For trinity believers: Does your world come unravelled if Jesus is not God,but ONLY Gods Son?

[shunyadragon]

Yes the archaeology agrees with what the Bible tells us.

Yrs and no, the following is probelematic

The Hebrews did not obey the law of Moses and over the years between Moses and the exile God punished them many times for that and other sins.
God finally exiles both the north and south Kingdoms and said that He was purifying those who went to Babylon and would bring back a people who would not go after other gods.

No, as far as the existence of Moses, the existence of confirming text, and the Exodus the Bible does not agree with archaeology. The archaeology demonstrates there was no massive Exodus as described in Exodus nor the existence of Moses. The evidence also clearly demonstrates polytheism was the common prevalent belief among Jews of Palestine up until the end of the exile,

 

[shunyadragon]

I’m just going by what the Bible says in the Old Testament…. Which does not detail any tribe name ‘Hebrew’ before Abraham, who left his pagan family to become its patriarch.

Abraham didn’t “join” a tribe - as I read it, he was the ‘Father’ of it.

Am I wrong…?

Regardless the belief in polytheism was prevalent up until the return from exile long after Abraham.

 

[Brian2]

No, as far as the existence of Moses, the existence of confirming text, and the Exodus the Bible does not agree with archaeology. The archaeology demonstrates there was no massive Exodus as described in Exodus nor the existence of Moses. The evidence also clearly demonstrates polytheism was the common prevalent belief among Jews of Palestine up until the end of the exile,

Yes and no. The evidence does demonstrate that polytheism was the common prevalent belief among Jews of Palestine up until the end of the exile.
As for Moses and the Exodus, I accept an early dating for the Exodus and conquest and the archaeology which agrees with the conquest story in the book of Joshua.
So I have no problem with the existence of Moses or the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan and the Law of Moses.

 

[shunyadragon]

As for Moses and the Exodus, I accept an early dating for the Exodus and conquest and the archaeology which agrees with the conquest story in the book of Joshua.
So I have no problem with the existence of Moses or the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan and the Law of Moses.

The archaeological evidence is very limited to confirm this. Evidence for the person Moses and Joseph do not exist. There is evidence of dates and places mentioned in Exodus, but the numbers is clearly unrealistic, and the entry into Palestine and the Conquest of Canaan. There is some evidence for a limited migration of a mix of Hebrews and non-Hebrews. I found a lot of selective articles supporting Genesis, but failing to present the whole evidence.

The following reference evaluates the claims of evidence for and against Exodus.

Archaeology vs. The Bible, You Decide!

ABSTRACT: This article comprehensively links sequential archaeological periods to the Bible rather than the Bible to archaeological periods dated by Egyptian history. The Bible, rather than a flawed Egyptian chronology, is used to date each period. Israel, normally placed in the Iron Age, is a Bronze Age culture. The Exodus starts the MBI, settled Israel starts the MBII, and the monarchy starts the LB. A corrected chronology results in a refreshingly convincing agreement between the Bible and archaeology at every period. We have no early texts of Exodus to halp confirm the account.

​

Copyright Ó 2002-20 Bruce Alan Killian updated 24 July 2020 email: bakillian at earthlink.net

To index file: www.scripturescholar.com/BibleArchaeology.pdf

THE PROBLEM​

The Bible and archaeologists do not tell the same story. The conquest of Canaan is a good example: The Bible says Joshua conquered the whole region leaving no survivors (Josh 10:42 cf. 11:16-23). Archaeologists say Israel “emerged” from among the Canaanite peoples without a conquest.[1] They say this because there is evidence of neither culture change nor comprehensive conquest. Archaeology has proved the Bible wrong.

Major differences between the Bible and archaeology are: There is no evidence of the destruction of Egypt by plagues at the Exodus. There is no evidence of a forty-year wilderness wandering, no evidence of a rapid and complete conquest by Joshua, and no evidence for a wealthy internationally trading kingdom of Israel under King Solomon, etc.

Properly interpreted archaeology should tell the same story as the Bible. The big details should match: plagues destroyed Egypt, Israel wandered forty years in the wilderness, Israel attacked and conquered Canaan, etc. Most recent archaeologists deny there is substantial evidence for these events.

Archaeologists cannot necessarily tell whether a culture is Canaanite or Israelite. They can tell cities were destroyed, but not necessarily how they were destroyed. They can tell the inhabitants were city dwellers or nomads. They can tell the difference between a poor local economy and a rich international economy. Most reconcilers pick one event, such as the Exodus or conquest of Canaan, not the big picture. The big details should match, but as currently interpreted, they do not. The goal of this article is to look at the big picture and provide a solution.

