The Trinity: A False Doctrine

We both agree that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are equally God. The difference is that you believe they are all united in one being AS one being, and I believe that they are separate beings. I will dedicate this round, then, to defending the individuality of each person of the Godhead. At the end of my argument, I will refute your points, and defend my own. First off, the Bible makes it clear that Jesus is not the Father. Lets look at what Matthew 28:19 has to say about this... "First, let's turn our attention to Matthew 28:19, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit". The grammatical construction of this verse is very revealing with regards to Trinitarian doctrine. First, each person of the Trinity is identified individually with use of the definite article preceding each (the Father…the Son…the Holy Spirit). The use of the definite article for each person of the Trinity identifies each as unique and distinct from the others. Yet at the same time, this verse groups each into a singular entity by use of the singular form "the name of". What is this name? The singular name of God is Yahweh/Jehovah, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit share that name." (http://www.contenderministries.org...) These are more than just "titles", but actual references and names. This is not the only passage that contradicts your position. Take a look at the following... John 5:31-32--- "If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid. There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is valid." God testifying for Himself? Sounds a bit schizophrenic to me. John 8:16-18--- "But if I do judge, my decisions are right, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two men is valid. I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me." Jesus stands with Himself? The one that should really stump you is "my other witness is the Father, who sent me", because Jesus just got done saying that a testimony for Himself would be invalid. Yet you still think that they are the same person? He still did testify for Himself, but that means little to humans. He needed another testimony from another being, and that being was God the Father; an ENTIRELY seperate being. John 11:41-42--- "So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, 'Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me.'" Then Jesus looked up and said, "Father (being Himself), I thank myself that I have heard myself. I knew that I always hear myself, but I said this to myself for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe I sent myself." Doesn't make sense does it. Jesus is OBVIOUSLY talking to another being. While we are on the topic of addressing seperate beings, read John 17. Jesus, in this passage, is praying to the Father. It is COMPLETELY ludicrous to say that He is praying to Himself. This, again, would show signs os schizophrenia. Before I continue on, I would like to make exactly clear what I believe concedrning this doctrine, because I don't think I have as of yet. I believe that All three persons are completely united as one God. The Father cannot cease to exist without the other two ceasing to exist as well. I believe also that they exist in three distinct persons, each posessing every attribute of God, and each being individual in their function. Having siad that, I will move on. I could use far more scripture to defend this, but for the time being I will move on. JESUS IS NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT. We can use Matthew 28:19 as proof here, but other than that there is more. John 15:26--- "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me." Here Jesus is sending the Holy Spirit out from the Father. Once again, it is ludicrous to say that Jesus is refering to Himself three times. Also, if you truly believe that they are all one being, you once again would have to diagnose God with schizophrenia; a most disrespectful thing to do. John 16:7--- "Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you." Jesus once again is refering to sending the Holy Spirit. This time, however, He is saying that He must go in order for the Spirit to come. I takes some faith to think that He is refering to Himself. In the sense that they are all completely unified as one God, the Holy Spirit IS Jesus. Thet are, however, defined as twon seperate beings, and therefore we must, by faith, accept them as two seperate beings, performing two seperte roles in the Godhead. John 14:16--- "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever," Once again, the same as above. Jesus talking about Himself three different times? Ludicrous. THE FATHER IS NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT Again, we can go to Matthew 28:19, but I will leave that as it is and go elsewhere for now. Rom. 8:26-27--- "Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. Acording to the will of God. God does things according to the will of God? Thats redundant. All of the above verses concerning the Holy Spirit are evidence of this claim as well, but for the sake of space, I will not continue on this in this argument. I can address it further in my final argument if need be. Now to your points. "The question is, why should I or anyone else not take that verse at face value?" I am simply not sure how to answer this. I do take it at face value, as do you. The difference is, we have a different view on the Trinity doctrine, so we cannot see eye to eye. I guess the best I can do to answer this is to say, I do take it at face value, because I too believe there is but one God. "Without the slightest pause, she explained that to refer to God...in the singular would be utterly insufficient and even disrespectful." You argue the majestic plural. This is a fairly sound argument, and it could very well go either way. The scripture could be read either way, and there is not a deffinite answer on either side, so I think that we will have to let this one go. "have you ever heard of the royal 'we'?" Your grasping at straws here. This would be the only time IN THE WHOLE BIBLE that God does this, and the whole idea of it is extremely weak. God does not dop this sort of thing anywhere else in the Bible, and it is weak to claim He does here. In reference to John 1, the word is obviously a person. The word is given a gender. "He was in the beginning with God". Also, God wrote the Bible through men, while in John it says "The word was with God and the word was God". Notice that in the greek, when it says the word was with God, the word for "with" could also be transleted as "in the presence of". Finally, the Bible is not God. It cannot be God. It is His word, but not Him. I I write book expressing my feels perfectly, does that make the book me? "why do we need God the Father and God the Holy spirit?" This is like asking "why do I need my appendix?". We are not asking why God is necessary, but if He is three persons or one. Gabriel didn't say God the Son because he didn't have to. There is only one God. Thats all the space I have. Thanks! Renzzy