How can the Trinity be monotheistic?

[kenan]

Here's the problem I'm having: I've believed in a one God most (if not all) of my life, and I converted to Christianity some time last year. I still believe in a one God, and Jesus Christ who is lord and saviour, but I don't understand the Trinity (that the "one" God is in fact 3 people who are completely separate but wholly God) because to me it's just thinly veiled polytheism. And also, to me the idea of the trinity contradicts the OT because of it's strict monotheism. Can anyone help with this?

 

[Imagican]

keenan,

I can offer this:

Trinity is not a concept that was taught by the prophets, the apostles or even Christ Himself.

in my opinion, it is a mixture of mysticism, philosophy and the previos beliefs of those that created it.

Love God with all your heart, mind and soul. Love your neighbor AS yourself. Complete these two and you will need no other 'man-made' beliefs that have no ability to alter the 'truth'.

Your observations are astute, and in my opinion, correct.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[kenan]

keenan,

I can offer this:

Trinity is not a concept that was taught by the prophets, the apostles or even Christ Himself.

in my opinion, it is a mixture of mysticism, philosophy and the previos beliefs of those that created it.

Love God with all your heart, mind and soul. Love your neighbor AS yourself. Complete these two and you will need no other 'man-made' beliefs that have no ability to alter the 'truth'.

Your observations are astute, and in my opinion, correct.

Blessings,

MEC

Thanks a lot for that Imagican, that helps a lot :D

 

[Vic C.]

keenan, I believe before anyone attempts to tackle your question, I have some questions myself:

Do you believe only God can save?

Do you believe Jesus is God?

Have you heard of a hypostatic union?

 

[dadof10]

Here's the problem I'm having: I've believed in a one God most (if not all) of my life, and I converted to Christianity some time last year. I still believe in a one God, and Jesus Christ who is lord and saviour, but I don't understand the Trinity (that the "one" God is in fact 3 people who are completely separate but wholly God) because to me it's just thinly veiled polytheism. And also, to me the idea of the trinity contradicts the OT because of it's strict monotheism. Can anyone help with this?

No one can fully grasp the Trinity, but we are talking about the nature of the Creator God. I don't think I would believe in Him if His Nature was fully comprehensible to one of His creatures. We can't create an ant, but if I were to become an ant and was able to communicate with them, would they be able to comprehend our human nature? Could they understand human love, kindness, prudence, joy, jelousy, envy, or any other aspect of our humanity? Would the fact that they couldn't wrap their little ant-minds around these things make them any less real?

And we can't even create anything as complex as an ant :D .

 

[cyberjosh]

keenan,

I can offer this:

Trinity is not a concept that was taught by the prophets, the apostles or even Christ Himself.

in my opinion, it is a mixture of mysticism, philosophy and the previos beliefs of those that created it.

Love God with all your heart, mind and soul. Love your neighbor AS yourself. Complete these two and you will need no other 'man-made' beliefs that have no ability to alter the 'truth'.

Your observations are astute, and in my opinion, correct.

Blessings,

MEC

Thanks a lot for that Imagican, that helps a lot :D

Kenan,

Please be careful to not believe only what you want to believe just because it seems easier to do so.

If it helps please read my two threads here: The Diety of Christ/Jesus is God: An Approach for Skeptics and The Holy Trinity.

Even Imagician knows of the obvious diety of Christ, although I believe he misunderstands it, because he said in that first thread, "The Diety of Christ has NEVER been 'questioned' by me. Only the 'concept of 'trinity'." In that thread I showed clearly how the Gospels and epistles show Jesus is God, but the real punch line after I presented the clear evidence was when I said:

...
John offers it to us plain, but are you simple enough of faith to recieve it as given?
...
[Relevant link here]

I hope you will keep an open mind and not just hear what you want to hear. I am an open-minded person and will be more than willing to discuss with you any questions or objections you might have.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[MarkT]

Here's the problem I'm having: I've believed in a one God most (if not all) of my life, and I converted to Christianity some time last year. I still believe in a one God, and Jesus Christ who is lord and saviour, but I don't understand the Trinity (that the "one" God is in fact 3 people who are completely separate but wholly God) because to me it's just thinly veiled polytheism. And also, to me the idea of the trinity contradicts the OT because of it's strict monotheism. Can anyone help with this?

