Friday 11 October 2013

Challenge from a Facebook Unitarian.

Here are some more anti-trinitarian arguments that I have come across while scouring the internet as is my habit and I hope to provide a feasible, BIBLICAL AND SCRIPTUAL answers to some of the points raised. Let's begin shall we.

The person who raised this was a Messianic Jew who denied the Trinity. I shall seek to demonstrate that the arguments of this person are not biblically founded.

"For quite some time, the trinity doctrine has been an extremely controversial subject. The word “tirinity” does not appear in the Scriptures anywhere. How then, did it become a major part of modern-day religion?
The modern belief in the trinity originated in the 4th century at the Council of Nicea in approximately 324 C.E. King Constantine, the Roman Emperor and an adherent to paganism, presided over the Council. Its main purpose was to unite the Roman Empire by achieving agreement on Christian doctrine. This would promote a universal consolidation within the church. According to history, in the same year that Constantine convened the council, in a fit of rage, he killed his innocent son Crispus, and then later also killed his wife."

The word Trinity comes from the latin Trinitas which was first used by Tertullian. Even though the Word Trinity, Persons and Hypostases are not used in scripture, this doesn't mean that scripture doesn't teach it. The word Incarnation is not in scripture but that doesn't mean it's not there. I reject hyperdulia, but not because the name is absent, but because scripture doesn't teach it. You don't use the argument that "the name is not there, therefore it's not true". 

The second point is the subject of the Council of Nicea being the Origin of the Trinity. Firstly, There were people who acknowledged the Deity of Christ before Nicea, like Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Trypho, he identifies Jesus as the Lord of Hosts and demonstrates that the Angel of the Lord is God and appeared to Abraham and the saints of the OT such as Moses:

"When I had spoken these words, I continued: "Permit me, further, to show you from the book of Exodus how this same One, who is both Angel, and God, and Lord, and man, and who appeared in human form to Abraham and Isaac, appeared in a flame of fire from the bush, and conversed with Moses." And after they said they would listen cheerfully, patiently, and eagerly, I went on: "These words are in the book which bears the title of Exodus: 'And after many days the king of Egypt died, and the children of Israel groaned by reason of the works;' and so on until,'Go and gather the elders of Israel, and thou shalt say unto them, The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared to me, saying, I am surely beholding you, and the things which have befallen you in Egypt.'" In addition to these words, I went on: "Have you perceived, sirs, that this very God whom Moses speaks of as an Angel that talked to him in the flame of fire, declares to Moses that He is the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob?"

There is more that can be quoted here regarding what Martyr had said, but, I'll let you guys read Martyr's letter to judge for yourself. Tertullian who I mentioned earlier is also before the Nicean Council coined the use of the word Trinity and goes out of his way to show that Father, Son AND Spirit are the One God, this can be found in his letter "Against Praxeus". 

As we can see, there are church fathers who acknowledge the Deity of Christ before the Nicea Council. Next, Constantine did call the bishops to settle their arguments amongst each other because the conflict between Trinitarians and Arians was threatening the peace of his empire, that is true, But he did not have a leading role within the council of Nicea itself.

"As the council proceeded, there were two distinct sides. Archdeacon Athanasius of Alexandrai, Egypt upheld the trinity. Arius fought for the opposition. After long weeks of debate, the admitted pagan, Pontifex Maximus Constantine, ruled in favor of the Trinitarian teaching of Athanasius, the Egyptian. Egypt, one of the oldest civilizations in the world, had long before adopted the pagan belief of the trinity. One of the most famous Egyptian trinities was that of Horus, Isis and Seb, (HIS), a trinity that consisted of father, mother and son, and a concept which also traces back to Babylon. As ironic as it may seem, there is a movement now by those who no longer pray to their Heavenly Father, but to a Heavenly Mother. The letters HIS appear on the altars in most Catholic and Protestant churches today, being erroneously explained as standing for various Latin phrases.
History teaches that much later, after instituting a mandatory belief in the trinity, Constantine tried to be more tender and merciful with the decision, but it was too late. The Nicean Creed had taken hold. All who did not believe in the trinity doctrine were persecuted and killed. Every available instrument of torture was used on the nonbeliever. The Nicean Creed has since been amended, but it is still read today in many of the Protestant and Catholic churches. Belief in the trinity doctrine is now required by those churches who associate themselves with the World Council of Churches."