Read on the article is comprehensive . . .

 

[Brian2]

The archaeological evidence is very limited to confirm this. Evidence for the person Moses and Joseph do not exist. There is evidence of dates and places mentioned in Exodus, but the numbers is clearly unrealistic, and the entry into Palestine and the Conquest of Canaan. There is some evidence for a limited migration of a mix of Hebrews and non-Hebrews. I found a lot of selective articles supporting Genesis, but failing to present the whole evidence.

The following reference evaluates the claims of evidence for and against Exodus.

Archaeology vs. The Bible, You Decide!

ABSTRACT: This article comprehensively links sequential archaeological periods to the Bible rather than the Bible to archaeological periods dated by Egyptian history. The Bible, rather than a flawed Egyptian chronology, is used to date each period. Israel, normally placed in the Iron Age, is a Bronze Age culture. The Exodus starts the MBI, settled Israel starts the MBII, and the monarchy starts the LB. A corrected chronology results in a refreshingly convincing agreement between the Bible and archaeology at every period. We have no early texts of Exodus to halp confirm the account.

​

Copyright Ó 2002-20 Bruce Alan Killian updated 24 July 2020 email: bakillian at earthlink.net

To index file: www.scripturescholar.com/BibleArchaeology.pdf

THE PROBLEM​

The Bible and archaeologists do not tell the same story. The conquest of Canaan is a good example: The Bible says Joshua conquered the whole region leaving no survivors (Josh 10:42 cf. 11:16-23). Archaeologists say Israel “emerged” from among the Canaanite peoples without a conquest.[1] They say this because there is evidence of neither culture change nor comprehensive conquest. Archaeology has proved the Bible wrong.

Major differences between the Bible and archaeology are: There is no evidence of the destruction of Egypt by plagues at the Exodus. There is no evidence of a forty-year wilderness wandering, no evidence of a rapid and complete conquest by Joshua, and no evidence for a wealthy internationally trading kingdom of Israel under King Solomon, etc.

Properly interpreted archaeology should tell the same story as the Bible. The big details should match: plagues destroyed Egypt, Israel wandered forty years in the wilderness, Israel attacked and conquered Canaan, etc. Most recent archaeologists deny there is substantial evidence for these events.

Archaeologists cannot necessarily tell whether a culture is Canaanite or Israelite. They can tell cities were destroyed, but not necessarily how they were destroyed. They can tell the inhabitants were city dwellers or nomads. They can tell the difference between a poor local economy and a rich international economy. Most reconcilers pick one event, such as the Exodus or conquest of Canaan, not the big picture. The big details should match, but as currently interpreted, they do not. The goal of this article is to look at the big picture and provide a solution.

Read on the article is comprehensive . . .

It is interesting that people have been able to provide solutions to the Exodus and Conquest "problems" with shifts in chronology.
It is also interesting that rereading Joshua and understanding what it says there in a slightly different way can solve the problems there and mean that the archaeology and Joshua agree.
The numbers of Israelites seems to be a problem but the numbers can be interpreted in different ways to bring the number of Israelites down considerably.
Anyway imo the whole thing can be fixed just through seeing things in a different light and we can see that Israel was in Egypt and the Exodus happened and the Conquest also.

 

[Dimi95]

Vague , Vague and VAGUE!


Luke 1:39-45
"At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth.When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear!But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!"

This is before John was born and before Jesus was born.

Let's start with this:

Chapter 42: The Gathering of the House of Israel

Chapter 42: The Gathering of the House of Israel

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

and then

How the Book of Abraham Exposes the False Nature of Mormonism | Cold Case Christianity

By taking an evidential approach to Christian and Mormon scripture, I confirmed the veracity of Christianity and guarded myself from the falsity of Mormonism

coldcasechristianity.com

 

[Brian2]

Vague , Vague and VAGUE!


Luke 1:39-45
"At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth.When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear!But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!"

This is before John was born and before Jesus was born.

Let's start with this:

Chapter 42: The Gathering of the House of Israel

Chapter 42: The Gathering of the House of Israel

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

and then

How the Book of Abraham Exposes the False Nature of Mormonism | Cold Case Christianity

By taking an evidential approach to Christian and Mormon scripture, I confirmed the veracity of Christianity and guarded myself from the falsity of Mormonism

coldcasechristianity.com

It's pretty vague as to whom you are replying and iffy as to whether they will see what you have written to them if they don't get a message to tell them about your message to them.

