Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

An Open Debate on the Trinity with JLB

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Trinitarian scholar, minister, and missionary, H. R. Boer admits: The very first Christians to really discuss Jesus’ relationship to God in their writings were the Apologists.

“Justin and the other Apologists therefore taught that the Son is a creature. He is a high creature, a creature powerful enough to create the world, but nevertheless, a creature. In theology this relationship of the Son to the Father is called Subordinationism. The Son is subordinate, that is, secondary to, dependent upon, and caused by the Father.” - p. 110, A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans (trinitarian), 1976.

Other respected scholars agree.
“Before the Council of Nicaea (AD 325) all theologians viewed the Son as in one way or another subordinate to the Father.” - pp. 112-113, Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity (trinitarian), 1977; and p. 114, The History of Christianity, A Lion Handbook, Lion Publishing, 1990 revised ed.

“The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.
 
That's amazing .
So in your mind God failing to " prove who He was " was a real possibility in the mind of both the most magnificent angel God ever created & Jesus Christ ?
Really ?



" Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God."

( Matthew 4:7 )
This is what happens when we have wrong theology. Because you don't understand the relationship between the Father and Son, you believe that Jesus called Himself, the Lord thy God. This is how people get so far off base. You believe one thing about Christ and you filter your reading of the Scriptures through that belief. But, because the first belief is incorrect it causes you to draw incorrect conclusions about the Scripture you're reading. Instead of spending your time with questions that serve no purpose, why not use that time to reconcile "ALL" of the passages that deal with the subject?
 
Last edited:
Trinitarian scholar, minister, and missionary, H. R. Boer admits: The very first Christians to really discuss Jesus’ relationship to God in their writings were the Apologists.

“Justin and the other Apologists therefore taught that the Son is a creature. He is a high creature, a creature powerful enough to create the world, but nevertheless, a creature. In theology this relationship of the Son to the Father is called Subordinationism. The Son is subordinate, that is, secondary to, dependent upon, and caused by the Father.” - p. 110, A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans (trinitarian), 1976.

Other respected scholars agree.

“Before the Council of Nicaea (AD 325) all theologians viewed the Son as in one way or another subordinate to the Father.” - pp. 112-113, Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity (trinitarian), 1977; and p. 114, The History of Christianity, A Lion Handbook, Lion Publishing, 1990 revised ed.

“The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.

Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 A.D.)
Justin, whom the trinitarian The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (p. 770) called “the most outstanding of the ‘Apologists,’” wrote:
God alone is unbegotten and incorruptible, and therefore He is God, but all other things after him are created and corruptible {Justin has just concurred that the world was begotten by God} .... take your stand on one Unbegotten, and say this is the Cause of all. - The Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF) 1:197 (‘Dialogue’).

Nevertheless, in Justin’s picture, as later in Tertullian’s, the generation of the Logos takes place only with a view to the world’s creation. The Son, therefore, is not co-eternal with God; Moreover, he exists to provide a mediator between God and the cosmos in creation and revelation, as the language of John 1:3 and 1:18, not to mention 1 Corinthians 8:6, seemed to suggest. Thus, the Logos theology appeared to introduce a ‘second God’ {deuteros theos - ‘a second god’ was the well-known term used by Philo and many of the second century Christian writers - see the LOGOS study} inconsistently with the principle of monotheism; and further, it suggested that the Logos represented a secondary grade or kind of divinity. It ‘subordinated’ the Son to the Father. - p. 84, A History of the Christian Church, Walker (trinitarian), Scribner’s, 1985 printing.