Athanasius and Eusebius, though they were Trinitarians, only differed the terminology to describe the Father and the Son, were they similiar substance, or same substance, mainly because they had to contend with the Modalist heresy that was propagated some time before. It is claimed by this individual that the Trinity is found within Horus, Isis and Seb, which is incorrect. The three individuals in Egyptian Mythology were Three Gods, Not One God in Three Persons, there is hardly a comparison between these two concepts, it's a strawman. 

Not to mention there is a level of inconsistency on the part of the Anti-Trinitarian who claims this. The same argument that is used against the Trinity regarding these  so called "parallels" are also used quite forcefully against the virgin birth. If you want to use a liberal argument to attack the Trinity, go ahead and attack the virgin birth as well if you are consistent. Though in the story of Horus you won't find the virgin birth, it's nevertheless an argument that used by liberals to attack Christianity and it's the same with the Horus, Isis and Seb triad, the Trinity is simply not there in Hinduism, Egyptian Mythology and even Babylonian Myths.

The subject of the Council of Nicea is addressed in the article here:

Again, there is no evidence that Athanasius or Constantine introduced something from an ancient Egyptian religion into Christianity, it's simply not there.

"The explanation of the trinity by Trinitarians is extremely confusing. Trinitarians teach that there are three persons, but one essence—all equal. The most distinctive doctrine of the trinity is that of the personality and deity of the Holy Ghost. The term “trinity” is not a Scriptures term; it is a manmade term.
To believe in the trinity is to believe that there is a unity of the heavenly beings. There are three co-eternal, co-equal persons, the same in substance, but different in individuality.
There are three persons—the Father, the Son, and the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit. Now these three are truly distinct one from another, and yet they are all one. The Nicean Creed reads that “...the Heavenly Father is a Mighty one, the Son is a Mighty one, and the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit is a Mighty one, and yet there are not three Mighty ones, just one.”
This appraisal of the trinity would lead one to believe that the Father must be His own son, and the Son must be His own Father, and that the third entity, the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit, is equal to the first two, the three being one, yet different. Hard to explain? Not for a Trinitarian. They conclude this explanation with the famous phrase: “It’s a great mystery of faith.” It is truly a mystery.
1Jon 5:7 where it says "All three are one" is not anywhere in the original scrolls or manuscripts. This has been added to scripture. This is a total corruption of scripture!"

The Trinity is indeed a mystery, but that doesn't mean it cannot be explained. The Trinity is that there is ONE God, who exists as Three Persons. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit and the Spirit is not the Father. It doesn't mean that the Father is his own Son or the Son is his own Father, that's a distortion of the Trinity, but that doesn't surprise me that someone would, after all, I have seen it constantly on the internet, even by Tovia Singer. As for 1 John 5:7, informed Trinitarians are aware it was added later, and yes, it is a phrase not in the earliest manuscripts or the originals, the latter which are no longer in existence. Besides, I don't even use the Comma Johanneum anyway. As for the book by John Henry Newman, I can't comment to much except that Easter and Christmas are not in scripture, That I agree with. 

But what does this have to do with the Trinity being pagan? Absolutly nothing. And of course an observance of a calendar and certain rituals which I won't go into right now but will say the rituals and calendar are not found in the New Testament. Also, Sunday worship was not "adopted" from the Romans. Sunday was only worshipped on because it was the day the Lord had risen. Sunday NEVER was a Sabbath to begin with, But someone worshipping on Sunday doesn't make them pagan. 

