Originally posted by Collier

The sentence, “Let's suppose I never gave one even,” is a tacit admission that you can’t.

Nothing of the sort. It's saying that for the sake of argument let's suppose I didn't know of one. What would that prove?

In fact, every time you refuse to give an example, you are tacitly admitting you can’t.

No. I'm waiting for the person who made the claim to back it.

It happens that I have read all of the New Testament looking for such an example, and can’t find one. That was expressed twice – and you - the person who invited questions so you could explain the doctrine - did not help. Unless somebody provides an example, I know there isn’t one. Very simple.

False. Because X is not provided, X doesn't exist? It does not follow. I'm waiting for you to back your claim. You're the one who came here making assertions. I want to see them backed.

Or should I take it as a tacit admission if you don't back them that you can't?

Thank you for the clarification. But why are you asking me what YOU should do?

Because you came here making assertions. I want to see those assertions backed.

heck I will bite Collier.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God.

The Word is the Son. Unless you think the Father is not God, then in John 1:1, "God" is referring to at least a Binity.

Originally posted by Sparko

Then how is it that the NT says that the SON created everything?

John 1:3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Col. 1:16-17 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Thank you for these verses. Look at them again.

THROUGH him all things were made ... The preposition is dia - by means of him.

For BY him all things were created ...

Hebrews 1:2 gives us the same teaching. “God ... has spoken to us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through (dia) whom he made the universe." So Jesus was the one THROUGH WHOM God created all things.

Here is the biblical trinity in action. God is the originator of all things, who carries out his purposes through his Son, by the power of his Spirit.

I do not believe there are three Gods. There is one God, the Father. The Son OF GOD and the Spirit OF GOD are exactly that. They are OF GOD. Therefore they are divine. They are by nature "God".

But the one God is the Father. I have the word of Jesus, Paul and Peter on that, and I believe they are telling the truth.

Originally posted by Phoenix Fawkes

Nothing of the sort. It's saying that for the sake of argument let's suppose I didn't know of one. What would that prove?


No. I'm waiting for the person who made the claim to back it.


False. Because X is not provided, X doesn't exist? It does not follow. I'm waiting for you to back your claim. You're the one who came here making assertions. I want to see them backed.

Or should I take it as a tacit admission if you don't back them that you can't?

Because you came here making assertions. I want to see those assertions backed.

I think most people who know anything about logic will recognize that the assertion has been backed.

Originally posted by Sparko

heck I will bite Collier.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God.

The Word is the Son. Unless you think the Father is not God, then in John 1:1, "God" is referring to at least a Binity.

Try reading a good commentary on this verse. The Word was with THE GOD. This identifies the Person with whom the Word was.

The Word was God (no article). This describes the Word. Everything that God was, he was.

There is no need to confuse the two.

And I am too old to be worth biting.

Originally posted by Collier

I think most people who know anything about logic will recognize that the assertion has been backed.

No. It hasn't. It's been made. If you want to back your assertion that God always refers to one person, then please tell how you know this.

Btw, if I didn't find a verse in the NT where God referred to the Trinity as a whole, I really wouldn't be surprised. I don't think any Trinitarian should be. God was usually used to refer to the Father in the NT and Lord to the Son, although both were titles of deity such as in the Shema.

Since God spoke the world into existence who was He speaking too? Only in the trinity do you have love and communication before creation. Since God is a God of love He loved before creation. a quote from some one else "Their is unity and diversity in the community of the trinity. There may be a high-archil difference but no essential difference" Then He told them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." (Luke 6:5) "The Father and I are one." (John 10:30) "Behold I am Jesus. I am the Father and the Son." (Ether 3:14) "I say unto you , that the Father and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and Father and I are one."(Nephi 11:37)
I just want to state, I don't understand your opposing argument against the trinity. When these verses givin are self explanitory. My conclusion is that you are arguing just to argue and don't care about correction in error.

Originally posted by Collier

Thank you for these verses. Look at them again.

THROUGH him all things were made ... The preposition is dia - by means of him.

For BY him all things were created ...

Hebrews 1:2 gives us the same teaching. “God ... has spoken to us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through (dia) whom he made the universe." So Jesus was the one THROUGH WHOM God created all things.

Here is the biblical trinity in action. God is the originator of all things, who carries out his purposes through his Son, by the power of his Spirit.

I do not believe there are three Gods. There is one God, the Father. The Son OF GOD and the Spirit OF GOD are exactly that. They are OF GOD. Therefore they are divine. They are by nature "God".

