Arguments against the trinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evanescence
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have pleaded the case that Jesus is referred to as God with JW’s. They say the Greek says “a god” in John 1:1 so I refer to John 20:28, where it says “the God”. They say, that is just one example and a common term used back then. I use other verses to show the divinity of Christ but they get stuck in the fact that Jesus is referred to as a god though and not the God in John 1:1. Other places in scripture refer to gods as well, such as Psalm 82 where people are called gods. Can anyone help me out here? I looked at all of the articles on the website but have run out of arguements. How do I explain that there are not several gods, but that Jesus is the God?

We both seem to agree that there is just one true God, but they insist that Jesus is not truly God, but just His son.

Thanks for your help!
 
Just refer them to John Chapter 17 (the whole chapter). It lays it out in plain english. 🙂

Jesus and God are not one and the same, but are one in the holy spirit just as all men who believe in God and hold their faith in him are one with God.
 
Kay Walker:
The JW’s basis for there being no Trinity is that they don’t believe that Jesus is God, but they’ll also tell you that they don’t believe in the Trinity because it’s not explicity mentioned in the bible and that it is pagan in origin. All these arguments can be refuted with the help of info on this website.

So maybe re-focus the discussion on the divinity of Christ. If you can prove Jesus’s divinity (and beware – they’ll call him divine as well, but they don’t mean equal to God) then you’re 2/3rds of the way to the Trinity.

Also, go to catholicxjw.com for resources from a JW convert to Catholicism.

Good luck.
Click to expand...
I had this discussion at work with someone who does not believe that Jesus is God. What came quickly to mind was the Gospel of John. There we read that in the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. (to paraphrase). This clearly shows that while we have the Word, and God, they are one and the same. Later we read that , the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Which I believe is a clear reference to Jesus. Therefore, Jesus is the Word made flesh and the Word is God, ->Jesus is God. This works for me.
 
Notice in Genesis how GOD speaks in plural form. "Gen 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."…hmmm tell the JW angels certainly can’t create therefore who is speaking in plural form??
 
One thing they do not do is rely on the meanings of the original languages and most know beans about them.

My favorite is to take their favorite verse Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. (Emphasis mine) And ask just how much Hebrew they know. The fact is that the word for one in this verse is the word “echad” which just happens to be the very same word used in Genesis 2:24 Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. (Emphasis mine) Now…this in no way proves the trinity, but it certainly shows that the word used speaks of a unity and it’s impossible to have a unity without a plurality, now isn’t it? and that just shoots the all-time biggest hole in their doctrine on this and sets them up for more. You can expect them to change the subject about right here. A common tactic.

Their corrupted translation says that “the word was a god” in John 1:1, so that’s their best dodge there. Pretty sad…
Pax tecum,
 
Catholics4Life said:
"Other places in scripture refer to gods as well, such as Psalm 82 where people are called gods. Can anyone help me out here? I looked at all of the articles on the website but have run out of arguements. How do I explain that there are not several gods, but that Jesus is the God?"

A suggestion: for now, skip any references to the Trinity. What you are trying to do is identify Jesus with YHWH of the Old Testament (who the Witnesses refer to as Jehovah).

John 12:39-40 For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again, “He has blinded their eyes and He hardened their heart, so that they would not see with their eyes and perceive with their heart, and be converted, and I heal them.” **These things Isaiah said because he saw His glory, and he spoke of Him. **(emphasis added)

John is quoting from Isaiah 6:10 (look it up) but the significant point is, the entire 6th chapter of Isaiah is a vision of YHWH’s glory (see Isaiah 6:1 - capital LORD means YHWH). So Isiaiah was having a vision of YHWH, but John is apparantly making the application to Jesus - “he saw His glory.”

Additionally there is **Phillipians 2:9 **"… for this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name." Question - what is the name that is above every name? Does Jesus have that name? (watch out; the New World Translation inserts, in brackets, the word “other”, as in “above every [other] name”. You might want to tactfully ask why the publishers of the NWT saw fit to add the word other there, when no other Bible does; what does that scripture mean as it reads in all other Bibles?)

Additionally Hebrews 1:10-12 quotes from Psalm 102:25-27 (about YHWH), and makes the application to Jesus.

Hope some of this helps.
 
40.png
VociMike:
Just to offer a different perspective, I have found that non-Trinitarians of all stripes offer a very strong challenge to “mainstream” Protestants. They sling bible verses back and forth at each other and often the mainstreams have to fall back on “it’s true because the Church has always taught it”. That is, the non-Trinitarians often force the mainstreams out of their “sola Scriptura” and into asserting the authority and infallibility of the Church, at least on this question. For a brief moment, in their exasperation, they become Catholic. 😃
Click to expand...
Amen. This might be a case of thank-God-for-our-enemies. The fact is when an SS Prot and a neo-Arian go at each other it’s as you said, “duelling scripture verses” usually accompanied by useless appeals to the Holy Spirt, revealing the non-Catholic position for the ideological bluster that it is: “We’ve got the Holy Spirit, yes we do! We’ve got the Holy Spirit, how about YOU!?” :dancing:

Scott
 
**Catholics4Life said: so I refer to John 20:28, where it says “the God”. They say, that is just one example and a common term used back then.
**
This is a denial of a plain statement by Thomas. It kind of reminds you of the politician who said “…it all depends what your definition of “is” is.” When confronted with plain words, deny that the word “God” means “God”. (And in fairness to the individual JW - they have been given this line of reasoning by others who they have a great deal of trust in. They should be reached out to in a spirit of love.)

Here’s one way of looking at it - and it has been stated elsewhere on this forum - if you look at the 21st chapter of John as a kind of epilog in which Jesus establishes the shepherding authority in the early church, then that leaves the Upper Room in the 20th chapter as the “conclusion” of the book of John. So - John’s gospel begins with a proposition (John 1:1 the Logos was God…) and “ends” with Thomas’ statement in John 20:28, “My Lord and my God!” Could it be much plainer?

Or, as I read that a COC minister said once, “Can I do any better than the Apostle Thomas?”
 
40.png
VociMike:
Huh? How does this relate to which belief derived from those inspired and profitable scriptures is correct?
Click to expand...
Well, I guess God-breathed Scriptures are not enough divine inspiration for you. Lost. :yup:

Bill
 
40.png
sonseeker:
Well, I guess God-breathed Scriptures are not enough divine inspiration for you. Lost. :yup:

Bill
Click to expand...
Sonseeker, you need to look at VociMike’s question again. The fact that the Scriptures were inspired by the Holy Spirit is not in question. VociMike is asking how that passage answers whether those who interpret the Scriptures and say it supports no Trinity vs. those who say there is a Trinity are not correct/correct. Scripture is being interpreted in two different ways here: there is a Trinity, there is not a Trinity. He was not questioning whether Scriptures were divinely inspired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top