To be honest, this mentioning of pagan rituals and things are smokescreen because they are not the topic. Although, I agree, there are rituals that have crept into the church, that shouldn't be there.
Lastly, courtesy of*, I shall provide a quote by Bernard Lohse, the author of "A Short History of Christian" where he says:
""First, it is important to note that the doctrine of the Trinity does not go back to non-Christian sources [pagan], as has sometimes been supposed in the past. There has been no lack of attempts to find the initial form of the doctrine of the Trinity in Plato, or in Hinduism, or in Parsiism. All such attempts may be regarded today as having floundered. It is another question, of course, whether or not the church, in developing the doctrine of the Trinity, had recourse to certain thought forms already present in the philosophical and religious environment, in order that, with the help of these, it might give its own faith clear intellectual expression. This question must definitely be answered in the affirmative. In particular cases the appropriation of this concept or that can often be proved. Unfortunately, however, it is true that particularly in reference to the beginnings of the doctrine of the Trinity there is still much uncertainty. In this area final clarity has not yet been achieved. As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity. This does not mean very much, however, for generally speaking the New Testament is less intent upon setting forth certain doctrines than it is upon proclaiming the kingdom of God, a kingdom that dawns in and with the person of Jesus Christ. At the same time, however, there are in the New Testament the rudiments of a concept of God that was susceptible of further development and clarification, along doctrinal lines. ... Speaking first of the person of Jesus Christ ... In other passages of the New Testament the predicate "God" is without a doubt applied to Christ (A Short History of Christian Doctrine, Bernard Lohse, 1966, p37-39)""

Now onto some more objections
"What does the Set-Apart Scriptures say about the trinity? Do the Scriptures uphold the teaching that the Son is equal to the Father, or the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit is equal to both Son and Father? Do the Scriptures teach that anyone or anything is equal to יהוה? Definitely not! The Scripture teaches the exact opposite.
We can divide this study into different categories. First, let’s see what יהוה has to say. Second, we’ll read what the Messiah יהושע said. Then, we’ll look directly at the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit, and clearly define who and what it is.
First, what does יהוה have to say about this subject? In Isaiah 44:6, He says: “Thus says יהוה, the King of Israel, and His redeemer, יהוה of Hosts; ‘I am the first and the last; and beside Me there is no mighty one.’” Also, in Isaiah 44:24, He says: “Thus says יהוה, your Redeemer, and He that formed you from the womb, ‘I am יהוה that makes all things; that stretches forth the heavens alone; that spreads broad the earth by Myself.’”
Notice the words יהוה uses to describe Himself and what He does; words like “beside Me there is no other Mighty one,” and “by Myself,” and the word “alone.” It does not sound as if יהוה is confused about this situation. In Isaiah 43:10, He said: “You are My witnesses,” says יהוה, “My servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe Me and understand that I am He; before Me there was no mighty one formed, neither shall there be after Me.” He sounds very positive, doesn’t He?
Notice how He clearly stated there were none before Him, and that there will be none after him. Could it be said? I am the one, ?"

The following about YHWH being the only God is not a refutation of the Trinity. Trinitarians are monotheists and anyone who says otherwise are either at best ignorant or at worst deceivers.
Trinitarians don't claim that a second god was with the Father, the problem with the persons use of the following passages is his assumption of Unitarianism. Monotheism does not prove Unitarianism. Funnily enough, Jesus claims to be the Alpha and Omega or the First and the Last in the book of Revelation 1:13-18, as well as Revelation 22:12-16.

"12 “Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
14 “Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.
16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”"

Contexually there is no doubt that Jesus is idenified as the Alpha and Omega. And Yes I am aware that in Revelation The Father is identified as Jesus' God and what Revelation says regarding this issue. The First and the last or the Alpha and Omega is a title of YHWH ALONE, yet Jesus not only possesses the title, he relates to the Father as his God, because he is still the God Man in heaven, Is there two Gods? No, One God is what scripture tells us in the Shema which Jesus quotes. The only way to look at Revelation is in light of of a Trinitarian context. That there is ONE God, in THREE Persons. Also, if you doubt the First and the Last is applied to Jesus, Read Revelation 2:

"8 “To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:
These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again. 9 I know your afflictions and your poverty—yet you are rich! I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 10 Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you life as your victor’s crown.
11 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who is victorious will not be hurt at all by the second death.".