 

[shunyadragon]

It is interesting that people have been able to provide solutions to the Exodus and Conquest "problems" with shifts in chronology.
It is also interesting that rereading Joshua and understanding what it says there in a slightly different way can solve the problems there and mean that the archaeology and Joshua agree.
The numbers of Israelites seems to be a problem but the numbers can be interpreted in different ways to bring the number of Israelites down considerably.
Anyway imo the whole thing can be fixed just through seeing things in a different light and we can see that Israel was in Egypt and the Exodus happened and the Conquest also.

If you believe something strong enough anything thing can be 'fixed' to justify what one believes. I gave a reference that clearly demonstrates the unresolvable problems for Genesis based on the evidence, and by the way the lack of evidence, including anything written before about 500 to 200 BC.

It is very common for ancient writings not written at the time of the events to amplify and rewrite including exaggeration of the events adding a touch of the supernatural..

 

[Soapy]

Regardless the belief in polytheism was prevalent up until the return from exile long after Abraham.

When you say that the belief in polytheism was prevalent up until the return from exile … which tribe are you referring to?

Abraham did not believe in polytheism, did he?

Was it not that God took Abram away from his family who DID believe in polytheism and changed Abram’s name to ‘Abraham’ because of the great commission God was sending him on?

Was it not that from the time of Abraham, the family Abraham was the Father of was, God-wise, completely monotheistic?

Was it a dialogue deception to say that polytheism was prevalent … Certainly polytheism was prevalent … but always, the belief we are concentrating on is monotheism, it’s roots, and patriarchs, of which Abraham was the Father in humanity of that belief through the hand of God. Hence God blessed Abraham, even calling him ‘Friend’ (to be understood as a special relationship with God - not ‘Buddy / Pal / Mate’ as we use the word today) and promising Abraham that the Saviour (The Messiah) would be born from his own family ‘from his loins’… which greatly pleases Abraham.

 

[shunyadragon]

When you say that the belief in polytheism was prevalent up until the return from exile … which tribe are you referring to?

Abraham did not believe in polytheism, did he?

Was it not that God took Abram away from his family who DID believe in polytheism and changed Abram’s name to ‘Abraham’ because of the great commission God was sending him on?

The Hebrews.

Was it not that from the time of Abraham, the family Abraham was the Father of was, God-wise, completely monotheistic?

No, the archaeological evidence confirms that polytheism was prevalent until the return of the exile, and the Pentateuch did not exist prior to 600-500 BCE.

Was it a dialogue deception to say that polytheism was prevalent … Certainly polytheism was prevalent … but always, the belief we are concentrating on is monotheism, it’s roots, and patriarchs, of which Abraham was the Father in humanity of that belief through the hand of God. Hence God blessed Abraham, even calling him ‘Friend’ (to be understood as a special relationship with God - not ‘Buddy / Pal / Mate’ as we use the word today) and promising Abraham that the Saviour (The Messiah) would be born from his own family ‘from his loins’… which greatly pleases Abraham.

There is a problem with the emphasis on Abraham in Hebrew history. I go by the archaeological evidence. Yes Abraham may have existed and promoted monotheism, but the evidence demonstrates that polytheism was dominant and not condemned or oppressed before the return from exile.

Abraham - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Most scholars view the patriarchal age, along with the Exodus and the period of the biblical judges, as a late literary construct that does not relate to any particular historical era,[8] and after a century of exhaustive archaeological investigation, no evidence has been found for a historical Abraham.[9] It is largely concluded that the Torah, the series of books that includes Genesis, was composed during the early Persian period, c. 500 BC, as a result of tensions between Jewish landowners who had stayed in Judah during the Babylonian captivity and traced their right to the land through their "father Abraham", and the returning exiles who based their counterclaim on Moses and the Exodus tradition of the Israelites.

 

[Soapy]

The Hebrews.

No, the archaeological evidence confirms that polytheism was prevalent until the return of the exile, and the Pentateuch did not exist prior to 600-500 BCE.

There is a problem with the emphasis on Abraham in Hebrew history. I go by the archaeological evidence. Yes Abraham may have existed and promoted monotheism, but the evidence demonstrates that polytheism was dominant and not condemned or oppressed before the return from exile.

