Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

[Brian2]

There is no part of the Bible that shows that Jesus is God in the flesh.
The Bible says that God is spirit so God cannot be flesh.

Jesus was not God in the flesh, Jesus was a Manifestation of God in the flesh.

1 Timothy 3-16 God manifest in the flesh

KJV And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

If 1Timothy 3:16 actually said what the KJV and NKJV have, that would mean that Jesus was God. That is what "God manifest in the flesh" actually means. But when you look up 1Timothy 3:16 in Bible Hub you can see that this seems to be another place where the KJV has it wrong.
However when the Baha'is say that Jesus or Baha'u'llah are Manifestations of God but are not God, that just indicates that Baha'i have taken the word "manifestation" and have changed the meaning of it.
I seem to remember that Baha'i has done that with a number of words. This indicates a lack of understanding of the English or an attempt to change the meaning of words by using the word in a different way than the original definition means.

 

[Soapy]

Hi Walt,

Does your explanation change anything? I'm sorry you feel I am in error. --Which scripture were you using to prove your point?

You Said,
"It's the Psalmist who, here, states the glory of God as Most High over the earth - not the Father, himself, as you stated here in error."
Which scripture are you quoting? That explains I am in error ? Which scripture please?

I don’t know if there is a fundamental misunderstanding going in here, but did you write this in your post:

• “The Father gives himself all the credit saying [ that you alone are the Most High over all the earth. ]
• Psalms 83:18

Those words are not spoken by God. They are from a SONG; a PSALM sung by a Levite priest from the family of the Levite, Asaph.

This singer is lauding YHWH in song (called a PSALM), declaring YHWH as being alone, the most high God over the whole world.

Your implication is that those words are FROM YHWH himself.

I don’t know if you are saying that ‘YHWH is the most high God over all the earth’ is what is true - IT IS… but you are quoting from the scriptures and attributing THE SCRIPTURE WORDS in the psalm to YHWH himself. It isn’t, it’s the Psamist who is SAYING/SINGING those words in a song.

You could, most likely, find a verse somewhere in scriptures where YHWH says like:

• ‘I am (first person singular of the verb, ‘to be’) the most high God over the whole earth’

There you can see the words ‘I am’ which makes it a personal declaration.

Saying ‘YOU ARE….’ is a declaration from another [person] towards the one spoken ABOUT.

Sorry, it’s simple English, 101.

Attention to detail… it’s the lack of attention to detail that later on down the line comes back to you as creating false doctrine. Again, I’m not saying that YHWH is not most high God over the earth but rather that THE WORDS you posted and the verse ARE PARTS OF A SONG OF ASAPH, a PSALM… they are not quotes from ‘The Father’.

Perhais you should just have stated that Yhwh is most high God over the earth and posted a verse where YHWH says it and then psalm 83:18 where Asaph SINGS IT.

 

[Soapy]

I am pretty sure the tetragrammaton (the four Hebrew letters for God's name) is clearly written thousands of times in the Hebrew scriptures. As you probably know, distinctions are made when translating. The J sound didn't come about in English until the past few centuries.

What’s your point?

I don’t see where I was disputing anything concerning whether it’s ‘YHWH’ or ‘Jehovah’ or anything at all related to what you Yust posted!

 

[walt]

Hi Walt,

I don’t know if there is a fundamental misunderstanding going in here, but did you write this in your post:

• “The Father gives himself all the credit saying [ that you alone are the Most High over all the earth. ]
• Psalms 83:18

Those words are not spoken by God. They are from a SONG; a PSALM sung by a Levite priest from the family of the Levite, Asaph.

This singer is lauding YHWH in song (called a PSALM), declaring YHWH as being alone, the most high God over the whole world.

Your implication is that those words are FROM YHWH himself.

I don’t know if you are saying that ‘YHWH is the most high God over all the earth’ is what is true - IT IS… but you are quoting from the scriptures and attributing THE SCRIPTURE WORDS in the psalm to YHWH himself. It isn’t, it’s the Psamist who is SAYING/SINGING those words in a song.

You could, most likely, find a verse somewhere in scriptures where YHWH says like:

• ‘I am (first person singular of the verb, ‘to be’) the most high God over the whole earth’

There you can see the words ‘I am’ which makes it a personal declaration.

Saying ‘YOU ARE….’ is a declaration from another [person] towards the one spoken ABOUT.

Sorry, it’s simple English, 101.