When did the First and the Last die? ON THE CROSS. I am sure most unitarians will agree it wasn't the Father who became flesh, AMEN, it wasn't. It was the SON WHO BECAME INCARNATE, NOT THE FATHER. Now you are thinking at this point "Well Jesus died therefore he cannot be God". Well, what do you mean by death? I direct you to the article here on my blog:

"What about the Messiah יהושע? Did He come preaching that He was equal to the Mighty One of this world? Where did יהושע get all of His knowledge? He got it from the same place any son does—from His Father. He said, in John 15:15, “For all things that I heard of My Father I have made known to You.” He is passing on the knowledge He learned from יהוה to His disciples. Notice that He always refers to יהוה as His Father, the authority figure. He never calls Him—יהוה—His partner or His co-worker, as if to say that He was equal to Him.
Now, if יהושע is equal to the Father, He would know all the things that יהוה knows! But that is not the case as we see in John 5:19. The Messiah said: “Verily, verily, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do: for what things so ever He does, then also does the Son likewise.” In verse 20, we read a very important account, “For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does: and He will show Him greater works that these, that you may marvel.” יהושע is saying that His Father has shown Him all He knows and He is going to show Him even more, even greater works that all may marvel.
Here is one of the most important scriptures to refute trinity: John 14:28, “You have heard how I said to you that I go away and come again to you. If you loved Me, you would rejoice, because I go to the Father: FOR MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I!” יהושע is very clear in the fact that He is NOT equal with His Father!
In direct contrast, יהושע the Messiah puts Himself in a category in which we may be included. In John 20:17, He told Mary to go back and tell the brethren: “I ascend to My Father, and your Father; and to My Mighty One, and your Mighty One.” If יהושע’s Father and my Father are the same, that means there will come= a time when יהושע will be our big brother. Now, isn’t that something to look forward to?
Now, consider this. יהושע is getting ready for His second coming and He doesn’t even know when that day will be. Does that sound ridiculous? It’s not. He said that very thing in Matthew 24:35. When asked when the end of the age would come, He answered: “But of that day and hour knows no man, not even the angels in heaven, but My Father only.”"

Firstly, saying "Oh he refers to the YHWH as his Father rather than partner and equal to him" doesn't refute us. Why? When Trinitarians say that Jesus is co-equal to the Father, we refer to equality in ESSENCE AND NATURE, NOT POSITION AND STATUS. As for John 5:19, It has nothing to do with the Father knowing things the Son doesn't, it speaks about the actions of the Father, which the Son likewise replicates. Jesus ONLY does what the Father does, which no mere man can claim, not even Moses could claim that. In fact, Another thing for you to digest, the Trinitarian postion makes it clear that the three persons DO NOT ACT INDEPENTLY from one another, which the scripture makes clear. Does Jesus go off and do his own thing? Certainly not. Carrying on into the passage we read.

"21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him."

This is in the very context that the person appealed to. Jesus not only gives life as the Father does and that judgement is given to him, but he tells us that ALL are to honor the Son just as they honor the Father. This isn't merely honouring your parents, or honouring a prophet or even an angel, THis is giving the same honour, value and devotion that is given to GOD ALONE, which would be blasphemy if Jesus is a mere angel, agent or prophet. As for John 15:15, Yes, Jesus has his information come from the Father directly, this isn't to say he hadn't had in the first place. He relays his information that he recieves from the Father. In fact he does say in another passage is that his teaching is not his own. What should we expect, the Son is in subjection to the Father in position and status, not essence and nature as I have stated before.

John 14:28 is considered to be the Anti-Trinitarian trump card, however, the context says something different to what the Anti-Trinitarian wants to say. Let's read it:

"28 “You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
This objection is already covered in my response to Tovia Singer

One question before I move on. Are your parents greater than you?, If yes, In what way? position or essence. Context of a sentence determines WHAT YOU MEAN by a particular word.
As For John 20:17, When Jesus took on human flesh, he began relating to the Father AS HIS GOD, He is also differentiating his relationship to the Father from ours. In the Book of Revelation he is still the God-Man, not only does Christ identify the Father as his God, he is also identified as THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA, a claim that can only be claimed by none other THAN YHWH HIMSELF!!!! which I will go into depth later on. As for the section where it says:

"If יהושע’s Father and my Father are the same, that means there will come= a time when יהושע will be our big brother. Now, isn’t that something to look forward to?"

I don't see how this is an objection. If you are the Father's child, Jesus is your brother a in a spiritual sense, because you have been adopted into the family of God, where is the problem with this?

