James G, can you explain this post?

[watchman F]

.
Jasoncran

Well, a point of view that is not “orthodox†Trinitarianism, but includes the Divinity of Christ, is often misunderstood as being Modalism.

This description of Modalism from Theopedia is accurate:

Modalism, also called Sabellianism, is the unorthodox belief that God is one person who has revealed himself in three forms or modes in contrast to the Trinitarian doctrine where God is one being eternally existing in three persons. According to Modalism, during the incarnation, Jesus was simply God acting in one mode or role, and the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was God acting in a different mode. Thus, God does not exist as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit at the same time. Rather, He is one person and has merely manifested himself in these three modes at various times. Modalism thus denies the basic distinctiveness and coexistence of the three persons of the Trinity.


That is NOT the same as a multi-personed God. Do you agree?

Perhaps you were confused by what I said about Isaiah 9:6. I did NOT say that I agreed with the idea that the Father is the Son. What I did say is that neither is the phrase "a mighty god", included in that verse, a reference to the Divinity of the Son.

I do agree that my view of a multi-personed God is certainly not an "orthodox" understanding of the nature of God. Nor am I particularly bothered by the fact that I have "unorthodox" views anymore. Many of my beliefs are not considered "orthodox" by one denomination of Christianity or another; and by persons who have beliefs that are as "unorthodox" as my own. I am just thankful that there are any points of agreement at all, given the fact that most who are in Christ, or are just Christians, are being so influenced by a humanly derived religion that has a variety of "orthodox" and "unorthodox" views.

JamesG

Can you explain what you mean if my understanding is not correct?

modalism is what that sounds like james.

James was not teaching modalism, far from it. this is something new and very strange. I have heard it before. Basically it is polytheism. That just like all humans are human, all god's are God. That God is a type of being, just like humans are a type of being. Seems James believes there are many ''people'' with the group of beings called God, just like there are many people with in the beings that are called human. The Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are just 3 of many others

 

[watchman F]

James where you at buddy, I am curious as to what your response might be.

 

[JamesG]

.
Watchman F


Re: James G, can you explain this post?
by watchman F on Wed Jul 14, 2010 10:41 am
James where you at buddy, I am curious as to what your response might be.


You’ll have to forgive me if I’m not always around. I have a life. I have also been involved in some research of late into a couple of aspects of Catholicism. And this has recently been exacerbated by the weather. I live in the outer LA area in which we have been involved with a heat wave. I can’t run my laptop at home in that kind of weather for long. We have no air conditioning. Fans are good enough for us, but not for the laptop.

What exactly is your question?

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.
Shad


sent: Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:29 pm
From: shad
To: JamesG

Since the idea of the Trinity wasn't formulated until the 4th century

do you have proof for this?



It is a matter of historical record. The first authoritative formulation of the Trinity was in the Council of Nicea in 325AD against the Arians who believed that Jesus Christ is not Divine. There were obviously those who believed in the Divinity of Christ prior to the Nicean Council. But to what extent the idea of a Trinity existed prior to that Council is not clear. Historically, it appears that the idea developed around the time of the Nicean Council itself in reaction to Arianism. It appears to be a historical development in the sense of a more complete understanding of the nature of God by those in those Councils who already considered Jesus Christ Divine.

There is no such specific formulation in the Bible itself. Even the term Trinity was created during those 4th century councils. This is four centuries after the era of the New Testament writers. Did the New Testament writers believe in the Trinity, and which form did it take if they did? In Christianity, it all depends on who you ask.

Notice how the Trinity, the most complicated and speculative and misunderstood of doctrines, has become THE doctrine that determines orthodoxy and cult status in Christianity. And those who do not believe in one of the “orthodox†Trinitarian ideas or believes that Jesus is not Divine have become very anti “orthodox†Trinitarian. Notice how the lines are drawn in a denominational fashion. And it has been that way since 325AD.

The Old Testament centers on a relationship with the living God. The New Testament centers on a relationship with the living Son of God through the living Spirit of God. Christianity, including the modern Arians such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, centers on a relationship with a human doctrine, a human interpretation, a human understanding of the nature of God. And that relationship determines whether or not one is a true “Christianâ€. Does Christianity really represent the Biblical writers, or is it just a man-made religion?