Attention to detail… it’s the lack of attention to detail that later on down the line comes back to you as creating false doctrine. Again, I’m not saying that YHWH is not most high God over the earth but rather that THE WORDS you posted and the verse ARE PARTS OF A SONG OF ASAPH, a PSALM… they are not quotes from ‘The Father’.

Perhais you should just have stated that Yhwh is most high God over the earth and posted a verse where YHWH says it and then psalm 83:18 where Asaph SINGS IT.

I am sure happy to read all the information you provide, now I understand more, the point you were making I think. I feel it's a blessing to learn more and more about The Father and Jesus and every subject in the Bible.

Please forgive me for anything I said earlier.. I stand corrected, In my mind I was thinking Jesus says.. Paul says.. and God by His inspired word says.. And He gives us instructions by Moses, Prophets, Angels and others in the Bible... 2 Timothy 3:16 scripture in the Bible is God-breathed..

2 Tim. 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, NIV

I could have picked a better scripture. but I see from your studies I need to keep learning, I love to learn anything more about God that I may have overlooked. I hope we can be friends, I enjoy reading your comments. When I read your information, I learned details I didn't realize were there.
Thank You so much!

 

[metis]

He prayed God's name be hallowed,or sanctified. He didn't say to never use it out of fear to desecrate it.

Which is of course what I posted.

 

[Soapy]

I am sure happy to read all the information you provide, now I understand more, the point you were making I think. I feel it's a blessing to learn more and more about The Father and Jesus and every subject in the Bible.

Please forgive me for anything I said earlier.. I stand corrected, In my mind I was thinking Jesus says.. Paul says.. and God by His inspired word says.. And He gives us instructions by Moses, Prophets, Angels and others in the Bible... 2 Timothy 3:16 scripture in the Bible is God-breathed..

2 Tim. 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, NIV

I could have picked a better scripture. but I see from your studies I need to keep learning, I love to learn anything more about God that I may have overlooked. I hope we can be friends, I enjoy reading your comments. When I read your information, I learned details I didn't realize were there.
Thank You so much!

Thank you for understanding and belief. It’s all that I ask.

 

[Soapy]

Which is of course what I posted.

It’s a such a thing that a complete misunderstanding, which is outlined completely in hindsight, is still a point of debate???!!!!

Is it not a simple enough thing to understand that the Jews TOOK THE POINT of taking God’s name in vain TOO FAR and, because of that, they stopped PRONOUNCING the name of God… They didn’t stop USING (writing) it. They just FEARED blaspheming and bringing a PERCEIVED retribution down upon themself.

We can see that the Old Testament includes the name of God right up until the end of that era. But can it be said that in the 400 years between the old and New Testament that they stopped even WRITING it???

Or is it more likely that the NEW TESTAMENT TRANSLATORS chose to blot out the name of God from anything NEW being written about God - I mean like even Jesus Christ nog pronouncing the name of his Father???!!

Is it likely that Jesus Christ feared blaspheming the name.,, Of course not. Did he fear upsetting the Jews… absolutely not!!!

So why is there nothing that Jesus said that contained the verbalising of the name of God???

I suggest that Jesus did speak the name of God but none of what he said was written down BY THE TRANSLATORS of the New Testament. Ask yourself, what of the quotes from the Torah where God’s name is mentioned - did JESUS change those into ‘My Father’ or ‘My God’ or similar to avoid saying ‘YHWH’?

But here is another thing? Who says that God does not have a NAME…? Is it not TRINITARIANS??? And why? Is it not so that they can call Jesus, ‘God’, because they know that it is the Father who is YHWH (His name) and that Jesus is the name of the Son, and the Spirit if God has no name because it is simply ‘OF GOD’ who has a name, ‘YHWH’?

These Trinitarians cannot change or modify the Old Testament bug they still tried by changing the name of God to an residual term, ‘LORD’, which is easily or accidentally able to be written as ‘Lord’, which carries a completely different meaning… Satanic kudos to whoever thought that up because we can see that it works - Trinity got it’s way and ‘LORD’ and ‘Lord’ mean the same things to its believers no matter how many times the difference is explained!!!

 

[metis]

It’s a such a thing that a complete misuncderstanding, which is outlined completely in hindsight, is still a point of debate???!!!!

It was a point and consensus of many years of Jewish commentary, which I wouldn't expect that you would know anything about. The rest of what you wrote is irrelevant to me.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, thank you. We, as well as angels, have ESSENTIAL aspects of God. I believe that it is absolutely so as God would put Himself into all that He creates…. Just as anyone who creates anything puts a little of themself into their creation… we create what we are!!!