As for the second coming and Jesus not knowing the day or the hour, Jesus' knowledge was limited while on earth. as Philippians 2:5-11 points out, Jesus had taken the form of a slave, however, there were cases where the disicples understood that Jesus knew all things. Jesus in Mark 13 and Matthew 24 had empited himself of his glory, not his divinity. Furthermore, in the same context, He speaks of the Son of Man coming with his angels. The Son of Man that Jesus is referring to in Daniel 7:13-14 which days the following:

"13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,[a] coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed."

Keith Thompson has done an excellent article where he speaks on Daniel 7:13-14 in depth.

Also, Jesus is describing the end times using terminology of ancient Jewish marriages. This can be found in a video by InspiringPhilisophy where he speaks on this which I will post in the description below:

Nextly, I shall tackle the issue of the Holy Spirit which the person brought up.
"How about the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit? Who Is it? What is it? Let’s take a closer look at the Scriptures to see if we can answer these questions. Some say the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit must be a person because the Scripture refers to it as “He.” We know the Hebrew language has no neuter gender. Everything is referred to as he or she, masculine or feminine. There is no “it.” We see an example of that in Matthew 26:52, when they arrived to take the Messiah away. יהושע told Peter to “...put your sword into his place.” We know the sword couldn't have been male or female. Now for the moment, let’s put that aside and take a look at Romans 8:26. Here we read, “But the spirit itself makes intercession for us.” Here we see the proper rendering by using the pronoun “it.” "

The first objection is the use of it and the Hebrew having no neuter gender and of course having a shield or something else refered to as a he or a she. 
One, The New Testament was written in Greek, not Hebrew, Two, even though in Greek the same argument can be made regarding things, It is context that determines whether the Holy Spirit or Ruach HaKodesh is a divine person. You have Ezekiel 11:5 where the Spirit comes to Ezekiel and says, This is what the LORD says. Here the Holy Spirit is relaying a message from the LORD, does a mere force relay a message? I think not. 

The same New Testament shows that the Holy Spirit can be lied to in Acts 5:

Acts 5 3-4
"3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”"

This simply cannot be taken as lying to a mere force, A divine force cannot be lied to. Here is a clear identification of the Holy Spirit as God even though he is not the Father. In the same chapter, the Holy Spirit is treated as a separate witness.

Acts 5 29-32
"29 Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings! 30 The God of our ancestors raised Jesus from the dead—whom you killed by hanging him on a cross. 31 God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins. 32 We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”"

Yes, Romans 8:26 some translations say itself or himself and this is disputed. But again, The context of the New Testament makes it clear that the Holy Spirit is a PERSON, NOT A FORCE OR POWER OR THE FATHERS PRESENCE. Also, in the same book of Acts it says in Chapter 13:2

"2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”"

Here, the Holy Spirit sets apart Paul and Barnabas for his work which he had called them to, This is not even remotely comparable to a shield or wisdom or even the sword Peter used. Also, In Acts 28, The Holy Spirit is said to be the one by Paul who spoke through Isaiah rather than the Father. Yet when we go to Isaiah 6, it is YHWH speaking to Isaiah.

"25 They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: “The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your ancestors when he said through Isaiah the prophet:
26 “‘Go to this people and say,
“You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
    you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”
27 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
    they hardly hear with their ears,
    and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
    hear with their ears,
    understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’"

Why in the world is Paul identifying the Holy Spirit as a person who can speak, have intellelect and will. When I am using person, I don't mean Father and Spirit have a body. I meant person in the sense of sense of being able to think, reason, plan and even speak.
Now to the next subject about the Holy Spirit's authority.

"Let’s check the Scriptures to see if it does. In Luke 1:32, we see the Father giving the Son a throne. We don’t see Him doing likewise to the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit. In John1:1, we see that, in the beginning, there was the Father and the Word—the Word we know to be יהושע. Why wasn’t the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit included with them? In Acts 7:55, Stephen looked up to heaven and saw the glory of יהוה and יהושע standing at His right hand. But he failed to mention the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit. If יהושע was at His right hand, wouldn’t the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit have been at His left? Again, in Revelation 3:21 and 22:3, we see two thrones—יהוה’s throne and יהושע’s throne. The throne is a symbol of power and authority. Surely, if the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit was co-equal, then it would have its own throne."

