The soul of man

[Butch5]

So was the Athanasian Creed. Some of its history is recorded HERE. It was probably not written by Athanasius after about AD 450 but is to defend the triune God and that Jesus was true God, co-equal with the Father.

Which shows that they didn't go by the Scriptures. Jesus said that the Father is the "ONLY" true God. He also said, 'the Father is greater than I.' They got so much wrong in that creed.

 

[Butch5]

Keep in mind that my comment was not to say that I don't believe in a Triune God. It seemed that you were basing your argument on the absence of a specific use of the word Trinity and Oz didn't seem to be catching that part of your argument so I was attempting to bring this out. Basically, yes, I would like Oz to present the points of Scripture that demonstrate our Triune God. I expect it should be enlightening.

Actually, that wasn't my argument. My argument is that there is not a being called God who consists of three other persons. However, I too would like to see OZ present those point. Maybe we could actually settle this issue.

 

[Butch5]

What people read directly in Scripture is the following:

1. There was, is, and always will be only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. Jesus is God (and man, of course).
4. The Holy Spirit is God.
5. The Father isn't the Son, the Son isn't the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit isn't the Father.

There is only one logical conclusion: we have three, coeternal, coexisting persons within the one being that is God.

According to Scripture there are other gods. However, that isn't the only conclusion and is certainly isn't a logical one. There is no example in the known universe of a being that consists of three other beings. Thus no one can claim that this is how God is, they can only speculate.

However, lets continue with this line of reasoning. The Father is called God, Jesus is called God, The Holy Spirit is God.

25 And Eliu said to the prophets of shame, Choose to yourselves one calf, and dress it first, for ye are many; and call ye on the name of your god; but apply no fire.
26 And they took the calf and drest it, and called on the name of Baal from morning till noon, and said, hear us, O Baal, hear us. And there was no voice, neither was there hearing, and they ran up and down on the alter which they had made. (1 Ki. 18:25-26 LXE)

We see that Baal is called god too. If being called god is the only criteria for being in the Trinity what about Baal.

The only other option is polytheism, which, if I remember correctly, is what your position advocates. Being that Christianity is monotheistic, just like the Judaism from which it came, we cannot accept polytheism.

But you do accept polytheism. Isn't it your position that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God? That's three Gods. Now I know you'll say they are one God. But in reality that's just word games. If the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Holy Spirit you have three they can't be one. As I said, there is no example in the known universe.

Earlier you said it is the only logical conclusion. Maybe something is being misunderstood.

 

[Butch5]

You don't think that Jesus is immortal? Notice that verse 16 is speaking about the same being as in verse 15. We see that the one in verse 15 is called "the King of kings, and Lord of lords." We then read in Rev. 17:14, "They will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful."

So who is the "Lord of lords and King of kings," the Father or the Son? Surely according to your position it cannot be both, can it?

Jesus is immortal because the Father continues to give Him life.

14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (1 Tim. 6:14-16 KJV)

Clearly this isn't about Jesus. People have seen Jesus. Paul said this one dwells in inapproachable light and that no one has seen nor can see Him. That's the Father. So, it seems that the title of King of Kings goes to both the Father and the Son.

 

[Butch5]

This passage by Paul is very interesting and N.T. Wright sees verse 6 as Paul's expansion of the Shema. If you want the verse to say that "one God, the Father" precludes Jesus from being God, then it follows that "one Lord, Jesus Christ" precludes the Father from being Lord. Yet that would contradict what we just looked at in 1 Tim. 6:15, among others.

Not at all. We can say that there is one Lord Jesus Christ because the after the resurrection all power and authority had been given to Christ. All things were put under His Authority with the exception of the Father Himself.

Then we have to consider what else is being said. If "of whom are all things" speaks of the Father's omnipotence and eternal pre-existence, then it follows that "by whom are all things" speaks of the Son's omnipotence and eternal pre-existence. We cannot say that in relation to the Father "all things" means absolutely everything that has come into existence but that it means something different in relation to the Son. And this is confirmed in John 1:1-3 and Col 1:16-17.

All that to say that we obviously have to be careful and take into account all that the Bible says.

