2 Corinthians 13:14 – Trinity?

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen. – 2 Corinthians 13:14, World English

This scripture is often presented by trinitarians as a though the scripture presents the Son of Yahweh as part of a triune God. In actuality, we find nothing in the scripture about three persons, all of whom are supposed to be the one true God.

That which is being prayed to with the Corinthian Christians is “Grace”, “love”, and “communion”, respectively of Jesus, God, and the holy spirit. “Grace” is not a person, nor is “love” a person, nor is “communion” a person.

Nevertheless, in order to see “trinity” in the verse, one has to imagine and assume that the triune God is not represented by the word “God”, but rather that only one of the alleged persons of “God” is represented by the word “God”, and then one has to imagine and assume that “the Lord Jesus Christ, is another person of, not the unipersonal “God” who is being spoken of in the verse, but rather the triune “God” who is being imagined, assumed and added to the verse. Then one has to do the same imaginings and assumptions, concerning the unipersonal God’s holy spirit, and add what they have imagined and assumed to the verse. Thus, not based on what the verse actually says, but rather what is being imagined and assumed upon the verse, the verse is then, by means of the circular reasoning employed, presented as proof of the triune God.

The reality is Paul never once presents the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as more than one person. Instead, Paul presents the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob uniperonsonally as “The God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:31, World English) Any idea of a triune God does have to be imagined, assumed, added to, and read into, what Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 13:14, or what any Bible writer wrote anywhere in the Bible.

One could say that there is a trinity in the sense that the only true God, the son of the only true God, and the holy spirit of the only true God, are one in agreement (1 John 5:8), but the trinitarian dogma of three persons in the one God cannot be found in this verse, or anywhere else in the Bible, except by means of what has to be imagined using the great spirit of human imagination, using that imagination to form assumptions into dogma, which dogma has to be added to, and read into any scripture to which the trinitarian dogma might be applied, including 2 Corinthians 13:14.

http://godandson.reslight.net/archives/1055.html

Of course, in doing so, the trinitarian dogma, by insisting that Jesus is still a man, strips and denigrates the purpose of Jesus’ coming into the world of mankind, of his obedience to the only true God which resulted in condemning sin in the flesh, and of the atoning sacrifice of his flesh, since, according to trinitarian dogma, Jesus still is flesh, a human being, etc., and thus, this is why such false teaching can be a hinderance to appreciably understanding the beauty of the ransom sacrifice that Jesus gave. — John 6:51; 12:47,48; 1 Timothy 1:15; 1 John 2:2; 4:2,3,10,14; 2 John 1:7; Hebrews 10:10; 1 Peter 3:18.

http://atonement.reslight.net/

Finally, the fact that “God” is presented as one person in 1 Corinthians 13:14, and that Paul does this throughout his letter when he uses the God to speak of the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, shows that Jesus is not being presented a person of a triune God.

For more related the trinity, see:

Jesus and His God

Isaiah 7:14 – Immanuel – God with Us

World English Bible translation, unless otherwise noted:

Isaiah 7:14 – Therefore [Yahweh]* Himself giveth to you a sign, Lo, the Virgin is conceiving, And is bringing forth a son, And hath called his name Immanuel. (Note: The Great Isaiah Scroll has the holy name in Isaiah 7:14)

Isaiah 8:8 – and it shall sweep onward into Judah; it shall overflow and pass through; it shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of its wings shall fill the breadth of your land, Immanuel.

Matthew 1:23 – “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son. They shall call his name Immanuel;” which is, being interpreted, “God with us.”

This scripture is evidently cited by trinitarians and oneness believers because it has the name, Immanuel, and since Matthew applies the statement in Isaiah 7:14 to Jesus, and since the name Immanuel means “God is with us”, it is being imagined and assumed that this is proof that Jesus is Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the only Most High. Trinitarians would further imagine and assume that two persons of their alleged triune God are being spoken of in Isaiah 7:14, one who is the alleged “first person” of their alleged triune God, and another who is the alleged “second person” of their alleged triune God.

