If God and Jesus are Equal, Thus the Trinity, How do you explain these scriptures?

Question

John 14:28:

"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my FATHER IS GREATER THAN I" (my caps)

Hebrews 5:7:

"Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;" (Why would Jesus have Godly fear if they are equal)

1 Corinthians 15:28:

"And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (Why would Jesus SUBJECT himself to God if they are equal)

These passages come from KJV

Diedre H----Sorry Can't agree with you

The bible also says

Genesis 2:24:

24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be ONE FLESH(my caps)

So does this mean that husbands and wives are equal or the same person--absolutely not, because we know that the man is the "head" of the woman.

The idea of being one is no more literal in the scripture you mention than it is in this one.

And i have cited here only 3 of many scriptures that support the inequality of God and Jesus.

Answer 1

Trinity: The central doctrine of religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three “Persons” are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. Thus some Trinitarians emphasize their belief that Jesus Christ is God, or that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are Jehovah. Not a Bible teaching.

Does the Bible teach that all who are said to be part of the Trinity are eternal, none having a beginning?

Col. 1:15, 16, RS: “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth.” In what sense is Jesus Christ “the first-born of all creation”? (1) Trinitarians say that “first-born” here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this expression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of “firstborn,” it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah’s family of sons. (2) Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals. What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? (3) Does Colossians 1:16, 17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created, when it says “in him all things were created . . . all things were created through him and for him”? The Greek word here rendered “all things” is pan′ta, an inflected form of pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this “all . . . other”; JB reads “any other”; NE says “anyone else.” (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB.) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regarding the Son, NW assigns the same meaning to pan′ta at Colossians 1:16, 17 so that it reads, in part, “by means of him all other things were created . . . All other things have been created through him and for him.” Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.

Rev. 1:1; 3:14, RS: “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him . . . ‘And to the angel of the church in La-odicea write: “The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [Greek, ar·khe′] of God’s creation.”’” (KJ, Dy, CC, and NW, as well as others, read similarly.) Is that rendering correct? Some take the view that what is meant is that the Son was ‘the beginner of God’s creation,’ that he was its ‘ultimate source.’ But Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon lists “beginning” as its first meaning of ar·khe′. (Oxford, 1968, p. 252) The logical conclusion is that the one being quoted at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of God’s creations, that he had a beginning. Compare Proverbs 8:22, where, as many Bible commentators agree, the Son is referred to as wisdom personified. According to RS, NE, and JB, the one there speaking is said to be “created.”)

Prophetically, with reference to the Messiah, Micah 5:2 (KJ) says his “goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” Dy reads: “his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity.” Does that make him the same as God? It is noteworthy that, instead of saying “days of eternity,” RS renders the Hebrew as “ancient days”; JB, “days of old”; NW, “days of time indefinite.” Viewed in the light of Revelation 3:14, discussed above, Micah 5:2 does not prove that Jesus was without a beginning.

In what position does belief in the Trinity put those who cling to it?

It puts them in a very dangerous position. The evidence is indisputable that the dogma of the Trinity is not found in the Bible, nor is it in harmony with what the Bible teaches. (See the preceding pages.) It grossly misrepresents the true God. Yet, Jesus Christ said: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:23, 24, RS) Thus Jesus made it clear that those whose worship is not ‘in truth,’ not in harmony with the truth set out in God’s own Word, are not “true worshipers.” To Jewish religious leaders of the first century, Jesus said: “For the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’” (Matt. 15:6-9, RS) That applies with equal force to those in Christendom today who advocate human traditions in preference to the clear truths of the Bible.

Regarding the Trinity, the Athanasian Creed (in English) says that its members are “incomprehensible.” Teachers of the doctrine often state that it is a “mystery.” Obviously such a Trinitarian God is not the one that Jesus had in mind when he said: “We worship what we know.” (John 4:22, RS) Do you really know the God you worship?

Serious questions confront each one of us: Do we sincerely love the truth? Do we really want an approved relationship with God? Not everyone genuinely loves the truth. Many have put having the approval of their relatives and associates above love of the truth and of God. (2 Thess. 2:9-12; John 5:39-44) But, as Jesus said in earnest prayer to his heavenly Father: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3, NW) And Psalm 144:15 truthfully states: “Happy is the people whose God is Jehovah!”—NW.

Answer 2

In the first passage, it says that only the Father can predict when the day will come. But where does it say all three are coequal, if the Father made them all? Have you ever heard the phrase "Jesus sits at the right Hand of God"? That means you go through Jesus to get to God, but not that they were the same. Never does it say "Jesus is the right Hand, but rather "Jesus sits at the right Hand." Therefore he is answering as the Gateway, not as God Himself. Its a pretty big commitment to say you can be forgiven for speaking against Christ. Be glad God gave you that promise. Don't abuse it and ask permission to put down the Holy Spirit. Since Jesus is the Gateway to God, then God is obviously greater then Jesus. Jesus was born to be an equal with mankind. Therefore, the head of a man is indirectly the head of Christ. And since men and women or of mankind, the head of a women is indirectly her husband. This must mean that the head of Christ is of God's ranking. All humanity is placed under Jesus. This makes perfect sense, because Jesus is a God/Man. Then as I said like 5 times, Jesus is placed under God. Hebrews came to be Jews, and Judaism believes Jesus a prophet, but not the Messiah. Therefore, Hebrew has no need to apply the Son or the Holy Spirit.