But I was, in fact, opposing the idea that I know that Brian2 was intimating… He wanted to make out that Jesus contained all the attributes of God which would mean that Jesus was either

• EQUAL TO GOD (though he would admit that God has no equal!!!!!)

or:

• WAS GOD in every sense … every sense except (??!!) that Jesus was subordinate TO GOD … can anyone but a trinitarian believe the logic (the illogic) of such a claim?

If you read his posts you can feel him squirming in his responses, you can feel the deceit in his creational answers making things up as he goes along with indifference to logic or sense or any aspect of reality.

However, each time his responses are contested it gives him the ability to modify his responses for next time by devising a seemingly more robust deception. But, for me, I stick to the basics WHICH DO NOT CHANGE, therefore no matter how much he squirms he cannot escape the fundamental lies of the trinity (or us it BINITY for him!) ideology (I don’t call it an Theology!).

There is no logic to the Trinity belief, don't you know that after 45 years?

 

[Trailblazer]

If 1Timothy 3:16 actually said what the KJV and NKJV have, that would mean that Jesus was God. That is what "God manifest in the flesh" actually means.

No, it does not mean that. If Jesus was God, Jesus would be God incarnated in the flesh. This article explains the difference between an incarnation and a manifestation.

“The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God…..

One can argue that Bahá'u'lláh is asserting that epistemologically the Manifestations are God, for they are the perfect embodiment of all we can know about God; but ontologically they are not God, for they are not identical with God's essence. Perhaps this is the meaning of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospel of John: 'If you had known me, you would have known my Father also' (John 14:7) and 'he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9)…...”

Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

But when you look up 1Timothy 3:16 in Bible Hub you can see that this seems to be another place where the KJV has it wrong.

Most of the English translations of that verse says that God was manifest in the flesh, or something that means the same thing.

1 Timothy 3:16 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

Manifest meaning

To show or demonstrate plainly; reveal.
Clearly apparent to the sight or understanding; obvious.
Manifest is defined as to prove or make something clear.
Apparent to the senses, esp. that of sight, or to the mind; evident; obvious; clear; plain.
To make clear or evident; show plainly; reveal; evince.
To prove; be evidence of.
To appear to the senses; show itself.
Obvious to the understanding; apparent to the mind; easily apprehensible; plain; not obscure or hidden.
To show plainly; to make to appear distinctly, usually to the mind; to put beyond question or doubt; to display; to exhibit.
The definition of manifest is something that is clear to see or understand.
To become manifest; be revealed.

Manifest Meaning | Best 22 Definitions of Manifest

However when the Baha'is say that Jesus or Baha'u'llah are Manifestations of God but are not God, that just indicates that Baha'i have taken the word "manifestation" and have changed the meaning of it.

What is manifestation in simple words?

A manifestation of something is one of the different ways in which it can appear. [formal] Different animals in the colony had different manifestations of the disease. [ + of] Synonyms: sign, symptom, indication, mark More Synonyms of manifestation.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/manifestation

So God appeared in the flesh because we could see the attributes of God embodied in Jesus, but the essence of God did not become flesh, so Jesus was not God in the flesh.

I seem to remember that Baha'i has done that with a number of words. This indicates a lack of understanding of the English or an attempt to change the meaning of words by using the word in a different way than the original definition means.

No, I don't do that. I use the dictionary definitions.

 

[walt]

No, it does not mean that. If Jesus was God, Jesus would be God incarnated in the flesh. This article explains the difference between an incarnation and a manifestation.

“The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God…..

One can argue that Bahá'u'lláh is asserting that epistemologically the Manifestations are God, for they are the perfect embodiment of all we can know about God; but ontologically they are not God, for they are not identical with God's essence. Perhaps this is the meaning of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospel of John: 'If you had known me, you would have known my Father also' (John 14:7) and 'he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9)…...”

Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

Most of the English translations of that verse says that God was manifest in the flesh, or something that means the same thing.

1 Timothy 3:16 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

Manifest meaning

To show or demonstrate plainly; reveal.
Clearly apparent to the sight or understanding; obvious.
Manifest is defined as to prove or make something clear.
Apparent to the senses, esp. that of sight, or to the mind; evident; obvious; clear; plain.
To make clear or evident; show plainly; reveal; evince.
To prove; be evidence of.
To appear to the senses; show itself.
Obvious to the understanding; apparent to the mind; easily apprehensible; plain; not obscure or hidden.
To show plainly; to make to appear distinctly, usually to the mind; to put beyond question or doubt; to display; to exhibit.
The definition of manifest is something that is clear to see or understand.
To become manifest; be revealed.

