What's new
By:
Filters
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!

Doctrine of the Trinity – Is it Fundamental to the Christian Faith

What did Jesus declare "From this present time you both know the Father, and have seen him"

  • One God manifest in the flesh

    Votes: 3 42.9%

  • He that sees me has seen the Father

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Jesus and the Father are one God

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Jesus was confused and the doctrines of man are to be obeyed

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    7
wondering said:
Well Mark.
I cannot argue this forever.
You might be a JW.
You might be a Mormon.
You said YES at "Christian" so I have to go by what you stated.

If a person is Christian, it implies that he accepts Christian theology - the study of God. It also implies that he accepts the major Christian doctrine: One of which is the trinity.

You're using begotten in a human sense. God is not human. I said a fews posts back that begotten means unique and that Jesus is of the same nature as God.
You'll have to come to this understanding on your own.
The internet is full of explanations on this. I looked and found this one to be the most concise.

I do not think study should be done on the internet since all kinds of strange ideas can be presented - especially to a new Christian. (not saying you're one).
But I do like how GotQuestions explains begotten in a simple way.

Here it is:

********************************************************
Question: "What does it mean that Jesus is God's only begotten son?"

Answer: The phrase “only begotten Son” occurs in John 3:16, which reads in the King James Version as, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." The phrase "only begotten" translates the Greek word monogenes. This word is variously translated into English as "only," "one and only," and "only begotten."

It's this last phrase ("only begotten" used in the KJV, NASB and the NKJV) that causes problems. False teachers have latched onto this phrase to try to prove their false teaching that Jesus Christ isn't God; i.e., that Jesus isn't equal in essence to God as the Second Person of the Trinity. They see the word "begotten" and say that Jesus is a created being because only someone who had a beginning in time can be "begotten." What this fails to note is that "begotten" is an English translation of a Greek word. As such, we have to look at the original meaning of the Greek word, not transfer English meanings into the text.

So what does monogenes mean? According to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD, 3rd Edition), monogenes has two primary definitions. The first definition is "pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship." This is its meaning in Hebrews 11:17 when the writer refers to Isaac as Abraham's "only begotten son" (KJV). Abraham had more than one son, but Isaac was the only son he had by Sarah and the only son of the covenant. Therefore, it is the uniqueness of Isaac among the other sons that allows for the use of monogenes in that context.

The second definition is "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind." This is the meaning that is implied in John 3:16 (see also John 1:14, 18; 3:18; 1 John 4:9). John was primarily concerned with demonstrating that Jesus is the Son of God (John 20:31), and he uses monogenes to highlight Jesus as uniquely God's Son—sharing the same divine nature as God—as opposed to believers who are God's sons and daughters by adoption (Ephesians 1:5). Jesus is God’s “one and only” Son.

The bottom line is that terms such as "Father" and "Son," descriptive of God and Jesus, are human terms that help us understand the relationship between the different Persons of the Trinity. If you can understand the relationship between a human father and a human son, then you can understand, in part, the relationship between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity. The analogy breaks down if you try to take it too far and teach, as some pseudo-Christian cults (such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses), that Jesus was literally "begotten" as in “produced” or “created” by God the Father.

source:
https://www.gotquestions.org/only-begotten-son.html
Click to expand...

FYI I'm not a JW or a Morman. My roots are in the Greek Catholic church and then the Pentecostal church. But that was before I read the Bible. So now I'm telling you what the Bible says. The Lord Jesus Christ is my Master.

To beget is to have children ie. to become father to. The LORD God begot our Lord. ie. He became the Father to the Son. He is also our Father.

Psalm 2:7
I will tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to me, “You are my son, today I have begotten you.

Acts 13:33
this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, ‘Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.’

So it's not just John 3:16. David wrote, ‘Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.’
 
You say it's the best understanding. I say I have a better understanding. So why won't you listen to me? You say, 'Greater minds than ours have, sort of, figured this out and have done their best.' I say speak for yourself.
 
I think a great many people in this discussion would benefit enormously in obtaining a copy of, "How We Got The Bible" , by New Testament Professor Dr. Neil Lightfoot.

