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!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
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/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
The problem with many people is that they try too hard to explain God, and no one can do that. It boggles my mind to think that He has ALWAYS existed and NEVER had a beginning, but I accept that as fact. I also accept the fact that God is a Triune God and somehow each of the Three has a different function, and yet all Three are One. That's called living by faith as God said the just shall do. I don't need answers to everything. All I need to do is trust God to know the answers, and to believe that all things WILL work the way He has planned despite our best efforts to get in His way.
jgredline
Member
Jon-Marc said:
Jon
You said a mouthfull and I agree with you 100%
The problem is that there is only ONE TRUE GOD and and his name is Jesus...
The second person of the God head.. Do I understand the God Head ? NO
But the bible clearly teaches this, so when I see someone who is Lost chasing after a false Jesus, I will say something because I simply care to much to see anybody condemmed... If I come out harsh, I offer no oppologies...
I really do Love and care what Happens to both Mec and Mutz... I really want to fellowship with them for all eternity....
O
Oscar3
Guest
Imajic
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth. 2 And the Earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. KJV
The English word for God here comes from the Hebrew word elohiym {el-o-heem'}. This is not a singular noun, it is a plural noun. Strong's Concordance notes that elohiym is the plural of elowahh [GOD]. This is why God says "us" later in Genesis. God refers to God in the plural.
Gen. 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: … KJV
The Hebrew word elohiym is a uni-plural noun. Examples of English uni-plural nouns would be group, church or family. In one family, there is more than one member.
John 14:9 Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, `Show us the Father'? NIV
God the Father and Christ are one. They are eternal beings that make up the God family and they are giving mankind the opportunity to join them in eternity as members of the God family. The Trinity doctrine teaches a closed Godhead that excludes humans. The Holy Spirit is not a person but is the power of God.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth. 2 And the Earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. KJV
The English word for God here comes from the Hebrew word elohiym {el-o-heem'}. This is not a singular noun, it is a plural noun. Strong's Concordance notes that elohiym is the plural of elowahh [GOD]. This is why God says "us" later in Genesis. God refers to God in the plural.
Gen. 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: … KJV
The Hebrew word elohiym is a uni-plural noun. Examples of English uni-plural nouns would be group, church or family. In one family, there is more than one member.
John 14:9 Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, `Show us the Father'? NIV
God the Father and Christ are one. They are eternal beings that make up the God family and they are giving mankind the opportunity to join them in eternity as members of the God family. The Trinity doctrine teaches a closed Godhead that excludes humans. The Holy Spirit is not a person but is the power of God.
O
Oscar3
Guest
Imagican said:
Hello Mec
I realize that this post was directed to jg, but in the same way Solo gave Georges the Smack Down :-D , I too look forward to handing out a smack down :wink:
Early Trinitarian Quotes
There are cult groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century until after the time of the Council of Nicea (325). This council "was called by Emperor Constantine to deal with the error of Arianism [see page 45] which was threatening the unity of the Christian Church."
The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea.
Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.
"O Lord God almighty...I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever" (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).
Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.
"For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water" (First Apol., LXI).
Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
"In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).
"We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)
Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.
"The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: ...one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all...'" (Against Heresies X.l)
Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
"We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation...[which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).
Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.
"If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority...There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father" (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).
"For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)
"Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification..." (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).
If, as the anti-Trinitarians maintain, the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine and was never taught until the council of Nicea in 325, then why do these quotes exist? The answer is simple: the Trinity is a biblical doctrine and it was taught before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.
Part of the reason that the Trinity doctrine was not "officially" taught until the time of the Council of Nicea is because Christianity was illegal until shortly before the council. It wasn't really possible for official Christian groups to meet and discuss doctrine. For the most part, they were fearful of making public pronouncements concerning their faith.
Additionally, if a group had attacked the person of Adam, the early church would have responded with an official doctrine of who Adam was. As it was, the person of Christ was attacked. When the Church defended the deity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity was further defined.
