According to what I have been able to gather from the Mormons about their belief in the trinity, I believe that they feel that there exists a Godhead which consists of 3 separate and distinct beings, but are united in purpose. Among the most important differences with other churches professing to be Christian are the issues concerning the nature of God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. I am searching for information in the Mormon doctrines where this is found so that I can reference it.
There is so much information to disprove a Trinity by using the Bible it's difficult to know where to start, so I thought I'd spend a few minutes discussing what I have read about the Trinity belief.
Q: "Do Mormons believe in the Trinity?" I could not determine if this site was a site with or without the Mormon blessing. So if you are a Mormon reading this, you might want to verify that this is or is not your belief. This information taken from:
https://gotquestions.org/Mormons-believe-Trinity.html
Answer: Mormons say they believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. However, Mormon doctrine denies the Trinity, teaching that the Father, Son, and Spirit do not comprise one God.
According to Mormonism, Jesus is a created being, the first spirit to be born of the Father (Mormon Doctrine, p.129) and a celestial mother (Mormon Doctrine, p.516). Therefore, Jesus could not be the eternal God or part of an eternal Trinity. Mormons also teach that both the Father and the Son are men with bodies of flesh and bone (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20; Articles of Faith, p 38); as two separate people, the Father and the Son cannot be considered “one.”
Mormons also teach that Jesus is just one of many sons of God. Jesus is referred to specifically as “a son of God” in the Book of Mormon (Alma 36:17). Lucifer, or the devil, is another son of God in Mormon theology (Mormon Doctrine, p.163). Further, Mormonism teaches that the number of gods is increasing. Any man on Earth can one day become the god of another planet and populate it with children born to him from his eternal wife (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-354). Any one of those children can later become a god in his own right (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20). Thus, there is not just One God, triune or not; there are many, many gods (Book of Abraham 4:3).
Mormonism’s founder, Joseph Smith, clearly rejected the Trinity. He wrote, “Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God. . . . All are crammed into one God according to sectarianism [the Christian faith]. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God—he would be a giant or a monster” (Teachings, p. 372). Other Mormon writers such as James Talmage have confirmed Mormon denial of the Trinity (Articles of Faith, p.35).
It is a mysterious doctrine, but the Bible does teach that there is One God eternally existing in three Persons (Matthew 28:19). Because Mormonism holds a distinctly unbiblical view of God, the Mormon Church should be considered a religion distinct from Christianity rather than a part of it.
(Editor’s note: many of the references in our articles on Mormonism are Mormon publications, such as Mormon Doctrine, Articles of Faith, Doctrines of Salvation, History of the Church, Doctrine and Covenants, and so forth. Others are from the Book of Mormon itself, e.g., books such as 1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, and Alma.)
Now: THE TRINITY DOCTRINE - My research on the Trinity as I understand it.
Scriptures in this research that are quoted herein, sometimes more than once:
Genesis 1:2, 26, 4:7,
Numbers 11:17,
Judges 14:6,
Psalm 8:5, 83:18, 139:7-12 143:10,
2 Samuel 23:2,
Proverbs 8:12, 22, 25-26, 30,
Isaiah 30: 27-28, 42:8, 59:18-19,
Daniel 4:34-35,
Habakkuk 1:12
Joel 2:28-29,
Micah 3:8,
Matthew 3:11, 16, 17, 4:1, 8, 9, 10, 10:19-20, 15:1-9, 20:23, 21:23-32, 43, 23:13-36, 28:19-20
Mark 1:8, 12, 8:38, 10:18, 12:32, 15:34,
Luke 1:67, 4:18, 5:17, 7, 35, 22:29, 42, 23:46,
John 1:14, 18, 3:13, 16, 18, 5:18, 19, 30, 6:38, 62, 7:16, 45-49, 8:17-18, 10:30, 31-36,
14:10, 16, 17, 24, 26, 28, 17:21-22, 20:17, 31,
16:3, 7, 8, 17:3, 20:17,
Acts 1:16, 2:1-4, 24, 31-32, 4:13, 23-25, 27, 30, 5:31, 6:3, 7:55-60, 11:24, 13:52 17:2-3, 10-11, 18:25, 28:25,
Romans 5:14, 21, 12:11,
1 Corinthians 1:10, 3:6-8, 8:5-6, 11:3, 12:4-6, 14:33, 15:24, 28,
2 Corinthians 1:3. 4:4, 7, 6:6, 13:13-14,
Philippians 2:6, 9
Colossians 1:15, 16
Galatians 1:1,
1 Thessalonians 5:19,
2 Thessalonians 2:3-7
1 Timothy 2:5-6, 5:21,
2 Timothy 3:16
Hebrews 2:2, 9, 3:1, 5:5, 8, 9:24,
James 1:13,
1 Peter 3:18
2 Peter 1:20-21,
1 John 4:9, 5:6-8
Revelation 1:1, 5-6, 3:2, 12, 14, 4:8 thru 5:7, 14:1,
For a total of ____ 200+ ____ scriptures and excerpts from _____ 31 ____ Bible books
DISCUSSION
Do you believe in the Trinity? Many people in Christendom (all religions professing to be Christian whether considered to be true or false by their doctrinal beliefs) do. After all, it has become the central doctrine of many churches of Christendom for centuries.
In view of this, you would think that there could be no question about it. But there is, and lately even some of its supporters have added fuel to the controversy.
Why should a subject like this be of any more than a passing interest? Because Jesus himself said at John 17:3, “Eternal life is this: to know you, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” So our entire future hinges on our knowing the true nature of God, and that means getting to the root of the Trinity controversy.
Various Trinitarian concepts exist. But generally, the Trinity teaching is that in the Godhead, there are three persons. The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost; yet, together they are not "three", but "one" God. The doctrine says that the tree are co-equal, almighty and uncreated, having existed eternally in the Godhead.