“The textual evidence is against 1 John 5:7[]...Of all the Greek manuscripts, only two contain it. These two manuscripts are of very late dates, one from the fourteenth or fifteenth century and the other from the sixteenth century. Two other manuscripts have this verse written in the margin. All four manuscripts show that this verse was apparently translated from a late form of the Latin Vulgate” Pgs. 100-101
Click to expand...
 
MarkT said:
The text doesn't say, "glory to God in the highest AND on earth".
Click to expand...
Actually, Yes it does. The punctuation marks are commentary added by various translations.

Angels give glory to God. That's what they do. They were giving glory to God on Earth that day. Not giving glory to the spirit of God or to the Spirit of the Father on Earth but to GOD on Earth.

Luke 2:11-14 Today your Savior is born in the city of David. He is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign for you: You will find a baby wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a manger.” Suddenly a vast, heavenly army appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

“Glory to God in the highest and on earth
peace among people with whom he is pleased!” ...​

Translations chose to put a comma before the "and Earth" which doesn't even make sense if you think about it. The conjunction is there because God was now on Earth AND in Heaven. Thus the army of angels came to give Him (God) glory on Earth.

The Holy Spirit, through Simeon, confirms this to Mary and Joseph:

Luke 2:25-26, 29-32 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon, and this man was righteous and devout, looking forward to the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he would see the Lord’s Christ.
“Now dismiss your slave in peace, Lord, according to your word. For my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all the peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and glory to your people Israel.”
​
Simeon saw, quite literally, with his eyes God on Earth.
 
wondering said:
If a person is Christian, it implies that he accepts Christian theology - the study of God. It also implies that he accepts the major Christian doctrine: One of which is the trinity.
Click to expand...

Jesus and the 12 did not accept the mainstream doctrines of the day taught by pharisee Judaism.
if Christians are to be lead by theology created by groups, there is no need to be be lead by the spirit.
we also know there are false teachers teaching false doctrines, how do we determine false teachings, Jesus taught we will know them by their fruits, so what are the fruits of the trinity?
 
Randy said:
Jesus teaching would be from God as Jesus openly stated it was the "FATHER" living IN Him doing His work.
JOHN 17 NIV Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you.8For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them.
Hebrews 1 strengthens such a statement as if the head of the body of christ needed confirmation to those who proclaim faith in him that his words are the words and judgments that will prevail.

Hebrews 1 NIV
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. 3
Click to expand...
I agree.
Jesus came to do God Father's work.
John 10:37-38

Also, Jesus is God's ULTIMATE revelation.
There can be no more perfect revelation of God than Jesus.
 
chessman said:
Actually, Yes it does. The punctuation marks are commentary added by various translations.

Angels give glory to God. That's what they do. They were giving glory to God on Earth that day. Not giving glory to the spirit of God or to the Spirit of the Father on Earth but to GOD on Earth.

Luke 2:11-14 Today your Savior is born in the city of David. He is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign for you: You will find a baby wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a manger.” Suddenly a vast, heavenly army appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

“Glory to God in the highest and on earth
peace among people with whom he is pleased!” ...​

Translations chose to put a comma before the "and Earth" which doesn't even make sense if you think about it. The conjunction is there because God was now on Earth AND in Heaven. Thus the army of angels came to give Him (God) glory on Earth.

The Holy Spirit, through Simeon, confirms this to Mary and Joseph:

Luke 2:25-26, 29-32 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon, and this man was righteous and devout, looking forward to the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he would see the Lord’s Christ.
“Now dismiss your slave in peace, Lord, according to your word. For my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all the peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and glory to your people Israel.”
​
Simeon saw, quite literally, with his eyes God on Earth.
Click to expand...

Chessman,
Are you sure about Luke 2:11-14?
I checked a few bibles and they all have the comma after "highest".
Do you remember where you learned this? I've never heard of it...
 
jaybird said:
Jesus and the 12 did not accept the mainstream doctrines of the day taught by pharisee Judaism.
if Christians are to be lead by theology created by groups, there is no need to be be lead by the spirit.
we also know there are false teachers teaching false doctrines, how do we determine false teachings, Jesus taught we will know them by their fruits, so what are the fruits of the trinity?
Click to expand...
You see jaybird,
Chistianity is a specific belief.
It goes back over 2,000 years.
YOU or I do NOT get to make the rules of what Christianity is.