The early church believed in the Trinity, as is evidenced by the quotes above, and it wasn't necessary to really make them official. It wasn't until errors started to creep in, that councils began to meet to discuss the Trinity as well as other doctrines that came under fire.
http://www.carm.org/doctrine/trinityquotes.htm
S
scorpia
Guest
Actually they were given not for public consumption but in spite of that, just chose to share them with you in this forum so that everybody may see how the Lord can speak in other language aside from Hebrew and Greek languages.unred typo said:
S
scorpia
Guest
mutzrein said:
John 10:30 plainly speaks "I and my Father are One", no less no more, but Mutz speaks otherwise. I thought you believe that it is forbidden to add and/or subtract anything that is written in the bbile, hence why say too much about John 10:30?
Jon-Marc
Before I respond to the scripture you have used and points raised, may I say that I like your attitude and it is perhaps significant that unlike many other trinitarians you have not judged those like myself who cannot ‘see’ the trinity as it is generally accepted within Christendom. And I believe this reflects one who does walk by faith in Christ – whose righteousness is indeed in Christ.
Now there is no question in my mind that there are many like yourself, born of the spirit of God, whose walk is also by faith and who do accept the trinity.
By the same token there are many like me who also walk in the Spirit, who having been born of this same Spirit do not accept the notion of the trinity as it is espoused by many in Christendom.
So let me make this plain. I don’t question a man’s salvation based on his acceptance or otherwise of this doctrine since I understand that our righteousness is by faith in Christ – not acceptance of a doctrine. And I can only agree that we must walk by faith in Christ and in the light of what God has revealed to each of us, His children.
Nevertheless, as a non-trinitarian I do find myself questioning how it is that trinitarians can accept something that I cannot - and vice versa.
You see God has revealed much of His nature and character to me over the years since I have been born of His spirit. But one thing I am constantly reminded of is that I am only His child by His grace. There has never been anything that I could do to earn favour or merit in His eyes so all I am able to do is walk humbly before Him, knowing that He is the author and finisher of my faith and that any righteousness can only ever be in and through the risen Christ. So, since it is by his grace that I know Him, I must also say that it is by His grace that I have received any knowledge or understanding of Him.
Now I have discussed many elements of my walk with the Lord and the things I hold to, since being on this forum this year. I have been berated and falsely accused of many things during this time, a position I find somewhat disturbing since my accusers more often than not claim to be born again whereas they say I am not.
Of course, I am what I am. No man can take away the gift of eternal life granted me without human decision by the grace of the one true God, through Christ His son.
Anyway, before I go further in response to your posts, may I ask you a question?
How is it that you learned of the trinity? Did you know about it before the grace of God, by whose Spirit you were born again? Or was it explained to you by a brother or sister in the Lord after you came to know him? Or was it perhaps revealed to you by God without any human foreknowledge?
Before I respond to the scripture you have used and points raised, may I say that I like your attitude and it is perhaps significant that unlike many other trinitarians you have not judged those like myself who cannot ‘see’ the trinity as it is generally accepted within Christendom. And I believe this reflects one who does walk by faith in Christ – whose righteousness is indeed in Christ.
Now there is no question in my mind that there are many like yourself, born of the spirit of God, whose walk is also by faith and who do accept the trinity.
By the same token there are many like me who also walk in the Spirit, who having been born of this same Spirit do not accept the notion of the trinity as it is espoused by many in Christendom.
So let me make this plain. I don’t question a man’s salvation based on his acceptance or otherwise of this doctrine since I understand that our righteousness is by faith in Christ – not acceptance of a doctrine. And I can only agree that we must walk by faith in Christ and in the light of what God has revealed to each of us, His children.
Nevertheless, as a non-trinitarian I do find myself questioning how it is that trinitarians can accept something that I cannot - and vice versa.
You see God has revealed much of His nature and character to me over the years since I have been born of His spirit. But one thing I am constantly reminded of is that I am only His child by His grace. There has never been anything that I could do to earn favour or merit in His eyes so all I am able to do is walk humbly before Him, knowing that He is the author and finisher of my faith and that any righteousness can only ever be in and through the risen Christ. So, since it is by his grace that I know Him, I must also say that it is by His grace that I have received any knowledge or understanding of Him.
