Imagican said:
Free, you openly admitted in this post that the IDEA of 'trinity' wasn't EVEN WRITTEN about UNTIL the second century. That IS TWO hundred years AFTER the death of Christ. You SAY possibly the FIRST hundred years AFTER His death but there is OBVIOUSLY no 'proof' of this statement.
The first century is the first 100 years beginning with Christ's death. The second century is the following 100 years, or 100 AD - 200 AD. In other words, when I stated the "very early second century" it doesn't mean 200 years after Christ's death, but just over 100 years.
Ignatius (AD 30-107):
"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia, deservedly most happy, being blessed in the greatness and fulness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning of time, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion
by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God:"
"There is one Physician who is
possessed both of flesh and spirit;
both made and not made;
God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God;
first passible and then impassible,â€â€even Jesus Christ our Lord."
There is your proof. The idea that Jesus was God was around for a long time prior to the Council of Nicea in 325.
Pretty BIG stretch from the quote that you have offered to 'trinity', which even the phrase itself was NOT introduced into Christianity until a MUCH later date. And the POINT of this thread is NOT who or how many 'belived' Jesus to BE God, but the actual 'doctrine' of the 'trinity'. EXACTLY what I have been TRYING to explain is that it TOOK hundreds of years to FORMULATE this doctrine. It most CERTAINLY 'started' somewhere BEFORE it was institued INTO Catholic tradition and LAW. But the TRUTH is that it was NOT EVEN SPOKEN OF until about 170-200 AD. And even then ONLY as informational opinonism by what are CALLED, (by the CC), the 'fathers of Christianity'. Yet even the Word offers that the TRUE APOSTLES were the FATHERS Of Chrstianity.
Imagican said:
Now SHOW US that there IS this God-man WRITTEN in The Word. I can show you PLAINLY that Jesus STATES that He IS the Son of God. I have YET to find a statement in which He PLAINLY states that HE IS GOD. He even takes it STEPS beyond a simple offering of WHO He is, He also offers that there are THINGS that ONLY The Father knows. Information that at the time EVEN HE was unable to fathom or simply information that He was NOT priviledged to. And He states that The Father is HIS God as well as ours. Pretty deceptive stuff IF He WAS God while making such statements.
I can show you and have shown you on several occasions. What you continue to ignore, and what I have repeatedly shown to be the case, is that your position fails to take into account all that the Scriptures reveal about Jesus and God. The doctrine of the Trinity on the other hand takes it all into account, even your supposed Scriptures which "prove" the Trinity to be false. While you must necessarily ignore or twist certain passages to mean something other than what they plainly mean, the doctrine of the Trinity neither ignores nor twists anything--it doesn't need to.
And I propose that NO amount of 'philosophical mysticism' is able to offer ANY more than what had already been offered. I can show you CLEARLY where the bible states that NO MAN has EVER SEEN God. For Christ to BE God, ALL that witnessed His presence on this planet WOULD have SEEN Him. Thus, either The Word is NOT accurate, or God has NEVER been SEEN by ANY MAN.
So, the attempt to offer that 'trinity' is SIMPLY a culmination of ALL the scriptures CANNOT be 'true'. For the simple statement that I have offered ABOVE refutes this 'claim'. And the doctrine of 'trinity' would HAVE to ignore or TWIST this scripture. For the 'trinity' to offer that Christ IS God would COMPLETELY refute that words offered through scripture that PLAINLY offer that God IS the Father of Christ as well as what I have offered above.
Imagican said:
Free said:
Who did God then love before Creation?
Before the 'Creation' of WHAT?
What do you think? Before the creation of everything--that is what is generally understood to be the case when one speaks of Creation.
That you even had to ask shows the lack in your position and understanding of Scripture. It is your position which makes it necessary to split certain passages or concepts into two parts in order to fit your erroneous theology.
Imagican said:
If you refer to the Creation of this planet and mankind, that's an EASY one to answer.
Seeing as how this is not what is meant when one uses the term "Creation", what is your answer?