shad said:
mondar said:
Mohrb said:
John 10:33........ The Jews answered him: “We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy, even because you, although being a man, make yourself a god.â€
My guess is this is the New World mistranslation.
Mondar,
The Trinity doctrine is based on not so clear verses. They don't harmonize with clear verses. That's why you guys are confusing everyone including your own followers, and then you say if you don't understand you are not Christian.
Shad,
Yes, the issue is who is a Christian. That has always been the question. The first anti-trinitarians may have been the gnostics. Of course the Early Church Fathers rejected gnostic philosophy. Later the Arians came into being. Historic Christianity has always rejected non-trinitarians as being a part of the faith. I say this not to cause offense, but the truth in this matter is definitional of the term "Christian." The concept of three persons, one being is historically definitional. If I am wrong about Christ being a part of the godhead, then I am not a Christian. I am not worshipping the real and actual God. If you are wrong, then you are not a Christian, and you worship a wrong God. I absolutely admit that I think in those ways because the issue of the trinity is definitional to Christianity.
As for clear/unclear verses, I would suggest the most clear verse in the entire NT is in Colossians 2:9.
(ASV) "
9 for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, ,"
While the entire concept of the trinity might not be in this verse, there is at least a duality in the Godhead. That is the point of this thread, more then the trinity. The OP is correct in starting trinitarian doctrine with the question, "who is Christ." In Colossians 2:9, the nature of Christ as a person of the godhead is clearly articulated. In fact, this verse is air tight.
What is in the verse?
----- "
all the fullness" --- It is interesting that Paul not only includes the term "
fullness," but he includes the term "all" (pas pasa pan). There is nothing less divine or godlike about Christ then there is about the Father. If the Father is God, Christ is all that God is too. With this phrase he cannot be less then the Father, and yet he is not the same person as the Father.
*** "
of the Godhead" --- I wish this word were used more in the GNT, but off the top of my head, I recall that it is the only place in the GNT that this term is used. It is the greek term
????????. It is a strong term, speaking of every and all aspects of what it means to be God. It is a term stronger then the more vague term God (theos).
*** "
bodily" --- Christ was not only fully God before his incarnation, but he was fully God when bodily on earth.
Concerning the context issue, and what context is clear and what is not.... Colossians is a book about the very subject of the nature of Christ. Now the Gospel of John certainly has many passages which speak to the issue of the nature of Christ in narrative form, Colossians is more clear because it is set in propositional form, and not narrative. Colossians 2:9 is the most clear statement in Colossians, but there is also Colossians 1:19 also makes reference to the same thing. It is a weaker statement in my opinion because the word "godhead" (????????) does not occur. But it is nevertheless, important. It is Colossians 2:9 that contains the decisive clauses. This is not to say that many passages in John are not also clear, but there is no way around Colossians 2:9.