Others, however say that the Trinity doctrine is false, that the Almighty God stands alone as a separate, eternal and all-powerful being. They say that Jesus in his pre-human existence was, like the angels, a separate spirit person created by God, and for this reason he must have had a beginning. They teach that Jesus has never been Almighty God’s equal in any sense, that he has always been subject to God and still is. They also believe that the Holy Ghost is not a ghost, not a person but is God’s spirit. His active force.
Supporters of the Trinity say that it is founded not only on religious tradition but also on the Bible. Critics of the Trinity doctrine say that it is not a Bible teaching. One history source even declares: “The origin in the Trinity doctrine is entirely pagan,” taken from the publication, “Paganism in our Christianity.”
If the Trinity is true, it is degrading to Jesus to say that he was never equal to God as part of a Godhead. But if the Trinity is false, it is degrading to Almighty God to call anyone his equal, and even worse to call Mary the “Mother of God.” If the Trinity is false, it dishonors God to say, as noted in the book Catholicism: “unless people keep this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt, they shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this: We worship one God in Trinity.”
It would seem that there are good reasons then, why we should all want to know the truth about the Trinity. So what I chose to do was to look at the various types of Trinity doctrines side by side.
One concept is from the Roman Catholic Church which states: “The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion, thus, in the words of Athanasian Creed: ‘the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God and yet there are not three Gods but one God.’ In this Trinity, the persons are co-eternal and co-equal, all alike are created and omnipotent.” Taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia.
Nearly all other churches in Christendom agree. For example, the Greek Orthodox Church also calls the Trinity, “the fundamental doctrine of Christianity,” even saying: “Christians are those who accept Christ as God.” In the book “Our Orthodox Christian Faith,” the same church declares: “God is triune, The Father is totally God. The Son is Totally God. The Holy Spirit is totally God.”
Thus the Trinity is considered to be one God in three persons. Each is said to be without beginning, having existed for eternity. Each is said to be almighty, with each neither greater nor lesser than the others.
Is such reasoning hard to follow? Many sincere believers have found this line of reasoning confusing, so contrary to normal reason, they ask, how could the Father be God, Jesus be God, and the Holy Spirit be God, yet there be not three Gods but only one God?
“Beyond the Grasp of Human Reason”
This confusion is widespread. The encyclopedia Americana notes that the doctrine of the Trinity is considered to be “beyond the grasp of human reason.” Many who accept the Trinity view it that same way. Monsignor Eugene Clark says: “God is one and God is three. Since there is nothing like this in creation, we cannot understand it, but can only accept it.” Cardinal John O’Connor states: “We know that it is a very profound mystery, which we don’t begin to understand.” And Pope John Paul II speaks of “the inscrutable mystery of God the Trinity.”
A dictionary of Religious Knowledge says, “Precisely what the doctrine is, or rather precisely how it is to be explained, Trinitarians are not agreed among themselves.” We can understand then, why the New Catholic Encyclopedia observes: “There are a few teachers of Trinitarian theology in Roman Catholic seminaries who have been badgered at one time or another by the question, ‘But how does one preach the Trinity?” And if the question is symptomatic of confusion on the part of the students, perhaps it is no less symptomatic of similar confusion on the part of their professors.”
The truth of that observation can be verified by going to a library and examining books that support the Trinity. Countless pages have been written attempting to explain it. Yet, after struggling through the labyrinth of confusing theological terms and explanations, investigators still come away unsatisfied.
In this regard, Jesuit Joseph Bracken observes in his book, What are they saying about the trinity? Priests who with considerable effort learned . . . the Trinity during their seminary years naturally hesitated to present it to their people from the pulpit, even on Trinity Sunday . . . Why should one bore people with something that in the end they wouldn’t properly understand anyways? He also says: “The Trinity is a matter of formal belief, but it has little or no effect in day-to-day Christian life and worship.” Yes, the Trinity Doctrine is the central doctrine of these churches and nobody can logically explain it.
Not a God of Confusion
How could such a confusing doctrine originate? The Catholic Encyclopedia claims again: “A dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation.” And in their Theological Dictionary it states: “The Trinity is a mystery . . . in the strict sense . . . which could not be known without revelation, and even after revelation cannot become wholly
intelligible.” However, it seems that contending that the Trinity is such a confusing mystery, that it must have come from divine revelation creates another major problem. This is because divine revelation itself does not allow for such a view of God: “God is not a God of confusion.” 1 Corinthians 14:33.
In view of that statement, would God be responsible for a doctrine about himself that is so confusing that even the Hebrew Greek and Latin scholars as well as Priests of Christendom’s highest order, including The Clergy of all Trinitarian denominations cannot even explain it using scriptural support? Furthermore, do people have to be theologians to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent? John 17:3
If that were the case, why did so few of the educated Jewish religious leaders recognize Jesus as the Messiah? His faithful disciples were, instead, humble farmers, fishermen, tax collectors, even housewives. Those common people were so certain of what Jesus taught about God that they could teach it to others and were even willing to die for their belief. Matthew 15:1-9, 21:23-32, 43 23:13-36; John 7:45-49; Acts 4:13
IS THE TRINITY CLEARLY A BIBLE TEACHING?
If the Trinity were true, it should be clearly and consistently presented in the Bible. Why? Because, as the apostles affirmed, the Bible is God’s revelation of himself to mankind. And since we need to know God to worship him acceptably, the Bible should be clear in telling us just who he is.
First Century believers accepted the Scriptures as the authentic revelation of God. It was the basis for their beliefs, the final authority. For example, when the apostle Paul preached to the people in the city of Beroea, “they received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so.” Acts 17:10-11. Then in Acts 17:2-3 It states, “. . .he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references from the Scriptures.” Since the Bible can ‘set things straight,’ it should clearly reveal information about a matter as fundamental as the Trinity is claimed to be.
A Protestant publication states, “The word Trinity is not found in the Bible . . it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century C.E.” (The Illustrated Bible Dictionary). A Catholic authority says that “the Trinity is not directly and immediately in the word of God.” (The New Catholic Encyclopedia). Another interesting finding is that there is no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together.