Now I have discussed many elements of my walk with the Lord and the things I hold to, since being on this forum this year. I have been berated and falsely accused of many things during this time, a position I find somewhat disturbing since my accusers more often than not claim to be born again whereas they say I am not.
Of course, I am what I am. No man can take away the gift of eternal life granted me without human decision by the grace of the one true God, through Christ His son.
Anyway, before I go further in response to your posts, may I ask you a question?
How is it that you learned of the trinity? Did you know about it before the grace of God, by whose Spirit you were born again? Or was it explained to you by a brother or sister in the Lord after you came to know him? Or was it perhaps revealed to you by God without any human foreknowledge?
scorpia said:
O good grief - the difference is not in adding to or subtracting from scripture but in the way that scripture is interpreted. Many, it seems cannot get their head around any other interpretation of the word 'one' than the way they want to see it or have been told it should be interpreted.
So let me ask you this question. When a husband & wife are joined together in marriage are they two or one?
And btw I'm pretty sure some of your posts contained stuff that many here have not read in scripture. Why, even this post could be seen as an example could it not? My bible says, "I and my Father are one" Can you not see that you have added something that is not there. Instead of 'one' indicating unity, you have made it 'One'. Now why is that I wonder.
I have been in this world for 60 years and have known the Lord for 43 of those. I have heard about the Trinity from Baptist ministers all those years. I have also been to Bible college, read the Bible through many times and done extensive studying and have come to the same conclusion as those ministers. I have also learned that I am no Bible scholar, and there is much I don't know. The word of God is so vast and complex that no one can learn it all in one lifetime.
Of course, one thing I have also learned in my 60 years is that I am often wrong. I try to use scripture to back up what I say, but unfortunately not everyone sees the same scripture the same way. I try not to judge and condmen other people since only God has that right. However, I will say what I believe to be the truth without calling others a liar, or saying they are of the devil. I am positve that all I know and learn is taught to me by God's spirit, although satan is constantly lying to me and trying to get me to doubt God--just as he did with Eve.
Of course, one thing I have also learned in my 60 years is that I am often wrong. I try to use scripture to back up what I say, but unfortunately not everyone sees the same scripture the same way. I try not to judge and condmen other people since only God has that right. However, I will say what I believe to be the truth without calling others a liar, or saying they are of the devil. I am positve that all I know and learn is taught to me by God's spirit, although satan is constantly lying to me and trying to get me to doubt God--just as he did with Eve.
mutzrein said:
Gabbylittleangel
Member
I have a question for those who do not believe in the Trinity.
There has been much said about if you believe Jesus is God or not.
What do you believe about the Holy Spirit? Who or what is the Holy Spirit if you do not believe it is God? In what way is the Holy Spirit not God?
WAIT!!
I decided that this question needed its own thread. Please post your answers there!
http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 673#306673
There has been much said about if you believe Jesus is God or not.
What do you believe about the Holy Spirit? Who or what is the Holy Spirit if you do not believe it is God? In what way is the Holy Spirit not God?
WAIT!!
I decided that this question needed its own thread. Please post your answers there!
http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 673#306673
Yet there is nothing to indicate that this is what Jesus was referring to. Are you and your father not one in another way? Are you not both human by nature? Your father, being human, begat you, a human.mutzrein said:
So how is it that the Father, who is God, begat someone who isn't God, who isn't of the same nature? Why can it not be said that they are one in nature? If Jesus isn't God then how can he be the Son of God?
I
Imagican
Guest
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:20 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free, my reply will be in bold.
Imagican wrote:
Ok, if Jesus and God were 'one', as in, 'the same' as in Jesus IS God, then HOW is it possible that there are things that God knows that Christ DOES NOT? If they are 'one' then why would they need to communicate with 'each other'? And if NO MAN has EVER 'seen God', then HOW could Christ BE God? I have yet for a 'trinitarian' to offer an acceptable answer to these types of questions.