Not following you here. How does all things speak of the Father's omnipotence? Also according to Jesus He isn't omnipotent.

 

[OzSpen]

No. But it's misery down there. 25,000 homeless. It's staggering. And no end in sight.

The Trinity is difficult and also the nature of Jesus - thus all the creeds to explain it. The one from Constantinople of 385 just made it more complicated. in fact, it was declared that the one from 325 was more accurate. This is due to the fact that we're trying to explain GOD with words. It's very difficult! Our minds are too finite.

I understand Butch5's position. I must say that I don't understand how one could call himself a Christian if he does not believe the Triune nature of God, which would mean that Jesus is not God.

Some concepts in Christianity just have to be accepted.

Wondering

W,

It's hard for me to imagine the devastation of living in an earthquake zone as I live in a region free from earthquakes - so far. I do hope they don't rebuild on the same site.

Yes, there are challenges in knowing the nature of Jesus and the Trinity but the minutiae of relationships is what gets me tangled at times. To keep it simple, the Scripture affirms:

• Jesus is God (John 1:1 ESV; John 8:58 ESV);
• He is not the Father or the Holy Spirit (Matt 6:9 ESV; John 15:26 ESV).
• All 3 are persons in the one Godhead (Matt 28:18-20 ESV);
• While Jesus was on earth he was God in human flesh (Matt 1:18-38 ESV).

The complications that often eventuate in discussing this (as we are finding on CFnet), cause some to deny the Trinity.

I agree that being a Christian requires that I believe in the triune God. However, it was many years after I became a Christian that I began to understand the nature of God. I accepted Him by faith in my mid teens and then grew up in my faith.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Which shows that they didn't go by the Scriptures. Jesus said that the Father is the "ONLY" true God. He also said, 'the Father is greater than I.' They got so much wrong in that creed.

Now provide references of the verses to which you refer along with expositions.

 

[Jim Parker]

Which shows that they didn't go by the Scriptures. Jesus said that the Father is the "ONLY" true God. He also said, 'the Father is greater than I.' They got so much wrong in that creed.

John 1:1 states that the Logos, who took on flesh as Jesus (1:14) is God.
At Jhn 8:58 (NKJV) Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
"I am" in Greek is "ἐγὼ εἰμί" which is the exact same name with which God identified Himself to Moses at Exo 3:14.
And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM (LXX: "ἐγὼ εἰμί") has sent me to you.' ”

The 7 great councils refuted the heresies of the neo-platonists (Arius, et. al.) who attempted to insert the latest fad of Greek philosophy into Christianity and taught that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were less than eternal God. The councils based their refutations of those heretics on scripture and on what the apostles and the church had taught from the beginning and in all places. (From Britain to India and beyond)

Therefore:
Real Christianity is trinitarian.
If your religion is not trinitarian then it is also not Christian. (Like the Mormons, the JWs and an assortment of crack-pot, "we may be ignorant as dirt but we know better than everyone else" fellowships.)

That's not my opinion.

It is the opinion of the entire Christian church.


iakov the fool


DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that may result from said reading. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it.Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[smaller]

John 1:1 states that the Logos, who took on flesh as Jesus (1:14) is God.
At Jhn 8:58 (NKJV) Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
"I am" in Greek is "ἐγὼ εἰμί" which is the exact same name with which God identified Himself to Moses at Exo 3:14.
And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM (LXX "ἐγὼ εἰμί") has sent me to you.' ”

The 7 great councils refuted the heresies of the neo-platonists (Arius, et. al.) who attempted to insert the latest fad of Greek philosophy into Christianity and taught that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were less than eternal God. The councils based their refutations of those heretics on scripture and on what the apostles and the church had taught from the beginning and in all places. (From Britain to India and beyond)

Therefore:
Real Christianity is trinitarian.
If your religion is not trinitarian then it is also not Christian. (Like the Mormons, the JWs and an assortment of crack-pot, "we may be ignorant as dirt but we know better than everyone else" fellowships.)

That's not my opinion.