The Encyclopedia of Religion Admits: Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity.” The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits, “The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament.” In his book, The Triune God, Jesuit Edmund Fortman also admits: “The Old Testament implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit . . . There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a Trinity within the Godhead . . . Even to see in the Old Testament suggestions or fore-shadowings or ‘veiled signs’ of the trinity of persons, is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers.” An examination of the Hebrew Scriptures themselves will bear out these comments. Thus, there is no evidence of any teaching of a Trinity in the first 39 books of the Bible that make up the true canon of the inspired Hebrew Scriptures.
Testimony of the Greek Scriptures
The same Jesuit Fortman states: “The New Testament writers . . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity. No explicit teaching that in one God there ar4e three co-equal divine persons . . . nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead.”
Interestingly, The New Encyclopedia Britannica agrees: “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament.” Again in The New International Dictionary of the New Testament Theology states, “The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence.”
Despite this obvious evidence, in that Neither the 39 books of the Hebrew Scriptures nor the canon of the 27 inspired books of the Christian Greek Scriptures provide any clear teaching of the Trinity. However, there are many that persistently maintain that the Trinity is scripturally based. So I chose to look back at how the Trinity actually developed and bring that information to the current times.
Q: How did the Trinity doctrine develop?
Many think it was formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. Although this may not be totally correct. I found that the Council of Nicaea did assert that Christ was the same substance as God, which apparently laid the groundwork for later Trinitarian theology. But it did not establish the Trinity, for at that council, there was no mention of the Holy Spirit as the third person of the triune Godhead. After Nicaea, debates on the subject continued for decades. Those who believed that Jesus was not equal to God even came back into favor for a time. But later Emperor Theodosius decided against them. He established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. to clarify the formula. By this, for the first time, Christendom’s Trinity began to come into focus.
I found interesting data in publications that stated that many centuries before the time of Christ, there were triads or trinities of gods in ancient Babylonia and Assyria. The French Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology notes one such triad in that Mesopotamian area: “The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods.
Throughout the ancient world, as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common. That influence was also prevalent in Egypt, Greece and Rome in the centuries before, during and after Christ. The trinity was a major preoccupation of the Egyptian theologians. And it seemed that there is a direct link between the spiritual force of Egyptian religion with this type of Christian theology.
In the book, “A Statement of Reasons,” Andrew Norton says of the Trinity, “We can trace the history of this doctrine, and discover its source, not in the Christian revelation, but in the Platonic philosophy . . . The Trinity is not a doctrine of Christ and of his Apostles, but a fiction of the school of the later Platonists.”
In the fourth century C.E. the apostasy foretold by Jesus and the apostles came into full bloom. Development of the Trinity was just one evidence of this. The apostate churches also began embracing other pagan ideas, such as hellfire, immortality of the soul and idolatry. Spiritually speaking, this form of Christendom had entered its foretold dark ages, dominated by a growing “man of lawlessness” clergy class. Support for this is found at 2 Thessalonians 2:3-7.
A few questions on this subject now come to mind. Why for thousands of years, did none of Gods prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the central doctrine of Faith?
The aforementioned information is data that I have gathered from various sources which I have documented. They may be accepted or debated but the information does exist as it has been stated. But now, I will document from the Bible scriptures that show clearly and beyond debate just whether or not the Trinity is a bible based doctrine or not.
FROM THE BIBLE
Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. I have used for this research, a Bible written in our everyday English for an easier understanding. I also compared the information herein offered from the King James Version. The main difference, aside from the easier understood language is that this Bible uses and identifies the name of God as Jehovah. The King James Version states in its preface, that it has removed the Title of God, Jehovah and replaced it with God or Lord as has always been the history of this version. One scripture to compare is Isaiah 42:8, “I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory.” Psalms 83:18 states, “You, whose name is Jehovah, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.” Nowhere in the Bible is anyone else called the ‘Almighty.” Neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit is ever called that, for God as he alone is referred to in the Bible as Jehovah is supreme. For the sake of this discussion, when I refer to God, I will use the name Jehovah since the Bible makes it abundantly clear, using 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 states, “ . . . Just as there are many gods and many lords, there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are and we for him and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him.” At John 17:3, Jesus called God, “the only true God.” Was he referring to himself? Try and read the scripture for yourself, and then make your own determination. Or consider 1Peter 3:18 which says, “Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit.” Did Jesus mean that when he said that “he might lead you to God” he was going to lead you to himself?
Discussing the existence as well as the heavenly pre-existence of Jesus, we find that while Jesus was a perfect human on earth, that this is not how he began. He himself declared that “he had descended from heaven.” (John 3:13) He also said to his followers: “What if you should see the son of man Jesus ascent to where he was before?” (John 6:62) Does this qualify him to be part of a Triune Godhead? No for the Bible plainly states that in his pre-human existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their individual creations. Jesus, in his pre-human existence, was “the firstborn of all creation.” Support for this is found in Colossians 1:15. He was the beginning God’s creation, found in Revelation 3:14. Yes, the Arch-Angel later known as Jesus was the beginning of Gods invisible creation.
Proverbs 8:12, 22,25-26 says, although referring to Wisdom, this scripture has commonly been also referred to as Jesus in his heavenly form when it states, “Yahweh (or Jehovah) created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I came to birth; before he made the earth, the countryside, and the first elements of the world.” As “Wisdom” in his pre-human existence, Jesus goes on to say that he was by Gods side, as a master craftsman (Proverbs 8:30). In harmony with this role as a master craftsman, the Bible says at Colossians 1:16, “through him God created everything in heaven and earth.” At 1 Corinthians 8:6, the Bible states, “For us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things.” (Hebrews 3:1) Consequently, holy brothers, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the apostle and high priest whom we confess—Jesus. If Jesus was high priest, then how could he also be God to whom he was high priest as mediator between the Christians and God?
