinity this way: “The Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods: but one God.”
Where did this complex Trinity teaching originate? The Christian Century, in its May 20-27, 1998, issue, quotes a pastor who acknowledges that the Trinity is “a teaching of the church rather than a teaching of Jesus.” Even though the Trinity is not a teaching of Jesus, is it consistent with what he taught?
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102005282
Was Jesus Considered to Be God?
WHILE Jesus is often called the Son of God in the Bible, nobody in the first century ever thought of him as being God the Son. Even the demons, who “believe there is one God,” knew from their experience in the spirit realm that Jesus was not God. So, correctly, they addressed Jesus as the separate “Son of God.” (James 2:19; Matthew 8:29) And when Jesus died, the pagan Roman soldiers standing by knew enough to say that what they had heard from his followers must be right, not that Jesus was God, but that “certainly this was God’s Son.”—Matthew 27:54.
Hence, the phrase “Son of God” refers to Jesus as a separate created being, not as part of a Trinity. As the Son of God, he could not be God himself, for John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God.”—RS,
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989304
No, I do not realize the view held by the Witnesses, And why would the Witness organization believe that to be the case? Because a contrary view would uproot their view of who CHRIST is. John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the FATHER, save HE which is of GOD, HE hath seen the FATHER.You do realize Jesus was not talking in a literal sense but what Jesus meant was they were both united in thought/deed...he says exactly that on down in the same chapter of John...
"If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me. But if I am doing them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may come to know and may continue knowing that the Father is in union with me and I am in union with the Father." John 10:37,38
We know he did not mean they were literally one and he also gives his position in regard to his Father in heaven as well, because Jesus also said...
"No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father’s side is the one who has explained Him." John 1:18
lol...it is not a view...it is what the scriptures declare...nice try though...the view
Same thing...they are in unity/in agreement...I've heard the expression many times about human fathers and sons who look/act so much alike..."if you've seen the son, you've seen the father"...no mystery there...John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the FATHER, save HE which is of GOD, HE hath seen the FATHER.
Yeah .... pardon my reminding everyone that this is from the same scripture that declares you should kill your neighbor for working on the sabbath, and stone your daughter to death for not being a virgin on her wedding night.lol...it is not a view...it is what the scriptures declare...nice try though...
Same thing...they are in unity/in agreement...I've heard the expression many times about human fathers and sons who look/act so much alike..."if you've seen the son, you've seen the father"...no mystery there...
lol...it is not a view...it is what the scriptures declare...nice try though...
GOD is what the FATHER, the MESSIAH, and the HOLY SPIRIT are. They are GOD. There is no other GOD. A human Son may look like his Father only since they are both entirely HUMAN. It's you and not I who is missing the obvious, but it's most likely for obvious reasons. You cannot be a "Witness" and believe anything, but as you are told to believe.Same thing...they are in unity/in agreement...I've heard the expression many times about human fathers and sons who look/act so much alike..."if you've seen the son, you've seen the father"...no mystery there...
I gave them to you, evidently you're not reading or maybe not comprehending or maybe both...Which Scripture.
Huh? I don't think so...John 10:37,38...Yeah .... pardon my reminding everyone that this is from the same scripture that declares you should kill your neighbor for working on the sabbath, and stone your daughter to death for not being a virgin on her wedding night.
Huh? When did they drop Deuteronomy and Leviticus out of your bible? It's in the Trump bible, if you can't find it.Huh? I don't think so...John 10:37,38...
Who?Huh? When did they drop Deuteronomy and Leviticus out of your bible? It's in the Trump bible, if you can't find it.
Who?
It packs three gods into one. That's not complex? He was his father, and that's not complex?I don't feel the doctrine of the TRINITY is that complex; however, it is a mystery that GOD reveals and as such Christians strive to understand it more fully. JESUS says HE has seen the FATHER.
Jesus said to him, John 14:9 “Have I been among you all this time and you do not know me, Philip? The one who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
ONE GOD in full communion with each of the other three persons in LOVE for all eternity. The MESSIAH is fully GOD and assumed the position of additionally becoming fully MAN. And as fully man, HE applied the term FATHER. The FATHER Creator assumed the roles of director, protector, provider, and disciplinarian. The HOLY SPIRIT Creator assumed the roles of comforter, guide, teacher, commissioner, and intercessor, The MESSIAH Creator assumed the roles of savior/redeemer, prophet, priest, and king. HOWEVER, being ONE GOD, what one accomplishes is experienced by the other two.It packs three gods into one. That's not complex? He was his father, and that's not complex?