You've been given some very good, very reasonable answers; you just don't accept them. This is the key passage that I have given to you several times:
Free, and you call this a 'reasonable answer'? Firstly, this scripture states that Christ was 'in the 'form' of God'. I ask you this: WHAT IS the 'form' of God? You answer this and you will quickly see how confused you are in your interpretation. Second, this scripture PLAINLY states that Christ 'DID NOT count equality A THING TO BE GRASPED. Do you NOT see what this is saying. IT PLAINLY states that Christ REALIZED that 'equality' with God was NOT a thing to BE GRASPED. Unlike Satan, Christ is PERFECTLY content with 'His place'. And realizes that equality with God is NOT a thing to attempt to 'create'.
Phi 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Phi 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Phi 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Phi 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
If you understood what was being said, you would have the answer to your questions, except the last one because it makes no sense.
Imagican wrote:
First of all. NOT EVEN IN THE WORD offered by the apostles is there a 'trinity'.
I just gave you a passage which gives one of the foundations of the Trinity, just as you have been given many other passages which support this and the other foundations of the Trinity.
Imagican wrote:
And Constantine was a PAGAN Emperor. This man was NOT a Christian when the council of Nicea took place. He was simply tired of the bickering over 'trinity' and chose to incorporate it into Christianity for the sake of 'peace' among the Bishops. That proves NOTHING so far as the validity of this doctrine. If ANYTHING it goes further towards proving that it was more likely to have been formed through PAGAN roots than through The Spirit.
Constantine has nothing to do with the formulation of the Trinity. The purpose of the Council of Nicea, under the leadership of Athanasius, was to come to an agreement on the nature of Christ. That in itself proves that belief in Christ as God was already in existence and being taught in the churches. There are writings from the early second century which show as much.
How deceptive you can be in your offerings. Constantine WAS THE ONE that made the DECISION to ACCEPT 'tinity' into the RCC. Perhaps you would fair well by studying history before making such statements that could influence others that know no better. And 'trinity' was ONLY being taught in 'some' churches prior to the Council of Nicea and THAT was the purpose of the gathering; To make 'trinity' UNIVERSAL. Your 'broad statements and inuendo are very deceiving. You made it sound as if 'trinity' was already 'a part' of the Church, when in reality it was ONLY 'a part' of some churches. Your statement about Constantine NOT having anything to do with the formulation is misdirection concerning your attack on my previous post. Constatntine DID order the gathering at Nicea, Constantine DID side with 'trinitarians' and Constantine DID make the ultimate decision to add 'trinity' to the RCC doctrine. And Constantine WAS a pagan at the time that HE made this decision. A pagan Emperor who's religion was Mithraism, a religion containing a 'triune god'.
Imagican wrote:
And IF it was truly of Spiritual origins, then HOW could it be possible for those led by The Spirit to torture and murder their brothers and sisters who REFUSED to accept it?
If I remember correctly, trinitarians were also persecuted later on when Arianism enjoyed a brief resurgence. Regardless, your question begs the question of whether or not those who reject Christ as God are Christians, are "brothers and sisters".
Free, you would make a 'good' Catholic in that you are 'unable' to see that EVERY HUMAN on this planet is a brother or sister. I did not say a brother or sister 'in Christ', but an understanding that all men and women are our 'brothers and sisters' is FUNDAMENTAL to Christianity to begin with. Was it NOT Christ that stated that for you to ignore the begger, the peasant, the prisoner, the sick, THE LEAST desirable humans on the planet, that YOU IGNORED HIM? Or is it YOUR contention that He was refering ONLY to those that 'believed in Him'?
It was the RCC that 'first introduced' this concept of; 'those that do not believe as WE do are nothing more than 'animals' mentality into Christianity. By labelijng others they were able to shirk their responsibilities towards humanity and treat those 'lesser' than they in ANY fashion that they so chose. From your statements, it would seem that you feel 'the same way'.
