• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can someone explain the Trinity please...

Unification

Well-Known Member
Let's have a bible study...

How many tribes surrounded the tabernacle?
How many nerves surround the brain?
The east entrance of the tabernacle, rested which main tribe from where the Christ comes from?
Camped in that tribe, there are how many people?
What is the speed of light in a vacuum?
1John5:8 states that "in Earth"... Or in the "body" are the Spirit, water, and blood.
Being not an anatomy expert, would one say the reasons we are alive are due to the Spirit, water, and blood inside of our bodies?
God is a consuming fire, correct?
What is fire? Energy?
How can a human sin even the slightest bit and not be consumed by this fire?
Where does knowledge/information come from and where is it stored?
 

Kolibri

Well-Known Member
If you cannot understand the beginning of this chapter, i.e., John 1:1 then how could you understand that John 3:18 is literally talking about your unbelief? You simply cannot understand all these things because you were chosen by God NOT to believe in the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is, “And the Word was God”. IOW, you were chosen by God to believe that the Lord Jesus is an “a god” and not “And the Word was God”

Oh boy, now we are fated to be "wrong." Why even bother then, as all things good and bad have already been foretold down to the tiniest detail? Of course, I could be misunderstanding your words here but it seems you believe in individual predestination of salvation. So then, what's the point of doing anything. All purpose is illusionary. Still that is a topic for another thread.
 
Last edited:

crazyrussian

No stranger to this topic
Just Googled it. From "The Gospel of the Holy Twelve" ???? Never heard of it. So not part of the Bible canon.
You should ask yourself why it's not part of the bible cannon. Since it is the most complete gospel available to you to date. It's verified ancient and at least two of your current bible gospels factually got their origins from the G-12 text.
 

Unification

Well-Known Member
You should ask yourself why it's not part of the bible cannon. Since it is the most complete gospel available to you to date. It's verified ancient and at least two of your current bible gospels factually got their origins from the G-12 text.

Thank you for that. I've never read that. Beautiful stuff, from the section I've read so far. Spirit agrees.

The first phase of truth for any human is admit they have a problem.... That the bible is a strong IDOL to them and not the inerrant word of God, or the final authority.
 
Last edited:

moorea944

Well-Known Member
If it says He descended, why would you think it doesn't mean that?
I say that because he didnt pre-exist. Bible says he was begotten. First born. God was his Father. We need to understand the language of scripture. People and things come from God. Doesnt mean that they existed in heaven.

If John wasn't in Heaven, where was he?
Are you serious? John was born. He was never in heaven. You know that, right?
 

Wharton

Active Member
You have to get this into your head. You cannot exegetically interpret/translate the 3rd clause into your own translation/alteration, i.e., NWT, if you will base your understanding from clauses 1 and 2.

The word “en/was” is in imperfect tense means before the beginning “the Word” and “the God” –clause #2- were together or at each other side already as suggested in verse 18, “the only begotten God who is at the bosom of the Father”. There was no mention of any creation before the beginning.

IOW, they, the Son, i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ, and the God, i.e., the Father were together before the beginning, i.e., from eternity.

Can we pinpoint the exact time they begun this relationship from eternity?

WE CANNOT base on the word “EN/WAS” imperfect tense. IOW, THE IMPERFECT TENSE “EN/WAS” IS SUGGESTING THE TIME FROM THE PAST OCCURRENCE, I.E., BEFORE THE BEGINNING, AS INDEFINITE, UNDERTERMINE, UNDIFINE.

IOW, TIME IS IRRELEVANT BEFORE THE BEGINNING OR THERE WAS NO TIME IN ETERNITY.

NO HUMAN MIND CAN COMPREHEND THE MEANING OF ETERNITY IF WE COULD JUST FOLLOW ON WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE WORD “EN/WAS”. SIMPLY PUT, “EN/WAS” OCCURRED IN ETERNITY.