You can make it out to be whatever you want to in your own personal belief, but you cannot go around teaching anything other than WHAT IT IS.

If we all started making up our very own rules, and then expoused them, how long do you think Christianity would last?

You speak of false doctrine.
Right.
Anything that is not traditional Christianity is false doctrine.
I don't know what specific doctrine you may have in mind, but I will say that your entire attitude is incorrect.

We can't accept what we like and discard the rest.
Christianity is a complete thought.

BTW, Pharisees were not taught by Jesus.
 
MarkT said:
FYI I'm not a JW or a Morman. My roots are in the Greek Catholic church and then the Pentecostal church. But that was before I read the Bible. So now I'm telling you what the Bible says. The Lord Jesus Christ is my Master.

To beget is to have children ie. to become father to. The LORD God begot our Lord. ie. He became the Father to the Son. He is also our Father.

Psalm 2:7
I will tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to me, “You are my son, today I have begotten you.

Acts 13:33
this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, ‘Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.’

So it's not just John 3:16. David wrote, ‘Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.’
Click to expand...
Fine.

But just for the record of whoever is reading along:

The Greek Catholic Church believes in the traditional Trinity or Godhead.
Now you're in a pentecostal church. They worship the Holy Spirit if I'm not mistaken.

And I do repeat BEGOTTEN DOES NOT MEAN CREATED OR MADE.
 
Last edited:
MarkT said:
You say it's the best understanding. I say I have a better understanding. So why won't you listen to me? You say, 'Greater minds than ours have, sort of, figured this out and have done their best.' I say speak for yourself.
Click to expand...
Are you speaking to me?

I won't listen to you because YOU didn't exist when the Trinity was accepted and you were not one of the theologians present at the time. Unless you're REALLY old.

Speak for myself regarding greater minds?
Have you read Origin?
Acquinas?
Tertullian?
Ambrose?

You should really find out about them.

Oh my gosh. I forgot Ignatius of Antioch. He was a student of John the Apostle.
And I don't even like Augustine, but you should read some of his stuff. I don't even understand some it. Maybe you will.

Here's a link.

The Church Fathers, Early Church Fathers, Christian Fathers, or Fathers of the Church are ancient and generally influential Christian theologians, some of whom were eminent teachers and great bishops. The term is used of writers or teachers of the Church not necessarily ordained[1] and not necessarily "saints"—Origen Adamantius and Tertullian are often considered Church Fathers, but are not saints, owing to their views later being deemed heretical.[2] Most Church Fathers are honored as saints in the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Church of the East, Anglicanism and Lutheranism, as well as other churches and groups. The era of these scholars who set the theological and scholarly foundations of Christianity largely ended by 700 AD.

While western churches regard only early teachers of Christianity as Fathers, the Orthodox Church honors as "Fathers" many saints far beyond the early centuries of church history, even to the present day.[citation needed]



Contents
[1 Great Fathers

Great Fathers[edit]
In each of Western and Eastern Christianity, four Fathers are called the "Great Church Fathers" as follows:[3][4]

In the Roman Catholic Church, they are also collectively called the "Eight Doctors of the Church"[3] and in the Eastern Church, three of them (Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus and John Chrysostom) are honored as the Three Holy Hierarchs.

PART I of II
 
PART II


Apostolic Fathers[edit]
Main article: Apostolic Fathers
The earliest Church Fathers, (within two generations of the Twelve Apostles of Christ) are usually called the Apostolic Fathers since tradition describes them as having been taught by the twelve. Important Apostolic Fathers include Clement of Rome,[5] Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, and Papias of Hierapolis. In addition, the Didache and Shepherd of Hermas are usually placed among the writings of the Apostolic Fathers although their authors are unknown; like the works of Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp, they were first written in Koine Greek.

Clement of Rome[edit]
Main article: Clement of Rome
His epistle, 1 Clement (c. 96),[5] was copied and widely read in the Early Church.[6] Clement calls on the Christians of Corinth to maintain harmony and order.[5] It is the earliest Christian epistle aside from the New Testament.