An interesting conversation took place in heaven as related to us in Genesis 1:26, there it says, “Let us make man in our image.” This simply means that two or more individuals will work together on something. In this conversation, God was simply addressing another individual. After simple even brief research, it can be determined that this conversation was between Jehovah God and his Son, Michael later known as Jesus. Yes, he was speaking to his master craftsman or the pre-human Arch-angel, Jesus. Hebrews 5:5 says, “you are my son, I today, I have become your father.”
COULD GOD BE TEMPTED?
At Matthew 4:1, Jesus is spoken of as being tempted by the Devil. After showing Jesus all the kingdoms of the world and their glory, Satan then said, “all these things I will give you if you fall down and do an act of worship to me.” (Matthew 4:8-9). Satan was trying to cause Jesus to be disloyal to God. How could this take place if Jesus was in fact God? Is Satan so bold so as to try and convince God to bow down to him? Could God rebel against himself? All creations including angels and humans could rebel against God and some did. The temptation of Jesus would make sense only if he was, not God, but a separate individual who had his own free will, one who could have been disloyal had he chosen to be, such as an angel or a human. James 1:13 supports this, “When under trial, let no one say: ‘I am being tried by God,’ for with evil things God cannot be tried nor does He himself try anyone.” Not being God, Jesus could have been disloyal, but he remained faithful saying: “Go away Satan! For it is written, ‘it is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’” Matthew 4:10. He didn’t say, you must worship me and me alone you should worship, did he? The Bible further states at 1 Timothy 2:5-6, “There is one God and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all.” Interesting that when he came to earth as this ransom, the Bible refers to him in Hebrews 2:9 as, “lower than the angels.” How could any part of an almighty Godhead – Father, Son or Holy Spirit ever as being lower than the angels?
The Bible calls Jesus the “only begotten Son of God. (John 1:14, 3:16, 18 and at 1 John 4:9) Trinitarians, by all counts I have researched, say that since God is eternal so the Son of God is eternal. But how can a person be a son and at the same time be as old as his Father? Jesus here known as the only-begotten Son, had a beginning to his life. In this context, the Almighty God can rightly be called his Father, that God is the senior and Jesus is the Junior, in time, position, power and knowledge. Since there eventually were other spirit creatures created in the heavens, it is proper to refer to Jesus as the only begotten Son of God since it has become evident that it was through Jesus that all o9ther spirit beings came into existence. Similarly, he has never been referred to in the Bible as “God the Son.” When Jesus died, the Roman soldiers standing by knew enough to say that what they had heard from his followers must be right, not that Jesus was God whom they had just killed but stated, “this certainly was God’s Son.” John 1:18 says, “No one has ever seen God.” God created the pre-human Jesus Directly. Thus, Jesus had a beginning and could never be co-equal with God in power or time as eternity since he had a beginning.
Jesus never claimed to be God. Everything he said about himself indicates that he did not consider himself equal to God in any way – not in power, not in knowledge and not in age. In every period of his existence, whether in heaven or on earth, his speech and conduct reflected subordination to God. God is always the superior, and Jesus will always be the lesser one who was created by Jehovah God, his father.
Time and again, Jesus showed that he was a creature separate from God and that he, Jesus, had a God above him. It was a God whom he worshiped, a God whom he called Father. In prayer to God, he said, “You, the only true God.” (John 17:3) At John 20:17, he said to Mary Magdalene: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” At 2 Corinthians 1:3, the apostle Paul confirms this relationship: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Since Jesus had a God, his Father, he could not at the same time be that God and Father. Paul said, “For us there is but one God, the Father . . . and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ . . . ” 1 Corinthians 8:6. Why do you think that Paul would separate the two during this statement? The apostle Paul further shows the distinction when he mentions “the presence of God and of Christ and of the elect angels,” at 1 Timothy 5:21. Jesus’ words as we read at John 8:17-18 are also significant. He states: “In your own Law it is written, ‘The witness of two men is true.’ I am one that bears witness about myself and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.” Here Jesus shows that he and the Father, that is Almighty God, must be two distinct entities, for how else could there truly be two witnesses in this statement?
Compare too the scripture at Mark 10:18 where it states, “why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.” So Jesus was saying that no one is as good as God is, not even he himself. God is good in a way that separates Him from Jesus. Time and again, Jesus made statements such as: “The Son cannot do anything of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing.” John 5:19 I have come down from heaven to do, not my will, but the will of Him that sent me.” John 6:38. What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me.” John 7:16.
The followers of Jesus always viewed him as a submissive servant of God, not as God’s equal. They prayed to God about “thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, . . . and signs and wonders are performed through the name of thy holy servant Jesus.” Acts 4:23, 27 and also vs. 30.
When Jesus was baptized, Gods voice from heaven said: “This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved.” Matthew 3:16-17. Was God saying that he was his own son? That he approved of himself? That he sent himself to earth? No, God the Creator was saying that he, as the superior personage was approving of his Son’s actions being the lesser one, for the work that laid ahead.
Jesus indicated his Fathers superiority when he said: “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor.” Luke 4:18. Anointing is the giving of authority or a commission by a superior to someone who does not already have authority. Here God is plainly the superior, for he anointed Jesus, giving him authority that he did not previously have. He further made his inferiority to Jehovah clear when the mother of two disciples asked that her sons sit one at the right and one at the left of Jesus when he came into his Kingdom. Jesus answered: “As for seats at my right hand and my left, these are not mine to grant; they belong to those to whom they have been allotted by my Father,” Matthew 20:23. Had Jesus been Almighty God, those positions would have been his to give. But Jesus could not give them, because Jesus was not God.
Jesus’ own prayers are a powerful example of his inferior position to his father Jehovah. When on the torture stake about to die, his prayer said in part, “ . . . let not my will but yours take place.” Luke 22:42. Then in Mark 15:34 Jesus cried out, “My God, My God, why have you deserted me?” To whom was Jesus crying out? To himself? or part of himself? Surely that cry, “My God,” was not from someone who considered himself to be God. And if Jesus were God, then by whom was he being deserted? Himself? That would not make any sense. Jesus also said: “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.” Luke 23:46. If Jesus were God, for what reason should he entrust his spirit to the Father?