Of course, simply bearing the name expressing that “God is with us” does not mean that the one bearing that name is the God that the name declares is with us. The bearer of any name in which God is declared as being or doing something does not mean that the bearer of the name is God who is being declared by those names as being or doing whatever is being spoken of. Many in the Old Testament bore names that declared God as being or doing something, and no one thinks to apply the meaning of the name to the bearer so as to make the bearer of the name into God who is declared to as being or doing by the name.

In other words, for example, the name “Jehu” means “He is Yah” or “Yah is He.” Does that mean the man who bore the name Jehu is, in reality, Yahweh? Likewise with the name Eliathath, which means “God has come”. Are we to think that Eliathath is God Almighty because of the name given to him? We can look at another name, “Elnathan”, meaning “God has given”; does it mean that the bearer of this name is God who does the giving? When Abraham called the place where he sacrificed the ram “Yahweh-jireh”, meaning “Yahweh will provide”, was he saying that the place was Yahweh Himself? Did the name Daniel, meaning “Judgment of God”, mean that Daniel was God?

The name “Immanuel”, however, is not the personal name of Jesus, for the scriptures as translated by most translations show that personal name in English as “Jesus”, meaning “Yah saves” or “Yah is savior”. The name “Jesus” attributes salvation to the God and Father of Jesus. Likewise, the name “Immanuel” is a titular name, not the personal name of the one being spoken of being born.

Why should Immanuel be a name given to Jesus? Because by means of Jesus, God is with his people. How so? The scriptures tell us in Acts 10:38; “How God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.” Here “God” is depicted as one doing the anointing of Jesus, and is said to be with Jesus. (See Isaiah 61:1) If God was with Jesus, then, through Jesus, God was with his people. Bearing the titular name Immanuel does not mean that Jesus was his God who was with Jesus.

Additionally, Isaiah 8:8 is speaking of Sennacherib, a king of Assyria, would “pass through Judah.” This prophecy refers to
King Sennacherib, for Tiglath-pileser, who slew Pekah and Rezin, did not pass through Judah. Through Isaiah, the people of Judah were told that Yahweh would take care of them and they were not even to defend themselves. The army of Sennacherib did come to Judah. After prophesying about Tiglath-pileser, Isaiah abruptly starts to prophesy about Sennacherib and uses the same language. Sennacherib would overflow into Judah; in fact, he flooded the land almost to the capital (“the neck”), and there he had his spokesman call up to the people, “You had better give in and submit peaceably because your God is not able to defend you.” Isaiah counseled the people not to worry, for God would fight the battle. King Sennacherib was likened to a tremendous bird such as an eagle or a vulture. So large was the bird that “the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy [Immanuel’s] land.” To those hearing the prophecy in Isaiah’s day, “Immanuel” was Judah. The land of Judah was pictured as a person, the neck or head being Jerusalem. The name “Immanuel” depicts how God was with Judah. Judah was delivered from Sennacherib not by battle instruments but by Yahweh’s destroying angel in one night. Thus God was with Judah in that God fought for Judah. Thus, the name Immanuel as used in Isaiah 8:8 is speaking of God being with his people, that his favor and strength was with his people so as to deliver his people, not that God was a man dwelling amongst the people.

Outside the Bible, we cannot say for sure whether in any baby in Bible times was ever name “Immanuel” or not. We know that in later Jewish history, several have held the name Immanuel, without any thought that the bearer of the name was God Almighty.

For further study, see:
http://godandson.reslight.net/archives/1221.html

Definition of Jesus – Has the Son of God Always Existed?