Could it be that the early trinitarians were so zealous for the truth and realized the seriousness of the error of not believing Christ to be God that they did something about it? They were fighting for orthodoxy, for "right belief", at a very volatile time in the early church when there were numerous beliefs teaching different Christs. This certainly doesn't justify what they did but whether or not one believes Christ is God is a matter of life and death.
And, as I stated previous, you would have made a 'good' Catholic. With thoughts such as these, one is 'able to justify ANYTHING' in the name of Christ. I suppose that James Jones just felt like 'doing something about it' when he order his flock to be MURDERED? And I'm quite sure that in 'his own mind' what he did made 'some kind' of 'sense'.
Now, once again Free, you shirk the questions that I poseed in favor of useless comments that have little or NO substance according to the 'truth' of the subject at hand. You come in and state that 'I' am WRONG and then offer NOTHING to refute what I have offered except through inuendo and misdirection.
So, back to the original questions. Since you made NO attempt to answer them I will ask them again so that they are not simply ignored by others for the 'sake of your comments'. I am still waiting for answers to the questions that I posed.......................................................................
MEC
_________________
"The glory of God is man fully alive." St. Irenaeus
"When men cease to believe in God, they do not believe in nothing; they believe in anything. "--G.K. Chesterton
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free, my reply will be in bold.
Imagican wrote:
Ok, if Jesus and God were 'one', as in, 'the same' as in Jesus IS God, then HOW is it possible that there are things that God knows that Christ DOES NOT? If they are 'one' then why would they need to communicate with 'each other'? And if NO MAN has EVER 'seen God', then HOW could Christ BE God? I have yet for a 'trinitarian' to offer an acceptable answer to these types of questions.
You've been given some very good, very reasonable answers; you just don't accept them. This is the key passage that I have given to you several times:
Free, and you call this a 'reasonable answer'? Firstly, this scripture states that Christ was 'in the 'form' of God'. I ask you this: WHAT IS the 'form' of God? You answer this and you will quickly see how confused you are in your interpretation. Second, this scripture PLAINLY states that Christ 'DID NOT count equality A THING TO BE GRASPED. Do you NOT see what this is saying. IT PLAINLY states that Christ REALIZED that 'equality' with God was NOT a thing to BE GRASPED. Unlike Satan, Christ is PERFECTLY content with 'His place'. And realizes that equality with God is NOT a thing to attempt to 'create'.
Phi 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Phi 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Phi 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Phi 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
If you understood what was being said, you would have the answer to your questions, except the last one because it makes no sense.
Imagican wrote:
First of all. NOT EVEN IN THE WORD offered by the apostles is there a 'trinity'.
I just gave you a passage which gives one of the foundations of the Trinity, just as you have been given many other passages which support this and the other foundations of the Trinity.
Imagican wrote:
And Constantine was a PAGAN Emperor. This man was NOT a Christian when the council of Nicea took place. He was simply tired of the bickering over 'trinity' and chose to incorporate it into Christianity for the sake of 'peace' among the Bishops. That proves NOTHING so far as the validity of this doctrine. If ANYTHING it goes further towards proving that it was more likely to have been formed through PAGAN roots than through The Spirit.
Constantine has nothing to do with the formulation of the Trinity. The purpose of the Council of Nicea, under the leadership of Athanasius, was to come to an agreement on the nature of Christ. That in itself proves that belief in Christ as God was already in existence and being taught in the churches. There are writings from the early second century which show as much.
How deceptive you can be in your offerings. Constantine WAS THE ONE that made the DECISION to ACCEPT 'tinity' into the RCC. Perhaps you would fair well by studying history before making such statements that could influence others that know no better. And 'trinity' was ONLY being taught in 'some' churches prior to the Council of Nicea and THAT was the purpose of the gathering; To make 'trinity' UNIVERSAL. Your 'broad statements and inuendo are very deceiving. You made it sound as if 'trinity' was already 'a part' of the Church, when in reality it was ONLY 'a part' of some churches. Your statement about Constantine NOT having anything to do with the formulation is misdirection concerning your attack on my previous post. Constatntine DID order the gathering at Nicea, Constantine DID side with 'trinitarians' and Constantine DID make the ultimate decision to add 'trinity' to the RCC doctrine. And Constantine WAS a pagan at the time that HE made this decision. A pagan Emperor who's religion was Mithraism, a religion containing a 'triune god'.