Irenaeus (c. 140-203 A.D.)
“... neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in His own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord supreme .... the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; it is incumbent on us to follow ... their testimonies to this effect.” (ANF, 1:422, ‘Against Heresies’)

“Such, then, are the first principles of the Gospel: that there is one God, the Maker of this universe; He who was also announced by the prophets ... which proclaim the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ignore any other God or Father except Him.” (ANF, 1:428, ‘Against Heresies’)

“For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father.” (ANF, 1:399-400, ‘Against Heresies’)

“If, for instance, anyone asks, ‘what was God doing before He made the world?’ we reply that the answer to such a question .... remains with God, and it is not proper for us to aim at bringing forward foolish, rash, and blasphemous suppositions [in reply to it] .... For consider all ye who invent such opinions, since the Father Himself is alone called God ... since, moreover, the Scriptures acknowledge Him alone as God” - (ANF, 1:400, ‘Against Heresies’)

Like most, if not all, Ante-Nicene Fathers Irenaeus taught that “Wisdom” speaking at Prov. 8:22-30 is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ, the Word. In fact, the very trinitarian writers of ANF admit also:
Prov. viii 22-25. This is one of the favourite Messianic quotations of the Fathers, and is considered as the base of the first chapter of St. John’s Gospel. - ANF 1:488, f.n. #10.

Here, then, is what Irenaeus taught about the Son of God, Wisdom, the Word, speaking at Prov. 8:22-25:
‘The Lord {“YHWH” in Hebrew OT manuscripts} created me the beginning of His ways in His work ... before all the hills, He brought me forth ... when He made the foundations of the earth strong, I was with Him preparing [them].’ .... There is therefore one God, who by {through} the Word and Wisdom created and arranged all {other} things. - ANF 1:488.

Tertullian (c. 160-220 A.D.)

Tertullian gave a distinctly subordinate place to the Son. The Son is not eternal. The eternal God became Father when he begot {or ‘generated’ or ‘produced’} the Son, just as he became Creator when he made the world. On this point Tertullian is one with the Apologists. - pp. 112-113, Boer (trinitarian), A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans (trinitarian), 1976.

Tertullian, too, like the other Ante-Nicene Fathers, taught that Prov. 8:22-30 relates the words of the Son of God, Christ (speaking as “Wisdom”):
“‘At first the Lord {YHWH} created me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works, before He made the earth, before the mountains were settled; moreover, before all the hills did He beget me;’ that is to say, He created and generated me in His own intelligence.” - ANF, 3:601, ‘Against Praxeas’. (Oldest existing manuscripts from 11th century)

And,
"Scripture in other passages teaches us of the creation of the individual parts. You have Wisdom {the Son of God} saying, ‘But before the depths was I brought forth,’ in order that you may believe that the depths were also ‘brought forth’ - that is, created - just as we create sons also, though we ‘bring them forth.’ It matters not whether the depth {like Wisdom itself} was made or born, so that a beginning be accorded to it" - ANF, 3:495, ‘Against Hermogenes’. (Oldest existing manuscript from early 11th century)

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-213 A.D.)
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 - c. 213), wrote, in a discussion of God:
“This discourse respecting God is most difficult to handle. For since the first principle of everything is difficult to find out, the absolutely first and oldest principle, which is the cause of all other things being and having been, is difficult to exhibit. …. No one can rightly express Him wholly. For on account of His greatness He is ranked as the All, and is the Father of the universe. Nor are any parts to be predicated of Him For the One is indivisible.” – pp. 463-4, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers [ANF], Eerdmans Publishing, 1989.

Clement, as with most (if not all) of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, also believed and taught that Prov. 8:22-30 presented the words of the Son of God (speaking as “Wisdom”) in his pre-human existence. He wrote:

“Wisdom, which was the first of the creation of God.” (Cf. Rev. 3:14) - ANF 2:465, ‘The Stromata.’
 
That's amazing .
So in your mind God failing to " prove who He was " was a real possibility in the mind of both the most magnificent angel God ever created & Jesus Christ ?
Really ?



" Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God."

( Matthew 4:7 )
This is an angle I never thought of. When people questioned and/or contemplated about Him He simply replied with a "And who do you say that I Am?" while here He directly confronts Satan by declaring who He is........astounding.
 
It takes a thousand words of heresy to try to tear down Christ, but Thomas spoke for us all when he dropped to his knees and said "My Lord and my God."
Yes he said that. But that doesn't prove this there in one concept. No one is arguing that Jesus isn't Deity. You guys keep trying to prove something that no one is disagreeing with .But then you're claiming this supports the three in one concept. The question you should be asking is, if this concept is true, why didnt those who were taught by the apostles believe it?
 