Whoever created the concept didn't understand the spiritual things. God is spirit. The person or persons who created the concept think God was a human being. That's why the RCC makes statues of human beings. They don't know the power and the glory of God. Perhaps the wrath of God doesn't let them see what they are doing.

No one seems to know God sent his Word. And his Word was God. This little tidbit really throws them. They can't imagine the LORD was created by the LORD in any sense or even that the Son would bear his Father's name. This is too much for them. They can't imagine he was the light, the first act of creation. They can't imagine him being the door or the light. Nope. To the RCC he was a human being. That's all that matters. Even though we should not see him in human terms, to quote Paul, 'Even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view. We regard him thus no longer' 2 Cor. 5:16 They do.

He appeared to Abraham as God Almighty. He also appeared to Moses as a burning bush and to the people he led out of Egypt as a pillar of cloud and a pillar of fire. But the people didn't know him.

But when he was born a man, suddenly they thought they knew him. But they still don't know him. Because the Word was the LORD, the Holy One of Israel. He was sent by God and God said, 'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.'

 

[kenan]

keenan, I believe before anyone attempts to tackle your question, I have some questions myself:

Do you believe only God can save?

Do you believe Jesus is God?

Have you heard of a hypostatic union?

Yes, no and no.

Disregarding the last point because I don't know what that is, I think that thats sort of a bad argument: you say only God can save, and since Jesus saved us, therefore he must be God. But didn't Moses deliver the Israelites from Egypt, thus saving them from them? He's not God, so I think it's a fair assumption that God can save through humans under His guidance.

No one can fully grasp the Trinity, but we are talking about the nature of the Creator God. I don't think I would believe in Him if His Nature was fully comprehensible to one of His creatures. We can't create an ant, but if I were to become an ant and was able to communicate with them, would they be able to comprehend our human nature? Could they understand human love, kindness, prudence, joy, jelousy, envy, or any other aspect of our humanity? Would the fact that they couldn't wrap their little ant-minds around these things make them any less real?

And we can't even create anything as complex as an ant :D .

I think it would be easier to believe if His nature was fully comprehensible to us, the Trinity to me is just a paradox and I think God Himself would understand that really, humans can be daft and can only comprehend so much and thus some wouldn't have faith, and I think God, being as loving as He is, wouldn't want to send His children to hell because of a technicality.

Kenan,

Please be careful to not believe only what you want to believe just because it seems easier to do so.

If it helps please read my two threads here: The Diety of Christ/Jesus is God: An Approach for Skeptics and The Holy Trinity.

Even Imagician knows of the obvious diety of Christ, although I believe he misunderstands it, because he said in that first thread, "The Diety of Christ has NEVER been 'questioned' by me. Only the 'concept of 'trinity'." In that thread I showed clearly how the Gospels and epistles show Jesus is God, but the real punch line after I presented the clear evidence was when I said:

...
John offers it to us plain, but are you simple enough of faith to recieve it as given?
...
[Relevant link here]

I hope you will keep an open mind and not just hear what you want to hear. I am an open-minded person and will be more than willing to discuss with you any questions or objections you might have.

God Bless,

~Josh

I'm most certainly keeping an open mind, kinda why I made this thread :-D I'll read your threads in a tick, but I have a problem with the diety of Christ too: if Christ is God, and Yahweh is God, but there isn't a trinity, this is most certainly polytheism because there are two gods. And the idea that Jesus is some sort of Godman is utterly ridiculous to me.

Whoever created the concept didn't understand the spiritual things. God is spirit. The person or persons who created the concept think God was a human being. That's why the RCC makes statues of human beings. They don't know the power and the glory of God. Perhaps the wrath of God doesn't let them see what they are doing.

