clear challenges to the trinity doctrine

[tigger2]

CLEAR CHALLENGES FOR THE TRINITY DOCTRINE

"trinity ...1. [cap.] Theol. The union of three persons or hypostases (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost) in one Godhead, so that all the three are one God as to substance, but three persons or hypostases as to individuality. 2. Any symbol of the Trinity in art. 3. Any union of three in one; a triad; as the Hindu trinity, or Trimurti." - Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, G. & C. Merriam Co., 1961. (underlined emphasis added by me.)
………………………………..

Athanasian Creed:

"And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other, none is greater or less than others; but the whole three persons are co- eternal together; and co-equal. So that in all things as is aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

"HE THEREFORE THAT WILL BE SAVED MUST THUS THINK OF THE TRINITY."
....................................................
"Trinity, the Most Holy

"The most sublime mystery of the Christian faith is this: 'God is absolutely one in nature and essence, and relatively three in Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) who are really distinct from each other." - p. 584, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Thomas Nelson, Inc., Publishers, 1976.
........................................................

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
"1. The Term 'Trinity':
"The term "Trinity" is not a Biblical term, and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence." - p. 3012, Vol. IV, Eerdmans, 1984.

………………………………....

Clear Challenges from scripture itself:

(A) Please carefully and thoroughly search to find a vision, dream, or clear description in scripture wherein God is visibly shown as more than one person.

(This is really not that difficult. Either there is a vision, dream, description, etc. somewhere in scripture clearly visibly showing the one God as three persons or there isn't. Either way, it should not be difficult to ascertain and admit truthfully.)
………………………………............

(B) Please show where in scripture God is ever described using the word "three."

(Either God is described somewhere in scripture using the word "three" or its clear equivalent (just as He is clearly and frequently described with the word “one� or its equivalent - “alone,� “only,� etc. ), or He is not. Either way it should not be difficult to ascertain and admit truthfully.)
……………………………….............

(C) Please find clear, direct, undisputed statements (equivalent to “Jesus is the Christ� or "YHWH is God" which are found repeatedly in clear, undisputed scriptures) which declare:

“YHWH is the Son,� or “YHWH is the Firstborn,� or, “YHWH is the Messiah (or ‘Christ’),� or any other equally clear, undisputed statement that “Jesus is YHWH� (the only God according to scripture).
……………………………….................

Since the Father is clearly, directly, and indisputably called "God, the Father," many, many times, and the Son and Holy Spirit are said by trinitarians to be equally the one God (in ‘three distinct persons’):

(D) Please give equally clear, undisputed scriptures where Jesus is called "God, the Son," (equal to those which declare "God, the Father" – Ro. 15:6; 1 Cor. 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; 2 Cor. 11:31; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 4:6; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:2; etc.)

and,
………………………………....................

(E) Please give equally clear, undisputed scriptures (such as "God, the Father") where the Holy Spirit is called "God, the Holy Spirit."
......................................................................

(F) If Jesus and/or the first century Christians (considered a sect of Judaism at that time) truly believed that Jesus was God, how could they possibly be allowed to teach in the temple and synagogues as they were? (This not only would not have been allowed, but the Jews would have stoned them to death.)
………………………………...................

(G) If John truly believed a stunning new essential ‘knowledge’ of God that Jesus is equally God, why would he summarize and conclude his Gospel with, “But these [the Gospel of John] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God…�

……………………………….................

(H) When the chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were attempting to gather evidence to kill Jesus, why did they have to hire false witnesses? And why did these same priests and false witnesses never say that Jesus believed (or taught) that he was God? Instead the high priest finally said to Jesus: “Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.� - Matt. 26:59-63 NIV.

Obviously these officials had never heard anyone accuse Jesus or his followers of claiming that Jesus was God!

I believe any objective observer would admit that the answers to these simple scriptural challenges (A-H above) should be abundantly, clearly, indisputably available if the trinity (or ‘Jesus is God’) worshipers are correct.

To look for rare instances of unclear, disputed scriptures which have to be interpreted to fit a trinitarian concept (developed after the death of the last Apostle and the completion of Scripture) and convince yourself that they are "proofs" seems to me to be a tragic error.

