The Trinity

[Catholic Crusader]

...I have NEVER denied the 'deity' of Christ....

If that is true then you are saying Jesus is God. But the Father is God too. But there is only one God. So, so far, you have two persons in one Godhead.

Add the Holy Spirit to that, and you have THREE persons in one Godhead - and THAT is the traditional description of the Trinity: Three persons in one Godhead, or One being in three persons.

You seem to have painted yourself into a corner here.

 

[Imagican]

There's a lot more to God han meets the eye.
Jesus also said He is the Resurrection. How could he have said that when he hadn't yet been crucified?

He KNEW what He had COME to do and that was DIE for our sins. And in this respect, from the moment of His conception, He WAS the redeemer or the Resurection. For He KNEW as well that once offered up in death that He would live again. That He WAS the Resurection.

MEC

How did He KNOW He would not falter?

I don't believe that He did KNOW that He would not falter. Hence, the reason for such fervent prayer leading up to the event. That He had 'faith' that He would succeed is without doubt. But I'm sure that Peter had faith in that He would NOT 'deny Christ', and we see that his faith was NOT enough.

Not knowing exactly what was in store for Him, Christ most likely had His 'doubts' as to being able to fulfill God's will without faultering. That He was able to succeed just goes to show that His faith was 'well founded'.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

...I have NEVER denied the 'deity' of Christ....

If that is true then you are saying Jesus is God. But the Father is God too. But there is only one God. So, so far, you have two persons in one Godhead.

Add the Holy Spirit to that, and you have THREE persons in one Godhead - and THAT is the traditional description of the Trinity: Three persons in one Godhead, or One being in three persons.

You seem to have painted yourself into a corner here.

Actually what I have offered is that The Father is 'greater' than the Son. And that even though 'heir', the Son is still subsevient to the Father. A 'part of the Godhead', no doubt, but NOT God Himself. For my interpretation is that there IS only 'one' True God and that His SON is not the 'same' as Himself.

And the 'deity' that resides in Christ was GIVEN Him by the Father who IS God. For it is God who has 'given' Christ a 'name above all others'. And in this respect, there is certainly 'deity' to be found in Christ.

No, CC, I do not subscribe to the 'philosophical' attempts of man to MAKE Christ God Himself. Godhead was enough for the apostles and it's enough for me. That Christ is NAMED the Son is ALSO 'enough for me'. I have no need nor desire to limit God or His Son by 'telling ANYONE' what their EXACT nature is or their relationship MUST hang on 'my' understanding. And I'm CERTAINLY not going to tell another that they MUST believe in something that I don't even understand.

For, 'what if', CC, what IF this 'trinity' was nothing more than a 'man-made' Godhead? One that does NOT exist in the offerings of God or His Son? Now, what would a 'man-made' explanation of a 'false interpretation' DO? Would it NOT be 'able' to create a 'different God' than that offered in scripture and truth?

For we KNOW that Satan desires NOTHING MORE than for man to worship HIM 'as God'. And there is much indication that he will 'set himself up AS God'. Furthermore, I believe that upon his manifestation in the flesh, he will 'claim' to BE Christ. What better way to insure this event than to teach that Christ IS God. Instead of Christ; The Son of God, we have included, (for what 'reason' I still have YET to understand), Christ that IS God Himself. Creating a 'second God' regardless of mystical wording that would have one God in 'three persons'.

Look, I have studied other religions that use this 'same' mystical 'multi faced gods in one'. It was NOTHING NEW at the time that this same concept was introduced into Christianity. And I do NOT believe that it was for the sake of truth but for the sake of the 'desires' of those that 'created trinity'. Perhaps just a familiarity to gods that they previously worshiped. Perhaps some 'thinkers' just decided that they MUST understand that which is NOT able to BE fully understood and took it upon themselves to 'create'. Perhaps there was even a 'darker objective'. I will not venture to SAY one way or the other. But that it was never taught by nor revealed TO the apostles is clear through scripture. For there was NEVER a mention of 'three persons in ONE God' by the apostles nor Christ Himself. And that is scriptural truth.

CC,

AS you have noted over and over again: the reason for so many different denominations is 'personal interpretation'. Do you NOT realize that when 'trinity' was first mentioned, that it was NOTHING other than 'personal interpretation'? For it was through ONE MAN that 'trinity' was originally conceived and introduced. And no matter HOW gifted this man 'appeared to be', he offered NOTHING other than 'personal interpretation'.