This is an angle I never thought of. When people questioned and/or contemplated about Him He simply replied with a "And who do you say that I Am?" while here He directly confronts Satan by declaring who He is........astounding.
It's also a misunderstanding of the text. That may be why you never thought of it.
 
Yes he said that. But that doesn't prove this there in one concept. No one is arguing that Jesus isn't Deity. You guys keep trying to prove something that no one is disagreeing with .But then you're claiming this supports the three in one concept. The question you should be asking is, if this concept is true, why didnt those who were taught by the apostles believe it?
You, by saying Christ is a deity, are saying there are multiple Gods. This simply cannot be. It doesn't matter if you slice and dice with Gods/gods/1/2 gods. There is ONLY ONE GOD.
 
You, by saying Christ is a deity, are saying there are multiple Gods. This simply cannot be. It doesn't matter if you slice and dice with Gods/gods/1/2 gods. There is ONLY ONE GOD.
But that's you opinion. The Bible shows us otherwise. As we see in Gen 19 there is Jehovah on earth and Jehovah in Heaven. No matter how you do the math, that's two.

I do have a question though. With the overwhelming amount of evidence presented in this thread, why would you still hold to an idea that is found no where in Scripture? At the very least why wouldn't you at least question it?
 
"Before all things was the Word."
The " Word " was not created, the Word " was " always in existence

" And the Word was God " ( John 1:1 )

" and the Word was made flesh.. " ( John 1:14 )
But you didn't post anything saying the Word always existed.

7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. (Ps. 2:1 KJV)

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: (Col. 1:15 KJV)

How does one exist before they are born?
 
Jesus being the target of Satan's " tempting", why does He then respond to Satan by saying:

" Thou shall not tempt the Lord Thy God " ( Matthew 4:7 )

Himself being the one in Satan's crosshairs ?
Did He think he could fool Satan ?
Trinitarian scholar, minister, and missionary, H. R. Boer admits: The very first Christians to really discuss Jesus’ relationship to God in their writings were the Apologists.

“Justin and the other Apologists therefore taught that the Son is a creature. He is a high creature, a creature powerful enough to create the world, but nevertheless, a creature. In theology this relationship of the Son to the Father is called Subordinationism. The Son is subordinate, that is, secondary to, dependent upon, and caused by the Father.” - p. 110, A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans (trinitarian), 1976.

Other respected scholars agree.
“Before the Council of Nicaea (AD 325) all theologians viewed the Son as in one way or another subordinate to the Father.” - pp. 112-113, Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity (trinitarian), 1977; and p. 114, The History of Christianity, A Lion Handbook, Lion Publishing, 1990 revised ed.

“The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.

Many people have different opinions or view about God.


What do you believe, based or your personal study of scripture?


Do you believe Jesus Christ is Lord; the Lord God?




JLB
 
Since Tertullian is the one who coined the term as it applies to Christianity, I think his understanding is important. After all, it is the original teaching on the Trinity. Anything that doesn't align with that is either wrong or an addition. The idea in the Athanasian Creed came some 150-200 years later. It wasn't held prior to that. That's why I said it is a 5th century idea. There is a 400 year period where that idea isn't in church history. That brings me to the question, why should we believe an idea from the 5th century that is found nowhere in Scripture?
Tertullian was not the original teacher of the Trinity.
The idea of Jesus as God always existed - this being the reason that the early Christians were willing to be persecuted for the risen Christ - but it was not confirmed as necessary for belief until the creeds. As you know, creeds were a way of confirming a belief central to the church when that belief was threatened in some way. I site Arius for the Nicene Creed in 325AD...the idea that the 2nd person of the trinity did not always exist, but was created by God.

Because Tertullian came up with the term TRINITY does not necessarily make him right.
I've been asking you what he believed that is different from the "orthodox" view, but since you haven't answered I looked it up online.

This is what Tertullian believed:

In opposition to these he asserted and developed logos christology in a unique way. Here is a graphic illustration of Tertullian’s trinity—not a triune God, but rather a triad or group of three, with God as the founding member.