Ignatius of Antioch[edit]
Main article: Ignatius of Antioch
Ignatius of Antioch (also known as Theophorus) (c. 35–110)[7] was the third bishop or Patriarch of Antioch and a student of the Apostle John. En route to his martyrdom in Rome, Ignatius wrote a series of letters which have been preserved. Important topics addressed in these letters include ecclesiology, the sacraments, the role of bishops, and the Incarnation of Christ.[8] He is the second after Clement to mention Paul's epistles.[5]

Polycarp of Smyrna[edit]
Main article: Polycarp of Smyrna
Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 69 – c. 155) was a Christian bishop of Smyrna (now İzmir in Turkey). It is recorded that he had been a disciple of "John." The options for this John are John, the son of Zebedee, traditionally viewed as the author of the Gospel of John, or John the Presbyter.[9] Traditional advocates follow Eusebius in insisting that the apostolic connection of Polycarp was with John the Evangelist, and that he was the author of the Gospel of John, and thus the Apostle John.

Polycarp tried and failed to persuade Pope Anicetus to have the West celebrate Passover on 14 Nisan, as in the East. Around 155, the Smyrnans demanded Polycarp's execution as a Christian, and he died a martyr. The story of his martyrdom describes how the fire built around him would not burn him, and that when he was stabbed to death, so much blood issued from his body that it quenched the flames around him.[5] Polycarp is recognized as a saint in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.

Papias of Hierapolis[edit]
Main article: Papias of Hierapolis
Very little is known of Papias apart from what can be inferred from his own writings. He is described as "an ancient man who was a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp" by Polycarp's disciple Irenaeus (c. 180). Eusebius adds that Papias was Bishop of Hierapolis around the time of Ignatius of Antioch. In this office Papias was presumably succeeded by Abercius of Hierapolis. The name Papias was very common in the region, suggesting that he was probably a native of the area.The work of Papias is dated by most modern scholars to about 95–120.

Despite indications that the work of Papias was still extant in the late Middle Ages, the full text is now lost. Extracts, however, appear in a number of other writings, some of which cite a book number

source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Fathers
 
wondering said:
I checked a few bibles and they all have the comma after "highest".
Do you remember where you learned this?
Click to expand...
I understand most all translations will break the statement up. However, the original does not.

I got this from Irenaeus:

But they are again in error, when saying that the Christ and Saviour from above was not born, but that also, after the baptism of the dispensational Jesus, he, [the Christ of the Pleroma, ] descended upon him as a dove. Therefore, according to these men, the angels of the Ogdoad lied, when they said, "For unto you is born this day a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David." For neither was Christ nor the Saviour born at that time, by their account; but it was he, the dispensational Jesus, who is of the framer of the world, the [Demiurge], and upon whom, after his baptism, that is, after [the lapse of] thirty years, they maintain the Saviour from above descended. But why did [the angels] add, "in the city of David," if they did not proclaim the glad tidings of the fulfilment of God's promise made to David, that from the fruit of his body there should be an eternal King? For the Framer [Demiurge] of the entire universe made promise to David, as David himself declares: "My help is from God, who made heaven and earth; " and again: "In His hand are the ends of the earth, and the heights of the mountains are His. For the sea is His, and He did Himself make it; and His hands founded the dry land. Come ye, let us worship and fall down before Him, and weep in the presence of the Lord who made us; for He is the Lord our God."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book3.html
​
JW's think Jesus was begotten at His baptism (30 years or so after His birth).
Unitarians think Jesus was begotten at His birth.
Mormons think Jesus was created as an angel sometime before the Earth was created.
Christians know Jesus was the Son of God for the same amount of time as the Father was God. Eternally so. Jesus is God in the tent of a human body called Jesus.
 
Last edited:
chessman said:
I understand most all translations will break the statement up. However, the original does not.

