Can someone explain the Trinity please...

[Kolibri]

Your unwillingness to look at an interlinear is very telling. You cannot deny that it is YHWH who appears to Abraham, and it is YHWH who Abraham converses with throughout the chapter. No amount of Scriptures can make a whole chapter to be wrong.

Um. no. I do not need to look because I already know that the divine name is there. It is there in the Hebrew manuscripts and it is there in the New World Translation. THAT is what my unwillingness means. I am already familiar and I am not in disagreement with your understanding of what is in the text.

I do not deny that Abraham may have believed it was God Almighty. But we know from the scriptures you are declaring to be invalid that it could not have been Jehovah himself.

Jehovah is the Alpha and Omega - no other God has been or ever will be of equal or of greater mightiness than him. He is the King of Eternity - He can not nor ever could have died. Thus he can not be Jesus because Jesus died. After Jesus was resurrected he was granted immortality along with his new spirit body. But prior to this neither he, nor any of the other angels, have ever been immortal. Being a created immortal was what made him and his brothers , once they receive their heavenly reward, a 'new creation'.

 

[JayJayDee]

You need to lose the snarky, smug attitude. It's very unbecoming for someone who claims to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses.. Putting a smiley face at the end of a nasty comment doesn't change it to nice.

Attack people's beliefs, not people.

Can I suggest that you do the same as you just made a personal attack on me....for goodness sake, lighten up. Everything I say is not a personal attack on you. Seriously.

I asked you a direct question. "Are you trying to squeeze God into your own belief system?" because you seem to be ignoring the plain scriptural evidence put before you.

If John wrote..."No man has ever seen God"......by saying that he has, you are contradicting an apostle of Jesus Christ. Is John telling us lies? How am I being being smug or snarky by asking that question? Is John telling the truth here or is it you?

 

[katiemygirl]

Can I suggest that you do the same as you just made a personal attack on me....for goodness sake, lighten up. Everything I say is not a personal attack on you. Seriously.

I asked you a direct question. "Are you trying to squeeze God into your own belief system?" because you seem to be ignoring the plain scriptural evidence put before you.

If John wrote..."No man has ever seen God"......by saying that he has, you are contradicting an apostle of Jesus Christ. Is John telling us lies? How am I being being smug or snarky by asking that question? Is John telling the truth here or is it you?

You don't seem to recognize your sarcasm and how you come across. You insinuate that I called the apostle John a liar. That is a personal attack. I will be putting you on the ignore list. Conversations with you are not in the least bit productive. Goodbye.

 

[katiemygirl]

Um. no. I do not need to look because I already know that the divine name is there. It is there in the Hebrew manuscripts and it is there in the New World Translation. THAT is what my unwillingness means. I am already familiar and I am not in disagreement with your understanding of what is in the text.

I do not deny that Abraham may have believed it was God Almighty. But we know from the scriptures you are declaring to be invalid that it could not have been Jehovah himself.

Jehovah is the Alpha and Omega - no other God has been or ever will be of equal or of greater mightiness than him. He is the King of Eternity - He can not nor ever could have died. Thus he can not be Jesus because Jesus died. After Jesus was resurrected he was granted immortality along with his new spirit body. But prior to this neither he, nor any of the other angels, have ever been immortal. Being a created immortal was what made him and his brothers , once they receive their heavenly reward, a 'new creation'.

Good Morning Kolibri,

First of all, Abraham did not write this account. The Holy Spirit did. So it cannot be true to say Abraham "thought" he saw YHWH.

Genesis, like all books of the Bible, are God breathed. The Holy Spirit would not have guided the author of Genesis to record what Abraham THOUGHT he saw. The words you read belong to the Holy Spirit, not Abraham, and not the author.

I do not question 1:18, nor have I declared it to be invalid. I totally agree that no man can see God and live.

But nowhere are we told that man cannot see God in human form, such as Jesus was, and live.

Gen. 18 clearly says YHWH appeared to Abraham. He conversed with Him, and we're told by the Holy Spirit that He was a man.