AFTER THE BEGINNING HUMAN MIND DID COMPREHEND AS WAS DECLARED IN THE BIBLE, BUT BEFORE THIS ONLY GOD THE FATHER, AND GOD THE SON, AND GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT CAN COMPREHEND ETERNITY.

IF NO TIME IN ETERNITY, THEN THERE IS NO CREATION, BUT ACCORDING TO YOUR INTERPRETATION THE Lord Jesus Christ WAS JUST A CREATION OF GOD. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF?
One human did comprehend the meaning of eternity/eternal now. Maybe the JW'S will believe Albert Einstein. LOL

“The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.”
 

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
If you cannot understand the beginning of this chapter, i.e., John 1:1 then how could you understand that John 3:18 is literally talking about your unbelief? You simply cannot understand all these things because you were chosen by God NOT to believe in the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is, “And the Word was God”. IOW, you were chosen by God to believe that the Lord Jesus is an “a god” and not “And the Word was God”

Oh, well that explains everything. :confused:
Thank you so much for that extremely interesting piece of information.
Only the "chosen ones" will believe in the trinity. All others will be blocked from believing it. Really?

You think that John 1:1 can only mean that Jesus is equal to the Father......seriously?

There are some who can see clearly what the Greek text says and others who want it to mean something else. So just for clarity, please provide a direct statement from either God or his son to the effect that they are equal parts of a godhead. Just one will do.....and I'll be happy to admit that I am deluded. ;)

Your view means of course, that the preaching work Jesus assigned to his disciples is all for nothing. It basically boils down to a message of doom for all those who won't accept the triune godhead, (which incidentally did not exist in church doctrine until the 4th century) . Everyone who is "chosen" by God to believe the trinity will do so, and those who are not "chosen" will not, no matter what anyone tells them? Oh happy days! What "good news" that is!

I'll just sneak back into my hole and refrain from saying a word to anyone because my preaching is useless then? The good news is really just bad news. :rolleyes: Yep.

2TH 2:11 For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false,
2TH 2:12 in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.
“but took pleasure in wickedness” MT 7:23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’

OK, consider this......what if the trinity is the greatest blasphemy ever perpetrated in the name of Christianity?
What if these scriptures are talking about those who accept the blasphemy as truth?
What if the "lawlessness" is putting the son in the same position as the Father and thus breaking the first commandment?
Who then becomes a "worker of lawlessness"? Who then is "taking pleasure in wickedness"?

Please think about that.

Remember those deeds, your righteous deeds that you kept on posting here?
You see the pattern here? These verses are talking about you guys/jw.

But they could never be talking about you guys though. :p LOL

The Pharisees never thought that Jesus' words could apply to them either.

MT 7:15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

What if the "wolves in sheep's clothing" were already corrupting Christianity before the apostles passed away? What if the wolves are the ones who introduced the trinity so long ago, that most people accept it as the foundation doctrine of Christianity?
Would you know? Many centuries of indoctrination is hard to shake.

Daniel foretold the "cleansing and refining" of God's people in the "time of the end". (Dan 12:4, 9, 10)
This is "the time of the end" right now, and God's people have obeyed his command to 'get out of Babylon the great' before he brings her just punishment upon her. (Rev 18:4, 5) Have you?

Since Christendom has not cleansed herself of the false teachings adopted from paganism in the early centuries, they can lay no claim to being God's people.They do not obey the teachings of the Christ at all, but ditch these in favor of their adopted beliefs that can be traced back to ancient Babylon.
We obey the Christ in taking the kingdom message to all who will listen, thereby not pre-judging anyone, but giving everyone an opportunity at life everlasting.

So, I guess time will tell won't it?
 
Last edited:

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
Of course John, an Orthodox Jew, knew exactly what he was writing. There are NO subordinate deities to an Orthodox Jew.

Can you read what you just said? I agree.

As a Jew, John would NOT have accepted Jesus as any kind of equal deity to his Father...that would have broken the first commandment.

