The Forgotten Trinity-James R. White tries to Explain the Unexplainable!

The Forgotten Trinity?

Trying to explain the unexplainable.

Unless otherwise stated, all scriptures used are from the New American Standard Bible
"It is so misunderstood that a majority of christians, when asked, give incorrect and at times downright heretical definitions of the Trinity." Page 16
Wow...what a lousy job Christendom has done educating its masses. A further examination of this book will explain why. John 1:1 "Few passages of Scripture are more important to our study of the Trinity, and in particular, of the person of the Son, than the prologue of John." p.48
Really? The last time I looked, it takes "3" to make a Trinity...hence the name. The Holy Spirit isn't even mentioned in the prologue of John. But to explain these few passages further, let us go to John 1:18. John 1:18 "No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
I will say that this is proof that Jesus can't be God almighty because people have seen Jesus. But Mr. White asks who walked with Abraham in Genesis 18:1? I have one word for you: "ANGELS". This is even stated in Genesis 19:1.
Who was the voice in the Burning Bush? The voice said, I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Then Moses hid his face , for he was afraid to look at God." Ex.3:6. But if you look at Ex.3:2 you will see that it was "the angel of the LORD" that appeared to him. This fact is re-iterated at Acts 7:30. Yes, angels were allowed to represent Jehovah/Yahweh....and even to use his name.(Exodus 3:13-15)
Angels were messengers of God. Moses was also a messenger. He is also called God. "Then the LORD said to Moses, 'See, I make you as God to Pharoah" Exodus 7:1
Jesus Christ is also a messenger of God, that is why he is referred to as the "Word". And that is why he can also be referred to as God. But none of the above are Almighty God, because as the Bible says, God is "invisible" (Colossians 1:15) and that "no man may see Me and live!"(Exodus 33:20)
"If Moses could be ['elohim](God), then, for the gospel writers, so could Jesus, who was regarded by the New Testament as at the very least a new Moses." p.252 4Q374: A Discourse on the Sinai Tradition: The Deification of Moses and Early Christology, Dead Sea Discoveries 3.3
Robert Wilken wrote in _The Myth of Christian Beginnings: "From the very beginning, the Christian tradition had struggled with the question of JESUS' relation to God . . . Very early Christians tried to account for his extraordinary life and accomplishments and his Resurrection, and it was not long before he was called Son of God--then God. EVEN SO, HE WAS NOT GOD IN THE SENSE IN WHICH THE FATHER WAS GOD--OR WAS HE? Was he creator, was he eternal, should he be addressed in prayer? These and other questions troubled thoughtful Christians for almost three centuries. During
these years, MOST CHRISTIANS VAGUELY THOUGHT OF JESUS AS GOD; yet they did not actually think of him IN THE SAME WAY THAT THEY THOUGHT OF GOD THE FATHER. They seldom addressed prayers to him, and thought of him somehow as SECOND TO GOD--DIVINE, YES, BUT NOT FULLY GOD . . . When the controversy over the relation of Jesus to God the Father broke out in the early fourth century, most Christians
were"SUBORDINATIONISTS," i.e. they believed that Christ was God BUT NOT IN PRECISELY THE SAME WAY THAT THE FATHER WAS GOD" (See pp. 177-183). Granville Sharp's Rule "our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus."
"that mightie God, and of our saviour Jesus Christ" (Geneva Bible) Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1
Mr. White states Granville Sharps rule of greek grammar which means that when 2 nouns in the same case are connected with kai(and), when only the first noun has an article, both nouns refer to the same person, but as Matthew 17:1 points out, there are exceptions to every rule. [While some may argue that names do not apply to the rule, I think that Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1 are semantic equivalents to names, and therefore do not apply either]. In at least 10 other instances though, God and Jesus are described as different individuals.(2Peter 1:2; 1Timothy 1:1,2; 2:5; 6:13; 2Timothy 1:1,2; 4:1; Titus 1:1; 3:6) Is is not better to explain things in a way that people understand, rather than relying on obscure "rules".