At the very least, it seems to me that if the Doctrine of the Trinity was so all-fired important, then God would have made sure that the doctrine was clearly explained with the proper terminology included in the writings of the 1st century, the New Testament writings. That not being the case, in Christianity, the practice of interpretation has been the practice of choice to understand what the Biblical writers have said relating to the nature of God. The result has been very interesting. If you’re into that sort of thing.

JamesG

 

[shad]

Thank you James for your information and insight.

Your insight is so logical.

God is not God of confusion. The Trinity is the most complicated and confusing doctrine man ever made, so much so that the even leaders cannot understand and explain it. Jesus says we know them by their fruit. RCC have been using this doctrine to persecute their opposers. Jesus' followers are not persecutors rather they are persecutees.

 

[JamesG]

.
Shad

I have read a few of your prior posts. But I am unclear as to what you believe. What is your concept of the nature of God and the relationship of Jesus Christ to God?

JamesG

 

[shad]

.
Shad

I have read a few of your prior posts. But I am unclear as to what you believe. What is your concept of the nature of God and the relationship of Jesus Christ to God?

JamesG

Jesus is Son of God and Savior of the world, He is sent by His Father to be the Lamb for us.
He is now sitting at right hand of almighty God, His Father and our Father.

Even though He is given authority to judge us when the time comes, He is not equal to His Father as Jesus clearly claims.

Anything else?

 

[Vic C.]

Either the LORD is telling us something in the verses below, or HE is trying to confuse us. So, since HE is not the author of confusion, the verses below must be some sort of revelation. Many people are so obsessed with trying to debunk that which they don't believe, they fail to see how systematically this doctrine has developed over the years. Instead, they chalk it up to being a "doctrine of man." :gah

Are there grave consequences for denying the Deity of Jesus? Maybe, maybe not, but when faced with compelling scripture that supports a Godhead, I choose not to ignore it.


2 Sam 22:3 The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.

Psa 106:21 They forgat God their saviour, which had done great things in Egypt;

Isa 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isa 45:15 Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.

Isa 45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.

Isa 49:26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Isa 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Hosea 13:4 Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.

 

[Mysteryman]

Either the LORD is telling us something in the verses below, or HE is trying to confuse us. So, since HE is not the author of confusion, the verses below must be some sort of revelation. Many people are so obsessed with trying to debunk that which they don't believe, they fail to see how systematically this doctrine has developed over the years. Instead, they chalk it up to being a "doctrine of man." :gah

Are there grave consequences for denying the Deity of Jesus? Maybe, maybe not, but when faced with compelling scripture that supports a Godhead, I choose not to ignore it.


2 Sam 22:3 The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.

Psa 106:21 They forgat God their saviour, which had done great things in Egypt;

Isa 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.This is the OT, and God was the saviour of Israel in the OT, and there was no other saviour for Israel at this time.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
Same as above. God was the only saviour of Israel. As God is talking to only Israel here !
Isa 45:15 Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.

Isa 45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
Of course there is only one God. And I say again, God was talking to Isreal here.
Isa 49:26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.Saviour of Isreal !

Isa 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Hosea 13:4 Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.

Same as above !

Bless

 

[shad]

Hosea 13:4 Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.

Without God the Father, there is no salvation. God the Father used Jesus to make it possible.

 

[JamesG]

.
Shad

Your response was a little vague in relation to my question. Do you believe that Jesus is one of the persons of God or a separate created individual? Do you believe that God is a person and is the same person as the one called the Father in the New Testament, and that Jesus is another person altogether? Or do you wish to keep those things vague on purpose because you don’t want to be too dogmatic in your description of God and of Jesus Christ? In the original Trinitarian formulation, the Father is over the Son even though they are equal in essence. Like a man is over a woman in the marriage relationship, even though they are equal in essence.

There was a Catholic writer who wrote centuries ago who called God the Cloud of Unknowing because he felt that it is beyond our capabilities to really know and understand God to a great extent. Perhaps this is something like you are trying to convey. But on the other hand, even the Jehovah’s Witnesses understand the humanity of Jesus Christ, maybe better than the Trinitarians because of their different emphasis, though they deny that Jesus is Divine or one of the persons within God and consider him to be the first created being.