When Trinitarians say the Father, Son and Spirit are equal, we are referring to their essence, not their roles in the redemption of man. The Father, Son and Spirit take different roles in our redemption hence why the Spirit doesn't have a throne or is standing at the right hand of God. Also in John 1:1*2, The Holy Spirit is not the focus of John, his focus is on the Deity of the Son. Besides, even in a unitarian context, The Holy Spirit as the Father's power, would be as eternal as the Father because in that context the Holy Spirit is connected to the Father. Also Hebrews 9:14 says:

"14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,[c] so that we may serve the living God!"

It is the Spirit of God who directs us to Jesus Christ and thus allows us the grace to follow him.

"יהוה says: “Study the Scripture. Hold fast to that which is good.” Remember, the day of judgment is going to be a one-on-one situation. Let’s pray we choose the right one. Those who believe and teach the trinity doctrine will have to face the same judgment everyone else does."

Some will rise to everlasting life and some to everlasting death. I am convinced that the denial of the Trinity will lead to the latter.

"What, then, is the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit? In John 15:26, we read that the Spirit comes from יהוה and, in this verse, it comes to us as proof of the Creator. When יהושע was baptized in Matthew 3:16, we see the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit again coming from יהוה, this time in the form of a++== anointed יהושע with the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit and with power, and He used it to do good, healing all that were oppressed—and יהוה was with Him. The Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit is יהוה's power, the power He sent out from Himself to do His work. As Ephesians 4:30 says: “Grieve not; the Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit of יהוה whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.”
The Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit is no great mystical figure, some calling it instead the “Set-Apart Ghost.” We are introduced to יהוה’s spirit in Genesis 1:2, “And the spirit of יהוה moved upon the face of the waters.”"

The next point is What is the Holy Spirit, Well, He isn't merely power, He is a person too, as I have mentioned before.

I also want to briefly mention something I didn't touch upon about sending the Spirit which I think is vital to remember.

"John 14:23 Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. 24 Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.
25 “All this I have spoken while still with you. 26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. 27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.

John 16 7 But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 about sin, because people do not believe in me; 10 about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11 and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.
12 “I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.

John 14:28 is in the same context as these verses. Notice that the Son says he and the Father will make their dwellings with the believers by the Spirit. Not to mention Jesus also says. 

"12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.

Even though some Bibles do not contain ask me but say ask instead, Jesus still says HE will do it within the given context. In John 15:16, The Father ALSO gives to the believer:

"16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you."

Both contexts demonstrate BOTH the Father and the Son can be invoked and give what is requested from them. We know how the Father does, but the only way Jesus can grant us our requests, not just to one person but to multiple people at the same time, is if he is OMNIPRESENT, an attribute that belongs ONLY to God.

In the context of John 14-16, the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of Truth certainly functions as a divine person who is SENT by The Father and Jesus himself. Why, Jesus himself identifies the Spirit AS A DIVINE PERSON, not as a mere shield or sword or anything remotely like that. As I have stated, the book of Acts clearly has the Holy Spirit speaking and acting as a person. As for coming from the Father, No problem, The Nicean Creed is consistent with this, as is scripture ULTIMATELY. Remember, Sola Scriptura, Scripture is OUR ULTIMATE RULE OF FAITH. Regarding Ephesians 4:30, Grieving the Holy Spirit even in that context still indicates the Spirit is a Person, you can't grieve a force or power.

As for Genesis 1 generally, you can argue it is speaking about the Trinity, including "Let us make man in our image" in verse 26. Although Tertullian uses this verse for the Trinity, I prefer not to. However, In light of the context of scripture, I wouldn't dismiss what Tertullian said as implausible.

"All religions claim to get the basic beliefs and doctrines for their religion from the Scriptures. But when +you ask them to explain the trinity, they tell you it’s a mystery of faith that cannot be understood. That contradicts what the Scriptures say. Matthew 10:26 says that there is nothing covered that won’t be uncovered, nothing hidden that won’t be revealed (see also Luke 8:17, and 12:2). There is no secret that won’t be made manifest; neither anything hidden that won’t be known."