And when we consider that 'this man' was steeped in the traditional teachings of the philosophers PREVIOUS to 'coming to Christ', it becomes even more apparent 'where' such inspiration 'came from' that led to the 'creation' of 'trinity'.

To those that 'created trinity', philosophy was 'their god'. These that INSISTED upon the ability to 'understand' even those things which ARE mystery led to their insistence that THEY could define God 'better' than what had been revealed. Seeking a 'deeper understanding' than that which had TRULY been revealed. Finding the means through the manipulation of words to PROVE that which they 'created'. For even now I can offer pure and utter distinction of Father Son and Spirit yet there are those that would talk 'around' or 'right through it' choosing to ignore the implications rather than 'understand them'.

I have 'created NOTHING' CC, I have simply accepted what has been revealed to me through scripture and Spirit. So, if you must lay 'fault somewhere', lay it where it belongs. I have NOT 'refused trinity' for it has NOT been revealed to me as being anything other than the 'same' as many other 'man-made' and 'man-introduced traditions' that I don't need to deny in order NOT to accept them. If someone came up with 'something new' tomorrow and offered it, I do NOT have to deny it to simply NOT accept it. If it is worthy, then it will be revealed. But the dangerous part is when we WILL ourselves revelation that 'becomes our OWN' rather than that offered from above. For there will be those and are, that for the sake of 'self' will choose to 'believe' what it is that appeases their OWN hearts and will. You may well accuse me of being JUST such a one. But all I KNOW is that which has been revealed to ME. I did NOT 'choose' to believe in 'trinity' for it has NOT been revealed to ME. And I know the work that was wrought in my life PREVIOUS to ever having HEARD the word 'trinity' so I KNOW that it is NOT paramont that I BELIEVE that Jesus IS God. For I KNOW that God hears my prayers that I offer in Christ's name. And I thank Jesus daily for His sacrifice. These have been ENOUGH for me to recognize the Spirit manifest in my life WITHOUT a 'belief in trinity'.

So, when I hear that one MUST believe in 'trinity' in order to KNOW God or HIs Son, it reminds me of the movie, "invasion of the Body Snatchers'' with their INSISTENCE that ALL must 'become one' in the same context of SERVITUDE and not JUST to God, but through a 'man-made' concept that places the Son in the SAME authority AS The Father.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

...I have NEVER denied the 'deity' of Christ....

If that is true then you are saying Jesus is God. But the Father is God too. But there is only one God. So, so far, you have two persons in one Godhead.

Add the Holy Spirit to that, and you have THREE persons in one Godhead - and THAT is the traditional description of the Trinity: Three persons in one Godhead, or One being in three persons.

You seem to have painted yourself into a corner here.

Actually what I have offered is that The Father is 'greater' than the Son. And that even though 'heir', the Son is still subsevient to the Father. A 'part of the Godhead', no doubt, but NOT God Himself. For my interpretation is that there IS only 'one' True God and that His SON is not the 'same' as Himself......

Are you saying that Jesus is a "lesser" God? Because thats what a deity is you know, a god. You said: "I have NEVER denied the 'deity' of Christ", and that is the same as saying Jesus is a god. So is he a god or isnt he? If so, which is what you said, then your only position is that he is a lesser god. Please clarify.

 

[Imagican]

CC,

I cannot answer the question in a way that is able to appease your senses. For you have assumed that 'deity' can ONLY mean God Himself.

But I will offer this: there ARE gods MANY. For Satan IS God to those that worship HIM. Just as Allah is God to those that worship him. Just as angels are gods to those that worship them. The sun and moon have been considered gods by many even until this very day. So YOUR definition of 'deity' has little bearing on the BIG picure. Only in the 'religion' that you follow is deity limited to YOUR understanding.

But I do not limit my ability to understand by that offered by others. For our vocabulary is an insignificant tool used to describe God or His Son.

Due to OUR nature, we oftentimes are ONLY able to see that which we CHOOSE or have the 'ability' to see. That does not make 'what' we see the TRUTH.

You could most certainly use this 'same' argument against what I offer. But there is a difference in discernment. For many have chosen to accept that which is offered by MEN as that offered from above simply for the sake of it 'making sense'. But we have been warned NOT to attempt discernment through that which is carnal.

The important thing is to accept what has been offered IN SPIRIT regardless of what MEN may 'say'. And this CAN be done by YOU, ME, or anyone else that chooses to submit themselves TO The Spirit.