Manifest Meaning | Best 22 Definitions of Manifest

What is manifestation in simple words?

A manifestation of something is one of the different ways in which it can appear. [formal] Different animals in the colony had different manifestations of the disease. [ + of] Synonyms: sign, symptom, indication, mark More Synonyms of manifestation.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/manifestation

So God appeared in the flesh because we could see the attributes of God embodied in Jesus, but the essence of God did not become flesh, so Jesus was not God in the flesh.

No, I don't do that. I use the dictionary definitions.

I agree with you, here is a link that talks about the earliest ancient manuscripts and what they said.

1 Timothy 3:16 - BiblicalUnitarian.com

The following is a clear explanation of the verse in the Bible that Trinitarians have sometimes used in attempts to “prove” the Trinity...

www.biblicalunitarian.com

Here is a question.. No matter which way we believe is true. Did Jesus explain the Trinity? No. Did The Father explain the Trinity? No.
Why is that?

no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports theos; all ancient versions presuppose hos or ho [“he who” or “he”]
see - link please.

 

[Trailblazer]

Here is a question.. No matter which way we believe is true, did Jesus explain the Trinity? No. Did The Father explain the trinity? No. Why is that?

It is because the Trinity doctrine is a man-made doctrine of the church. It is not biblical.

 

[Soapy]

It was a point and consensus of many years of Jewish commentary, which I wouldn't expect that you would know anything about. The rest of what you wrote is irrelevant to me.

Yes, you are right to call of irrelevant… because it should never have been a point of contention in the first place…

Unless you cannot read nor understand what you’ve read, my point was exactly that: The Jewish belief in possibly blaspheming the name of God, taken to the n’th degree such that no one of Jewish faith can even say His name, the eternal name: ‘YHWH’, has led to the eternal name of the one true God being DISCARDED … which has the effect of making the name null, void, immaterial - just like you said!!!

So, do you believe, like the Trinitarians, that the one true God does not have a name??

If you believe in the one true God having an eternal name, what do you say that eternal name is?

 

[metis]

Unless you cannot read nor understand what you’ve read, my point was exactly that: The Jewish belief in possibly blaspheming the name of God, taken to the n’th degree such that no one of Jewish faith can even say His name, the eternal name: ‘YHWH’, has led to the eternal name of the one true God being DISCARDED … which has the effect of making the name null, void, immaterial - just like you said!!!

So, do you believe, like the Trinitarians, that the one true God does not have a name??

If you believe in the one true God having an eternal name, what do you say that eternal name is?

I really don't care what you may believe in this area as I just explained the general approach used within Judaism regarding the Most Holy Name minus the existence of the Temple. If you don't agree with what Jews tend to believe, then let me recommend you not attend a shul on Shabbat.

 

[Soapy]

I agree with you, here is a link that talks about the earliest ancient manuscripts and what they said.

1 Timothy 3:16 - BiblicalUnitarian.com

The following is a clear explanation of the verse in the Bible that Trinitarians have sometimes used in attempts to “prove” the Trinity...

www.biblicalunitarian.com

Here is a question.. No matter which way we believe is true. Did Jesus explain the Trinity? No. Did The Father explain the Trinity? No.
Why is that?

no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports theos; all ancient versions presuppose hos or ho [“he who” or “he”]
see - link please.

Walt, think on this also: Where contention is placed on DISPUTING the trinity ideology, why is there nothing that PROVES (is written, spoken, inferred, intimated) AGAINST the trinity ideology?

The answer is that: Since there was no such thing written, spoken, intimated, inferred, as to a Trinity, there absolutely would be nothing to contend…

It is like someone asking: ‘Why didn’t Jesus just say, “I am not God!!”’. The answer being that no one ever thought Jesus WAS GOD such that Jesus should deny it. No Jew, Pharisee or Sadducee, Scribe, or Priest, ever thought of Jesus as God, the Father.

There is only one situation written in which the Jews thought of Jesus as anyone other than just a plain everyday guy: When Jesus said

• ‘God is my Father’

The Jews did not think of this as some kind of ‘God-Man’, only GREEKS would think that way (or maybe these were GREEK THINKING JEWS??!!)