After Jesus died, he was in the tomb for part of three days. If he were God, then Habakkuk 1:12 is wrong when it says: “O my God, my Holy One, you do not die.” But the Bible says that Jesus did die and was unconscious or dead in the tomb. And who resurrected Jesus from the dead? If he was truly dead, he could not have resurrected himself. On the other hand, if he was not really dead, his pretended death would not have paid the ransom price for Adams sin. But he did pay that price in full by his genuine death. So it was “God who resurrected Jesus by loosing the pangs of death.” Acts 2:24.
Does Jesus’ ability to perform miracles such as resurrecting people indicate that he was God? Well, the apostles and the prophets Elijah and Elisha had that power too, but that did not make them more than men. God gave the power to perform miracles to the prophets, Jesus and the apostles to show that He was backing them. But id did not make any of them part of a plural Godhead.
Jesus had limited knowledge
When Jesus gave his prophecy about the end of this system of things, he stated: “But of that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” Mark 12:32. Had Jesus been the equal Son part of a Godhead, he would have known what the Father knows, or if he was God, he would not be able to make that statement without lying. Similarly we read at Hebrews 5:8 that Jesus “learned obedience from the things he suffered.” Can we imagine that God had to learn anything? No, but Jesus did, for he did not know everything that God knew. And he had to learn something that God never needs to learn – obedience. God never has to obey anyone.
The difference between what God knows and what Christ knows also existed when Jesus was resurrected to heaven to be with God. Note the first words of the last book of the Bible: The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him.” If Jesus himself were part of an equal Godhead, would he have to be given a revelation by another part of the Godhead? Surely he would have known all about it, for God knew. But Jesus did not know, for he was clearly not God.
Jesus continues subordinate
In his pre-human existence, and also when he was on earth, Jesus was subordinate to God. After his resurrection, he continues to be in a subordinate, secondary position.
Acts 5:31 says that “God exalted this one (Jesus) to his right hand.” Paul said at Philippians 2:9 that: “God exalted him to a superior position.” If Jesus had been God, how could he have been exalted, that is, raised to higher position than he already had? If that were the case, he would have already been in the most high exalted position by being a co-equal part of a Triune God. So, if before this exaltation, Jesus had been equal to God, exalting him any further would have made him superior to the balance of the Godhead, God the Father and the Holy Spirit. There just isn’t any logic to this line of reason.
Paul also said at Hebrews 9:24 that Christ entered “heaven itself, so that he could appear in the actual presence of God on our behalf.” If you appear in someone else’s presence, how can you be that person? You cannot. You must be different and separate. Similarly just before being stoned to death, the martyr Stephen “gazed into heaven and caught sight of God’s glory and of Jesus standing at God’s right hand.” Acts 7:55. Clearly he saw two separate individuals, but no holy spirit, no triune Godhead. Did he just miss something? Was it a typographical error? Perhaps a slip in the inspiration of the accounting in this scene? In the account at Revelation 4:8 to 5:7, God is shown seated on his heavenly throne, but Jesus is not. He has to approach God to take a scroll from Gods right hand. This shows that in heaven Jesus is not God but is separate from him.
Consider 1 Corinthians 15:24, 28. After that will come the end, when he (Jesus in heaven) will hand over the kingdom to God the Father . . . Then the Son himself will be subjected to the One who has subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.
Jesus Never Claimed to be God
The Bibles position is clear. Not only is Almighty God Jehovah a personality separate from Jesus, but He is at all times his superior. Jesus is always presented as a separate lesser and humble servant of God. That is why the Bible plainly says that, “The head of the Christ is God” 1 Corinthians 11:3. And this is why Jesus himself said: “The Father is greater than I.” John 14:28. The fact is that Jesus is not God and never claimed to be.
Quoting from the Rylands Bulletin, a bulletin recognized by an increasing number of Bible scholars stated, “The fact has to be faced that the New Testament research over, say the last thirty or forty years has been leading an increasing number of reputable New Testament scholars to the conclusion that Jesus certainly never believed himself to be God.” Also it stated, “When therefore they assigned Jesus such honorific titles as Christ, Son of Man, Son of God and Lord, these were way of saying not that he was God, but that he did God’s work.” Concluding that the idea of Jesus’ being God opposes the entire testimony of the Bible. Jesus was always the obedient subordinate servant.
Holy Spirit
According to the Trinity doctrine, the Holy Spirit is the third part of this triune Godhead. I found in a publication, “Our Orthodox Christian Faith,” stated that “The Holy Spirit is totally God.”
In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Hebrew word most frequently used for the word “Spirit” is ru’ach meaning breath; wind; or spirit. In the Greed Scriptures, the Greek word is pneu’ma, having a similar meaning. Do these words indicate that the Holy Spirit is part of a Trinity?
The Bibles use of Holy Spirit indicates that it is a controlled force that Jehovah God uses to accomplish a variety of this purposes. To a certain extent, it can be likened to electricity, a force that can be adapted to perform a great variety of operations.
At Genesis 1:2, the Bible states that “God’s active force (spirit – in Hebrew – Ru’ach) was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters.” In the King James version it states, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Here, God’s spirit was his active force working to shape the earth.
God uses his spirit to enlighten those who serve him. Also, David prayed at Psalms 143:10, “Teach me to do your will, for you are my God. Your spirit (ru’ach) is good; may it lead me in the land of uprightness.” When 70 capable men were appointed to help Moses, God said to him at Numbers 11:17, “. . . and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee and I will put it upon them . . .” In a Bible written in our modern English, it says, “I shall have to take away some of the spirit (ru’ach) that is upon you and place it upon them.”