Do you get this? Calling Jesus "theos" simply means a "mighty one". Can anyone doubt that the son of God is a "mighty" divine being who was sent by his Father on assignment? Paul calls Jesus an "apostle" (Heb 3:1) Can God be an apostle?

Would John have believed for one moment that his "one God" (Deut 6:4) could be in two places at once? That one part of God on earth in human form could be praying to another equal part of himself in heaven...what nonsense!

The Jews did not believe that YHWH was omnipresent, nor did they believe that their God was incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ. Not one of the apostles put Jesus in the place of his Father and not once did Jesus claim to be Almighty God. If you did not force your trinity into scripture, it would not be there.
 
Last edited:

Wharton

Active Member
Can you read what you just said? I agree.

As a Jew, John would NOT have accepted Jesus as any kind of equal deity to his Father...that would have broken the first commandment.

Do you get this? Calling Jesus "theos" simply means a "mighty one". Can anyone doubt that the son of God is a "mighty" divine being who was sent by his Father on assignment? Paul calls Jesus an "apostle" (Heb 3:1) Can God be an apostle?

Would John have believed for one moment that his "one God" (Deut 6:4) could be in two places at once? That one part of God on earth in human form could be praying to another equal part of himself in heaven...what nonsense!

The Jews did not believe that YHWH was omnipresent, nor did they believe that their God was incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ. Not one of the apostles put Jesus in the place of his Father and not once did Jesus claim to be Almighty God. If you did not force your trinity into scripture, it would not be there.
What John said is that Jesus is God. Not a subordinate mighty god. That would never enter his mind. Either he is God or he isn't. He certainly didn't think of him as Michael the archangel incarnated on earth. That's something that you have forced into scripture.

Can God be in two places at once? Of course he can. He is in all places and all TIMES at once. The nonsense is that you limit God.

Can God be an apostle? Yes, he can. An apostle is a teacher with authority. The father is THE teacher with authority. He sends the Word, Jesus, as his earthly teacher with authority. Jesus trains and sends, his successors, the apostles as his teachers with authority. The apostles train and send theirs. If you read Acts, you will see that after Jesus ascends, the people follow the teachings not of Jesus, but of the apostles. The father hands off to the son (which is why Jesus states he gets his teaching from the father), the son hands off to the apostles and the apostles hand off to their successors.

Unfortunately, JW's have no apostolic succession and have no teachers with authority. Very simply, you don't follow the teaching method approved of by the father and the son.

You do have a problem understanding nature and essence. That the father and the son have the same nature and essence. Once again, no one begets an inferior being. God begets God. Human begets human. Animal begets animal. Jesus and the father are One in essence and nature.
 

Kolibri

Well-Known Member
What John said is that Jesus is God. Not a subordinate mighty god. That would never enter his mind. Either he is God or he isn't. He certainly didn't think of him as Michael the archangel incarnated on earth. That's something that you have forced into scripture.

Can God be in two places at once? Of course he can. He is in all places and all TIMES at once. The nonsense is that you limit God.

Can God be an apostle? Yes, he can. An apostle is a teacher with authority. The father is THE teacher with authority. He sends the Word, Jesus, as his earthly teacher with authority. Jesus trains and sends, his successors, the apostles as his teachers with authority. The apostles train and send theirs. If you read Acts, you will see that after Jesus ascends, the people follow the teachings not of Jesus, but of the apostles. The father hands off to the son (which is why Jesus states he gets his teaching from the father), the son hands off to the apostles and the apostles hand off to their successors.

Unfortunately, JW's have no apostolic succession and have no teachers with authority. Very simply, you don't follow the teaching method approved of by the father and the son.

You do have a problem understanding nature and essence. That the father and the son have the same nature and essence. Once again, no one begets an inferior being. God begets God. Human begets human. Animal begets animal. Jesus and the father are One in essence and nature.