Imagican wrote:
And IF it was truly of Spiritual origins, then HOW could it be possible for those led by The Spirit to torture and murder their brothers and sisters who REFUSED to accept it?
If I remember correctly, trinitarians were also persecuted later on when Arianism enjoyed a brief resurgence. Regardless, your question begs the question of whether or not those who reject Christ as God are Christians, are "brothers and sisters".
Free, you would make a 'good' Catholic in that you are 'unable' to see that EVERY HUMAN on this planet is a brother or sister. I did not say a brother or sister 'in Christ', but an understanding that all men and women are our 'brothers and sisters' is FUNDAMENTAL to Christianity to begin with. Was it NOT Christ that stated that for you to ignore the begger, the peasant, the prisoner, the sick, THE LEAST desirable humans on the planet, that YOU IGNORED HIM? Or is it YOUR contention that He was refering ONLY to those that 'believed in Him'?
It was the RCC that 'first introduced' this concept of; 'those that do not believe as WE do are nothing more than 'animals' mentality into Christianity. By labelijng others they were able to shirk their responsibilities towards humanity and treat those 'lesser' than they in ANY fashion that they so chose. From your statements, it would seem that you feel 'the same way'.
Could it be that the early trinitarians were so zealous for the truth and realized the seriousness of the error of not believing Christ to be God that they did something about it? They were fighting for orthodoxy, for "right belief", at a very volatile time in the early church when there were numerous beliefs teaching different Christs. This certainly doesn't justify what they did but whether or not one believes Christ is God is a matter of life and death.
And, as I stated previous, you would have made a 'good' Catholic. With thoughts such as these, one is 'able to justify ANYTHING' in the name of Christ. I suppose that James Jones just felt like 'doing something about it' when he order his flock to be MURDERED? And I'm quite sure that in 'his own mind' what he did made 'some kind' of 'sense'.
Now, once again Free, you shirk the questions that I poseed in favor of useless comments that have little or NO substance according to the 'truth' of the subject at hand. You come in and state that 'I' am WRONG and then offer NOTHING to refute what I have offered except through inuendo and misdirection.
So, back to the original questions. Since you made NO attempt to answer them I will ask them again so that they are not simply ignored by others for the 'sake of your comments'. I am still waiting for answers to the questions that I posed.......................................................................
MEC
_________________
"The glory of God is man fully alive." St. Irenaeus
"When men cease to believe in God, they do not believe in nothing; they believe in anything. "--G.K. Chesterton
I
Imagican
Guest
Free said:
Free, Mutz has offered some 'relevant' information. We and Christ ARE ONE, a man a woman wed and 'become ONE'. God and Christ are ONE. Instead of denial, please offer some scriptural or Spiritual understanding that shows that this 'oneness' between us, God, Christ and each other differs somehow?
And Free, in the same 'sense' that you offer, how is it that WE were created 'in the image of God' yet WE are NOT God? Here IS the answer to the questions that you posed.
Christ CAN be the Son without being God Himself by the SIMPLE FACT that there is ONLY ONE GOD. And Christ was/IS CERTAINLY a 'part of God'. This IS without doubt. But that He is also a 'separate entity is OBVIOUS from the words from His OWN MOUTH. Even 'trinity' offers that Christ and God are 'two separate entities'. Yet you state that this statement of Christ and God being ONE indicates that they are 'the same'. WRONG. Christ IS The Son of God. And like MY FATHER, even though I was begotten of my father, and in some ways, we are ONE, we are NOT 'the same'. I am but a 'part' of my father and there is NOTHING that I can do to 'make' myself him.