God has always existed as God and, therefore, His people should have always known who He was and worshiped him in truth.

To believe that God withheld this information from his people (or made it something to be interpreted from unclear references) from the beginning (and throughout all Scriptures) seems to be a tragic error.

[AdHoc]

Yes I believe the bible is the word of God and no other text has more authority.

Excellent! I know of many that do not. Some are even trinitarians.

I have no knowledge of or concern for that creed. I'm not a Catholic so I've only just been introduced to the information.

Though you're not Catholic, the trinity doctrine stems from that religion. They take full credit for it and they seem to take a lot of pride in establishing that doctrine. If you want to understand the truth of your doctrine better, perhaps you could learn more about it's origin.

I may not be right but feel like you might be trying to make a slightly logically flawed argument here...

"The trinity belief is a Catholic belief, the Catholic religion is wrong therefore the trinity belief is wrong"

If I'm wrong about this please tell me what your point is.

Catholics probably have lots of beliefs that I share and lots that I don't. I really don't care beyond my natural curiosity.
the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end

Jesus said "I am the resurrection and the life whoever believes in Me will live even if he dies"

Yes he did and he is correct. Is this implying that Jesus is God? Not according to the Bible. 1 Cor 15:21 says, "For since death came through a man, resurrection of the dead also comes through a man." Note, does it call Jesus God? No, it says through a man.

Paul says we see through a glass darkly but someday we will know as we are known.

It seems you are choosing dark glasses. At the top of this post you said there is no other higher authority on earth than the Bible. Explain please what you mean. Are you saying that Paul might have been wrong because looking through a dark glass when he said, resurrection comes through a man? Do we believe that life comes through the death of a man or not?

What I'm saying is that scripture says we don't know everything yet but someday we will.

Now i've got you arguing with the scriptures as well. We make a fine pair you and I.

I don't argue with scripture. I argue with teaching traditions. Scripture is always correct. How we read it is where the error occurs. Eisegesis or 'lead into' scripture is to put one's own ideals before reading what the scripture says. I person making a claim and then going to the Bible to justify themselves is terribly flawed. It should be the other way around.

"Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way, The earliest of his achievements of long ago. From ancient times I was installed, From the start, from times earlier than the earth...Then I was beside him as a master worker. I was the one he was especially fond of day by day; I rejoiced before him all the time; I rejoiced over his habitable earth, And I was especially fond of the sons of men." Proverbs 8:22, 23, 30, 31

Who do you think this scripture is speaking of?

Wisdom personified.

The defintion of personified: "represented (a quality or concept) by a figure in human form." Wisdom is being personified by whom in Proverbs 8:22, 23, 30, 31?

I don't see where it applies to anyone except to an intrinsic quality.

Since I've answered your questions will you answer me and tell me who the Good Shepherd is?

So much to read even sometimes I miss an answer. I answered this question in post 42.
viewtopic.php?p=925566#925566

I asked "Who is the Good Shepherd?"

And you answered...

"The good shepherd is not the same as the good teacher.
There are two different words for the term 'good' in Greek.

John 10:11 uses 'kalos' shepherd meaning "beautiful, good, worthy"
http://biblehub.com/greek/2570.htm

Yet in Luke:18:19 the Greek word 'agathos' is used. Which means, "intrinsically good". God is naturally Good or the essence of good. and Jesus didn't describe himself this way. The Rabbis of Jesus' days did call themselves 'agathos' teachers. That title was apparently improper.
http://biblehub.com/greek/18.htm"

Please tell me... Who is the Good Shepherd?

Also I'm interested to know who the First and the Last is.

The Bible tells us the answer.

"This is what Jehovah says, The King of Israel and his Repurchaser, Jehovah of armies: ‘I am the first and I am the last. There is no God but me." - Isaiah 44:6.

"Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I have called. I am the same One. I am the first; I am also the last." - Isaiah 48:12

Yes the Bible tells us the answer so the First and the Last is Jehovah and there is no God but Jehovah.

And in Revelation 22:13 who is "the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end"?