No one seems to know God sent his Word. And his Word was God. This little tidbit really throws them. They can't imagine the LORD was created by the LORD in any sense or even that the Son would bear his Father's name. This is too much for them. They can't imagine he was the light, the first act of creation. They can't imagine him being the door or the light. Nope. To the RCC he was a human being. That's all that matters. Even though we should not see him in human terms, to quote Paul, 'Even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view. We regard him thus no longer' 2 Cor. 5:16 They do.

He appeared to Abraham as God Almighty. He also appeared to Moses as a burning bush and to the people he led out of Egypt as a pillar of cloud and a pillar of fire. But the people didn't know him.

But when he was born a man, suddenly they thought they knew him. But they still don't know him. Because the Word was the LORD, the Holy One of Israel. He was sent by God and God said, 'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.'

Forgive me if I read that wrong, but were you saying that Jesus is 100% God? Obviously that can't be possible because God can't die.

 

[dadof10]

I think it would be easier to believe if His nature was fully comprehensible to us, the Trinity to me is just a paradox and I think God Himself would understand that really, humans can be daft and can only comprehend so much and thus some wouldn't have faith, and I think God, being as loving as He is, wouldn't want to send His children to hell because of a technicality.

O.K. If my little analogy didn't help, by all means reject it, but please don't give up. It is a revealed Scriptural Truth that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Because our finite minds can't fully understand, doesn't make it any less true.

 

[lovely]

Hi everyone, kenan asked a similar question in a thread in the general forum, and so I wanted to repost my response here for those reading. Secondly, I would like to say to kenan, that you should study who the BrideGroom is in the Old Testament, and in the New. John the Baptist acknowledged Jesus as being the BrideGroom, and so did Jesus Himself when He spoke to JTB's disciples about fasting, and why His disciples did not fast...having the BrideGroom with them. The Lord bless all of you.

Re: This Is Really Sad, I Am Suprised At Him
by lovely on Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:15 am

kenan, you may lower your flameshields for the moment.

I think that those who deny the Deity of Jesus are in serious error.

Here's why I think so.

1John 4 speaks about the spirit of error, even the spirit of the antichrist.

1John 4
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

John also says that there is no lie in the Truth, and that unless we receive Jesus as the Christ we do not receive the Father.

1John 2
20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.
21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

John says that the Word (Jesus) is God, and that He was made flesh and dwelt among us.

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

It's important to understand that Jesus was our priest. He was not of the tribe of Levi, and He did not need a sacrifice for Himself, and did not have to repeat the sacrifice. Why? He is an eternal priest (God) and a perfect sacrifice of flesh (man). To me Hebrews reveals this.

Colossians

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

and

Colossians 2

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

To me, there are many passages that reveal who Jesus is. The Lord bless you.

 

[mondar]

Hello all,
The trinity is a very scriptural doctrine. It can be deduced from the fact that there are three co-equal and co-eternal personalities that are God, but only one being that is called God. Jesus obviously laid claims to deity, yet so did the Father. John implies the diety of the Holy Spirit. The biblical data does not use the word trinity, but when the biblical data is considered, there is no other possibility then the concept of the trinity. That there are three seperate persons is obvious when Christ asked the Father on the cross why he was forsaken by the Father. Modalism cannot do justice to such scriptural data.

The problem with the scriptural understanding of the trinity (three co-equal, co-eternal persons in one being) is that there is no parallel found anywhere in creation. Nowhere in the universe is there any other creature that is three persons and one being. The reason this is a problem is that we often learn by illustration. Without a parallel in creation the doctrine of the trinity might feel abstract to some.

God can be complete only by being a 3 person and 1 being God. It takes 3 persons and one being for the eteral God to be complete in eternity past. There is one being, but because there are three persons, the Son is capable of loving the Father. The Father can love the HS. There can be fellowship. God is then not dwelling in some lonely eternity past, but is completely self sufficient by himselves (plural ending on a singular word is intentional). So then when God created, it was not out of necessity on his part. We supply no need that God has. The reason for creation is not to supply Gods needs, but simply for his glory.

