Are members of the Trinity really "co-equal"?

[polonius]

After the “Ascension of Jesus� the Jewish Christians continued as very observant members of Judaism and worshipped in the Temple. This means that they had to believe the most basic of Jewish teachings – “Hear O Israel, the Lord is One�

Although the Old Testament made clear that the Messiah was a man (not divine) as does Acts, about 85 AD, Christians began to claim that Jesus was divine himself. This resulted in them being anathematized from Judaism labeled “minim� or apostates and excluded from Jewish synagogues. (see the gospel of John written in 95 AD).

To remedy this problem, about the third century the idea of a Trinity was invented. It’s three members were said to be absolutely consubstantial (same substance), co-eternal, and co-equal.

But the “co-equal� claim is self-defeating. If two things are absolutely “co-equal� they are the same. There is no characteristic to distinguish them. If they can be distinguished, obviously they are not the same or co-equal.

[Ross]

Why insist on using the name Jehovah today for God when it is not present in the Greek scriptures, or even the LXX, other than attempting to manipulate people into believing that that YHWH is the Father only, and that the Christ is insignificant and not 'co-equal?'

Ask Jehovah why he insists on his people to use his personal name:

Mal. 3:16 At that time those who fear Jehovah spoke with one another, each one with his companion, and Jehovah kept paying attention and listening. And a book of remembrance was written before him for those fearing Jehovah and for those meditating on his name.
17 “And they will be mine,” says Jehovah of armies, “in the day when I produce a special property. I will show them compassion, just as a man shows compassion to his son who serves him. 18 And you will again see the distinction between a righteous person and a wicked person, between one serving God and one not serving him.”

The name that Christians are admonished to revere is the name of Jesus, not YHWH. This is stated clearly in NT scripture.

Phil 2: 9,10
"the name that is above every name, that at the mention of the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those in heaven, those on earth and those under the earth"

'Jehovah' or YHWH is not present in the NT by name. The invisible God in heaven became known to Christians as the Father.

Who are you presumptuous people to insert it into your NT Bible and insist on using it to promote your Watchtower God where it is not present in even one single NT manuscript? It was to insist on your doctrine that Jesus was the Archangel Michael and not God.

[Ross]

Why insist on using the name Jehovah today for God when it is not present in the Greek scriptures, or even the LXX, other than attempting to manipulate people into believing that that YHWH is the Father only, and that the Christ is insignificant and not 'co-equal?'

No one ever said that Christ is "insignificant." Why do you insist that the only way he can be significant is to be God? Jesus is the Son of God, not God. He said in many ways that the Father is the only true God---the Father alone. (John 17:3; John 20:17) The Father has said that all of mankind has to accept Jesus' redemptive sacrifice in our behalf, the only way to gain everlasting life. That is certainly not picturing the Son as insignificant.

The difference between God dying for mankind, and a created being (archangel) dying for mankind is significant beyond comprehension. That is why.

Could you please answer the other bit

Why insist on using the name Jehovah today for God when it is not present in the Greek scriptures, or even the LXX, other than attempting to manipulate people into believing that that YHWH is the Father only, and that the Christ is not 'co-equal?'

[onewithhim]

Why insist on using the name Jehovah today for God when it is not present in the Greek scriptures, or even the LXX, other than attempting to manipulate people into believing that that YHWH is the Father only, and that the Christ is insignificant and not 'co-equal?'

No one ever said that Christ is "insignificant." Why do you insist that the only way he can be significant is to be God? Jesus is the Son of God, not God. He said in many ways that the Father is the only true God---the Father alone. (John 17:3; John 20:17) The Father has said that all of mankind has to accept Jesus' redemptive sacrifice in our behalf, the only way to gain everlasting life. That is certainly not picturing the Son as insignificant.

The difference between God dying for mankind, and a created being (archangel) dying for mankind is significant beyond comprehension. That is why.

Could you please answer the other bit

Why insist on using the name Jehovah today for God when it is not present in the Greek scriptures, or even the LXX, other than attempting to manipulate people into believing that that YHWH is the Father only, and that the Christ is not 'co-equal?'

Where in the Bible does it say that God had to die for mankind? Wasn't there the comparison with Adam?--Christ was to balance the redemptive scales, so to speak.
"'The first man Adam became a living person.' The last Adam [Christ] became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45) A man for a man.

"For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man [Christ] many will be made righteous." (Romans 5:19)

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #33]
"The Other Bit" to Ross: Do more research before you go accusing people of trying to hoodwink everybody.

We know that manuscripts have been found that show the divine name(YHWH) was actually in the Greek Scriptures until someone came along and decided to take it out. It certainly was/is in the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament), 7,000 times. You can see the Tetragrammaton throughout. Why should the Jews leave out the divine name EVER? If it's all through the Tanakh why would anyone want to remove it, around the time of Jesus? In the NT surely God is mentioned and his name is used...why wouldn't it be?

Anyway, we have the inspired OT with the Tetragrammaton 7,000 times throughout, so we appreciate and love that divine name, even if some erring scribes have taken out the Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures.

[Ross]

"The Other Bit" to Ross: Do more research before you go accusing people of trying to hoodwink everybody.

You have no idea how much research I have done

[Ross]

We know that manuscripts have been found that show the divine name(YHWH) was actually in the Greek Scriptures until someone came along and decided to take it out.

Who is 'we?'
What manuscripts? Biblical manuscripts of the NT? Show me please. I have seen one dodgy statement from antiquity that you might purport to be a manuscript saying this.

[Ross]

It certainly was/is in the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament), 7,000 times. You can see the Tetragrammaton throughout.
Anyway, we have the inspired OT with the Tetragrammaton 7,000 times throughout, so we appreciate and love that divine name

Not an issue. YHWH. And it is still in the Masoretic Text.

[Ross]

Do more research before you go accusing people of trying to hoodwink everybody.
In the NT surely God is mentioned and his name is used...why wouldn't it be?

Because it isn't in the real Bible, the manuscripts.
This is hoodwinking.
Show me YHWH in any NT Koine' Greek manuscript in existence

[Ross]

some erring scribes have taken out the Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures.

God has preserved the Bible for the benefit of all mankind against all odds. His inspired Word. But couldn't prevent dishonest scribes from removing his name in the NT; and needed you guys in the 1950's to put it back?

[onewithhim]

some erring scribes have taken out the Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures.

God has preserved the Bible for the benefit of all mankind against all odds. His inspired Word. But couldn't prevent dishonest scribes from removing his name in the NT; and needed you guys in the 1950's to put it back?

Yup.

His answer to the dishonest scribes is the reasserting of His name into the scripture where it belongs, since the New World Translation came along. Now, you can tell something is off when translating quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in which the Tetragrammaton appears, most translators use "Lord" rather than God's personal name. Why would they do that? The Name appears in the Hebrew reference, and should appear in the quotation in the NT. You and I can certainly see some dishonest shenanigans afoot there.