Greeks (as everyone knows) believed in Heaven as the Olympus of their Gods. And, of course, the Greek Gods were ‘famed’ for procreating human offspring who were both Gods and Men… So you can see how it came about that some ‘Jews’ might try to claim that Jesus was, himself, claiming to be such a ‘God-man’.

But that isn’t even the real point: The Jews, as it’s written…, claimed that Jesus was:

• ‘MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD’!

Please note this carefully… They did not call him ‘GOD’… It is ONLY IN TRINITARIAN ARGUMENT that this claim is made!!!!

The argument in the first part was that ‘A Son is equal to his Father’ - and where in Heaven or on earth is there ever such a claim made in righteousness???? Nowhere… a device of the trinitarian fallacy mindedness. How can a subordinate entity be equal to that from which it is subordinated???

What magic allows a cup of size x to be taken out of a cup of the same size x? And magic is not real but mere illusion - and so it is with the claim of a son being equal to his Father! The argument says that since the Father passes on what is His to the Son then that Son “ALREADY OWNS WHAT IS THE FATHER’S” and so they are equal…

But what is it if the Father has many Sons - are they all equal to the Father? Does each own all that the Father owns….?? And what of the Father’s WIFE…?

Walt, the Trinitarians didn’t think of out before publishing these depravitues as their doctrine and that’s why they have so much trouble trying to defend it with fallacious texts and discreditable scripture renderings.

In the second part, Jesus says he was doing the work of the Father, and that showed in the things they saw him do: Heal the sick, make the blind to see, make the lame to walk, preach the testimony OF GOD (why would he do that if he WAS GOD!! Answer: See Rev 1:1: Who have what to whom and why?). In stating what he was doing, Jesus was DEFINING WHAT A SON [Of God] meant, though he never ever called himself by these word (this term): ‘Son of God’, but rather, ‘Son of Man’ - a human Being.

 

[Soapy]

I really don't care what you may believe in this area as I just explained the general approach used within Judaism regarding the Most Holy Name minus the existence of the Temple. If you don't agree with what Jews tend to believe, then let me recommend you not attend a shul on Shabbat.

I would never attend a ship on Shabbat!!

The fact that you cannot stomach the truth is testimony to the limitations of the Jewish faith, and it is as Jesus said about the Jews over 2000 years ago why the truth of God was taken away from them and given to the gentiles, to the Samaritans (They believed Jesus was the Son of God!), to Greeks, to prisoners, to the poor….!!

 

[Soapy]

I found a video on YouTube Where one of the Jewish scholars that helped with the Dead Sea Scrolls says in their Jewish history writings they have a record of a Rabbi, that is Wrapped in the Torah and burn to death alive. The have Jewish history writings that explain, it was a Roman law no one is allowed to speak the name of God in the letters it is written. I believe this law was enforced around the first century.

Do you want the link to this video?

Walt, hundreds of fake videos are out there - be careful what you watch…!!!

Most videos on religious matters are made to MAKE MONEY… not about expressing truth!!

It was absolutely the Jews who thought that saying the name of God could get them eternal death.. They used to use the name of God as an insurance policy, to seal a deal, to swear an oath, … and the welch on it…..!!!!! Doing so brought the name of God into disrepute… made it if no worth… and God would be angry with them as anyone would be.

And while it’s true if the used the name disrespectfully, used it frivolously, welched on things sworn in that name, they would be punished, they came to STOP ALTOGETHER “IN CASE’ they blasphemed.

 

[YoursTrue]

Which is of course what I posted.

Ok.

 

[YoursTrue]

Walt, hundreds of fake videos are out there - be careful what you watch…!!!

Most videos on religious matters are made to MAKE MONEY… not about expressing truth!!

It was absolutely the Jews who thought that saying the name of God could get them eternal death.. They used to use the name of God as an insurance policy, to seal a deal, to swear an oath, … and the welch on it…..!!!!! Doing so brought the name of God into disrepute… made it if no worth… and God would be angry with them as anyone would be.

And while it’s true if the used the name disrespectfully, used it frivolously, welched on things sworn in that name, they would be punished, they came to STOP ALTOGETHER “IN CASE’ they blasphemed.

Are you sure about this?

 

[YoursTrue]

What’s your point?

I don’t see where I was disputing anything concerning whether it’s ‘YHWH’ or ‘Jehovah’ or anything at all related to what you Yust posted!

I am saying that about the pronunciation because it's important to know about the background. Along with the unchristian action of putting LORD instead of properly rendering the text.