Snap crackle and pop is your best answer? It's silly. It's a tiny cult trying to maximise its membership in a pagan society with multiple gods.ONE GOD in full communion with each of the other three persons in LOVE for all eternity. The MESSIAH is fully GOD and assumed the position of additionally becoming fully MAN. And as fully man, HE applied the term FATHER. The FATHER Creator assumed the roles of director, protector, provider, and disciplinarian. The HOLY SPIRIT Creator assumed the roles of comforter, guide, teacher, commissioner, and intercessor, The MESSIAH Creator assumed the roles of savior/redeemer, prophet, priest, and king. HOWEVER, being ONE GOD, what one accomplishes is experienced by the other two.
No, Christianity is a fellowship of believers who have more on their side than chants, statues and incense. In a world full of counterfeit beliefs, designed by Satan to distort the truth --- Christianity might be evaluated, as you do, to be another stab at superstition. However, I do note that there is a real difference. And it isn't about painting one's face, lighting candles, nor touching one's head to the floor in a specific direction... It's all about getting to know GOD more deeply without any pretension. And part of that is understanding why HE went to the cross when HE had NOTHING to gain.Snap crackle and pop is your best answer? It's silly. It's a tiny cult trying to maximise its membership in a pagan society with multiple gods.
What did Thomas mean when he said to Jesus, “My Lord and my God”?
On the occasion of Jesus’ appearance to Thomas and the other apostles, which had removed Thomas’ doubts of Jesus’ resurrection, the now-convinced Thomas exclaimed to Jesus: “My Lord and my God! [literally, “The Lord of me and the God (ho The·osʹ) of me!”].” (Joh 20:24-29) Some scholars have viewed this expression as an exclamation of astonishment spoken to Jesus but actually directed to God, his Father. However, others claim the original Greek requires that the words be viewed as being directed to Jesus.
Even if this is so, the expression “My Lord and my God” would still have to harmonize with the rest of the inspired Scriptures. Since the record shows that Jesus had previously sent his disciples the message, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God,” there is no reason for believing that Thomas thought Jesus was the Almighty God. (Joh 20:17) John himself, after recounting Thomas’ encounter with the resurrected Jesus, says of this and similar accounts: “But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name.”—Joh 20:30, 31.
So, Thomas may have addressed Jesus as “my God” in the sense of Jesus’ being “a god” though not the Almighty God, not “the only true God,” to whom Thomas had often heard Jesus pray. (Joh 17:1-3) Or he may have addressed Jesus as “my God” in a way similar to expressions made by his forefathers, recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures, with which Thomas was familiar. On various occasions when individuals were visited or addressed by an angelic messenger of Jehovah, the individuals, or at times the Bible writer setting out the account, responded to or spoke of that angelic messenger as though he were Jehovah God. (Compare Ge 16:7-11, 13; 18:1-5, 22-33; 32:24-30; Jg 6:11-15; 13:20-22.)
Jesus was teaching them a difficult lesson and Thomas was there. This gives proper understanding on the confession of Thomas:
(Joh 14:5) Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?
(Joh 14:6) Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
(Joh 14:7) If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
(Joh 14:8) Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
(Joh 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; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
(Joh 14:10) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
(Joh 14:11) Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
Thomas, upon seeing the risen Christ now grasped this grand truth, that the Father was "in" Christ and makes the confession. The Father, whom Jesus calls the only True God dwelled 'in' Christ, doing the works and commanding Jesus the things to say.
Thomas is not saying Jesus is God, he is stating the things Jesus has been saying all along, namely that the Father is in him.......now he sees/believes.
So, do you think it's okay to celebrate Christmas? You really believe Thomas was that deep of thinker? I know that I upon seeing the risen CHRIST, I would have imagined CHRIST to be GOD. Nothing more, nothing less. Neither Thomas nor I would have had our lexicons handy and you give Thomas far too much credit ----- he was no more educated than any of us and perhaps a lot less. Thomas realized that he was seeing GOD, and I do too!LittleNipper, your post has nothing to do with the declaration of Thomas. You conveniently disregard the verses in John 14, which gives a biblical clear meaning to bring in other scriptures, which in reality support my position, not yours, lol.