Bible prophecy was recorded when men of God were “borne along by Holy Spirit (Greek – pneu’ma)” 2 Peter 1:20-21. In this way, the Bible was inspirit of God. (The Greek word for this expression taken from 2 Timothy 3:16 was Theo’pneustos) or actually translated God Breathed. The Holy Spirit guided Certain people to see visions or to have prophetic dreams: 2 Samuel 23:2, Joel 2:28-29, Juke 1:67, Acts 1:16, 2:32-33 just to mention a few.
Mark 1:12 implies that the Holy Spirit impelled Jesus to go into the wilderness after his baptism. This same Spirit was like a fire within Gods servants, causing them to be energized by that force. Ane it enabled them to speak out boldly and courageously. Micah 3:8, Acts 7:55-60, 18:25, Romans 12:11, 1 Thessalonians 5:19.
By his Spirit, God carries out his judgments on men and nations. Isaiah 30:27-28, 59:18-19. And God’s Spirit can reach everywhere, acting for people or against them. Psalm 139:7-12
Gods Spirit can also supply “Power beyond what is normal” to those who serve him. 2 Corinthians 4:7. This enables them to endure trials of faith or to do things they could not otherwise do. Regarding Samson, Judges 14:6 relates: “The Spirit of God seized on him and though he had no weapon in his hand, he tore the lion in pieces.” Did a divine person actually enter or seize Samson? Manipulating his body to do what he did? No, that would simulate demonism which God clearly condemned as he did in Noah’s day. It must be then that it was really the “power of the Lord that made Samson strong.”
The Bible says that when Jesus was baptized, Holy Spirit came down upon him appearing like a dove, not like a human form. (Mark 1:10) This active force of God enabled Jesus to heal the sick and raise the dead. As Luke 5:17 says, “The Power of the Lord was behind Jesus’ works of healing.” God’s spirit also empowered the disciples of Jesus to do miraculous things. Acts 2:1-4 relates that the disciples were assembled together at Pentecost when “suddenly there occurred from heaven a noise just like that of a rushing still breeze, . . . and they all became filled with Holy Spirit and started to speak with different tongues, just as the Spirit was granting them to make utterance.” So the Holy Spirit gave Jesus and other servants of God the power to do what humans ordinarily could not do. A catholic theologian Edmund Fortman (quoted earlier in this discussion) says in an article entitled The Triune God: “Although this Spirit is often described in personal terms, it seems quite clear than the sacred writers of the Hebrew Scriptures never conceived or presented this Spirit as a distinct person.” In the Scriptures, it is not unusual for something to be personified. Wisdom is said to have children (Luke 7:35). Sin and death are called kings (Romans 5:14,21). At Genesis 4:7, it states “Sin is a demon crouching at the door,” personifying sin as a wicked spirit crouching at Cain’s door. But of course, sin is not a spirit person; nor does personifying the Holy Spirit make it a spirit person.
Similarly, at 1 John 5:6-8 not only the spirit but also “the water, and the blood” are said to be witnesses.” Obviously the water and blood are not persons, neither is the holy spirit a person. In harmony with this, is the Bibles general usage of Holy Spirit in an impersonal way, such as paralleling it with water and fire. (Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:8) People are spoken of as being filled with Holy Spirit in the same way they are filled with such qualities as wisdom, faith and joy as shown in Acts 6:3, 11:24 and 13:52. At 2 Corinthians 6:6 Holy Spirit is included among a number of qualities. Such expressions would not be so common if the Holy Spirit were actually a person.
Then too, while some Bible texts say that the Spirit speaks, other texts show that this was actually done through humans or angels (Matthew 10:19-20, Acts 4:24-25, 28:25, Hebrews 2:2) The action of the Spirit in such instances is like that of radio waves transmitting messages from one person (or a radio / TV / Computer etc.) to another far away.
At Matthew 28:19, reference is made to “the name . . . of the Holy Spirit.” But the word “name” does not always mean a personal name, either in Greek or in English. When we say “in the name of law,” we are not referring to a person. We mean that which the law stands for, its authority. So baptism, “In the name of the Holy Spirit” recognizes the authority of the spirit, that is from God and functions by divine will.
Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit as a “helper,” and he said it would teach, guide and speak (John 14:16, 26, 16:13) The Greek word he used for helper (parakletos) is in the masculine gender. So when Jesus referred to what the helper would do, he used masculine personal pronouns (John 16:7-8). On the other hand, when the neuter Greek word for Spirit (pneuma) is used, the neuter pronoun “it” is properly employed.
Most Trinitarian translators hide this fact as the Catholic New American Bible admits regarding John 14:17, “The Greek word for ‘spirit’ is neuter, and while we use personal pronouns in English (he, his, and him), most Greek manuscripts employ it.” So when the Bible uses masculine personal pronouns in connection with “parakletos” in the Bible at John 16:7-8, it is conforming to rules of grammar, not expressing a doctrine. Also in a Catholic Dictionary, I found where it is stated, “On the whole, the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power.”
In conclusion, I find here by using all the available sources I could find that The Holy Spirit is not a person but is in fact God’s active force that he uses to accomplish his will. It is not equal to God, it is not God, but is always at His disposition and is subordinate to him. Simply put, the Spirit is Gods power. If you question why I so often used a catholic source to aid in clarifying the status of the Holy Spirit, it is because, there is ample information available in their research data, some of it is in agreement with a reasonable conclusion and the parts I quoted herein are in agreement with logic and common sense as I have discovered it. I don’t feel that I used biased sources either. I feel my research on these points so far listed, I have been fair to all resources herein observed. I stepped out of my own belief to view from the doctrines of others and have come to the above mentioned conclusions. And yet with all the Catholic literature used in this research which plainly point to the fact that the Holy Spirit is a power and not a person, the Catholics still are being taught that the Holy Spirit is 1/3 of a god triune being.