[2timothy316]

"Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I have called. I am the same One. I am the first; I am also the last." - Isaiah 48:12

Yes the Bible tells us the answer so the First and the Last is Jehovah and there is no God but Jehovah.

And in Revelation 22:13 who is "the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end"?[/quote]
Rev 22:13 is explained by Isaiah 48:12. The first and the last and the Alpha and Omega is Jehovah.

[2timothy316]

Yes I believe the bible is the word of God and no other text has more authority.

Excellent! I know of many that do not. Some are even trinitarians.

I have no knowledge of or concern for that creed. I'm not a Catholic so I've only just been introduced to the information.

Though you're not Catholic, the trinity doctrine stems from that religion. They take full credit for it and they seem to take a lot of pride in establishing that doctrine. If you want to understand the truth of your doctrine better, perhaps you could learn more about it's origin.

I may not be right but feel like you might be trying to make a slightly logically flawed argument here...

Well, look up the origin of your trinity doctrine and find out if my argument is flawed or not. I'm kind of surprised you don't know more about the trinity and where it came from. You said, 'I feel'. Who can argue feelings? However, if you want to accept the trinity as the Catholics stated it in the 4th century, I can show Bible scriptures where that doctrine and and the Bible are contradictory. Or you'll need to point to where i can find your flavor of trinity.

"The trinity belief is a Catholic belief, the Catholic religion is wrong therefore the trinity belief is wrong"

If I'm wrong about this please tell me what your point is.

Catholics probably have lots of beliefs that I share and lots that I don't. I really don't care beyond my natural curiosity.

Yet they were the first to teach the trinity. That means that any deviation from that is a whole new trinity doctrine. Do you want to follow the original trinity doctrine? Or one of our own or someone else's design?

[2timothy316]

I asked "Who is the Good Shepherd?"

And you answered...

"The good shepherd is not the same as the good teacher.
There are two different words for the term 'good' in Greek.

John 10:11 uses 'kalos' shepherd meaning "beautiful, good, worthy"
http://biblehub.com/greek/2570.htm

Yet in Luke:18:19 the Greek word 'agathos' is used. Which means, "intrinsically good". God is naturally Good or the essence of good. and Jesus didn't describe himself this way. The Rabbis of Jesus' days did call themselves 'agathos' teachers. That title was apparently improper.
http://biblehub.com/greek/18.htm"

Jehovah is a shepherd (Ps 23:1-6) Jesus is a shepherd, even the Good, fine and great Shepherd. (John 10:11, Hebrews 13:20) Yet Jesus is not the highest shepherd. Why not?

Between the Jehovah the Shepherd and the Jesus the Shepherd, who is greater? The Bible says Jehovah, the Father, is the greater than the Son. (John 14:28)

[AdHoc]

"Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I have called. I am the same One. I am the first; I am also the last." - Isaiah 48:12
Yes the Bible tells us the answer so the First and the Last is Jehovah and there is no God but Jehovah.

And in Revelation 22:13 who is "the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end"?

Rev 22:13 is explained by Isaiah 48:12. The first and the last and the Alpha and Omega is Jehovah.

Its super-interesting to me that you don't think Jesus is clearly "the First and the Last and the Alpha and Omega" written in Revelation 22...

Just before that in verse 12 He says " Behold I am coming quickly and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done.

Then in verse 16 " I, Jesus have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David the bright morning star."

Then again in verse 20 He says, "Yes, I am coming quickly."

and John says in response, "Come, Lord Jesus."

If that isn't self-evident I don't think there could be anything I could show you that would possibly change your mind.

[AdHoc]

Yes I believe the bible is the word of God and no other text has more authority.

Excellent! I know of many that do not. Some are even trinitarians.

I have no knowledge of or concern for that creed. I'm not a Catholic so I've only just been introduced to the information.

Though you're not Catholic, the trinity doctrine stems from that religion. They take full credit for it and they seem to take a lot of pride in establishing that doctrine. If you want to understand the truth of your doctrine better, perhaps you could learn more about it's origin.

I may not be right but feel like you might be trying to make a slightly logically flawed argument here...