Christianity is not polytheism. That would be three beings that are God. God is three persons, but not three beings. Christianity is not modalism, because there are three seperate persons. Christianity is not Arianism. In Arianism, Christ is a creation subservient to the Father.

The text that I find to be the most brilliant in the scriptures on the Trinity is the prolog to the Gospel of John.
* "The word was with God" ---- Shows that the Word (Jesus Christ) is a seperate person from the Father.
* "The word was God ---- Shows that the Word was a part of the being called God.
* "The same was in the beginning with God ---- The Father and Christ dwell together eternally. Both are eternal beings.
* "All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made." ---- This might be repititious, but this verse defines "the beginning." The beginning cannot be creation, because Christ created all things, and nothing was made that was not made by Christ. Christ is completely seperate from creation. He is eternal and God.

Christ was with God as a seperate person, and Christ is God... this can only be explained by what history calls the doctrine of the trinity.

 

[Vic C.]

keenan, I believe before anyone attempts to tackle your question, I have some questions myself:

Do you believe only God can save?

Do you believe Jesus is God?

Have you heard of a hypostatic union?

Yes, no and no.

Disregarding the last point because I don't know what that is, I think that thats sort of a bad argument: you say only God can save, and since Jesus saved us, therefore he must be God. But didn't Moses deliver the Israelites from Egypt, thus saving them from them? He's not God, so I think it's a fair assumption that God can save through humans under His guidance....

Thanks for responding. Listen, you are going to get bombarded with different responses on this hot topic, so just say slow down if they come at you too fast.

If you aren't familiar with a hypostatic union, just look it up. It will at least clarify why many of us believe what we believe.

you say only God can save, and since Jesus saved us, therefore he must be God.

Um, I never said that in my post.

But didn't Moses deliver the Israelites from Egypt, thus saving them from them?

Moses didn't save them from eternal separation from God; he delivered they out of Egyptian bondage. It wasn't an everlasting delivery, for we know from Scripture the Israelites became captives over and over again.

As mondar and others said, this is a scripturally sound doctrine. If you are truly seeking it, you will see it in scriptures. If you are seeking to discount it, I'm afraid that's all you may see in Scripture.

Lets forget about the Trinity for a moment and focus on Jesus' Deity. If you are convinced Jesus is not God, then the rest will by clouded by that belief. I can write no more than what Mondar has already presented. I would reflect on his words and the words of Lovely and Josh as well.

I would also take the advice of Dadof10; Don't give up!

 

[kenan]

Hello all,
The trinity is a very scriptural doctrine. It can be deduced from the fact that there are three co-equal and co-eternal personalities that are God, but only one being that is called God. Jesus obviously laid claims to deity, yet so did the Father. John implies the diety of the Holy Spirit. The biblical data does not use the word trinity, but when the biblical data is considered, there is no other possibility then the concept of the trinity. That there are three seperate persons is obvious when Christ asked the Father on the cross why he was forsaken by the Father. Modalism cannot do justice to such scriptural data.

The problem with the scriptural understanding of the trinity (three co-equal, co-eternal persons in one being) is that there is no parallel found anywhere in creation. Nowhere in the universe is there any other creature that is three persons and one being. The reason this is a problem is that we often learn by illustration. Without a parallel in creation the doctrine of the trinity might feel abstract to some.

God can be complete only by being a 3 person and 1 being God. It takes 3 persons and one being for the eteral God to be complete in eternity past. There is one being, but because there are three persons, the Son is capable of loving the Father. The Father can love the HS. There can be fellowship. God is then not dwelling in some lonely eternity past, but is completely self sufficient by himselves (plural ending on a singular word is intentional). So then when God created, it was not out of necessity on his part. We supply no need that God has. The reason for creation is not to supply Gods needs, but simply for his glory.

Christianity is not polytheism. That would be three beings that are God. God is three persons, but not three beings. Christianity is not modalism, because there are three seperate persons. Christianity is not Arianism. In Arianism, Christ is a creation subservient to the Father.