A representation of the trinity of Tertullian

Under the influence of Stoic philosophy, Tertullian believes that all real things are material. God is a spirit, but a spirit is a material thing made out of a finer sort of matter. At the beginning, God is alone, though he has his own reason within him. Then, when it is time to create, he brings the Son into existence, using but not losing a portion of his spiritual matter. Then the Son, using a portion of the divine matter shared with him, brings into existence the Spirit. And the two of them are God’s instruments, his agents, in the creation and governance of the cosmos.

The Son, on this theory, is not God himself, nor is he divine in the same sense that the Father is. Rather, the Son is “divine” in that he is made of a portion of the matter that the Father is composed of. This makes them “one substance” or not different as to essence. But the Son isn’t the same god as the Father, though he can, because of what he’s made of, be called “God”. Nor is there any tripersonal God here, but only a tripersonal portion of matter - that smallest portion shared by all three. The one God is sharing a portion of his stuff with another, by causing another to exist out of it, and then this other turns around and does likewise, sharing some of this matter with a third.


If the Son did not always exist...then the JW would be correct in their belief that Jesus is a unique Son,,,but is not GOD.
I find that explaining the Trinity is a real problem. It seems that our mind has to battle with not coming up with 3 Gods...
no matter how it's explained...3 Gods seem to appear.

Anyway, is the above what you believe?

Jesus, did say to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, He didn't say anything there about one God in three persons. What He said doesn't prove the idea from the 5th century.

The idea of the Trinity does appear in the NT...it just isn't fully clarified or revealed.
Jesus said He was sending the Helper...so t he Holy Spirit already existed too.
In the baptism of Jesus all 3 persons appear:
God Father
God Son
God the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove

Matthew 3:16-17
16After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him,
17and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.”


Tertullian believed the 2nd and 3rd persons were created...
if this was true, they could not be God.
God is not created --- He is self-created or always existent.
If a person is created, what created him is God....the person created must be less, and I believe Tertullian did believe this.

You're question is:

What is the main difference between what you believe Jesus to be and what the Christian faith believes?

I would submit that what I believe is the Christian faith. It was first. You can't have error in a doctrine before the doctrine is established. Therefore that which is first is right. If teaching on the trinity differs in the 5th century from that which was taught in the beginning, it is the 5th century teaching that is wrong.

You've confused me.
Please clarify what was taught FIRST
and what was taught in the 5th century.
I believe you brought up the 5th century,,,not me.
For me the early period of the church, including the ECFs ended in 325AD.

As we saw in Genesis 19, there was Jehovah on Earth and Jehovah in Heaven. That shows us from Scripture that there are two and that the modern idea cannot be correct. As I said earlier, This relationship isn't hard to understand if we just let the Scriptures speak and stop trying to force our ideas on it.

There are not two Jehovah's.
Genesis 19 is just speaking in the third person.
If a verse sounds like a new idea, we have to stop and try to understand it in a different way.
There are NOT TWO God FATHER'S.
Jehovah is God Father.

This is the Athanasian Creed. Is this the Creed which you hold to be correct?

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite.

So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say,

There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood.

Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.


BTW...Catholic means universal for the Creed.
Today the CC no longer believes Jesus entered into hell.
 
"Before all things was the Word."
The " Word " was not created, the Word " was " always in existence

" And the Word was God " ( John 1:1 )

" and the Word was made flesh.. " ( John 1:14 )
But you didn't post anything saying the Word always existed.
For me the scripture:
" Before all things was the Word...And the Word was God "
( John 1:14 )
Means the Word always existed.
What does it tell you about the Word's existence ?
 
Many people have different opinions or view about God.


What do you believe, based or your personal study of scripture?


Do you believe Jesus Christ is Lord; the Lord God?




JLB
I believe that if Jesus Christ did not come forth from the grave there would be no hope for me or you .
 
Tertullian was not the original teacher of the Trinity.
The idea of Jesus as God always existed - this being the reason that the early Christians were willing to be persecuted for the risen Christ - but it was not confirmed as necessary for belief until the creeds. As you know, creeds were a way of confirming a belief central to the church when that belief was threatened in some way. I site Arius for the Nicene Creed in 325AD...the idea that the 2nd person of the trinity did not always exist, but was created by God.