I have NO scriptural proof that those that 'created trinity' were ANYTHING but 'philosophers' bent on making determinations that fit what THEY wanted to believe. And in order to ensure that OTHERS did things 'their way', they instituted nothing short of LAWS that demanded that ALL follow as THEY taught.

I have found NO indication throughout scripture that TELLS us to accept a 'triune God'. I have found no indication throughout scripture that Christ has commanded us to accept Him AS God. Everything that I have found indicates that this is simply not so. That Christ's GOD as well as OUR God is the SAME God is what is offered over and over universally throughout the Word. . And this is of truth in that it was offered BY God's SON and the apostles chosen specifically to inform us of God and His Son.

What I must wonder is how those that 'created trinity' got around the simple fact that over and over again it is offered that Christ was GIVEN His power, Given a name above all names, Given a seat at God's right hand, given all this and more BY God yet you would have me believe that He IS God and giving these things unto Himself? Praying to HIMSELF? A mediator between US and HIMSELF?

You see, I do not 'lightly' contest this 'trinity'. If there had been ANY indication of it's existence OTHER THAN the words of men, I would most certainly defend it as I would ANY OTHER PART OF THE WORD. But that is NOT the case. For I have been unable to find nor have it revealed to me that Christ is ANYTHING other than what He TOLD us He IS.

So it is not ME that has chosen to follow something 'different' than what has been offered by God through His prophets, Son or apostles. I have done my best to pray, study, and follow as I have been led. And in this context, i have found NO 'trinity' other than in the words of men.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[mutzrein]

Well said MEC.

In respect to the 'deity' of Christ, I accept what you say but I can't see it scriptually - but it does refer to His divinity. So I make a differentiation between the two.

Blessings

 

[nadab]

Hello Vic.C,
The proper use of blood is clearly set forth in the Bible. Immediately after the Noachian Flood in 2369 B.C.E., God gave a mandate to Noah and all his offspring, saying: "Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to to you. Only flesh with it's soul - it's blood - you must not eat."(Gen 9:3,4) Though it says not to "eat" blood, does this mean that we can, in another way, ingest or put blood into our bodies ? At this time, was there any other way of taking blood into their bodies ? No, for the medical procedures that are common place today were then totally unknown. Is not feeding intraveinously, eating, such as when patients are unable to eat through their mouths and is the fastest way to deliver fluids and medicine throughout the body ?

Hence, God put this mandate or authoritative order, in words that Noah and his offspring would understand. If you had lived one hundred years ago, and someone were to use the words PDA, computer, or flash drive, would you have grasped what was meant ? These words nor devices were not existing then. Therefore, God used language that had meaning to them, to not take blood into their bodies, in any form. This principle applied to all mankind.

You said that a ' review of Leviticus 17 and it's context' , "we will see there is no law against blood transfusions. Actually, we will see that some laws are broken if one is refused a life-saving transfusion." Is that really so ? Let's see.

At Leviticus 17:10, God confirmed his command regarding blood, saying: "As for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in your midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood, and I shall indeed cut him off from among the people." Thus, the penalty for "eating the blood", disobedience, was a 'cutting off ' or death.

God further told the nation of Israel that "the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul in it. That is why I have said to the sons of Israel: "No soul of you must eat blood and no alien resident who is residing as an alien in your midst should eat blood."(Lev 17:11,12) In addition, God told through Moses: "Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: "You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul (or life) of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off."(Lev 17:14)

Thus, the use of blood other than for atonement would call for a person to "be cut off " in death. Just before the tenth plague on Egypt in 1513 B.C.E, the Israelites were given the command to "take some of the blood (of the sacrificial sheep) and splash it upon the two doorposts and upper part of the doorway belonging to the houses in which they will eat it (the sacrificial sheep)."(Ex 12:7) Those who adhered to this command, their firstborn were spared. The firstborn of either Israelite or Egyptians not obeying this order, died. Hence, life for the firstborn was in the balance if one disrespected God's command on blood, for the blood of the sheep atoned for his life. Thus, under the Mosaic Law, the only use of blood was atonement for sin, not for personal use, as in a blood transfusion.