But the one God is the Father. I have the word of Jesus, Paul and Peter on that, and I believe they are telling the truth.

two problems, Collier. It says BY and through him all things were made. and Col 1:15 makes it clear that not only were all things created BY the Son, but that they all things hold together by the Son.

and second, in Isaiah YHWH says he didn't have any helpers. He created everything alone, by himself. If Jesus is not YHWH then that makes God a liar.

Isaiah 44:24 "This is what the LORD says-- your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,

Originally posted by Collier

Try reading a good commentary on this verse. The Word was with THE GOD. This identifies the Person with whom the Word was.

The Word was God (no article). This describes the Word. Everything that God was, he was.

There is no need to confuse the two.

And I am too old to be worth biting.

That made no sense whatsoever. want to try again without the shorthand?

If the Word was everything "God" was then the word would be "God" - simple logic. The first article was to distinguish between the two identities in person, so that prevents modalism. The second phrase identifies the two ontologically as the same being.

Originally posted by Phoenix Fawkes

No. It hasn't. It's been made. If you want to back your assertion that God always refers to one person, then please tell how you know this.

Btw, if I didn't find a verse in the NT where God referred to the Trinity as a whole, I really wouldn't be surprised. I don't think any Trinitarian should be. God was usually used to refer to the Father in the NT and Lord to the Son, although both were titles of deity such as in the Shema.

Good. We agree then. You're not surprised, and neither am I.

Originally posted by Collier

Good. We agree then. You're not surprised, and neither am I.

To which I still say I want to see you make the defense of the claim in the OT.

Also, do you know why I wouldn't be surprised if such was the case in the NT?

Originally posted by jbgwatney

Since God spoke the world into existence who was He speaking too? Only in the trinity do you have love and communication before creation. Since God is a God of love He loved before creation. a quote from some one else "Their is unity and diversity in the community of the trinity. There may be a high-archil difference but no essential difference" Then He told them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." (Luke 6:5) "The Father and I are one." (John 10:30) "Behold I am Jesus. I am the Father and the Son." (Ether 3:14) "I say unto you , that the Father and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and Father and I are one."(Nephi 11:37)
I just want to state, I don't understand your opposing argument against the trinity. When these verses givin are self explanitory. My conclusion is that you are arguing just to argue and don't care about correction in error.

Why are you quoting the Book of Mormon? If you are Mormon, then your faith title must reflect that.

Bill. He could just be showing that their own book shows that.

Originally posted by Bill the Cat

Why are you quoting the Book of Mormon? If you are Mormon, then your faith title must reflect that.

Thank you, Bill. I had no idea where the quotes were coming from. I just knew I had never read them in the Bible.

Originally posted by Sparko

That made no sense whatsoever. want to try again without the shorthand?

If the Word was everything "God" was then the word would be "God" - simple logic. The first article was to distinguish between the two identities in person, so that prevents modalism. The second phrase identifies the two ontologically as the same being.

No shorthand was intended. Sorry about my poor communication skills. Try a good commentary.

Originally posted by Sparko

two problems, Collier. It says BY and through him all things were made. and Col 1:15 makes it clear that not only were all things created BY the Son, but that they all things hold together by the Son.

and second, in Isaiah YHWH says he didn't have any helpers. He created everything alone, by himself. If Jesus is not YHWH then that makes God a liar.

Isaiah 44:24 "This is what the LORD says-- your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,

This is well argued. Thank you.

But your options are too limited. I could just as reasonably say that if Jesus is YHWH, then John 17:3 makes Jesus a liar. There has to be another option.

The prophecy of Isaiah is full of contrasts between YHWH and false gods. It is YHWH alone – without the help of all the idols and wizards and false gods that Israel was constantly turning to – that created the heavens and the earth. He did it by means of his Son; but we don’t learn that until the New Testament.

The context gives you a similar paradox. If you look at chapters 44-46, you will see that YHWH is foretelling the victory of Cyrus – YHWH’s shepherd (44:28); YHWH’s messiah (45:1). Cyrus, he says, is going to fulfill all of YHWH’s purpose in rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple (44:28, 45). Cyrus – YHWH’s beloved - is going to defeat Babylon and set the captives free (48:14, etc.)

But then he says, in ch. 45:24, “From YHWH alone come victory and strength.”

Was Cyrus YHWH, then? Or was YHWH a liar?

Neither one. Cyrus’s success was YHWH’s success. YHWH alone saved Israel, but he used Cyrus to do it.

In the same way, YHWH alone created the heavens and the earth. He did it through his Son – we learn that in the New Testament – but the work is YHWH’s. He is the “one God, the Father, from whom all things come and for whom we exist” (1 Cor. 8:6).

All things come FROM the one God, the Father. But all things come THROUGH the one Lord, Jesus Christ. The Bible is absolutely consistent. Neither YHWH nor Jesus is a liar.