The Greek word a-po'sto-los comes from a common verb a-po-stel'lo. The verb means "send forth". So the noun literally means "one that is sent forth." Clarity of concept. If you want to prove someone has authority as a teacher you have to use more than the word definition itself. You could use other words applied to the apostles to get that thought, but not that word itself.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
There really is nothing more to say regarding the matter besides slinging mud.
Did you really think that all these are nothing but Mudslinging? The difference between “And the Word was God” in John 1:1 and your alteration of John 1:1 an “a god” in John is Heaven and Hell. We are talking about souls here and not just mudslinging. Can we put time on eternity? It’s either one soul goes to heaven with God eternally or to hell eternally and that is the difference between your twisted teachings [a god] and the truth [and the Word was God].

Gal 1:6 I am shocked that you are turning away so soon from God, who in his love and mercy called you to share the eternal life he gives through Christ. You are already following a different way
Gal 1:7 that pretends to be the Good News but is not the Good News at all. You are being fooled by those who twist and change the truth concerning Christ.
Gal 1:8 Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including myself, who preaches any other message than the one we told you about. Even if an angel comes from heaven and preaches any other message, let him be forever cursed.
Gal 1:9 I will say it again: If anyone preaches any other gospel than the one you welcomed, let God’s curse fall upon that person.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
Did you read the article?
You cannot place an indefinite article before theos in the 3rd clause for the simple reason that it was NOT there in Greek to begin with.

Why can’t you understand that the ONLY reason why JW placed that “a” before theos, without any proof at all exegetically, is because they want to deny the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. It’s all about denying the Lord Jesus Christ as God, the Son of God from eternity.

Let’s just use our daily common sense. How can an “a god” be with “the God” before the beginning. Why would God need an “a god” to create the heavens and the earth? Read John 1:3 and Genesis chapter 1 and 2 and find out who created the heavens and the earth. It did not say angel/s.

How can one specifically define “the Word” with the definite article, meaning as the only “the Word” in a sentence and as the subject of the sentence in the 3rd clause, and then uncategorized this [“the Word”] with indefinite article like an “a god”?

The “a god” implies that there are more than one “a god”, i.e., there are gods with “the God” before the creation of the heavens and the earth or before the beginning. This is how they support their twisted concept or theory that the Lord Jesus Christ was just an angel of God, but Hebrews 1:6 “And let all the angels of God worship him.” proved them wrong. Angels worship God and not their fellow angels. The one the angels worship is clearly superior by far to them.

Here is one the commenters:

In John 1:3, it is written that «πάνταδι᾽αὐτοῦἐγένετοκαὶχωρὶςαὐτοῦἐγένετοοὐδὲἕνὃγέγονεν», that is, "All things were made by him, and not one thing that was made was made without him."

Now, folks, all things were made by the Word (ὁλόγος, which is the antecedent of the pronoun αὐτοῦ in John 1:3).


If the Word is "a god" but not "God," how then did the Word "make all things"?

"A god" is created (a creature), for only God is uncreate and eternal. Only God is the creator of all things.

So, how did a god create all things when he himself had to be created?

It's illogical. No, it's not a "mystery" that we can simply brush off. It's illogical. It's a contradiction. The Bible is not a book of contradiction. It's a book of truth. The Word must be God because it created all things.”
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
Oh, well that explains everything.

Thank you so much for that extremely interesting piece of information.

Only the "chosen ones" will believe in the trinity. All others will be blocked from believing it. Really?


You think that John 1:1 can only mean that Jesus is equal to the Father......seriously?

There are some who can see clearly what the Greek text says and others who want it to mean something else. So just for clarity, please provide a direct statement from either God or his son to the effect that they are equal parts of a godhead. Just one will do.....and I'll be happy to admit that I am deluded.
How about more than one? Read post #542

Can someone explain the Trinity please... | Page 28 | ReligiousForums.com
 
Last edited:
Top