When the issue of circumcision arose in 49 C.E., the apostles and older men met to make a decision regarding it. In so doing, under the guidance of the holy spirit, these said, with James as spokesman: "Symeon has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name....Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, but to write them to abstain ( Greek apechomai, meaning literally "to be from having") from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood."(Acts 20:20)

The apostles and older men then wrote letters to the congregations, saying that "the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining (Greek apechomai) from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you."(Acts 20:28,29)

If a doctor tells an alcoholic patient to abstain from alcohol, can he then put it into his system intraveinously ? The word abstain means to "refrain from something", literally "to hold yourself awayâ€Â, from Latin abstinere.(Encarta Dictionary) Can he or she follow the course of abstinence if they, in any way, introduces alcohol into their bodies ? Likewise with blood, for God has given explicit instructions not put blood into our bodies by any means, to abstain or ' hold oneself away ' from it. The only proper use of blood in God's eyes is for atonement, not for blood transfusions.

Did the apostles and older men, under the direction of God's holy spirit, say that one needs to avoid fornication, idols and from things strangled, but then allow for blood to used as one wishes ? Blood was not singled out, to be used as one were inclined, even what some might call saving of a life. To be pleasing before God, one must "abstain....from blood". It is in the same category as fornication, which the apostle Paul said bars one from ' inheriting the kingdom'.(1 Cor 6:9) So does the misuse of blood.

At 1 Thessalonians 5:22, the apostle Paul used the same Greek word apechomai, saying: "Abstain from every form of wickedness". Can we play around with “wickedness†in any form and still please God ? He quoted from Isaiah 52:11 at 1 Corinthians 6:17, saying: “Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves, says Jehovah, ‘ and quit touching the unclean thing’ and I will take you in.†Thus, any one who calls themselves Christian, has to follow the command to “abstain...from bloodâ€Â, just as the command to “abstain from fornicationâ€Â. One cannot pick and choose what they wish to follow and still be pleasing to God.

The Jerusalem council of the older men and apostles sent its decision to the Christian congregations to be observed. (Acts 16:4) About seven years after the Jerusalem council issued the decree, Christians continued to comply with the “decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication.†(Acts 21:25) And more than a hundred years later, in 177 C.E., in Lyons (now in France), when religious enemies falsely accused Christians of eating children, a woman named Biblis said: “How would such men eat children, when they are not allowed to eat the blood even of irrational animals?â€Ââ€â€The Ecclesiastical History, by Eusebius, V, I, 26.

Early Christians abstained from eating any sort of blood. In this regard Tertullian (c. 155-a. 220 C.E.) pointed out in his work Apology (IX, 13, 14): “Let your error blush before the Christians, for we do not include even animals’ blood in our natural diet. We abstain on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat. Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress.†Minucius Felix, a Roman lawyer who lived until about 250 C.E., made the same point, writing: “For us it is not permissible either to see or to hear of human slaughter; we have such a shrinking from human blood that at our meals we avoid the blood of animals used for food.â€Ââ€â€Octavius, XXX, 6.

From the time that the new covenant was inaugurated over the blood of Jesus Christ, Christians have recognized the life-giving value of this blood through God’s arrangement and through Jesus as the great High Priest who “entered, no, not with the blood of goats and of young bulls, but with his own blood, once for all time into the holy place and obtained an everlasting deliverance for us.â€Â(Heb 9:12) Through faith in the blood of Christ, Christians have had their consciences cleansed from dead works so that they may render sacred service to the living God. They are concerned about their physical health, but they are primarily and far more seriously concerned with their spiritual health and their standing before the Creator.(Heb 9:14,15)

 

[oneisgod]

Should you believe it? Do you believen in the Trinity? Most people in christendom do. After all, it has been the central doctrine of the churches for centuries.
In view of this, you would think that there could be no questions about it. But there is, and lately even some of its supporters have added fuel to the controversy.
Why should a subject like this be of any more than passing interest? Because Jesus himself said "Eternal like is this: to know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent forth". John 17:3 So our entire future hinges on our knowing the true nature of God, and that means getting to the root of the Trinity controversy. Therefore, why no examin it for ourself?

I have been asked to move here which is good?

I as a Christian Witness of Jehovah consider the Trinity to be a false teaching for the following:-

THE TRINITY AS A PHILOSOPHY INSTEAD OF A Biblical THEOLOGY!

a) "Was the idea of the Trinity - that One God exists in three Persons and One Substance - influenced by pre-Christian traditions? It is well known that the New testament offers no such doctrine, and there is no evidence the Jesus of Nazareth regarded himself as a member of the Trinity. The doctrine was developed during the first four Christian centuries, culminating in the Council of Constantinople in AD 381. . . . In Egypt the concept of trinity was of ancient origin, but it flourished especially in the second century AD and afterwards, when the mystery cult of Isis reached its acme of popularity in a Graeco-Egyptian framework which found adherents in many countries of the Roman empire. This religious amalgam exercised a potent influence on early Christian thinkers, particularly in Alexandria"

b) "There is no clear evidence that the apostles of Jesus entertained that doctrine. Nor does he give his claim to be "Christ" or his participation in the godhead any such prominence as on feels would have been done had he considered it a matter of prime significance."

