That often when Jesus speaks to the Father, “Father” is used as a name. It isn’t just another title used for Yahweh, it’s the name of a “person” who is God.
Ah no. 'The Father' is not the name, it's a role in the same way as 'the Son' is not a name. Jesus used to speak a lot about how different attributes were considered belonging to God only belong now to him because the Father passed them over to him. The authority to give life, forgive sins, judge and so on. So 'the Father' and 'the Son' are roles.
Again, that simply cannot be an option as it doesn’t address the root of the problem. To be “of the same nature” means that the Son and Holy Spirit must be God also; it cannot be any other way. This is one of the very reasons for the doctrine of the Trinity.
Trinity is just a concept, doctrine and not a person you can see somewhere in the Bible. Could you provide some references mentioning trinity saying or doing something? Please provide from NT because it shows the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and reveals their relations most clearly.
He is the only one who is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. He alone created all that came into existence. He alone is necessary being, having always existed. He alone is perfectly holy, loving, and just. All those things, and more, belong to the nature of God alone. So, if the Son and the Holy Spirit share the same nature as the Father, and I agree that they do, it necessarily follows that they must also be truly God. It cannot be otherwise.
It cannot be otherwise, as you said, only for those believing in the trinity doctrine. This is simply your belief and interpretation and not something based on facts although you claim the opposite. But the reality and message of Jesus and all authors of NT is different. I can provide you plenty of clear references mentioning the Tree but are you able to provide just one mentioning that trinity?
Let's do the test, who do you see here:
Matthew 3
13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John in order to be baptized by him.
14 But John tried to prevent[
d] him, saying, “
I need[
e] to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
15 But Jesus answered
and[
f] said to him, “Permit
it now, for in this way it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he permitted him.
16 Now
after he[
g] was baptized, Jesus immediately went up from the water, and behold, the heavens opened[
h] and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove coming[
i] upon him.
17 And behold,
there was[
j] a voice from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”
If NT text is not enough let's take what is considered as I understand to be the earliest creed, Apostles' one, as an evidence what early church used to believe in:
I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended to the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.
Do you see some trinity here? If trinitarianism is based on God's revelation, which is not, and it's necessary to believe in it, and no one can be saved without believing in it, so why it's not in the creed?
No, there are three omniscient, omnipotent.
No, God created everything not by himself but through Jesus.
No, all three where in the beginning.
No, all three are perfectly holy, loving, and just.
This is exactly what NT teaches.
If they are each of the same nature but not a Trinity, then you only have polytheism or Modalism to try and account for three coequal persons with the same divine nature. But both of those positions directly contradict Scripture. That makes no pieces fit Scripture.
You can label it whatever you want. Once more, who do you see here:
Let's do the test, who do you see here:
Matthew 3
13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John in order to be baptized by him.
14 But John tried to prevent[
d] him, saying, “
I need[
e] to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
15 But Jesus answered
and[
f] said to him, “Permit
it now, for in this way it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he permitted him.
16 Now
after he[
g] was baptized, Jesus immediately went up from the water, and behold, the heavens opened[
h] and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove coming[
i] upon him.
17 And behold,
there was[
j] a voice from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”
Or do you want me to provide all mentions of the Three: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?
Could you provide just one reference mentioning trinity directly?
It is a title but when we use it to refer to the one true God, Yahweh, it also speaks to his nature because he is the only one. Numerous times throughout Scripture we are told that Yahweh is the only true, living God. The rest of the gods are man-made idols, at best. So, when we use the title God, it is referring to Yahweh, unless additional context shows otherwise.
Sure. Yahweh is the Father's name and he is the only true God. And you are right, since he was the first one who revealed himself to us as opposite to all those man-made idols, so called gods, doctrines and concepts now all divine attributes are defined in relation to the Father. So when NT says the Word was God it means the Word was of the same nature as the Father, the only true God.
Of course, as representatives of God, but they are not actual deity.
Sure.
In the proper sense it does belong only to Yahweh, of course, but the point is that Jesus is also called God in the full and proper sense.
Jhn 20:28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (ESV)
Yes, there's nothing wrong with that. If humans can be called that than even more he is worthy. He is God by nature and God by his deeds and authority.
But, it would make him less divine. There was, is, and ever will be only one God and it is only God who is deity, whose nature is divine. Everyone and everything else is necessarily less than.
No, there are three divine. Jesus was revealed to us as coequal to the Father in terms of nature.
No one is saying they are one person. The doctrine of the Trinity is very careful in its language—three persons, one being that is God; three “whos,” one what; three “whos,” one substance. Not one person nor three Gods.
You are saying there is only one being called God and use 'what' for him... or for it... But I don't care, glory to God I know the Three and has no need in any man-made doctrines.
But, as I stated, if you reject the Trinity, your only options are polytheism or Modalism. Your position of simply stating “there are three divine” who are “coequal in nature” creates significant problems and doesn’t solve anything since you reject the Trinity.
Glory to God I have the best possible option to simply believe in what was revealed to us. Throw out those labels they are just meant to prevent from seeing the true option. I will gladly and without any hesitation throw out everything for the sake of Truth because 'my position' is simply what NT says and I got no problems, I'm not a unitarian not believing Jesus is like God by nature or the Holy Spirit is a person. I need nothing except the Three.
But just for curiosity, what problems do you believe I have believing only in the Three?
That is some of what it is about, yes.
No worries; it isn’t a problem.