The text that I find to be the most brilliant in the scriptures on the Trinity is the prolog to the Gospel of John.
* "The word was with God" ---- Shows that the Word (Jesus Christ) is a seperate person from the Father.
* "The word was God ---- Shows that the Word was a part of the being called God.
* "The same was in the beginning with God ---- The Father and Christ dwell together eternally. Both are eternal beings.
* "All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made." ---- This might be repititious, but this verse defines "the beginning." The beginning cannot be creation, because Christ created all things, and nothing was made that was not made by Christ. Christ is completely seperate from creation. He is eternal and God.

Christ was with God as a seperate person, and Christ is God... this can only be explained by what history calls the doctrine of the trinity.

This was pretty helpful, I'll post back here soon, I'm reading a couple of articles on this subject.

 

[Imagican]

Vic,

While I will wholeheartedly agree that ONLY God can SAVE; I would NOT agree that it is up to us to define HOW He chooses to do so.

For IF He so chose, then ''I'' could offer words of forgiveness that were bound THROUGH Him. That He chose to offer forgiveness through His Son is not evidence that the Son IS God.

And Kenan has hit upon the exact reason that 'trinity' IS to be questioned. It reeks of mythical and philosophical content to the extent that even those that accept it are forced to offer that NO ONE can understand it.

Yet God HAS revealed Himself TO us. He does NOT desire to be a 'mystical HIDDEN God'. He IS our Father and being such would NOT leave us devoid of an understanding of Himself OR His Son. Trinity offers NO 'better' understanding of God OR His Son. ONLY in the minds and hearts of those that wish to worship Christ AS God woudl 'trinity' have ANY validity or purpose PERIOD.

I have no problem worshiping Christ and I DO. i simply do not worship the Son AS the Father. For there is but ONE God and there is but one Son of God that has died for our sins. I have simply not allowed the devices of men to influence the position that Christ holds. He now sits at the right hand of God. Now WHY would these words exist if Christ WERE God. That would indicate that He now sits at HIS own right hand.

While there certainly are Father Son and Spirit, the ineffectual attempts of the ancients to define them DIFFERENTLY than that offered by God Christ and His apostles means little in the scope of that which has been offered.

If we look back at 'how' this doctrine was created, by whom, and WHY, we are able to come to a more enlightening understanding of exactly 'what' it is.

I choose to place my faith in God and His Son. 'Trinity', to ME, takes away from the simplicity that has been offered and replaces it with something that even those that accept it openly admit they don't even understand. I understand Father and Son. My children understand Father and Son. It's really THAT simple.

And once again, the ONLY difference in what I believe and what those that accept 'trinity' believe is that I believe EXACTLY what we have been offered by Christ and His apostles, and those that accept 'trinity' believe that Christ IS God. Whereas Christ Himself stated that the Father, who IS God, is GREATER than He. That there were 'things' that ONLY the Father, (God), knew, plainly showing that IF indeed Christ WERE God, then He could NOT have made such a statement. Either that or the statement is not true. I choose to believe that the words offered by Christ were not only true, but THE Truth.

Each must come to grips with their OWN understanding. Either that or simply become followers of "men". God is able to reveal what He chooses to reveal. Ours is but to choose WHO we will follow. But I can assure you that simply through the basic study of the different denominations it becomes apparent that not ALL that has been offered OF men has been revealed BY God. For many at the time of the apostles had 'gone out from among THEM' to teach things that were NOT as offered by God. And we were warned that there would be MANY that would follow them even to this day. And that upon the time of the end, that MOST would follow the OPPOSITE Of the truth and do so 'willingly'.

Guys, please don't fault me over some 'man-made' doctrine. I simply follow where I am led. 'Trinity' has NOT been revealed to me other than in the nature of it's existence, (the why and how it came to be). If there is an issue with my understanding, please don't fault me for that which has not been revealed to me. I have prayed and I have studied and the more I have dwelved into this matter the more it is unable to stand up in scripture or in my heart.