"You simply simply cannot find the doctrine of the Trinity set out anywhere in the Bible. St Paul has the highest view of Jesus' role and person, but nowhere does he call him God. Nor does Jesus himself explicitly claim to be the second person of the Trinity, wholly equal to his heavenly Father."-For Christ's Sake by Tom Harpur(Anglican Priest).
For more on Granville Sharp's Rule see Greg Stafford. I Am He When Jesus says "I Am" in John 8:24, 58, is he claiming to be Jehovah. Not when we read verse 50 where he says he does not seek his own glory. By ascribing the Exodus 3:14 to him at verse 58 makes Jesus a liar. Many trinitarians don't agree with this assumption that Jesus is saying that he is Jehovah/Yahweh here either. As for the NASB that James White uses, "Printing 'I AM' in capitals reflects the theory that Jesus is intending to make a claim connecting with the wording given in Ex.3:14. Full deity is attributed to Jesus Christ in the NASB."(The English Bible from KJV to NIV by Jack P. Lewis) That is why The New Living Translation has "Jesus answered, 'The truth is, I existed before Abraham was even born.' "
The truth is, almost all of the scriptures that James R. White uses exclude the Holy Spirit, which is needed to make a TRIUNE God. This just proves my assertion that all trinitarians are closet Sabellianists. The scriptures are also very ambiguous. It is for this reason that many reference works state: “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament.” The New Encyclopædia Britannica
"The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father" MS Encarta 99
"In the sense of a definition the doctrine of the Trinity is stated nowhere in Scripture." The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church Early Church Fathers Did the early church fathers believe in the same God as James R. White. Mr. White circles around this knowing full well that many of them held "heretical" views of the Trinity.
"With the exception of Athanasius virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordinationism at least up the year 355; subordinationism might indeed, until the denouement of the controversy, have been described as accepted orthodoxy." (Hanson, The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, p.xix)
"It is interesting that in the period before Nicaea a universal subordinationist view existed among the Fathers." (Rolf Furuli, The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation)
James White speaks passionately of the Nicene Creed which is evident on p.194 of his "King James Only Controversy". Even Grant Jeffrey states in his "The Handwriting of God" that 325 A.D.(the same year as the Creed, and Emperor Constantine was the overseer of it) is when Constantine was baptized as a Christian. But history shows that he was still a sun worshipper, he thought of himself as God-incarnate, he even held Arian views of God. In fact, he only made a death-bed conversion to Christianity in 337 A.D. The "Christianity" of James White and other trinitarians has become bastardized. It is an awkward reflection of the "faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints." Jude 3 "One of the most effective ways of sharing the deity of Christ with one of Jehovah's Witnesses is... ...to demonstrate that the New Testament identifies Jesus as Yahweh." J.R.White(The King James Only Controversy, p.205)
He says that there are passages in the O.T. like Ps. 102:25-7 that refer to Jehovah, but are used in reference to Jesus in the N.T. like Hebrews 1:10-12. This is true. Does that make Jesus Jehovah? NO! A scripture in Matthew 2:15 applies to Jesus, but the earlier reference in Hosea 11:1 applies to Israel. Does than make them the same? No! There is a prophecy about Elijah in Malachi 4:5 that is applied to John the Baptist in Matthew 17:12,13; 11:14. Is John the Baptist really Elijah? No! They just did a similar work. There are more examples, but these should suffice.
Notice that argument starts with showing the DEITY of Christ. This is a smoke and mirrors ploy. By trying to show you the supposed DEITY of Christ, they are not showing you the TRIUNITY of their God. Greg Stafford In his NOTES in the back of his book, James White makes very unfavorable references(about 16) to Greg Stafford and his book "Jehovah's Witnesses Defended". Click here for the other side of the story.
Email Me