Abraham - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Most scholars view the patriarchal age, along with the Exodus and the period of the biblical judges, as a late literary construct that does not relate to any particular historical era,[8] and after a century of exhaustive archaeological investigation, no evidence has been found for a historical Abraham.[9] It is largely concluded that the Torah, the series of books that includes Genesis, was composed during the early Persian period, c. 500 BC, as a result of tensions between Jewish landowners who had stayed in Judah during the Babylonian captivity and traced their right to the land through their "father Abraham", and the returning exiles who based their counterclaim on Moses and the Exodus tradition of the Israelites.

I may have asked this before and/or you may already have said… but what do you mean by ‘The return from exile’’?

Who ‘departed’/ ‘Were taken away’… into exile and then returned …?

When did this occur - biblically, book, chapter… please… I’m not aware at this moment.

Moreover, yes…! There was polytheism abounding in EVERY TRIBE AND NATION ON EARTH before God called Abr[ah]am to form the One God Only monotheistic belief. And Yes!! Even today there is only one True belief in a One God Only Religion (I’m excluding Islam, of course).

Is that wrong?

I’m just reading Ezra 6, in which the ‘Exiles’ were certainly carrying out monotheistic worship to GOD, YHWH, the one and only true God. So it seems to me (o need to read the chapters and verses before Ezra 6) that monotheism followed the Hebrews even while they were in exile - which would go with my point.

 

[wellwisher]

I used to be a trinity believer myself. When i found out Jesus was not Yhwh it felt like my foundation had crumbled beneath me. What held me together was knowing Jesus was still Jesus. He still lived a perfect human life and gave it for mankind. He was still Gods son. He was still king of Gods Kingdom(until the end comes). Everything was still created through him.

The real bonus of learning the truth was it was the 1st time i could worship God properly and serve Him properly. It has only gotten better since. My whole life changed like never before. It was the first time i learned what Gods will was and therefore could do it. I finally knew and felt that freedom Jesus spoke of. True freedom.

"You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free"

The trinity can be understood with an analogy. There is a man name Joe, who is a son to his parents, a husband to his wife, and a father to his children. Joe is one person, who wears three hats, with each hat geared to the needs of a different generation. He is submissive and respectful to his parents in a way he is not with his wife and children. He is intimate with his wife in ways he is not with parents and children. While he is firm but fair with his children in ways he not with his parents or wife.

The Trinity is like God's three hats, for his three different flocks, that serve the three aspects of the one God. There was Old Testament God the father, New Testament God the Son, and the Future Testament God the Holy Spirit. It is not about one being better than the other, but rather each is a way to reach the one God; Judeo-Christian. The future Testament has yet to be compiled, but it would about the intimate moments of the Holy Spirit, within individuals similar to the husband and wife; The Saints greatest hits over the past 2000 years.

The Trinity is also connected to the three major updates of the brain's operating system; version 3.0. The first is at Adam and Eve; version 1.0, where the ego appears; secondary center. Version 2.0 appears with the symbolism of Noah's Ark, where version 2.0 humans are reduced by the update. Version 3.0 appears to be defined by the coming of Jesus. Version 4.0 is set for the future. Joe becomes a grandparent.

 

[seekandfind]

The trinity can be understood with an analogy. There is a man name Joe, who is a son to his parents, a husband to his wife, and a father to his children. Joe is one person, who wears three hats, with each hat geared to the needs of a different generation. He is submissive and respectful to his parents in a way he is not with his wife and children. He is intimate with his wife in ways he is not with parents and children. While he is firm but fair with his children in ways he not with his parents or wife.

The Trinity is like God's three hats, for his three different flocks, that serve the three aspects of the one God. There was Old Testament God the father, New Testament God the Son, and the Future Testament God the Holy Spirit. It is not about one being better than the other, but rather each is a way to reach the one God; Judeo-Christian. The future Testament has yet to be compiled, but it would about the intimate moments of the Holy Spirit, within individuals similar to the husband and wife; The Saints greatest hits over the past 2000 years.

The Trinity is also connected to the three major updates of the brain's operating system; version 3.0. The first is at Adam and Eve; version 1.0, where the ego appears; secondary center. Version 2.0 appears with the symbolism of Noah's Ark, where version 2.0 humans are reduced by the update. Version 3.0 appears to be defined by the coming of Jesus. Version 4.0 is set for the future. Joe becomes a grandparent.

While Joe may have many hats Joe never talks to his other hats as if they arent Joe and the other hats dont talk to or about Joe as different persons. We know what that would mean if he did.

