Grailhunter
Member
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
Joef said....Hey All,
But if YOU have the true definition....Joef said....Hey All,
In the original post, Bible asks "How do you defend the trinity from the Bible alone " To get us back on topic, I wrote this. Critique as you will.
And I was just saying I was defending the Trinity.....the true definition.
Would you believe I have had people say that to me before? LOLBut if YOU have the true definition....
Does that mean every theologian that doesn't agree with you is wrong??
The history of the concepts of the TrinityIMHO, the true definition MUST be what the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers believed to be true.
Welcome to the proud crowd of older people and memory. No I did not say that.You stated that the Trinity was not confirmed till the 500 or 600's, if I remember correctly.
Really it was discussed in the 100's and 200's and confirmed in 325AD.
as most people understand....is actually not that accurate in reality. What do people believe about the Trinity?The doctrine of the Trinity as most people understand originated from the council of Nicaea in 325 + -.
I know you don't want me replying to you, but with all due respect, that definition is one of the very reasons I have been persistent with you. That definition is of unitarianism (one person) not Trinitarianism (three persons). Trinitarianism, as I’ve stated many times, has historically been defined (very simply) as three persons within the one being that is God. Yet, all the "evidence" you have given against the Trinity has been against that false definition. You have soundly defeated Modalism, or some form of it, in all your posts but have actually left Trinitarianism unaddressed. It very much matters that we get that order correct--three whos, one what; not three whats, one who.I usually define the popular belief of the Trinity as three God in one person.
The singular “God” is used because there is, was, and ever will be only one God, according to God himself. That is foundational to true Christianity.Most people refer to the Trinity as God, not Gods. But this definition is the middle of the road..
Why do I not want to talk to you?I know you don't want me replying to you, but with all due respect, that definition is one of the very reasons I have been persistent with you. That definition is of unitarianism (one person) not Trinitarianism (three persons). Trinitarianism, as I’ve stated many times, has historically been defined (very simply) as three persons within the one being that is God. Yet, all the "evidence" you have given against the Trinity has been against that false definition. You have soundly defeated Modalism, or some form of it, in all your posts but have actually left Trinitarianism unaddressed. It very much matters that we get that order correct--three whos, one what; not three whats, one who.
Maybe you have heard some Christians define the Trinity as three Gods in one person, but I never have. That isn't to say that some laypersons get it wrong, because they likely do (if all the research polls in recent years regarding what Christians believe are correct). But you would likely be very hard-pressed to find any legitimate scholar or theologian that would define the historic, orthodox doctrine of the Trinity as three Gods in one person. It has been consistent from before Nicaea up to the present day, although scholars have always debated certain nuances that they probably have no business trying to figure out. But, we are curious creatures and want answers.
The singular “God” is used because there is, was, and ever will be only one God, according to God himself. That is foundational to true Christianity.
Hey All,
Thanks wondering. Think about how hard it was to understand the Trinity before the completed Bible existed. This topic has 45 pages and we as a group of mostly believers (I hope) cannot agree on what the doctrine means. How do you believe the apostles would view this discussion?
Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz
Hmm, so what's the difference between a King and a Prince,So what is the Trinity really about?
I contend that the Trinity is three Gods in unity with Yahweh being the supreme God and no one like Him. Actually it is the construct of the unity that is the legitimate discussion, not the oneness. This discussion is speculative because the exact construct of this unity may be beyond our comprehension. And with that in mind I suggest that it is possible that part of the unity is because of the perfection of the intellect of all three Gods, in that they think alike, so consequently will never disagree with each other.
Welcome to the proud crowd of older people and memory. No I did not say that.
The doctrine of the Trinity as most people understand originated from the council of Nicaea in 325 + -.
It would be nice, since you're in the Apologetics Forum, if you defended your position. This is what Apologetics is all about...defending one's faith and its beliefs.Why do I not want to talk to you?
Because you have been trolling me ever since I have been here.
And how many times have I asked you to stop harassing me.
I have yet to see you be correct on anything.
And by the time I got done responding to you I would break every rule they have.
Now leave me alone!
To whom is the above addressed?Who's delivering to Who
1 cor 15:25
Then the end comes, when he will deliver up the Kingdom to God, even the Father; when he will have abolished all rule and all authority and power.
Those are man's words. A prince is usually a Son of a King. (Royality)Hmm, so what's the difference between a King and a Prince,
You are a person and you have your own mind, will and "spirit".G,
If you notice in the above, it states that we Christians believe in ONE GOD.
There can only be one God.
One Lord Jesus Christ, who was determined to be God, or we're worshipping a man which contradicts the Shema.
Jesus is NOT MADE, He is begotten - the ONLY and UNIQUE one - cosubstantial with the Father, who was incarnated and became man.
We also believe in the Holy Spirit, but less is said about Him at this point in history.
The above is also correct.
The Trinity is ONE GOD, consisting of 3 Persons.
It's important to know what PERSONS means.
Sometimes I think that some of us do not. Not necessarily You.
The word PERSON is very important in understanding the Trinity.
Here are a couple of links some might like to see:
...the Bible also indicates that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons. For example, since the Father sent the Son into the world (John 3:16), He cannot be the same person as the Son. Likewise, after the Son returned to the Father (John 16:10), the Father and the Son sent the Holy Spirit into the world (John 14:26; Acts 2:33). Therefore, the Holy Spirit must be distinct from the Father and the Son.
In the baptism of Jesus, we see the Father speaking from heaven and the Spirit descending from heaven in the form of a dove as Jesus comes out of the water (Mark 1:10-11). In John 1:1 it is affirmed that Jesus is God and, at the same time, that He was “with God”- thereby indicating that Jesus is a distinct Person from God the Father (cf. also 1:18). And in John 16:13-15 we see that although there is a close unity between them all, the Holy Spirit is also distinct from the Father and the Son.
The fact that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons means, in other words, that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. Jesus is God, but He is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is God, but He is not the Son or the Father. They are different Persons, not three different ways of looking at God.
source: https://www.cru.org/us/en/train-and-grow/spiritual-growth/core-christian-beliefs/understanding-the-trinity.html#:~:text=The doctrine of the Trinity means that there is one,essence and three in person.
"Three separate Gods united in the Godhead"
Why not make it THREE SEPARATE PERSONS united in the Godhead?
Then it would be right ... otherwise you're creating 3 GODS, and there is only One God.
Would you consider the Godhead to be God Almighty, The Great I Am, Yahweh?
And the other two would be PART of the Godhead?
Maybe this is close. I wonder what Free would have to say about this...
(I know you don't want to post to him, but I do have to say that in this particular Forum, we should answer other member's questions unless you report them for being nasty and breaking the TOS rules. We consider this to be a very serious forum and we ask that the rules be adhered to. I write this also for the benefit of others that might be reading along.
)
The are co-equal in nature and substance.
How could there be a Big God and a Little God?
That's only when Jesus was on earth.
As to the minds, the 3 Persons have their own will and mind,
but they are UNITED in mind in every way (for instance in their goal for humans).
This link has to do with Personhood:
Nerdfighteria Wiki - Personhood: Crash Course Philosophy #21
Personhood: Crash Course Philosophy #21nerdfighteria.info
Not sure what you mean.Hmm, so what's the difference between a King and a Prince,