Yes, of course Jesus was raised, glorified and given a position of authority over the angels, who sits to the right of God. Jesus is the Son of God, the Christ, raised to glory, having been given all power and authority from His Father and God.
(1Co 15:27) For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
(1Co 15:28) And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
Now, back to Thomas' declaration....Jesus said His Father is in him, to see him is to see the Father.....Thomas and the disciples had a hard time learning this lesson, but when Thomas saw the risen Christ, all doubt was removed for truly the Father must be 'in' Christ, for he just saw Jesus die a horrible death and now he's here standing in front of Thomas. Hence the declaration, "My Lord and my God".
Notice, "My Lord":
G2962
κύριος
kurios
koo'-ree-os
From κῦρος kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, that is, (as noun) controller; by implication Mr. (as a respectful title): - God, Lord, master, Sir.
Total KJV occurrences: 748
Notice, "My God":
G2316
θεός
theos
theh'-os
Of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: - X exceeding, God, god [-ly, -ward].
Total KJV occurrences: 1343
In the NT, Jesus is called "Lord" (kurios) and the Father called "God" (theos) many, many, many times.
It's correct that the Trinitarian language took years to formulate to what we have today. Nonetheless, the early Christians still believed in the Trinity even if they didn't describe it in the same way. And how do we know this for certain? Because we have early writings from the Church Fathers. What's also important about their writings is it shows other theological doctrines that survived since the 1st century.“The doctrine of the trinity . . . is not a product of the earliest Christian period, and we do not find it carefully expressed before the end of the second century.”—Library of Early Christianity—Gods and the One God.
What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?
The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
Taught by Early Christians?
DID the early Christians teach the Trinity? Note the following comments by historians and theologians:
“Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds.”—The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology.
“The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the [Trinity] idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognised the . . . Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One.”—The Paganism in Our Christianity.
“At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian . . . It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings.”—Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics.
“The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. . . . Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989302
No thanks...I really don't care what you believe...It's correct that the Trinitarian language took years to formulate to what we have today. Nonetheless, the early Christians still believed in the Trinity even if they didn't describe it in the same way. And how do we know this for certain? Because we have early writings from the Church Fathers. What's also important about their writings is it shows other theological doctrines that survived since the 1st century.
Read the letters from St. Ignatius and Polycarp. These are individuals who studied under the Apostles. And they taught Christ is God. Ignatius was the Bishop of Antioch which is the place historically where they were first referred to as Christians. Here is an article that goes into a deeper dive and references.Nine Early Church Fathers Who Taught Jesus Is God
For those who think Emperor Constantine invented the deity of Christ, here are thirty-six quotations from nine different church fathers that predate the Council of Nicea.www.str.org
And a follow-up question. Why should I believe the governing body's interpretation of scripture over St. Ignatius the first century Bishop who studied under the Apostle John?
The early CHURCH at the very least would not have seen CHRIST to be inferior to the FATHER. And the early CHURCH would have been incensed with individual's who denied the worship of CHRIST. They would see those that seek to make CHRIST inferior as heretics and unworthy of the name CHRISTian. The entire Bible is about CHRIST in one way or another. The "Jehovah's" Witnesses are all about themselves, their beliefs, their literature, and their translation. And every other church is apostate in their eyes. And they don't care what anyone believes outside the beliefs of their own organization. They do no investigate anything that they are told by their leaders... They just accept it. and reject everything else. They fear shunning and losing their salvation.“The doctrine of the trinity . . . is not a product of the earliest Christian period, and we do not find it carefully expressed before the end of the second century.”—Library of Early Christianity—Gods and the One God.
What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?
The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
Taught by Early Christians?
DID the early Christians teach the Trinity? Note the following comments by historians and theologians:
“Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds.”—The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology.
“The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the [Trinity] idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognised the . . . Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One.”—The Paganism in Our Christianity.
“At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian . . . It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings.”—Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics.
“The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. . . . Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989302
Christians have believed this for 2 thousand years. And it's because Christ is God.And the Apostles taught their successors his Godhood. It's not just what I believe it's what historical Christianity teaches. What you do is re-interpret scripture. The Watchtower tried to be scholarly and seem like they understood Christianity more than those who shed blood for Christ. That's not Christianity it's a bunch of prideful people who do not bow their knees to the one true God. Do any of the Elders in your Kingdom Hall know Greek? Can they even study the N.T. in the original language? The priests at my local parish are all educated in Greek.No thanks...I really don't care what you believe...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?