Because Tertullian came up with the term TRINITY does not necessarily make him right.
I've been asking you what he believed that is different from the "orthodox" view, but since you haven't answered I looked it up online.

This is what Tertullian believed:

In opposition to these he asserted and developed logos christology in a unique way. Here is a graphic illustration of Tertullian’s trinity—not a triune God, but rather a triad or group of three, with God as the founding member.

A representation of the trinity of Tertullian

Under the influence of Stoic philosophy, Tertullian believes that all real things are material. God is a spirit, but a spirit is a material thing made out of a finer sort of matter. At the beginning, God is alone, though he has his own reason within him. Then, when it is time to create, he brings the Son into existence, using but not losing a portion of his spiritual matter. Then the Son, using a portion of the divine matter shared with him, brings into existence the Spirit. And the two of them are God’s instruments, his agents, in the creation and governance of the cosmos.

The Son, on this theory, is not God himself, nor is he divine in the same sense that the Father is. Rather, the Son is “divine” in that he is made of a portion of the matter that the Father is composed of. This makes them “one substance” or not different as to essence. But the Son isn’t the same god as the Father, though he can, because of what he’s made of, be called “God”. Nor is there any tripersonal God here, but only a tripersonal portion of matter - that smallest portion shared by all three. The one God is sharing a portion of his stuff with another, by causing another to exist out of it, and then this other turns around and does likewise, sharing some of this matter with a third.


If the Son did not always exist...then the JW would be correct in their belief that Jesus is a unique Son,,,but is not GOD.
I find that explaining the Trinity is a real problem. It seems that our mind has to battle with not coming up with 3 Gods...
no matter how it's explained...3 Gods seem to appear.

Anyway, is the above what you believe?



The idea of the Trinity does appear in the NT...it just isn't fully clarified or revealed.
Jesus said He was sending the Helper...so t he Holy Spirit already existed too.
In the baptism of Jesus all 3 persons appear:
God Father
God Son
God the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove

Matthew 3:16-17
16After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him,
17and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.”


Tertullian believed the 2nd and 3rd persons were created...
if this was true, they could not be God.
God is not created --- He is self-created or always existent.
If a person is created, what created him is God....the person created must be less, and I believe Tertullian did believe this.



You've confused me.
Please clarify what was taught FIRST
and what was taught in the 5th century.
I believe you brought up the 5th century,,,not me.
For me the early period of the church, including the ECFs ended in 325AD.



There are not two Jehovah's.
Genesis 19 is just speaking in the third person.
If a verse sounds like a new idea, we have to stop and try to understand it in a different way.
There are NOT TWO God FATHER'S.
Jehovah is God Father.

This is the Athanasian Creed. Is this the Creed which you hold to be correct?

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite.

So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say,

There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood.


Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.

BTW...Catholic means universal for the Creed.
Today the CC no longer believes Jesus entered into hell.
Hi Wondering,

There's no point. There's been plenty posted and ignored. Plus in all of this I've made it clear that I beleive the Nicene Creed and reject the Athansian Creed. I don't even know how you came to think I accept the Athansian Creed
 
For me the scripture:
" Before all things was the Word...And the Word was God "
( John 1:14 )
Means the Word always existed.
What does it tell you about the Word's existence ?
That's because nothing was created yet. He was before all things. That doesn't He didn't come into existence.

You said there aren't two Jehovahs yet the Scriptures clearly show us there is. If you don't accept the Scriptures as authoritative there is no basis for discussion.
 
I always wonder why, in the face if overwhelming evidence, people try to change the Scriptures rather than their beliefs.
 
That's because nothing was created yet. He was before all things. That doesn't He didn't come into existence.

You said there aren't two Jehovahs yet the Scriptures clearly show us there is. If you don't accept the Scriptures as authoritative there is no basis for discussion.
So you don't believe the " Word " has no beginning and no end ?
 
Back
Top