The statement is made that the Son of God has always existed, but that Jesus has not always existed. The claim, in effect, is that Jesus is only the Son of God in the flesh; that the Son of God is not “Jesus” aside from the flesh. Thus, it is claimed that Jesus is for all eternity still a human being. There are several errors in this line of reasoning that are false and contrary to scripture. Indeed, such a teaching nullifies the basis of the atonement.  Of course, Jesus had only been given the name “Jesus” when he came into the world of mankind that had been made through him. This does not mean that Jesus did not exist before his becoming a man, nor does it mean that Jesus ceased to exist since he is no longer in the days of his flesh. — Hebrews 5:7.

The Son of God has not always existed; only the God of whom he is the Son has always existed. The very term “son” denotes that he was brought forth into existence, and thus at some point he did not exist.

John 1 is cited as proof that the Son of God has always existed. In reality, however, such a thought has to be imagined in the imaginations of men, assumed, added to, and read into, what is stated in John 1. The fact that the Logos of God is spoken of as already in existence at the beginning spoken of in John 1:1 does not mean that Logos had always been in existence. One needs to consider what is meant by “the beginning” as well as what is meant the “panta”  — all — that was brought forth into existence by means of the firstborn creature.

See our studies on this at:
http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=200

http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=300

http://defending.reslight.net/?p=10

The other matter of grave importance is the claim that Jesus is still  human being, else he would not be Jesus. This is actually sophistry, since there is nothing at all in the scriptures to support such a claim. If, however, Jesus is still a human being, a little lower than the angels, then Jesus has not given up his human flesh, soul, body, life for all eternity to pay the redemptive price for sin, and thus the very basis of the atonement is nullified.

http://atonement.reslight.net

As we have shown in earlier studies, Jesus is no longer in the days of his flesh, he was put to death in the flesh and made alive in the spirit. This does not in any way mean that Jesus had to cease being Jesus simply because he is now a spirit being, higher than the angels, and no longer a human being, lower than than the angels. Jesus, although he did not carry the name of Jesus, was still the same person before he became flesh. It was Jesus who spoke of his existence with his God and Father, the only true God, before the world of mankind was made. (John 17:3,5) Thus, Jesus, although he did not yet have the name Jesus, was in existence with the glory of a celestial, not a terrestrial body (1 Corinthians 15:40), before the world of mankind was made. It was Jesus who said that he was to return to where he was before. Thus, it was Jesus — although he did not bear the name Jesus at that time — who was in the “where” to which he was to return. (John 6:62) Likewise, even though Jesus is no longer flesh, no longer a human being, and has been exalted again with the celestial glory, above the angels, he is still Jesus, and he is no longer of the terrestrial glory of a human being.

See our earlier studies at:

http://atonement.reslight.net/?p=1

http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=218

http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=215

Definition of Jesus — His Two Glories

Some claim that John 1 and Colossians 1 defines Jesus as both fully God (as in Almighty God) and also as fully man. It is further claimed that the true definition of “Jesus” is “the Son of God in the flesh.” It is then assumed, based on this definition, that if Jesus is still alive, then he must also still be “in the flesh.” However, when we examine these scriptures, we find that there is nothing either in John 1 or Colossians 1 that justifies the conclusion that Jesus ever was, is now, or ever will be, the only true God (the Supreme Being, the only Most High). Nor do we see anything that gives us a definition that Jesus is now the “Son of God in the flesh.”

The Bible reveals that Jesus has had two different general forms of glory, but he did not have both at the same time. Before Jesus became a man, he spoke of a glory that he had with the only true God before the world (the world that was made through him; the world that he came into, the world that did not recognize him — John 17:1,3,5) was made. (John 1:3,10) Jesus prayed that he again have the glory that had with the only true God, so while he was in the days of his flesh, Jesus did not have that glory. If he did have that glory while in the days of his flesh, then why would he ask the only true God (John 17:1,3) to give that glory to him again? — John 17:5.