This is how John 1:18 is reconciled with Gen. 18. They do not contradict one another. We don't have to make claims the Bible doesn't make, saying Abraham THOUGHT he saw God. The Bible says no such thing. We read in Gen. 18 that Abraham saw and spoke with YHWH, who was in the form of a man.

When people saw Jesus, they saw Him in His human form. They could not have looked upon Him in His God form and lived.

 

[JM2C]

Act 20:28 is one of those verses that are commonly looked to by trinitarians.

Ac20:28—Gr.,διὰτοῦαἵματοςτοῦἰδίου

(di·a′touhai′ma·tostoui·di′ou)


1903


“with the blood of His own Son”


TheHolyBibleinModernEnglish,by F. Fenton, London.


1950


“with the blood of his own [Son]”


NewWorldTranslationoftheChristianGreekScriptures,Brooklyn.


1966


“through the death of his own Son”


Today’sEnglishVersion,American Bible Society, New York.


Grammatically, this passage could be translated as in theKingJamesVersionandDouayVersion,“with his own blood.”

Periepoiësato 4046 purchased, dia 1223 with, idiou 2398 own, haimatos 129 blood. Purchased with own blood.


The word Son, Huios 5207 in Greek is not in Acts 20:28

 

[JM2C]

That has been a difficult thought for many.

Not really to a Trinitarian like me.

That is doubtless why ACDSyh (margin) (followed by Moffatt’s translation) read “the congregation of the Lord,” instead of “the congregation of God.”

Is this the same Moffatt who translated Isaiah 7:14’s “virgin/Parthenos/LXX” to a “young woman with child” thus denying the virgin birth in Matthew 1:23? I can see the connection between you/JW and this guy.

 

[JM2C]

When the text reads that way it furnishes no difficulty for the reading, “with his own blood.” However, אBVg read “God” (articulate), and the usual translation would be ‘God’s blood.’

The Greek words τοῦ ἰδίου (toui·di′ou) follow the phrase “with the blood.” The entire expression could be translated “with the blood of his own.”

A noun in the singular number would be understood after “his own,” most likely God’s closest relative, his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ. On this point J. H. Moulton inAGrammarofNewTestamentGreek,Vol. 1 (Prolegomena), 1930 ed., p. 90, says: “Before leaving ἴδιος [i′di·os] something should be said about the use of ὁ ἴδιος [hoi′di·os] without a noun expressed.

The word “own/adjective” modifies of the word “blood/noun” IOW, “with His own blood” and not “with the blood of his own [son]” i.e., “without a noun expressed”

"God purchased with his own blood" is the correct interpretation.

 

[JM2C]

Yes, only-begotten god (Jesus) who is located at the bosom of the Father (bosom position would refer to the position of special favor of being at the Father's side )

Jesus was Not a man before God sent Jesus to earth. No angels are men but angels see God.
Both words: God and god are titles. Such as Moses was god to Pharaoh - Exodus 7:1 and that Moses was a god to Aaron - Exodus 4:16.
The Tetragrammaton only ever applies to the LORD God (YHWH)
Who are the two (2) LORD/Lord's of Psalm 110:1 ?____________________________
One LORD is in all capital letters, whereas the other Lord is in come lower-case letters.
Isn't the Tetragrammaton only ever applied to the LORD in all upper-case letters ?

What is Adonai in Psalm 110:1 without the vowel points?

 

[katiemygirl]

Periepoiësato 4046 purchased, dia 1223 with, idiou 2398 own, haimatos 129 blood. Purchased with own blood.


The word Son, Huios 5207 in Greek is not in Acts 20:28

You are absolutely correct! The word Huios SON does not appear in any Greek text in Acts 20:28.

 

[katiemygirl]

28 Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed YOU overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son].

The word for SON, which is "huios" is not found in ANY Greek manuscript.

I don't know what translation you are using, but it is corrupt. It has added to the word of God.

This is why it is so important for all of us to look at the original text.

Have a nice weekend. God bless you and yours.

 

[cataway]

The word for SON, which is "huios" is not found in ANY Greek manuscript.

I don't know what translation you are using, but it is corrupt. It has added to the word of God.

This is why it is so important for all of us to look at the original text.