It is the opinion of the entire Christian church.

iakov the fool

Let's not kid ourselves that there was complete agreement. I happen to agree with the filioque insertion. Without that insertion there are legit scriptural problems, such as understanding the Spirit of Christ in believers or Jesus saying He would send the Comforter, John 16:7, among others. I think your side of that particular view has it's justifications as well, but ultimately I think your side makes an unnecessary separation there in saying only The Father sends the Holy Ghost. What your position calls double procession actually requires a division between the Father and the Son that isn't really needed, as there is none, hence 'and of the Son.' Where your position claims double there is really only One Spirit, which I don't think anyone denies.

I think the East had issues.

 

[Butch5]

John 1:1 states that the Logos, who took on flesh as Jesus (1:14) is God.
At Jhn 8:58 (NKJV) Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
"I am" in Greek is "ἐγὼ εἰμί" which is the exact same name with which God identified Himself to Moses at Exo 3:14.
And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM (LXX: "ἐγὼ εἰμί") has sent me to you.' ”

The 7 great councils refuted the heresies of the neo-platonists (Arius, et. al.) who attempted to insert the latest fad of Greek philosophy into Christianity and taught that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were less than eternal God. The councils based their refutations of those heretics on scripture and on what the apostles and the church had taught from the beginning and in all places. (From Britain to India and beyond)

Therefore:
Real Christianity is trinitarian.
If your religion is not trinitarian then it is also not Christian. (Like the Mormons, the JWs and an assortment of crack-pot, "we may be ignorant as dirt but we know better than everyone else" fellowships.)

That's not my opinion.

It is the opinion of the entire Christian church.


iakov the fool


DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that may result from said reading. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it.Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

Jim, I don't have time at the moment to reply in full. However, so that it's clearer when I reply will you please define for me what you mean by "God"?

 

[GodsGrace]

But, the concept wasn't in Christianity until the 400's AD. That's the point I've been making. How do you have 400 years of Christianity without a doctrine that so many claim is central to Christianity?

Butch5
There can be no new revelation.
However, existing revelation can be clarified, explained in more detail, etc.
The bible also took till the 300's to be put together. Should we not accept it only because it took so long to compile?
Its pages were written before that. The idea of Jesus being God for the reasons OzSpen explained so well were around but took time to clarify.

Even Paul digested all the information he had for 3 years before starting to write and in detail what Christianity is.

How do you explain John 1:1?

And as to Jim Parker, just a heads up:
The Father
Yahweh

 

[Jim Parker]

Jim, I don't have time at the moment to reply in full. However, so that it's clearer when I reply will you please define for me what you mean by "God"?

God has revealed Himself as Father, Son and Holy spirit, the Trinity, one in essence and undivided.

 

[GodsGrace]

God has revealed Himself as Father, Son and Holy spirit, the Trinity, one in essence and undivided.

I thought of the word "reveal" after my last post.

When we say God, we think of God, the Father, or Yahweh in the O.T.

But God has revealed Himself in different ways. As the Father, as the Son and as the Holy Spirit.

When I was studying the Trinity years ago, I remember reading or hearing that even this explanation is wrong and too simplified.

It seem that no matter how you explain it, it cannot be understood and just has to be accepted.


Wondering

 

[Jim Parker]

I thought of the word "reveal" after my last post.
When we say God, we think of God, the Father, or Yahweh in the O.T.
But God has revealed Himself in different ways. As the Father, as the Son and as the Holy Spirit.
When I was studying the Trinity years ago, I remember reading or hearing that even this explanation is wrong and too simplified.
It seem that no matter how you explain it, it cannot be understood and just has to be accepted.

Wondering

We cannot define God. God is beyond our understanding and God has not revealed everything to man but only what we need to know.

Deu 29:29 (NKJV) The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.

 

[GodsGrace]

We cannot define God. God is beyond our understanding and God has not revealed everything to man but only what we need to know.

Deu 29:29 (NKJV) The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.

Not only did He not reveal everything - even if He did, we wouldn't understand it.
I like to say that God lives in a different dimension. We like to put Him in a box, but He's too big for that.
I Am That I Am.

I don't even like to question everything like we do here. But it's a good pass time I guess.
The very fact that we disagree and have our own ideas proves that God is beyond our understanding, as you state.