Paul spoke of the two general kinds of glory, when he was answering the question about the kind of body with which the dead are raised. He said: “There are also celestial [in the heavens] bodies, and terrestrial [in the earth] bodies; but the glory of the celestial differs from that of the terrestrial.” — 1 Corinthians 15:40.

Jesus, before he became a man, Jesus had the celestial glory, but he did not have the terrestrial glory. Thus John writes: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God [Ton Theon], and the Word was God [Theos, in this usage, more properly should be rendered "mighty," in the sense of mightiness, not as "God" whom the Word was with]. The same was in the beginning with God [Ton Theon].”  (John 1:1,2) John was definitely not telling us that Jesus was “God” whom Jesus was with, but John is telling us of a special mightiness that Jesus had with the only true God before the world of mankind was made. — John 1:10; 17:3,5.

The title “Word,” designates Jesus as the Word of God, as shown in Revelation 19:13. John, in using the word “THEOS” of Jesus, was not making the claim that Jesus “was” the only true God whom Jesus was said he was with. (John 17:1,3,5) Many scholars say that THEOS here is speaking qualitatively. Forms of THEOS in the New Testament correspond with forms of the Hebrew word EL in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, when forms of the Hebrew word EL were used “qualitatively,” they could be used of other persons and things than Yahweh in the sense of might, power, strength.

We will begin by showing this usage with John 10:34,35, where Jesus quotes and refers to  Psalms 82:1,6, where the Psalmist uses both forms of the Hebrew word EL and ELOHIM, and thus these words are applied the sons of the Most High, the sons to whom the Logos came (as Jesus explained). In John 10:34,35, the word ELOHIM is rendered as THEOI, the plural of THEOS. According the King James Version, God [ELOHIM] standeth in the congregation of the mighty [EL]. (Psalm 82:1) In reference to the sons of the Most High, the KJV renders the term EL as “the mighty.” Applying this scriptural principle to THEOS in John 1:1, we would likewise have “the Logos was mighty.”

Additionally, this is not the only place that the KJV renders forms of the words EL (Strong’s Hebrew #410)  and ELOHIM (Strong’s Hebrew #430) with terms showing mightiness or strength. Here are a few scriptures: Genesis 23:6 (mighty); Genesis 30:8 (mighty); Genesis 31:29 (power); Deuteronomy 28:32 (might); 1 Samuel 14:15 (great); Nehemiah 5:5 (power); Psalm 8:5 (angels); Psalm 36:6 (great); Proverbs 3:27 (power); Psalm 29:1 (mighty); Ezekiel 32:21 (strong); Jonah 3:3 (exceeding). The point is the King James translators, in all these verses, did not render the word for deity/divinity [EL] as “God” or as “god”, but with terms of might, strength, great, power and might. Likewise, since John is definitely not stating that the Word was the God that the Word was with, the most directly scriptural understanding of John 1:1c should be: “the Word was mighty.”

All of the spirit beings, by “nature” of the superior might given to them by the Almighty are scripturally designated as el or elohim, and thus can be spoken of as divine — mighty — in being. — Psalm 8:5 (compare Hebrews 2:9; also Psalm 50:1 and 96:4 could be speaking of angels as elohim); 45:6,7; Isaiah 9:6,7; John 1:1,2; Acts 2:33; 5:31; Ephesians 1:20,22; Philippians 2:9-11; Hebrews 1:2-4,8; 1 Peter 1:21; 3:22.

The scriptural conclusion is that since John is definitely not saying that the Word “was” (past tense) the only true God, then he is speaking of THEOS as a quality, that is, of the might, power, the glory that he “was” but was not while he was in the days of his flesh. Whatever is meant by THEOS in John 1:1c expresses what the LOGOS “was” before he became flesh, not while he “was” in the days of his flesh. – Hebrews 5:7

See the studies on John 1:1,2 at:
http://reslight.net/forum/index.php?topic=435.0
http://godandson.reslight.net/john-1.html