Well, look up the origin of your trinity doctrine and find out if my argument is flawed or not. I'm kind of surprised you don't know more about the trinity and where it came from. You said, 'I feel'. Who can argue feelings? However, if you want to accept the trinity as the Catholics stated it in the 4th century, I can show Bible scriptures where that doctrine and and the Bible are contradictory. Or you'll need to point to where i can find your flavor of trinity.

I think you've missed my point. I'm not saying your argument against the trinity is flawed. I think you are making a reasonable argument and you're using scripture to support it I just think trying to suggest that my argument is either related to a Catholic belief or a totally new belief, while interesting, has absolutely zero value in establishing the accuracy of either of our viewpoints.

"The trinity belief is a Catholic belief, the Catholic religion is wrong therefore the trinity belief is wrong"

If I'm wrong about this please tell me what your point is.

Catholics probably have lots of beliefs that I share and lots that I don't. I really don't care beyond my natural curiosity.

Yet they were the first to teach the trinity. That means that any deviation from that is a whole new trinity doctrine. Do you want to follow the original trinity doctrine? Or one of our own or someone else's design?

I would prefer to get my doctrine from the bible so if your doctrines or any Catholic doctrines can be supported by scripture than I would believe it. 2Timothy316

Catholics believe Mary was Jesus' mother. That's supported by the scripture and so I don't have a problem with that but I've also been told they teach the worship of Mary and praying to Mary which I don't believe is supported by scripture so I don't believe that.

I think you're begging the question that any deviation from the Catholic trinity doctrine is "a whole new doctrine" because you haven't established that they were the first to teach that. They may have come up with the word "Trinity" but the New Testament clearly teaches that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are also God along with the Father.

[AdHoc]

I asked "Who is the Good Shepherd?"

And you answered...

"The good shepherd is not the same as the good teacher.
There are two different words for the term 'good' in Greek.

John 10:11 uses 'kalos' shepherd meaning "beautiful, good, worthy"
http://biblehub.com/greek/2570.htm

Yet in Luke:18:19 the Greek word 'agathos' is used. Which means, "intrinsically good". God is naturally Good or the essence of good. and Jesus didn't describe himself this way. The Rabbis of Jesus' days did call themselves 'agathos' teachers. That title was apparently improper.
http://biblehub.com/greek/18.htm"

Jehovah is a shepherd (Ps 23:1-6) Jesus is a shepherd, even the Good, fine and great Shepherd. (John 10:11, Hebrews 13:20) Yet Jesus is not the highest shepherd. Why not?

Between the Jehovah the Shepherd and the Jesus the Shepherd, who is greater? The Bible says Jehovah, the Father, is the greater than the Son. (John 14:28)

So there's levels of goodness? Jesus is the Good shepherd and Jehovah is the Highest shepherd.

I thought no one was good but God?

And if Psalm 23 doesn't say YHWH is the "highest" shepherd would it be eisegesis to add that in?

[tigger2]

viewtopic.php?p=928303&highlight=#928303
AdHoc (post 74) wrote:

"Its [sic] super-interesting to me that you don't think Jesus is clearly 'the First and the Last and the Alpha and Omega' written in Revelation 22...

"Just before that in verse 12 He says 'Behold I am coming quickly and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done.[']

"... verse 16 'I, Jesus have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David the bright morning star.'

"Then again in verse 20 He says, 'Yes, I am coming quickly.'

"and John says in response, 'Come, Lord Jesus.'

"If that isn't self-evident I don't think there could be anything I could show you that would possibly change your mind."

................................................
Let's see how numerous trinitarian-translated Bibles have rendered Rev. 22:8-16 by their uses of quotation marks (beginning and ending marks).

John is identified as the speaker in 22:8. The angel speaks in (:9). The angel apparently continues speaking in (:10). The angel may be still speaking in (:11) --- or it could be John or even someone else (as implied in verse 10 in the NAB, 1970 ed.).

Now is the angel still speaking in (:12) or is it God, or is it Jesus, or even John? There is simply no way of telling who the speaker is from any of the early Bible manuscripts. It’s entirely a matter of translator’s choice. Some translators have decided it is the angel who continues to speak, and they punctuate it accordingly. So the NASB, JB, and NJB use quotation marks to show that these are all words spoken by the angel.