Do you see what I am looking for?

JamesG

 

[Mysteryman]

.
Shad

Your response was a little vague in relation to my question. Do you believe that Jesus is one of the persons of God or a separate created individual? Do you believe that God is a person and is the same person as the one called the Father in the New Testament, and that Jesus is another person altogether? Or do you wish to keep those things vague on purpose because you don’t want to be too dogmatic in your description of God and of Jesus Christ?

There was a Catholic writer who wrote centuries ago who called God the Cloud of Unknowing because he felt that it is beyond our capabilities to really know and understand God to a great extent. Perhaps this is something like you are trying to convey. But on the other hand, even the Jehovah’s Witnesses understand the humanity of Jesus Christ, maybe better than the Trinitarians because of their different emphasis, though they deny that Jesus is Divine or one of the persons within God and consider him to be the first created being.

Do you see what I am looking for?

JamesG

Hi James G

Since this is an open board, may I respond here ?

No, I have no idea what you are looking for. However, I do know that Jesus the Christ, the only begotten Son of God was not created. He was born. On the point of the revealed Mystery, Christ being the head of the body of Christ. This was the Last Adam, and the Last Adam was created. Colossians 1:9 - 28 and chapter 2 verses 1 - 20 and Colossians 3:10 - "And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him (God) that created him (Christ Jesus, the Last Adam)". And Ephesians 4:22 - 24. And Romans 16:25 & 26

 

[shad]

.
Shad

Your response was a little vague in relation to my question. Do you believe that Jesus is one of the persons of God or a separate created individual? Do you believe that God is a person and is the same person as the one called the Father in the New Testament, and that Jesus is another person altogether? Or do you wish to keep those things vague on purpose because you don’t want to be too dogmatic in your description of God and of Jesus Christ? In the original Trinitarian formulation, the Father is over the Son even though they are equal in essence. Like a man is over a woman in the marriage relationship, even though they are equal in essence.

Let me ask you a simple question, are you Jesus' follower?

There was a Catholic writer who wrote centuries ago who called God the Cloud of Unknowing because he felt that it is beyond our capabilities to really know and understand God to a great extent. Perhaps this is something like you are trying to convey.

I am not a trinitarian and I dont try to understand man-made doctrines. I am a simple Jesus' servant.

But on the other hand, even the Jehovah’s Witnesses understand the humanity of Jesus Christ, maybe better than the Trinitarians because of their different emphasis, though they deny that Jesus is Divine or one of the persons within God and consider him to be the first created being.
Do you see what I am looking for?
JamesG

No I dont know what you are looking for.

 

[JamesG]

.

Vic C

2 Sam 22:3 The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.

Psa 106:21 They forgat God their saviour, which had done great things in Egypt;

Isa 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isa 45:15 Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.

Isa 45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.

Isa 49:26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Isa 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Hosea 13:4 Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: forthere is no saviour beside me.


These verses are very revealing. They reveal God referring to himself as a person, not a being with more than one person. The personal pronouns are highlighted, but I couldn't get the underline to work.

This is intriguing and must be considered.

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.
Shad

""I am not a trinitarian and I dont try to understand man-made doctrines. I am a simple Jesus' servant.""

This answers my question. And I don't blame you. Stick with the inner witness who uses the Bible as his tool and you can't go wrong. But don't try to interpret what you receive through the Spirit or you will only have another man-made doctrine. I encourage you to continue to be a servant of Jesus in a simple way. Maybe there is hope for the revival of the true meetings of the true ekklesia yet.

""are you Jesus' follower?""

The meaning of "Christian" is a "follower of Christ". That is an outward relationship like following a religious or secular leader. That is not what Jesus is looking for. He wants us to believe "into" him, not "in" him. So that we will be "in" Christ. The term "Christian" denotes an outward relationship. To be “in Christ†is an inward relationship. I am one who is “in Christâ€. I do not refer to myself as a Christian because the term has been misappropriated by Christianity as a self denotation. And I consider Christianity to be nothing more than a man-made religion like Islam and Buddhism. To call myself a Christian is to give a wrong impression, that I am a part of the religion that calls itself Christianity. I am not a part of that religion. Nor do I follow any denomination of Christianity. That would be like following a particular nation. I am in Christ.