c) "Professor Studer shows how early apocalyptic vision developed into sophisticated, philosophically orientated theology concerning the mystery of God, the world and humankind."

d) "Christian thought, working with data of the NEW TESTAMENT AND USING Greek PHILOSOPHY AS ITS INSTRUMENT, CONSTRUCTED THE DOCTRINE OF Trinity IN UNITY."

e) "The Platonism and Stoic of the pagan philosophers of the Hellenistic Age was used by the early church Fathers of the Church as a welcome aid to the formulation of Christian doctrine ... "

f) "Those wishing to see Jesus as god rather than man could rely on the Gospel according to St John. For this, despite its Hellenism, had concentrated in mystical and allegorical fashion on the divine nature of Jesus, seeing him not as a man but as a personified idea pp.206, 207)."

g) "Now if, when it emerged, the Nicene dogma was inevitable, it was nonetheless new. . . . Equally, it marks a transition from things related to us as they are in themselves, from the relational concepts of God as supreme agent, Creator, Omnipotent Lord of all, to an ontological concept of the divine substance itself."

h) "It may be that the Platonic contribution in this field [Plaestinian-bred Christian religion] has already been absorbed, and digested by the Christian Fathers, but Plato is perenninial."

i) "Plato's Influence
"Although Plato did not hold a dominant place in the philosophy of the Hellenistic Age, he came to the that position in the early centres of the Christian era. Patristic theology took shape largely in the framework of platonic philosophy. Not only Christian thought but also some Jewish (notably Philo) and later Islamic philosophy owed much to him. Plato's emphasis on nonmaterial reality, a deathless soul distinct from the body, the idea of a cosmic religion (beauty of the celestial order), and a just society has been enormously influential."

j) "The Apologists were in the direct line of decent of Christian tradition. With them began a process of accommodation, inevitable in the progress of the Church, between Christianity and the dominant philosophy, a process carried on with greater skill and knowledge by Alexandrian doctors of the third century and issuing finally in the fourth century in the comprehensive Faith of Nicaea and the Christianization of Hellenism rather that the "Hellenization of Christianity.""

One could well assume that these quotations came from the pages of the Watchtower magazine or the lips of one of Jehovah's Witness, but this would be a mistake as these quotes are from the following:-

a) From the dust cover of the book 'Triads and Trinity' by John Gwyn Griffiths BA, DD (Wales), MA (Liverpool), D.Phil., D.Litt. (Oxon,) is Professor Emeritus of Classics and Egyptology at the University of Wales, Swansea;
b) H.G. Wells' book 'The Outline of History' p.52, 6l;
c) The back cover of Basil Studer's book 'Trinity and Incarnation'
d) 'Christian Doctrine' by J.S. Whale p.41;
e) 'Greek and Roman Philosophy after Aristotle' by Jason L. Saunders Ed p.12;
f) 'The Climax of Rome' by Michael Grant p.21l;
g)'The Way to Nicea' by Bernard Lonergan p.136.
h) 'PLATO and the Christians' by Adam Fox Archdeacon of Westminster (1757) p.27
i) 'Background if Early Christianity' 2nd Ed. by Everett Ferguson p.315
j) 'The Greek Fathers' by James M. Campbell associate professor of Greek & Latin in the Catholic University America pp.23-24 and all being eminent scholars and or orthodox theologians.

In the last quote (j), it raises the question which we will consider herein, which is did Christianity Christianise Hellenism or was Christianity was Hellenized by Greek pagan thought rather then Christianity cleaning pagan Greek philosophy and making it expectable to God! The idea that ended as the 'Trinity' via the pagan philosophical notion of the "Logos" as a Pagan Greek philosophy is also expounded on by the 'Church Father' Tertullian in Apologeticus xxi, 10:-

