Disproving the Trinity *mind=blown"

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by Coup d'état, Apr 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Menso

    Menso Go Lakers!

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    15,063
    :wtf2:

    Really? Jesus wasn't silent:

    27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

    28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.

    29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

    Is this silence? He not only failed to correct him, he effectively cosigned the statement.
    test
  2. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    The thing is, Thomas was not saying Elohim as the TRUE ETERNAL CREATOR. That is clear and even if you want to break down the original language and go that route it is clear.

    Yahshuah, Thomas, and all the disciples, even Paul later knew Yahshuah was the Son. This trinity doctrine is a MONSTER.

    Question, do you think Yahshuah is the Eternal Creator ? or are you just playing devils adovate ?
    test
  3. Menso

    Menso Go Lakers!

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    15,063
    You shall have no other Gods before me.

    Thomas clearly called him God, not only that, he called him "MY" God.
    test
  4. Menso

    Menso Go Lakers!

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    15,063
    I love how you sidestep the big questions. You said Jesus was silent, he clearly was not. Is this the knowledge of Scripture you bring to the table? If so, I really should take it easy on you: your wits are not sufficient to the task at hand.
    test
  5. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    I don't think you quite understand. I am not trying to side step any questions. By you ignoring all the scriptures and even the purpose of the Gospels you are rejecting the real MessiYAH's claims as to who he was and why he was sent. The Gospel of John whole purpose was to established Yahshuah as the Son of Elohim, as the MEssiYAH that we may belive on his name...not to establish him as Elohim.

    let me clear up. By silent I meant that Yahshuah did not forth right correct him about him calling him ELohim. There is a reason he did not. They both knew he was not the true creator.

    Thomas understood this.

    Since John writes that we might have life believing in the name of Yahshuah, one should also be reminded of Yahshuah's words at John 17:3, "Father.... this is eternal LIFE that they may know You, the only true Elohim, and Yahshuah the MessiYAH whom You sent.

    Thomas' words to Yahshuah in Greek literally read, "the Lord of me and the God of me." In Greek this is how one would refer to two persons. If one wanted to refer to one person he would say, "the Lord and God of me." This is confirmed by the first and Sixth Granville Sharp rules. However, Trinitarians make a convenient exception to the sixth rule for this particular verse.

    There are actually TWO important things to see here. First, there is the fact that both nouns, (1) Lord, and (2) God, are each qualified by the definition article ('the'). Second, both nouns, (1) Lord, and (2) God, are qualified by the words "of me." This is also telling. Thomas could have said, "the Lord and the God of me." But he did not.

    The Granville Sharp First Rule of Greek Grammar states that when you have a TSKS construction, only one person is being identified. In simple terms, this means a THE-NOUN-AND-NOUN word construction. So if a person wanted to refer to Jesus as his Lord and God it would be stated in Greek as, "the Lord and God of me." Essentially, one definite article ("the") indicates one person is in view. Trinitarians insist upon this rule at Titus 2:13 and allow no one any exceptions. However, this is not the construction Thomas used at John 20:28. Thomas used the construction which Greek speakers used to refer to two persons.

    The Granville Sharp first rule was the result of research by a man named Granville Sharp. However, it is not enough for someone to say that such a Greek construction demonstrated only one person is in view. He had to also demonstrate that a Greek speaker would say such words differently if two persons were in view instead of one.

    The Granville Sharp Sixth Rule states that when you have a TSKTS construction, two persons are in view. In simple terms, this is a THE-NOUN-AND-THE-NOUN construction. So if you wanted to refer to both your Lord and another identity who is your God, you would say, "the Lord of me and the God of me." Essentially, two definite articles ("the") indicates two persons are in view. One definite article, one person, two definite articles, two persons. However, while Trinitarians allow no one any exceptions to the first GS rule at Titus 2:13, they completely deny the sixth GS rule at John 20:28 and make a convenient exception for themselves for the sake of their doctrine.


    2. Further Grammar Observations

    Thomas not only used the Greek convention to signify two persons, he also did something else which indicates two persons are being identified. Thomas also did not say, "the Lord and the God of me." He actually said, "the Lord OF ME and the God OF ME." This further indicates that Thomas had two persons in view.



    3.The Grammar of the Context

    At John 20:17, Jesus speaks and uses the Greek convention to signify one person, "THE Father of me and Father of you and God of me and God of you." This is even further evidence that Thomas did not refer to one person but to two persons. John's grammar convention is to use one definite article for one person as we see in John 20:17 only a few verses prior to John 20:28. The "of me" vs. "of you" expressions are simply alternating and contrasting ways necessary for Jesus to make his point.



    4. What Jesus said about Seeing and Believing

    The grammatical evidence that Thomas was referring to two persons is very weighty. So now we must inquire as to whether there is any other evidence this could be the case, especially from John's Gospel since John 20:28 appears in John's Gospel. And indeed, Jesus gives a very clear teaching that exactly pertains to our question.

    We have seen that preceding verse and the following verse of John 20:28, the immediate context, is about seeing and believing. Thomas' statement is embedded and framed by Jesus' comments on seeing and believing. Jesus explained on at least two occasions what it means to see and believe in him - that to see and believe in him was to see and believe in the Father.

    And Jesus cried out and said, "He who believes in Me does not believe in Me but in Him who sent Me. He who sees Me sees Him who sent Me." (John 12:44-45).

    He who has seen Me has seen the Father. (John 14:9).

    My Lord and My God. (John 20:28).



    Keeping in mind that John 20:28 is embedded and framed in Jesus' statements about seeing and believing, carefully regard what Jesus taught us with respect to John 20:28.

    Verse Jesus The Father
    John 12:44 He who BELIEVES in ME [BELIEVES] in HIM who sent me.
    John 12:45 He who SEES ME SEES HIM who sent me
    John 14:9 He who has SEEN ME has SEEN THE FATHER.
    John 20:28 MY LORD and MY GOD.

    Conclusion

    When all the evidence is weight, there is simply no doubt that Thomas was affirming Jesus' earlier teaching to him and the other disciples, that to see and believe in Jesus was to see and believe in the Father.
    test
  6. Brown Jesus

    Brown Jesus Menso is for Dummies

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,254
    Collossians 1:13-18.

    What are you saying Coup?

    The Word of God possesses the creative force; Jesus is the Word of God.
    test
  7. Brown Jesus

    Brown Jesus Menso is for Dummies

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,254
    No more devils advocate, you clearly don't understand the term.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)