W

 

[Butch5]

God has revealed Himself as Father, Son and Holy spirit, the Trinity, one in essence and undivided.

That's Modalism Jim.

I'm askin you to define the word.

 

[Butch5]

I thought of the word "reveal" after my last post.

When we say God, we think of God, the Father, or Yahweh in the O.T.

But God has revealed Himself in different ways. As the Father, as the Son and as the Holy Spirit.

When I was studying the Trinity years ago, I remember reading or hearing that even this explanation is wrong and too simplified.

It seem that no matter how you explain it, it cannot be understood and just has to be accepted.


Wondering

HI Wondering,

The idea that God revealed him as the Father and as the Son, and as thevHold Spirit is the doctrine of Modalsim. it's an ancient doctrine and was refuted early on.

The reason it can't be explained is because it's a fallacy. there is nothing in the Bible that says God is a being hat consists of three persons the reason people come to this conclusion is because they misunderstand how the word "theos" is being used

 

[GodsGrace]

HI Wondering,

The idea that God revealed him as the Father and as the Son, and as thevHold Spirit is the doctrine of Modalsim. it's an ancient doctrine and was refuted early on.

The reason it can't be explained is because it's a fallacy. there is nothing in the Bible that says God is a being hat consists of three persons the reason people come to this conclusion is because they misunderstand how the word "theos" is being used

Well, maybe you could explain the word Theos to me?
Also, I had asked you to explain John 1:1

Is Jesus the Word?
Was He in the beginning?
Was the Word with God?
Was the Word God?

Wondering

 

[Free]

According to Scripture there are other gods. However, that isn't the only conclusion and is certainly isn't a logical one. There is no example in the known universe of a being that consists of three other beings. Thus no one can claim that this is how God is, they can only speculate.

However, lets continue with this line of reasoning. The Father is called God, Jesus is called God, The Holy Spirit is God.

25 And Eliu said to the prophets of shame, Choose to yourselves one calf, and dress it first, for ye are many; and call ye on the name of your god; but apply no fire.
26 And they took the calf and drest it, and called on the name of Baal from morning till noon, and said, hear us, O Baal, hear us. And there was no voice, neither was there hearing, and they ran up and down on the alter which they had made. (1 Ki. 18:25-26 LXE)

We see that Baal is called god too. If being called god is the only criteria for being in the Trinity what about Baal.

Why is it that when discussion of the Trinity takes place, context goes out the window? Happens every time.

You previously quoted 1 Cor. 8:6, so let's look a little more at the context:

1Co 8:4 Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that "an idol has no real existence," and that "there is no God but one."
1Co 8:5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"—
1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

A god is whatever one chooses as their object of worship. So in one sense, yes, there are many gods, but in the sense that we are speaking of regarding the true, living God, there always has been and will only ever be, one.

And of course being called a god is not the only criteria for being in the Trinity. No one has made such a claim.

But you do accept polytheism. Isn't it your position that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God? That's three Gods. Now I know you'll say they are one God. But in reality that's just word games. If the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Holy Spirit you have three they can't be one. As I said, there is no example in the known universe.

Earlier you said it is the only logical conclusion. Maybe something is being misunderstood.

No, the Trinity is not polytheism. The wording of the doctrine of the Trinity is very specific to avoid polytheism--three persons, one God. If you want me to get all philosophical, I have an article in a Bible that explains how this is logically possible.

You say "there is no example in the known universe," but that is not at all an argument, or at least not at all a good one. God is who he is; there is no other like him. The closest analogy I have come across is the Triple Point of substances. Water, for example, at a certain pressure and temperature, can simultaneously exist in gaseous, liquid, and solid forms. One substance, three states. Of course that could also be used to support modalism (every analogy has its shortcomings). The difference being, we know that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. They are all distinct, yet referred to either explicitly or implicitly as God.

It just seems to me that if a single substance as simple as water can simultaneously exist in three different phases given the right conditions, how can we say that God cannot?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_point

 

[Jim Parker]

I like to say that God lives in a different dimension.

i heard an astrophysicist say that God had to exist in at least 11 dimensions.
(huh ????)