When Jesus became a man, he no longer had the glory of the celestial, but he became fully a man, crowned with the glory a little lower than the angels. (Hebrews 2:9) As already, shown, while in the days of his flesh, Jesus did not have his former glory. (John 17:5) But he did possess the glory of a human, a glory that he maintained without spot or blemish, since he never sinned, and thus never fell short of the glory of his God and Father. (Romans 3:23) According to the scriptures, all mankind are dying because of Adam’s sin. (1 Corinthians 15:21,22; Romans 5:12-19) Yet Jesus never sinned. Does this mean that Jesus was not a man? Common evidence of the scriptures show that Jesus is not included in the “all” being spoken, since the manner in which he came into this world was not as a result of uniting a man’s sperm with the ovum of a woman. Hebrews 10:5 lets us know that his body was specially prepared by God Himself. He was not of dying race in Adam. (Romans 5:115-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22) Thus, his body was not a dying body, but it was a body having sinless life,  a body with the possibility of living forever, as Adam had before Adam sinned. John, in speaking in the past, while Jesus was flesh, said that: “In him was life.” (John 1:4) Jesus could not give dying flesh for mankind, but he could give living flesh (flesh not under condemnation of death), which he spoke of symbolically as “living bread.” (John 6:51) Jesus, therefore, offering his life, was offering the life that was in him, in his flesh, his human body, for the world of mankind. And having thus never sinned, having proven himself incorruptible before God even under severe sufferings, Jesus brought life and incorruption to light for mankind. (2 Timothy 1:10) He condemned sin in the flesh, proving that a sinless man could remain obedient. (Romans 8:3) In his obedience, he, as a human being, was brought to perfection, to completion, thus putting on incorruption (having proven himself incorruptible), as Adam could have done had Adam remained obedient. By his obedience to the only true God, Jesus thus conquered, and thus, as a human, no death could claim any hold on him. However, Jesus willingly gave up his human soul — his human sentiency — to pay the price for Adam and the dying race in Adam, so that his soul — his sentiency — was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit. (1 Peter 3:18)  In receiving his soul back from realm of death, from the Bible hell, Jesus’ soul was no longer with the glory of a physical, terrestrial, earthy, body, but it was then a with the glory of a celestial, spiritual, heavenly body. Jesus, by his taking Adam’s place, has become the “last Adam” — the last father — the human race, so that his is now, not an earthly father, but the “life-giving spirit” from heaven.

Jesus gave himself as human in sacrifice, he did not give himself as THEOS in sacrifice.  The ransom sacrifice of Jesus only buys back what Adam lost. Adam lost sinless life on earth, in a physical, terrestrial body; Adam did not lose life in the heavens. It was only due to his sin, that Adam fell short of the glory of God. Before he sinned, therefore, his flesh did not fall short of that glory. There is nothing at all in the Bible that indicates that life in the heavens was ever offered to Adam. Thus, what Jesus gave to purchase mankind was not a spiritual, a celestial glory, but rather an earthly, fleshly glory. By offering in sacrifice that crown of glory, which is a little lower than the angels, Jesus therefore tasted death for every man. — Hebrews 2:9.

Of course, the name “Jesus” was first applied to Jesus when he became a Man. Before he became a man, Jesus tells us of his existence with the only true God, and that he had a glory at that time which he did not have as a man. Thus he prayed that the glory that he formerly had should be given to him again. (John 17:1,3,5) John speaks of that glory by using the Greek word “theos.” (John 1:1,2) Theos does usually mean “God,” but it does not always mean so. The Hebrews many times used the Hebrew words that are translated into Greek by the word “theos” to mean might, power, strength, etc. Jesus applied this general meaning to theos when he spoke of the sons of God as THEOI, thereby rendering the Hebrew ELOHIM by the Greek word THEOI (a plural of THEOS –  As a man, Jesus had the full glory of man, since he never fell short of that glory due to sin, for in him was no sin. That glory, however, is a glory a little lower than the angels. (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7) Thus his human crown of glory was never marred with sin, as is true of the descendants of Adam. — Romans 3:23; 5:12-19.