However, the NKJV, NEB, REB, RSV, and NRSV show by their use of quotation marks that someone else is now speaking in verse 12. Most Bibles indicate that the person who spoke verse 12 (whether God, angel, Jesus, or John) also spoke verse 13 (“I am Alpha and Omega�).

Now the big question is: Is it clear that the speaker of verses 12 and 13 continues to speak? Some Bibles indicate this. But other highly respected trinitarian translations do not!

The ESV; ISV; LEB; MEV; MOUNCE; NAB (2010 ed.); NASB; NEB; NKJV; NLT; NRSV; REB; RSV; 21st Century King James Version; TEV; and WE show (by quotation marks and indenting) that Rev. 22:14 and 15 are not the words of the speaker of verses 12 and 13 but are John’s words. (The Jerusalem Bible; the NJB; and Moffatt show us that the angel spoke all the words from verse 10 through verse 15.) Then they all show Jesus as a new speaker beginning to speak in verse 16.

So, if you insist that the person speaking just before verse 16 is the same person who is speaking in verse 16, then, according to the trinitarian ESV; ISV; LEB; MEV; MOUNCE; NAB (2010 ed.); NASB; NEB; NKJV; NLT; NRSV; REB; RSV; 21st Century King James Version, TEV; and WE, you are saying John is Jesus!!! (According to the JB and NJB you would be insisting that the angel is Jesus!)

And, just as the use of “I, John� indicated a new speaker in Revelation 1:9, so does the only other such usage in that same book. Yes, Rev. 22:16 - “I, Jesus� also introduces a new speaker. This means, of course, that the previous statement (“I am the Alpha and Omega�) was made by someone else!

Even the KJV translators have shown by their use of the word “his� in verse 14 (found in the of Received Text) that they didn’t mean that Jesus was the same speaker as the Alpha and Omega. The speaker of verse 13 is Almighty God. The comment in verse 14 of these Bibles (as literally translated from the Received Text) explains the importance of doing “His Commandments� (not “My Commandments�)! Therefore the speaker of verse 14 is obviously not God as clearly stated by those Bibles which were translated from the Received Text, e.g., KJV; NKJV; KJIIV; MKJV; Young’s Literal Translation; Webster Bible (by Noah Webster); Revised Webster Bible; and Lamsa’s translation (Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text).

So we can easily see that there is no reason to say Jesus spoke the words recorded at Rev. 22:13 (or the above-named trinitarian Bibles would surely have so translated it!) and, in fact, the context really identifies the speaker as being the same person who spoke at Rev. 1:8, God Almighty, Jehovah, the Father.

The only other uses of the title “Alpha and Omega� (Rev. 1:8 and 21:6) confirm this understanding.

“And He who sits on the throne said, ‘Behold, I am making all things new.’ .... And He said to me, ‘It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. .... He who overcomes shall inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.’� - Rev. 21:5-7, NASB.

“Revelation 21:6, 7 indicates that Christians who are spiritual conquerors are to be ‘sons’ of the one known as the Alpha and the Omega. That is never said of the relationship of spirit-anointed Christians to Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke of them as his ‘brothers.’ (Heb. 2:11; Matt. 12:50; 25:40) But those ‘brothers’ of Jesus are referred to as ‘sons of God [the Father].’ (Gal. 3:26; 4:6).� - pp. 412-413, Reasoning from the Scriptures, WBTS, 1985.

So Rev. 21:6, 7 confirms the understanding that the Alpha and Omega is the Father, not Jesus.

In short, there is no reason, other than a desire to support the trinity tradition, to believe that Jesus is being called “Alpha and Omega� in Rev. 22. And there is good evidence to believe that it is his Father only who uses this title for himself.

P.S. Is it really true that no one can answer the challenges found in the OP??

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 75 by AdHoc]

You indicate that you believe that tigger's information is not backed up by Scripture. If you really read his post I think you would see that all of his comments are truly Scriptural. He always cites Scriptural backing.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 77 by tigger2]

There seems to be no one who can even begin to Scripturally challenge what is in the OP.