Some have made the statement that some Bible texts offer proof in support of the Trinity. However, when reading such texts, we should keep in mind that the Biblical and historical evidence does not support the Trinity. Any Bible reference offered as proof must be understood in the context of the consistent teaching of the entire Bible. Very often the true meaning of such a text is clarified by the context of surrounding verses. And this is true of all such scriptures on a variety of subjects.
The only scriptures I found in the Bible were all three, the Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit are mentioned in one setting was found at Matthew 28:19-20, which says: “Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations; baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” also compare a second scripture, 2 Corinthians 13:13-14 where it says: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” It might be stretched to include also 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 which you could read on your own.
Just because three entities, persons or subjects are considered in one paragraph, sentence or stream of thought does not make all three the same, co-equal or even one to say the least. Nor more than discussing Lani, Kawika and Keone or Peter, James and John in the same conversation. This type of reference admits McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, “Proves only that there are three subjects named . . . but it does not prove, by itself, that all the three belong necessarily to the divine nature and possess equal divine honor.”
Although a supporter of the Trinity, that source says of 2 Corinthians 13:13-14: “We could not justly infer that they possessed equal authority, or the same nature.” And of Matthew 28:19-20, it says: “This text, however, taken by itself, would not prove decisively either the personality of the three subjects mentioned or their equality or divinity.”
Other proof texts deal only with the relationship between two – The Father and Jesus. Consider the text located at John 10:30 which is often cited to support the Trinity doctrine, even though no third person is mentioned there. But Jesus himself showed what he meant by his being “one” with the Father. At John 17:21-22, he prayed to God that his disciples “may all be one, just as you, Father are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us . . . that they may be one just as we are one.” Was Jesus praying that all his disciples would become a single entity? No, obviously Jesus was praying that they would be united in thought and purpose, as he and God were. See also 1 Corinthians 1:10. Another example is 1 Corinthians 3:6-8 where Paul says, “I planted, Apollos watered . . . He that plants and he that waters are one.” Paul did not mean that he and Apollos were two persons in one; he meant that they were unified in purpose. The Greek word that Paul used here for “one” (hen) is neuter, literally “one thing,” indicating oneness in cooperation. It is the same word that Jesus used at John 10:30 to describe his relationship with his Father. It is also the same word that Jesus used at John 17:21-22. So when he used the word “one” (hen), in these cases, he was talking about unity of thought and purpose.
Right in context of the verses after John 10:30, Jesus forcefully argued that his words were not a claim to be God. He asked the Jews who wrongly drew that conclusion and wanted to stone him: “Why do you charge me with blasphemy because I, consecrated and sent into the world by the Father, said, ‘I am God’s son’”? John 10:31-36. No, Jesus claimed that he was not God the Son but the Son of God.
Some have used John 5:18 as a support for their belief in the Trinity. There is says in part, “ . . . he was also calling God in own Father, making himself equal to God.” But who said that Jesus was making himself equal to God? Not Jesus. He defended himself against this false charge in the very next verse: “To this accusation Jesus replied: . . . ‘The Son can do nothing by himself, he can only do what he sees the Father doing.’” By this, Jesus showed the Jews that he was not equal to God and therefore could not act on his own initiative. Is it possible that someone equal to Almighty God saying that he could do nothing by himself? Compare too, Daniel 4:34-35. The context of both John 5:18 and 10:30 shows that Jesus defended himself against false charges from Jews who, like the Trinitarians of today, were drawing wrong conclusions.
Philippians 2:6 in the Catholic Douay Version says of Jesus: “Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Other translations read this way:
1. Who being in the form of God, did not regard it as a thing to be grasped at to be on an equality with God. The New Testament, by G.R. Noyes
2. He truly of divine nature! Never self-confidently made himself equal to God. Das Neue Testament, revised edition by Fried-rich Pfafflin.
3. Who although being in the form of God, did not consider being equal to God a thing to greedily make his own. La Bibbia Concordata.
4. He always had the nature of God, but he did not think that by force he should try to become equal with God. In Today’s English Version.
5. Who, although he was existing in Gods form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.
6. Who being in the form of God, did not count equality with God something to be grasped. The New Jerusalem Bible.
In confirming this understanding, Philippians 2:6 when read objectively, shows just the opposite, that Jesus did not think it was appropriate. The context of the surrounding verses 3-5 and 7-8 makes it clear how verse 6 is to be understood. Yes, Jesus humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death. Something that Almighty God would or could never do.
At John 1:1, the King James Version reads: “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Trinitarians claim that this means that the Word (in Greek, hologos) who came to earth as Jesus Christ was Almighty God himself. Note, however that here again the context lays the groundwork for accurate understanding. Even the King James Version says, “The word was with God.” Someone who is “with” another person cannot be the same as that other person. Again, consider other translations and how their scholars use the same verse.
1. and the word was a god. The new Testament in an Improved Version Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: with a Corrected Text.
2. and a god was the word. The Emphatic Diaglott.
3. and the Word was a divine being. La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel
4. and the Word was divine, The Bible an American Translation by J.M.P. Smith
5. and of a divine kind was the word. DasNeue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme
6. and the Word was a god. New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.
7. and the Word was a God. The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek
8. and a god (or of a divine kind) was the Word. Dan Evangelium nach Johannes by Sigfried Schultz. And finally . . .
9. and godlike kind was the Logos. Das Evangelism nacho Jonah’s by Jonah’s Schneider.
I found at John 1:1, there are two occurrences of the Greek noun theos or god. The first occurrence refers to Almighty God, with whom the Word was and the Word or logos was with God a form of theos. The first theos is preceded by the word “ton” (the), a form of the Greek definite article that points to an instinct identity, in this case the Almighty God (and the Word was with God). On the other hand, there is no article before the second theos at John 1:1. So a literal translation would read, “and god was with the Word.” Yet we have seen that many translations render this second theos (a predicate noun) as divine, godlike or a god. On what authority do they do this? The Koine Greek language had a definite article (the), but it did not have an indefinite article (a or an). So when a predicate noun by the definite article, it may be indefinite, depending on the context. It is strictly a grammatical ruling that we need to consider. If the truth of an issue is to be clarified, all the issues need to be examined and observed. This is just one more of them. So there is no argument that John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word that he was divine, godlike, a god but not the Almighty God. This scripture confirms and harmonizes with the rest of the Bible which shows that Jesus was called “the Word” in his role as God’s spokesman and was obedient subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.