A son is never his father and a father is never his son.

Why do you find it necessary that they are the same God?

 

[Ebionite]

The trinity can be understood with an analogy.

A problem with your analogy is that for it to be representative of the Tanak, Joe would also have to have a lawyer hat that relates to Moses, and second husband hat for the "Spirit of God" Ruach Elohim, which is not the same as the "Holy Spirit" Ruach ha Qodesh.

The dodgy theology of the Trinity was apparently so much of a problem that extra text was added to 1 John 5:7-8 to help support the doctrine.
The blood and water of those verses relates to the blood and water of John 19:34, which is about the spear. The story of the spear only appears in John, and there's not reason why it shouldn't be in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, but it isn't.

A spear does appear in Psalm 35, though, which is about the righteous servant and contains text which relates to the events leading up to the crucifixion.

https://wethepeople.nz/torah/pages/twin.html#s17

 

[seekandfind]

It doesn't bother me because Christ Michael is a Son OF the Trinity, created by the Trinity and divine in his own right.

Christ is part of the trinity and hes the son of the trinity makes no sense. Where are the scriptures that say Christ is the son of the trinity?

 

[seekandfind]

But Jesus was the Christ before He was anointed with the Spirit at His baptism.
That anointing was for Jesus to be given the power to do the things that He would do during His ministry years.
The anointing was not to make Him the Christ or to make Him the Son of God.

"Christ" literally means anointed or messiah.

You are saying he was anointed before he was anointed.

He didnt become the Christ until his baptism.

 

[Colt]

Christ is part of the trinity and hes the son of the trinity makes no sense. Where are the scriptures that say Christ is the son of the trinity?

The word Trinity isn't in the scripture although there is reference to plural deity.

Jesus referred to Father, Son and Spirit just before returning to heaven BUT he never claimed to be the Second person of triune deity.

 

[Brian2]

"Christ" literally means anointed or messiah.

You are saying he was anointed before he was anointed.

He didnt become the Christ until his baptism.

Luke 2:11“Do not be afraid! For behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people: 11 Today in the city of David a Savior has been born to you. He is Christ the Lord! 12And this will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.”…

We see from this that Jesus was the savior, Christ the Lord at His birth.
He was chosen Christ from before the earth was created.
Christ means anointed with oil and this is symbolic for the Holy Spirit.
He was baptised with water and the Holy Spirit by John but He was the Christ, who was baptised with the Spirit for the work of His Ministry and to save us.
But I suppose it is not worth arguing about in itself.

 

[Eli G]

When Jesus read Is. 61:1.2 about his anointment as Messiah, he said:

Luke 4:21 (...) “Today this scripture that you just heard is fulfilled.”

Jesus' words indicate that although his birth occurred by a miracle of the holy spirit, his signage as Messiah did not happen at that time. That means that he became anointed or Christ/Messiah of God at the time of his baptism.

The same would apply to his title as King, which he had already when he was a human but did not exercise until he returned to heaven and be enthroned next to God.

John 18:37 So Pilate said to him: “Well, then, are you a king?” Jesus answered: “You yourself are saying that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is on the side of the truth listens to my voice.”

Therefore, it is logical to conclude that Luke's words in 2:11 speak prophetic. This same logic of reasoning applies to Lucas 2:26, where it is explained that Simeon was waiting for a promise made to him about seeing the Christ of Jehovah before he died. Apparently he was a very old man and it is evident that he could not meet Jesus when he was already an adult anointed by God and began to serve as Messiah/Christ.

PS: It was not John who anointed Jesus with holy spirit, but Jehovah from heaven at the moment of his baptism.

 

[Soapy]

Luke 2:11“Do not be afraid! For behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people: 11 Today in the city of David a Savior has been born to you. He is Christ the Lord! 12And this will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.”…

We see from this that Jesus was the savior, Christ the Lord at His birth.
He was chosen Christ from before the earth was created.
Christ means anointed with oil and this is symbolic for the Holy Spirit.
He was baptised with water and the Holy Spirit by John but He was the Christ, who was baptised with the Spirit for the work of His Ministry and to save us.
But I suppose it is not worth arguing about in itself.

Those words spoken by an angel (of angels) were sent by God… God who sees things as though already have occurred. So it is no surprise nor a revelation for God’s words to foretell what will be as though they already were.

But you know these things already.., you just refuse to admit them when the truth is in front of you.