Have a nice weekend. God bless you and yours.

to read and understand it your way it is not in agreement with 1 john 1:7
However, if we are walking in the light as he himself is in the light, we do have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

NKJV 1john 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.

learn this please , if the bible you are using does not agree with the rest of the bible then you have a bad bible

 

[JayJayDee]

Conversations with you are not in the least bit productive.

I agree. Walking on eggshells around people is hard work.

You are free to ignore anything I say......

 

[Kolibri]

Good Morning Kolibri,

First of all, Abraham did not write this account. The Holy Spirit did. So it cannot be true to say Abraham "thought" he saw YHWH.

Genesis, like all books of the Bible, are God breathed. The Holy Spirit would not have guided the author of Genesis to record what Abraham THOUGHT he saw. The words you read belong to the Holy Spirit, not Abraham, and not the author.

I do not question 1:18, nor have I declared it to be invalid. I totally agree that no man can see God and live.

But nowhere are we told that man cannot see God in human form, such as Jesus was, and live.

Gen. 18 clearly says YHWH appeared to Abraham. He conversed with Him, and we're told by the Holy Spirit that He was a man.

This is how John 1:18 is reconciled with Gen. 18. They do not contradict one another. We don't have to make claims the Bible doesn't make, saying Abraham THOUGHT he saw God. The Bible says no such thing. We read in Gen. 18 that Abraham saw and spoke with YHWH, who was in the form of a man.

When people saw Jesus, they saw Him in His human form. They could not have looked upon Him in His God form and lived.

Then how do you understand Gen 1:2-2:4? If these words were taken from a universal perspective, then it does not match science at all. The earth was not formed before the sun and stars. But from the perspective of the seeing things from the surface of the planet, it all fits science.
Perspective always needs to be taken into account.

Regarding God, Habakkuk 1:12a says:

Are you not from everlasting, O Jehovah?
O my God, you do not die.

How can Jesus be the Almighty? He died. Only mortals can die.

(Moses is considered the compiler of the first 5 books of the Bible (all except the last little bit of Deuteronomy) as well as the book of Job.)

 

[katiemygirl]

to read and understand it your way it is not in agreement with 1 john 1:7
However, if we are walking in the light as he himself is in the light, we do have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

NKJV 1john 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.

learn this please , if the bible you are using does not agree with the rest of the bible then you have a bad bible

1 John 1:7 is one of my favorite verses. It's one I have memorized and use often.

Jesus is God's Son, and it is Jesus who shed His blood. No question about it. Then Acts 20 says, "the assembly of God that He acquired through His own blood. This clearly says God shed His blood. The word SON does not appear in any Greek manuscript. So it is not me who is using a bad Bible. My Bible has not added the word SON. Yours has.

These are the facts from both verses. The blood of God's Son cleanses us from all sin. God acquired the assembly through HIS own blood.

Conclusion: Jesus is God. There is no other possibility unless you deny what Acts 20:28 says, or add the word SON to Acts 20:28.

You see, I have no issue reconciling the two verses. They are both absolutely true. They do not contradict one another. Jesus is God's Son, and He is also God.

Here are both verses from Youngs Literal Translation.

Acts 20
28 `Take heed, therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit made you overseers, to feed the assembly of God that He acquired through His own blood,

1 John 1
7 and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin;

 

[JayJayDee]

Interlinear translation of Acts 20:28....

28 προσέχετε Be YOU paying attention ἑαυτοῖς to selves καὶ and παντὶ to all τῷ the ποιμνίῳ, flock, ἐνin ᾧ which ὑμᾶς YOU τὸ the πνεῦμα spirit τὸ the ἅγιον holy ἔθετο put ἐπισκόπους, overseers, ποιμαίνειν to be shepherding τὴν the ἐκκλησίαν ecclesia τοῦ of the θεοῦ, God, ἣν which περιεποιήσατοhe reserved for self διὰ through τοῦ the αἵματος blood τοῦ of the ἰδίου. own (one).

Allowing for Greek phraseology we can see that "the blood of the own" is another way of saying "his own blood" meaning his own kin...his own son.
We use the same phrase to describe "our own flesh and blood".