Then a question may also be considered. Does saying that Jesus Christ is “a god” conflict with the Bibles teaching that there is only one God? No, for at times the Bible employs that term to refer to mighty creatures. Psalm 8:5 reads: You also proceeded to make him (man) a little less than godlike ones, that is angels. In Jesus’ defense against the charge of the Jews, that he claimed to be God, he noted that “the Law uses the word gods of those to whom the word of God was addressed,” that is human judges. John 10:343-35. Being called a god in biblical sense does not suggest that that god would be referred to as the Almighty God. Even Satan is referred to as a god. He is called at 2 Corinthians 4:4 “the god of this system of things.”
Jesus has a position far higher than angels, imperfect men or Satan. Since these are referred to as gods, mighty ones, surely Jesus can be and is a “god”. Because of his unique position in relation to Jehovah, Jesus is a “mighty god.” Isaiah 9:6. But does not “mighty god” with its capital letter indicate that Jesus is not in some way equal to Jehovah Jog? Not at all. Isaiah merely prophesied this to be one of four names that Jesus would be called, and in the English language such names are capitalized. Still, even though Jesus was called “Mighty” there can be only one who is “Almighty.” To call Jehovah God “Almighty” would have little significance unless there existed others who were also called gods but who occupied a lesser or inferior position. Throughout the entire Bible, Jehovah God was never referred to as a “Mighty God,” but was always referred to as the “Almighty God.”
Again, the context helps us to understand this. A few days earlier the resurrected Jesus had told Mary Magdalene to tell the disciples: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and you god.” John 20:17 Even though Jesus was already resurrected as a mighty spirit, Jehovah was still his God. Revelation 1:5-6, 3:2, and vs. 12 to quote a few scriptures in agreement with this direction of thought.
Just three verses after Thomas’ exclamation at John 20:31, the Bible further clarifies the matter by stating: These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,” not that he was Almighty God. And it meant “Son” in a literal way, as in a natural father and son relationship, not as some mysterious part of a Triune Godhead.
Again, I confirm that not one scripture anywhere in the Bible says or suggests that all three entities herein discussed are the same in substance, power and eternity. The Bible is consistent in revealing Almighty God Jehovah, as alone supreme, Jesus as his created Son and the Holy Spirit as God’s active force.
Jesus Conversation & Prayers
Consider now the conversations Jesus had with his followers, onlookers, even prayers that were quoted during various occasions. None give any indication that Jesus was in fact the true God or was a 1/3 triune part of the true God confirming that he is a total and separate entity, that he is a created being similar in composition and structure to other angels. By his activity and his various assignments clearly show that he was the arch angel, being the highest angel in Jehovah’s creation, His first born.
As I read various articles which reference or uses scriptures from the Bible, I often find statements where Jesus could not be equal to his Father. Mark 8:38 says, “Whoever becomes ashamed of me . . . when he arrives in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” Why would he say in the glory of his Father? If he were equal in glory to his Father, wouldn’t he just say something similar to “when He arrives in all His glory?”
Jesus is quoted as saying at John 5:30, “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not min own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.” (King James Version). How could Jesus make this statement if he was in fact God or even a part of God or if he was in any way equal to God?
John 14:10 states: “Do you not believe that I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me? The things I say to you men, I do not speak of my own originality; but the Father who remains in union with me is doing his works.” Could this statement be made if Jesus was God or even part of a triune Godhead?
Consider too, John 14:24, “He that does not love me does not observe my words; and the word that you are hearing is not mine, but belongs to the Father who sent me.”
At John 14:28 Jesus says, “ . . . the Father is greater than I am.” How could Jesus make any of these statements if he was God?
At Luke 22:29 Luke reports, “and I make a covenant with you just as my Father has made a covenant with me, for a kingdom,” It is not possible for a person to make a covenant with himself nor would it be proper language for anyone to construct a sentence structure such as quoted from vs. 29 suggesting that a contractual arrangement had been created between a Father and a Son and yet only one individual existed. Yet still where is the third entity in this arrangement mentioned? There is no mention anywhere in this surrounding context which suggests or even indirectly suggests that the Holy Spirit was a party to this contractual agreement. Jehovah’s Holy Spirit would be involved only in the enforcing of the contractual arrangement according to the logic of what activity the Holy Spirit is engaged, which has come to be known as Jehovah’s active force.
Surely Paul, an apostle of Christ knew of the relationship between God and Christ. This is why in Galatians 1:1 he opens his letter to the Galatians with the statement, “Paul, an apostle, neither from men nor through a man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him up from the dead.” Obviously Jesus cannot be God because God didn’t die, nor did a 1/3 part of God die, thereby leaving only 2/3’s of a God in existence. Simply put, Jehovah God performed the resurrection of Jesus, the Son from earthly life back to the heavens where he lived before he agreed to offer his life as a ransom sacrifice. Then neither does this scripture point to Jesus as a part of a triune Godhead here since there is no mention of the Holy Spirit.
Revelation 14:1 says: “And I saw, and, look! the Lamb standing upon the Mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty-four thousand having his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads.” How could the 144,000 have his (Jesus’) name AND the name of his father written on their foreheads if both Jesus and his Father are one?
The ample scriptures herein listed should serve any honest hearted reasoning person to conclude that Jehovah is God, Jesus in His (God’s) son and the Holy Spirit is Jehovah’s active force.
As with all my research, it is ongoing and always under construction. So whatever you may be reading, there's a good chance it will change by the time you read it a second time. As I learn more about the Mormon teaching, I will post it and revise what I have written.
No comments:
Post a Comment