Jesus was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit. (1 Peter 3:18) If Jesus is still flesh, then he never sacrificed his flesh; thus there has never been any offering made to God for our sins. — John 6:51; Ephesians 5:2; Hebrews 9:14; 10:10,12.

Jesus is no longer in the “days of his flesh.” (Hebrews 5:7) He now has a celestial (heavenly), spiritual body, having become the life-giving spirit from heaven. — 1 Corinthians 15:40,44,45,47.

Thus, Jesus never had two different “natures” (glories) at once. Jesus, before he became flesh, did not have the crown of human being, a little lower than the angels, but he did have the a celestial glory alongside the only true God. When he became flesh, he did not have the glory that he formerly had, but he did have the terrestrial glory of a human being, a little lower than the angels. Having sacrificed the glory of being a human being, a little lower than the angels, Jesus now is again with the celestial glory. Jesus never possessed both glories at once, thus the doctrine of Jesus’ having dual natures/beings at once is not in the Bible.

To Be Continued in Part 2

In response to:

http://neoreformation.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/the-definition-of-jesus/

1 John 5:7 – Biblical Oneness Vs. Trinity

1 John 5:6
This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood.
1 John 5:7
It is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
1 John 5:8
For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood; and the three agree as one. — World English translation

In the KJV, based on the so-called “Textus Receptus”, 1 John 5:7 reads:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Most translations leave out the phrase “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” This is because these words are not found in the earlier Greek manuscripts, and more than likely were added later.

At any rate, even as it is given in the Textus Receptus, there is nothing there about three persons in one God (theos), or three persons in one being (ousia). The Greek word for “one” in 1 John 5:7 of the Textus Receptus is the word that is usually transliterated as “hen”. It is neuter, and thus would call for a neuter designation in reference to what the three are being spoken of as “one”. For the designation to have been one as in “one God”, the Greek would call for the Greek word masculine “heis”, not the neuter “hen”. This is shown in 1 Corinthians 8:6, where the Greek has “heis theos” (one God). Likewise, if the thought should be one being, then the Greek would call for the Greek word “mia”, not the Greek word “hen”. This is shown in the trinitarian phrases, “”treis hypostaseis en mia ousia”, (“three persons in one substance”), or “mia ousia, treis hypostaseis” (“One essence in three persons”).

The neuter designation is also indicated on 1 John 5:8, which reads in the King James Version:

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one (Greek, hen).

Thus the oneness being spoken of is a oneness of “agreement,” not of being “one God”, or of “one being”.

This is the same kind of oneness that Jesus prayed for his followers to have with himself and his God:

that they may be one, even as we are. — John 17:11.

that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us. — John 17:21.

Nor does the latter scripture say, as some would seem to want it to say: “that they may all be one; but not as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, and not that they also may be one in us.” Jesus is most definitely praying for the same manner of oneness that he has with his God and Father (John 10:30) be extended to include his followers.  If Jesus’ oneness with his God and Father means that Jesus is one God with his God (self-contradiction), then Jesus would actually have been praying for his followers to become one God with his Father.

Thus, 1 John 5:7, even as it reads in the Textus Receptus, says nothing about three persons in one God. Like all other scriptures presented to allegedly support the doctrine of the trinity, the trinitarian idea has to be assumed, added to, and read into what is stated. Even as it appears in the Textus Receptus, there is no reference at all to the trinity dogma.

See also:

http://reslight.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/1-john-571-john-57/

http://reslight.net/forum/index.php/topic,102.0.html

http://godandson.reslight.net/1john-5-7.html

http://clearblogs.com/jesusandhisgod/2206/John+10%3A30.html

http://reslight.net/forum/index.php/topic,236.0.html

http://godandson.reslight.net/john-10-30.html