So again we have only a vague inference where the trinity is read into a verse. It is exactly the same with every text used to prove what the Bible does not teach. Jesus is divine...a "mighty one" but he is the son of God, not part of a so called godhead. If the Jews did not believe in such a God, then Jesus didn't either. Why would he teach something that his own people could not understand. In all their history, they had worshipped one God, the Father. Jesus called his Father "the only true God" without including himself. (John 17:3) The apostles too mentioned only "one God, the Father" and speaking of their Lord Jesus as a separate entity and even calling him an "apostle" (Heb 3:1)

If even after his return to heaven, Jesus can still call his Father "my God", what is that telling us? (Rev 3:12) How can one equal part of God worship another part of himself? Ridiculous!

If there is no direct statement by either God or his Christ to the effect that they are two equal parts of one God, (let alone three) then we have conjecture, not doctrine.

 

[katiemygirl]

Then how do you understand Gen 1:2-2:4? If these words were taken from a universal perspective, then it does not match science at all. The earth was not formed before the sun and stars. But from the perspective of the seeing things from the surface of the planet, it all fits science.
Perspective always needs to be taken into account.

Regarding God, Habakkuk 1:12a says:

Are you not from everlasting, O Jehovah?
O my God, you do not die.

How can Jesus be the Almighty? He died. Only mortals can die.

(Moses is considered the compiler of the first 5 books of the Bible (all except the last little bit of Deuteronomy) as well as the book of Job.)

The MAN Jesus died, and praise God that He did. Without Him, we would have no hope. The spirit of Jesus never died. He is sitting at the right hand of God this moment. I'm surprised you asked such a question. Before creation, the plan for Jesus to die was already in place so that we may live with Him eternally.

Tell me. Do JW's believe Jesus was raised from the dead and now sits at the right hand of God?

Not buying your argument. You're trying to understand Gen. 18 from a human perspective rather than leaning on God for understanding. Why not read the chapter and accept what is says at face value? If the Holy Spirit wanted us to believe that Abraham only thought he saw and conversed with YHWH, He would have told us. It sounds like you might think Abraham was hallucinating.

No offense meant to you personally, but it seems to me that JW's have to go to such great lengths to explain so many verses away. Why not just accept Scriptures the way they are written? No adding, no taking away. They really do agree when you take them straight up, without twisting them to fit your theology.

By the way, I know Moses held the pen, but don't forget the author was the Holy Spirit.

 

[Kolibri]

Do JW's believe Jesus was raised from the dead and now sits at the right hand of God?

Yes. He was siting from the time he went back to heaven to the time he began ruling as King of God's Kingdom. He was not siting at the right hand of himself.

Anyhow, I am out of time. I will review what comes into this thread later.

 

[Mycroft]

I was talking to a Lutheran Pastor the other day and he said God provided the greatest gift when he offered himself up as Jesus on the cross. But from what I read in the Bible, when Jesus was on the cross, he spoke to God in heaven. How then can he be God at the same time? Please explain. Thanks

It's like an orange. god, jesus and the holy ghost are all segments of the orange. Each its own distinct segment, yet all part of the orange.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Or instead of an orange, how about a family? God is one family. There is a father and a son in that family. Both are separate beings but are part of one family.

 

[cataway]

1 John 1:7 is one of my favorite verses. It's one I have memorized and use often.

Jesus is God's Son, and it is Jesus who shed His blood. No question about it. Then Acts 20 says, "the assembly of God that He acquired through His own blood. This clearly says God shed His blood. The word SON does not appear in any Greek manuscript. So it is not me who is using a bad Bible. My Bible has not added the word SON. Yours has.

These are the facts from both verses. The blood of God's Son cleanses us from all sin. God acquired the assembly through HIS own blood.

Conclusion: Jesus is God. There is no other possibility unless you deny what Acts 20:28 says, or add the word SON to Acts 20:28.

You see, I have no issue reconciling the two verses. They are both absolutely true. They do not contradict one another. Jesus is God's Son, and He is also God.

Here are both verses from Youngs Literal Translation.

Acts 20
28 `Take heed, therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit made you overseers, to feed the assembly of God that He acquired through His own blood,

1 John 1
7 and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin;

yet again you prove my point there is no trinity . thank you