In a corporate sense this is connected to a proper understanding of the Body of Christ, and how each ekklesia that exists in each city in which those who are truly in Christ reside expresses the Body of Christ, and how this all functions in the Life of God through the Spirit of God.

James G

 

[shad]

.


The meaning of "Christian" is a "follower of Christ". That is an outward relationship like following a religious or secular leader.

You are wrong. I dont belong to any organization and I serve Jesus by reading the Bible. I don't follow anyone else. I share responsibilities with other followers.

In a corporate sense this is connected to a proper understanding of the Body of Christ, and how each ekklesia that exists in each city in which those who are truly in Christ reside expresses the Body of Christ, and how this all functions in the Life of God through the Spirit of God.
James G

Do you serve Jesus or just try to understand the Bible?

 

[JamesG]

.
Shad

““You are wrong. I dont belong to any organization and I serve Jesus by reading the Bible. I don't follow anyone else. I share responsibilities with other followers.â€â€

I did not understand this answer. What am I wrong about? This answer gives me the impression that you have read things into what I said that was not there, and didn’t really understand what I said. If you’re one of those people who takes things the wrong way on purpose in a reactive way as if everyone is out to get you, then you don’t want to talk to me, because I won’t respond to that kind of garbage.

““Do you serve Jesus or just try to understand the Bible?â€â€

What do you mean by “serve� And the second half of that sentence implied that you think that I am just one who is a Bible interpreter. If so, you misunderstand me. I do not believe in Bible interpretation. I believe in understanding reality through the inner witness of the Spirit of God who uses the Bible as a tool. I believe in being led totally by the Spirit of God as Paul encourages (Romans 8).

JamesG

 

[shad]

.


I did not understand this answer. What am I wrong about?

Jesus' followers follow Jesus, not anyone else.

What do you mean by “serve�

Spreading Jesus' teachings and commandments.

And the second half of that sentence implied that you think that I am just one who is a Bible interpreter. If so, you misunderstand me. I do not believe in Bible interpretation. I believe in understanding reality through the inner witness of the Spirit of God who uses the Bible as a tool. I believe in being led totally by the Spirit of God as Paul encourages (Romans 8).
JamesG

Do you believe that the Scripture is God breathed?

 

[JamesG]

.
Shad

I still don’t understand. What am I wrong about? Do you think that I am wrong to believe in and follow an inner witness of the Spirit of God? Do you think that I am wrong to be more than just an outward follower of Christ?

The Bible is a written document that has been given by God for a specific purpose through the Spirit of God, as both Paul and Peter testify. The Bible alone is nothing but dead letters. Apart from the inner witness of the Spirit it can mean anything that we want it to mean or interpret it to mean.

And spreading the teachings of Jesus is only a part of the purpose of God for those who are in Christ. Did you understand what I meant by being in Christ?

JamesG

 

[shad]

.
Shad

I still don’t understand. What am I wrong about? Do you think that I am wrong to believe in and follow an inner witness of the Spirit of God? Do you think that I am wrong to be more than just an outward follower of Christ?

You seem to be saying that Christians follow organization. That's not what Jesus teaches. All Jesus' servants are Jesus' followers and they are called Christians because Jesus is Christ.

The Bible is a written document that has been given by God for a specific purpose through the Spirit of God, as both Paul and Peter testify. The Bible alone is nothing but dead letters. Apart from the inner witness of the Spirit it can mean anything that we want it to mean or interpret it to mean.

So you don't believe that the Bible is God breathed?

And spreading the teachings of Jesus is only a part of the purpose of God for those who are in Christ.

That is the main purpose of Christianity.

Did you understand what I meant by being in Christ?

Everyone seems to be using the words in their own understanding. what I understand is Jesus' representative. All Jesus' followers are supposed to be Jesus ambassadors or representatives.