MEC
I
Imagican
Guest
Jon-Marc said:
And I contend that in these 43 years to which you refer, your belief was based upon 'man's' teaching so far as 'trinity' is concerned. For IF you had NOTHING other than The Word and The Spirit to guide you, it is QUITE possible that you would have NEVER HEARD the word 'trinity' in your entire 60 years of existence.
MEC
O
Oscar3
Guest
Mutz
The problem that you forgot to mention to Jon-marc is that; not only do you not believe in the trinity, but you believe the ''sin'' of not believing that Jesus is God. Yes this is a ''sin'' for you are denying Jesus of his deity. As the scriptures teach;''ONLY GOD CAN FORGIVE SINS'' so if Jesus is not God who will forgive your sins?
Mutz and Mec or Mec and Mutz
You two are dangerously close of commiting the unpardonable sin. You guys are basically doing the same thing the pharissess accused Jesus of by telling him that he was casting out demons by belzzabub. In the the same way they denied him his deity, you are also doing the same.
Don't get mad, think about it. Who are you attributing the things that Jesus has done on the Cross to? Certainly not God, because you don't believe Jesus is God. If you don't believe Jesus is God, then God is not God.
Now more than a few minutes ago Adrian Rodgers had a good point.
''The Devil would much rather send you to hell while sitting in a church pew instead of using a Gun''
The problem that you forgot to mention to Jon-marc is that; not only do you not believe in the trinity, but you believe the ''sin'' of not believing that Jesus is God. Yes this is a ''sin'' for you are denying Jesus of his deity. As the scriptures teach;''ONLY GOD CAN FORGIVE SINS'' so if Jesus is not God who will forgive your sins?
Mutz and Mec or Mec and Mutz
You two are dangerously close of commiting the unpardonable sin. You guys are basically doing the same thing the pharissess accused Jesus of by telling him that he was casting out demons by belzzabub. In the the same way they denied him his deity, you are also doing the same.
Don't get mad, think about it. Who are you attributing the things that Jesus has done on the Cross to? Certainly not God, because you don't believe Jesus is God. If you don't believe Jesus is God, then God is not God.
Now more than a few minutes ago Adrian Rodgers had a good point.
''The Devil would much rather send you to hell while sitting in a church pew instead of using a Gun''
I
Imagican
Guest
Jon-Marc said:
Marc, I have YET to 'try to explain God'. It is those that INSIST on this 'trinity' that do so. And, as far as 'living by faith', this amounts to NOTHING if one's faith is based on falacy. Nothing so far as 'pleasing the Father' is concerned.
And Marc, I'm not quite 60 yet, (and may not make it that far. One never knows), but I too believe that one MUST trust in God for the 'truth'. And that is the premiss of this thread. To turn away from the teachings of men in FAVOR of the teachings of Christ about Himself and God. And your statement that we do NOT need answers to EVERYTHING is 'TRUTH', yet 'trinity' tries to define something that perhaps fits DIRECTLY into this understanding that EVERYTHING CANNOT be defined by man.
MEC
I
Imagican
Guest
and oscar, your eloquent us of the english language goes FAR in presenting the spirit which you follow, (and I suppose you are a 'big' wrestling fan eh?) Smack-down? I guess that could have been used to describe the treatment of the brothers and sisters of those that 'created' this 'trinity' whom they tortured and murdered for REFUSING to accept this 'man-made' doctrine. And your quotes do NOTHING but offer this same conclusion; 'man-made' doctrine.
Now, oscar, do us a favor and quote just ONE of the apostles that even MENTIONED this 'trinity'. Or a piece of scripture offered through Christ or EVEN God Himself perhaps, that speaks of this 'trinity'......................
Ah, I didn't think so. So, can I assume that you too would agree that this 'trinity' was 'created by men' instead of offered by God?
MEC
Now, oscar, do us a favor and quote just ONE of the apostles that even MENTIONED this 'trinity'. Or a piece of scripture offered through Christ or EVEN God Himself perhaps, that speaks of this 'trinity'......................
Ah, I didn't think so. So, can I assume that you too would agree that this 'trinity' was 'created by men' instead of offered by God?
MEC