Regardless of 'how' you try to manipulate words in order to make it 'seem' to be different, kenan has already pointed out it's BIGGEST flaw; three in one STILL makes THREE different Gods. Call it what you will, persons, functions, etc........ the number three is STILL the number three no matter HOW you spell it. Take this into account along with the evidence that those that created it were already familiar with 'triune gods' to start with, and it's easy to see how this doctrine 'came about'. What concerns me is the inherent danger of accepting such a definition and how such may interfere with one's walk.

For we know that there ARE gods MANY. But ONLY ONE 'true God'. Creating our own no matter why can only lead to an ineffectual worship that has no bearing of fruit. i am NOT accusing just offering possibilities. For IF Christ IS The Son and NOT God Himself, what is it then that those that believe in 'trinity' worship? Please note that I have plainly offered a BIG 'if'. What I have offered is NOT a statement to disuade but offered to promote serious inquiry instead of blind acceptance and adherance to a doctrine that was clearly created by men.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

mondar,

In reference to your offering; What IS 'in the beginning'? The beginning of WHAT? The beginning of US, *mankind', or the beginning PERIOD. For IF you state that it is in reference to the beginning PERIOD, then you would offer indication that God is NOT truly eternal.

So, to speak of such is to require an understanding of WHAT is refered to 'in the beginning'.

I believe that it is OBVIOUS that when we see these words offered usward, they are in reference to that which pertains to US. The creation of that which concerns US, (mankind). For IF it is in reference to A beginning so far as 'a start', then that would offer that there was a time BEFORE the 'beginning'.

So, my point? The same was 'in the beginning with God'. This does NOT state in any way that Christ was ALWAYS with God. It simply states that 'in the beginning so far as WE are concerned' the creation of this planet and the life that dwells upon it, THAT beginning, Christ was WITH God. This offers NOTHING concerning the history of heaven and God Himself OR His Son. To make such statements is to ASSUME that which has not actually been offered.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[kenan]

Imagican, out of curiosity, what do you believe? I couldn't really grasp what your beliefs were from your posts, do you believe that Christ and God are one or separate, and is Christ the literal Son of God (and was He created or not). Could you clarify? Cheers

 

[cyberjosh]

I'll read your threads in a tick, but I have a problem with the diety of Christ too: if Christ is God, and Yahweh is God, but there isn't a trinity, this is most certainly polytheism because there are two gods.

This is precisely why the understanding of the Trinity is so important, because the Scriptures do clearly make out Christ to be God and almost all the early Church Fathers believed Christ to be God as well, well before the formulation of the "formal" doctrine of the Trinity at the council of Nicea. This is also where when we see that Christ is God, as well as that Yahweh (the Father) is God, that the understanding of Jesus' words "I and the Father are one" become of tantamount importance. Jesus is one with the Father and is the very image of His person and through him all things came into existance (that can be said of no other). The diety of Christ evident but vieled, because it was His primary purpose here to be a servant to many and not to exercise earthly authority since he knew His kingdom was not of earth. Therein lies the scandal/stumbling block of the Logos, who is God, becoming flesh and dwelling among us (John 1:1-3, 14). What the first chapter of John says about the Logos is nothing short of astonishing. God becoming flesh is clearly spelled out in no unsure terms. How is that possible? Therein lies the mystery of Christ.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[Imagican]

Imagican, out of curiosity, what do you believe? I couldn't really grasp what your beliefs were from your posts, do you believe that Christ and God are one or separate, and is Christ the literal Son of God (and was He created or not). Could you clarify? Cheers

Kenan,

For the sake of those that take offense to what I offer concerning this issue I will only offer this:

We do NOT know one way or the other whether Christ is a 'created being' or not. What the early church did was make a decision based on limited information and then insisted that EVERYONE claiming to BE Christian accept it.

I believe that there is but ONE True God. And this God is OUR Father and the Father of Christ, His Son. I believe that there has been but ONE begotten of God and that is our Savior Jesus Christ who lived and died among us and now lives again and sits at the right hand of God His Father.

I worship Christ, but as the Son which is EXACTLY what He offered. I pray to God in the name of Christ for this is HOW He instructed us to pray. The prayer that He offered was not only instruction but example. For when He offered it, it was NOT mearly words, but a prayer that HE offered as an example.