Next the following:
"Luke 12:1 Meanwhile, when a crowd of many thousands had gathered, so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus began to speak first to his disciples, saying: “Be[a] on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2 There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 3 What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs."
"Luke 8:16 “No one lights a lamp and hides it in a clay jar or puts it under a bed. Instead, they put it on a stand, so that those who come in can see the light. 17 For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open. 18 Therefore consider carefully how you listen. Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what they think they have will be taken from them.”"
"Matthew 10:26 “So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.[b] 30 And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows."

Luke 8:16 deals with our Christian walk, we are a light to the word, and as such must not conceal it. Also to Luke 12:2 to Trinitarians as if we are hiding something secret and revealing is flat out disingenious. Jesus is warning the apostles against the yeast an wickedness of the Pharisees and what the apostles will do will not only be done within the confines of a secret place but also. In Matthew 10:26, Jesus is speaking of Events that will transpire before his return and will be proclaimed by the apostles.

The Trinity being a mystery is not a violation of these texts.
"The Scriptures also tell us to search and we will find; to ask and it will be given to us; to knock and it will be opened. Aren’t those who are teaching Scripture today reading the same Scriptures that we are? If they are, then where are they hiding those Scriptures saying that the Father, Son and Ruwach HaKo’desh/Set-Apart Sprit are all equal?"

Equal in WHAT WAY? You confuse essence and rank. I see the scriptures teaching the Trinity. 

"Where do men get the right or the authority to burden us with unscriptural rules, regulations and false ideas? Life could be so simple. The only thing we would have to do is what יהוה tells us. We know that all His commands are for our good and that His Word is truth..."

I think you are confusing Biblical Christians with Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy. I agree that the God's word is truth.

"Who was the Elohim of the Old T? What Elohim has no one seen then? Who has seen and heard from the Father YAH??? Who? What was his name??? Who then did Moses and the 70 elders see on mount Herob/Sinai? If all three are one then who are these two?
Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen Elohim.1 The only brought-forth Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He did declare.2 Footnotes: 1See 5:37, 6:46, 1 John 4:12. 2The pre-existent Son declared, and was the One who appeared to men.
Joh 6:44 “No one is able to come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him. And I shall raise him up in the last day.
Joh 6:45 “It has been written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by יהוה.’ Everyone, then, who has heard from the Father, and learned, comes to Me.
Joh 6:46 “Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from Elohim – He has seen the Father.
Joh 5:37 “And the Father who sent Me, He bore witness of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
1Co 10:1 For I do not wish you to be ignorant, brothers, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea,
1Co 10:2 and all were immersed into Mosheh in the cloud and in the sea,
1Co 10:3 and all ate the same spiritual food,
1Co 10:4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed, and the Rock was Messiah."

Once again, When Trinitarians say God is one, we are referring to oneness in their essence, not oneness in their person hood. You are confusing Trinitarianism with Modalism. I already said the Father and the Son are not the same person as one another but share the same essence. Oneness in being, not in person.
I also have already addressed Tovia Singer on John 1:18, 1 John 4:12 and John 5:37. John 6:46 although not mentioned in the article, follows the same principle. As for 1 Corinthians 10:4. I have a set of videos where Sam Shamoun touches on this briefly and does an interesting set of videos on John 8:58 which I encourage you taking a look at. Feel free to check those out.

Sam Shamoun on John 8:58
 would to stress this point one more time, Jesus being a distinct person from the Father doesn't disprove the Trinity, because we do NOT say that Jesus is the Father, that's Modalism.

Anyway, I hope I have addressed the arguments raise by my opponent adequately and to the best of my ability. Feel free to be bereans, After all, I encourage all who are reading to be Bereans. T

Thanks for taking the time to read.

Answering Judaism. 

PS. What was strange is that after posting the link to original videos on Facebook on the unitarians post, he removed them. To the one I have responded to, If you are going to make claims, expect to have people challenge you on those claims. If you have good arguments, what do you have to fear from me?

PS. Here are two links by Michael Licona that deal with the lies of Acharya S:

*16th September 2017 The quote came from their site and was quoted on their site.

*2 10th of February 2020. See the following information on John 1:1: It is very important regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses arguments regarding John 1:1.

No comments:

Post a Comment