I got this from Irenaeus:

But they are again in error, when saying that the Christ and Saviour from above was not born, but that also, after the baptism of the dispensational Jesus, he, [the Christ of the Pleroma, ] descended upon him as a dove. Therefore, according to these men, the angels of the Ogdoad lied, when they said, "For unto you is born this day a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David." For neither was Christ nor the Saviour born at that time, by their account; but it was he, the dispensational Jesus, who is of the framer of the world, the [Demiurge], and upon whom, after his baptism, that is, after [the lapse of] thirty years, they maintain the Saviour from above descended. But why did [the angels] add, "in the city of David," if they did not proclaim the glad tidings of the fulfilment of God's promise made to David, that from the fruit of his body there should be an eternal King? For the Framer [Demiurge] of the entire universe made promise to David, as David himself declares: "My help is from God, who made heaven and earth; " and again: "In His hand are the ends of the earth, and the heights of the mountains are His. For the sea is His, and He did Himself make it; and His hands founded the dry land. Come ye, let us worship and fall down before Him, and weep in the presence of the Lord who made us; for He is the Lord our God."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book3.html
​
JW's think Jesus was begotten at His baptism (30 years or so after His birth).
Unitarians think Jesus was begotten at His birth.
Mormons think Jesus was created as an angel sometime before the Earth was created.
Christians know Jesus was the Son of God for the same amount of time as the Father was God. Eternally so. Jesus is God in the tent of a human body called Jesus.
Click to expand...
Hi Chessman,
Thanks for posting the above.
Do you understand "begotten" the same way MarkT does?
I like how you stated that Jesus was the son of God for the same amount of time as the Father was God. Eternally so.

Just to clarify...
Jesus, as JESUS, was born 2,000 years ago.
He left the "person" of God Father to come to earth.
But He was within the Holy Trinity as the second person, or the WORD, as John states in John 1, from the beginning to time.

He was never born as the 2nd person of the Trinity.
He always was.

Not easy talking about this, is it??
 
chessman said:
Actually, Yes it does. The punctuation marks are commentary added by various translations.

Angels give glory to God. That's what they do. They were giving glory to God on Earth that day. Not giving glory to the spirit of God or to the Spirit of the Father on Earth but to GOD on Earth.

Luke 2:11-14 Today your Savior is born in the city of David. He is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign for you: You will find a baby wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a manger.” Suddenly a vast, heavenly army appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

“Glory to God in the highest and on earth
peace among people with whom he is pleased!” ...​

Translations chose to put a comma before the "and Earth" which doesn't even make sense if you think about it. The conjunction is there because God was now on Earth AND in Heaven. Thus the army of angels came to give Him (God) glory on Earth.

The Holy Spirit, through Simeon, confirms this to Mary and Joseph:

Luke 2:25-26, 29-32 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon, and this man was righteous and devout, looking forward to the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he would see the Lord’s Christ.
“Now dismiss your slave in peace, Lord, according to your word. For my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all the peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and glory to your people Israel.”
​
Simeon saw, quite literally, with his eyes God on Earth.
Click to expand...

It says, 'and on earth peace' or peace on earth.
 
wondering said:
You see jaybird,
Chistianity is a specific belief.
It goes back over 2,000 years.
YOU or I do NOT get to make the rules of what Christianity is.
Click to expand...

people just like you and i make up these doctrines.

You can make it out to be whatever you want to in your own personal belief, but you cannot go around teaching anything other than WHAT IT IS.
Click to expand...

"what it is" ? would this be referring to scripture or doctrine?

If we all started making up our very own rules, and then expoused them, how long do you think Christianity would last?
Click to expand...
history shows the exact opposite. as the the church added doctrines, the more it split up into divisions.

You speak of false doctrine.
Right.
Anything that is not traditional Christianity is false doctrine.
Click to expand...

how about anything that is contrary to what Jesus or His Father taught? traditions are of man. mankind has a long history of making mistakes.

BTW, Pharisees were not taught by Jesus.
Click to expand...
the councils that create doctrines like the trinity were not taught by Jesus.
 
chessman said:
No. Of course not. The word begotten does NOT mean born nor does it mean 'made'. Like you said, people that spoke the original language of the NT (like Irenaeus) specifically said "begotten not made" for a reason.


No. It requires precision and we fail at it at times.
Click to expand...

So Jesus wasn't born?

The meaning of begotten doesn't change just because you add 'not made'.

The Psalm says the LORD said to me, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten you'. Ps. 2:7 So we know the LORD God spoke to our Lord. So in what sense was our Lord begotten? First the LORD God called him his Son. Then he gave him life (eternal life) in himself.
John 5:26
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top