We know from scipture that what Christ gave to us was GIVEN Him by God. He said as much. What we observe in the Gospels was example Christ offered usward as it had been offered Himward. For He plainly stated that what He offered in example was as He had observed from the Father, who we know IS God.

So, what I believe is that God is God the Father and Christ IS His Son. Other than the offerings of men I have found no other such definition of the relationship between Father and Son. And a simle study of 'trinity' purely proves that this concept was created by men. Right or wrong is irrelevant to me. All I can follow is that which I have been led to understand. if i can't understand it, then no matter how much effort i put into it, i can't TRULY follow that which I cannot understand. I understand Father and Son without doubt. But Father and Son being the SAME God in two separate parts makes no sense to me whatsoever. and it certainly has never been revealed to me. it was long AFTER I had come to know God and His Son that I first heard of this 'trinity'. And then by those that instantly attempted to condemn me for my lack of understanding or acceptance. But you know what? Neither God NOR His Son condemened me. Their love remained sincere regardless of how the 'churchologist' attempted to condemn me. Their love has flourished in my life and transformed me in spite of the accusations that I MUST accept 'trinity' or i didn't know God. So, in THIS respect, I know that 'trinity' is false. For I did NOT have to accept it to accept the love that God has offered through His Son.

True or False, it has not been able to prove itself through that which I have observed. For I have seen those whose heads appeared to be prepared to spin around in circles and from the look on their faces they were prepared to start spittin green stuff over my denial of this doctrine. That certainly doesn't show the love that I KNOW the Father and Son have usward. They didn't force us to accept them and it's hard to believe that They would have others FORCED to accept this 'man-made' doctrine.

So, I believe in God, the Father of Christ. And i believe in Christ, the Son of God. Not only do I believe, but know Them both as my Father and Savior. Whether there is such a 'thing as trinity' remains to be revealed to me in a way that I can understand it. And I'm certainly NOT going to place my faith in something that I don't understand regardless of how many others have.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Oh, And kenan, I DO believe that God and Christ ARE One. Just as we can be one with Christ, so too are Christ and His Father ONE. But this is in purpose and understanding, not as identical beings. For that which we are a 'part of' makes us ONE with it. No different than those that follow Satan being ONE with the devil in purpose. Read for yourself EVERY line offered using the reference to Christ and God BEING ONE and you will clearly see that this is not a literal offering of them being the 'same' in entity but in purpose and family. As I and my father ARE of the same family, so too are Father and Son ONE. All who follow in truth are one with God THROUGH Christ. But not a one of us would attempt to state that we are JUST another 'person' in the 'trinity' for then it would be a 'quadrinity', totally negating the word 'trinity' itself. But, folks, we HAVE been plainly offered that WE and Christ ARE Able to BE ONE AS WELL.


Blessings,

MEc

 

[Vic C.]

Kenan,

While we do have to admit the concept of three in one (that's 1x1x1, not 1+1+1) is strange to us and is somewhat of a mystery to our three dimensional minds, it is a deeply thought out and Biblical concept that wasn't taken lightly. It actually presents less of a problem than MEC's beliefs.

I have no problem worshiping Christ and I DO.

Then according to what he believes, Jesus is not God but is to be worshiped nonetheless.

Problem:

Exo 20:2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
Exo 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

i simply do not worship the Son AS the Father.

Neither do we. The triune concept makes a clear distinction between the Father and Son. If one is worshiping the Son as the Son, who some claim to not be God, then Exodus 12:3 is again in violation.

I have simply not allowed the devices of men to influence the position that Christ holds.

The positions Jesus holds is best represented by what we teach and believe. It again diffuses the possibility of breaking the Most Sacred of the commandments.

Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.

There's no way around it. It may "feel good" to be "obeying" the scriptures in such a literal fashion as MEC and others do, but it creates doctrinal issues. Jesus then becomes merely a salvation"tool". He doesn't warrant worshiping and shouldn't be interceding in our behalf in the first place. But that's not what the whole of the NT teaches... and it starts here:

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Peace