Answer 3

You are right about something: That Jesus subjected Himself to the Father. He did.
He most certainly did.

But we also have to realize that we touch upon the nature of God when attempting describe the relationship of Him as if we were discussing the ever elusive nature of God with Himself. That has eluded many scholars over the centuries; even the name "trinity" being an attempt that falls short of the real truths about that, whatever they may be.

But it is correct in saying that Jesus gave Himself, or: God gave Himself in order that we might live. I remember the verses in Philippians 2 that line all that out for us. It would make a very worthy study to go through it is Greek!
5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7 but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

If what you are saying co relates with those statements, then I would say that you had it right on.

Answer 4

Remember that when Jesus was on earth in human form He gave up the glory that He had when He was with the Father. How else could He be fully God and fully man at the same time. He submitted Himself even unto death on the cross so we could be saved if we so chose. Now that He is back with the Father He has all that glory returned to Him.

You may also want to ask why should a woman submit to her husband if they are equal? Submission is not allowing yourself to be walked upon nor does submission make you of less worth than the one you are submitting to. It simple puts an order to things, it doesn't cause you to be inferior.

Answer 5

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

Here's part of what the link says.

Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system.

But to more specifically answer your question, the Bible says that Jesus "emptied Himself", made Himself nothing taking on the form of a man. He humbled Himself and set aside his divine perogative so that He could live as a man and satisfy the requirements of the Law and offer Himself up as a sacrifice for others. (Philippians 2 & Hebrews 2).

Answer 6

Jesus said the Father was greater than He not because Jesus is not God, but because Jesus was also a man and as a man he was in a lower position. He was ". . . made for a little while lower than the angels . . ." (Heb. 2:9). Also in Phil. 2:5-8, it says that Jesus "emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men . . ."
Jesus has two natures. Jesus was not denying that He was God. He was merely acknowledging the fact that He was also a man. Jesus is both God and man. As a man, he was in a lesser position than the Father. He had added to Himself human nature (Col. 2:9). He became a man to die for people.
A comparison can be found in the marriage relationship. Biblically, a husband is greater in position and authority than his wife. But, he is no different in nature and he is not better than she. They share the same nature, being human, and they work together by love.
So, Jesus was not denying that He was God. He was simply acknowledging that He was also a man and as a man, he was subject to the laws of God so that He might redeem those who were under the law; namely, sinners (Gal. 4:4-5).

Answer 7

Jesus in his human form was "emptied" so to speak of his deity for our sakes(Philippians 2:6-11) yet in the end "Every knee will bow every tounge confess,Jesus is Lord".
His being the "Son" is for our sakes too. It makes it so we can understand a little better.It isn't 'who's more important' it is a positioning.Father ,Son and Holy Spirit.
In Genesis1 God says"Let US make man in OUR image"....In John 1 ,Collosians 1 and Hebrews 1 it says all things were made by God through Jesus.How can He not be God?He is the creator!

Answer 8

The Trinity is God: 1) the Father, 2) the Son (Jesus) and 3) the Holy Spirit. Jesus came down to earth in the human form of God. But he was separate from God, the Father. When He was about to be arrested, He prayed to the Father "to let this cup pass from Me. But not mine, but Thy will be done." And on the cross, He prayed again to the Father, "Forgive them, they know not what they do."

(Confusing I know; my mom explained it to me like this: take water. In three different forms, it can be ice/solid, liquid, or steam. But it's all still a form of water.) Hope that helps.

Answer 9

In my own earthly ignorance I will say that Jesus, who was the Son of God, begotten unto Mary by the Holy Ghost was here to teach us "the way."
He taught us to fear and follow and subject ourselves to the will of the Father, which is also His will, because they are one and the same. As far as I'm concerned the Mystery of the Holy Trinity is not to be questioned. I believe in the one true God that was taught to me by the Catholic Church.

Answer 10

FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended.

Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: “Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.”

What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea? The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”

Hence, Constantine’s role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology,” says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.

None of the bishops at Nicaea promoted a Trinity, however. They decided only the nature of Jesus but not the role of the holy spirit.

Answer 11

John 14:28 and 1 Corinthians 15:28

The "greater" is one of function, not nature. For example, the owner of a company is greater in terms of power in running the company than any of his employees, who are subject to him (within the limits of the law, at least). That, however, doesn't mean than he is ontologically greater than any of them.

Hebrews 5:7

"The Greek is literally 'from fear or reverence' - ἀπὸ της εὐλαβείας apo tēs eulabeias.... The word properly means 'caution, circumspection;' then timidity, fear; then the fear of God, reverence, piety.... The most natural and obvious interpretation, however, as it seems to me, is, that it means that he was heard on account of his reverence for God; his profound veneration; his submission."