"We have already said* that God devised the whole universe by Word. by Reason, by Might. Among your own philosophers, too, it is argued that Logos, that is Word and Reason, would seem to be the Artificer of the universe. This Logos Zeno defines as the maker who formed and ordered all ; he will have it that this Logos is called fate and God, and mind of Jove, and universal law. All this Cleanthes gathers up into Spirit and affirms it to pervade the universe.** We, too, to that Word, Reason and Power (by which we said God devised all things) would ascribe Spirit as its proper nature ; and in Spirit, giving utterance, we should find Word ; with Spirit, ordering and disposing all things, Reason ; and over Spirit, achieving all things, Power. This we have been taught, proceeds from God begotten in this proceeding from God, and therefore called "Son of God" and "God", because of unity of nature. ftns. *Ch. 17. **Compare Seneca, Natur. Quaest. ii, 45 ... also Virgil, Georgic, iv, 122-224."-Loeb Classical library p.106-7

oneisgod

 

[Love25]

Should you believe it? Do you believen in the Trinity? Most people in christendom do. After all, it has been the central doctrine of the churches for centuries.
In view of this, you would think that there could be no questions about it. But there is, and lately even some of its supporters have added fuel to the controversy.
Why should a subject like this be of any more than passing interest? Because Jesus himself said "Eternal like is this: to know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent forth". John 17:3 So our entire future hinges on our knowing the true nature of God, and that means getting to the root of the Trinity controversy. Therefore, why no examin it for ourself?

I have some Questions and would like to know opinion of chrsitian friends about it:

1- Do you understand Trinity!?

2- In order to beleive in it should you Understand it or you should beleive it without understanding!?

3- In order to understand it should we use our thinking or you need to have Holy Ghost!?

4- If we need Holy Ghost then How non christian will beleive in it if they dont understand it becuase they dont have Holy Ghost!?

5- Why this subject is always avoided and forbiden to talk about it when deeply questioned, isnt when you have Truth in your side you would always share it and would like the whole world to know about it!?

Peace

 

[herald]

Jesus: Almighty- Rev 1:8
Jesus: Before Abraham: John 8:58
Jesus: Creator: John 1:3
Jesus: Emmanuel: Mt 1:23 "God with us"
Jesus: God: Lu 1:47
Jesus: Image of the Invisible God: Col 1:15
Jesus: Lord of Lords: 1 Tim 6:15;Rev 19:16
Jesus: Mighty God: Isa 9:6
Jesus: The Everlasting Father: Isa 9:6
Jesus: Son of God: Mt 16:16;17:5;Lu 1:35;John 10:36.
Jesus: "The Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world." Rev 13:8

The Holy Spirit: Peter calls the Holy Spirit God in Acts 5:3,4.

The Triune God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit - One in essence, three in person. There is no sin or separation in the Godhead.

"And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness..." Gen 1:26.

"And the Lord God said, Behold the man is become as one of US, to know good and evil..." Gen 3:22

 

[Rick W]

Jesus: Almighty- Rev 1:8
Jesus: Before Abraham: John 8:58
Jesus: Creator: John 1:3
Jesus: Emmanuel: Mt 1:23 "God with us"
Jesus: God: Lu 1:47
Jesus: Image of the Invisible God: Col 1:15
Jesus: Lord of Lords: 1 Tim 6:15;Rev 19:16
Jesus: Mighty God: Isa 9:6
Jesus: The Everlasting Father: Isa 9:6
Jesus: Son of God: Mt 16:16;17:5;Lu 1:35;John 10:36.
Jesus: "The Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world." Rev 13:8

The Holy Spirit: Peter calls the Holy Spirit God in Acts 5:3,4.

The Triune God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit - One in essence, three in person. There is no sin or separation in the Godhead.

"And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness..." Gen 1:26.

"And the Lord God said, Behold the man is become as one of US, to know good and evil..." Gen 3:22

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

"There is no sin or separation in the Godhead."
indeed

 

[SonByAdoption]

by lianna7 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:14 pm
I know I will sound stupid considering the fact that I have tried all my life to understand this very thing . I just wanted to ask a few questions that make it difficult for me to understand the trinty. Ok 1. If Jesus were really God why did he pray in the Garden before his capture and ask that the cup be taken from him , and then go on to say but thy will be done who was he praying too ? 2. Why on the cross did Jesus say Father why have thou forsaken me . ? 3. This one is the biggest thing for me to grasp , how could God die . ? Again pardon me for my ingnorance but this is troubleing for me .

The Son of God was born from His Father in eternity before time and before creation. That's why God's only begotten Son is called God a few times in the scriptures because just like you've inhterited your parents human nature Jesus inherited His Father's God or Divine nature.

If Jesus were really God why did he pray...?
Even though God's only begotten Son is our Lord and our God it does not mean that He is His own God. Jesus was not roleplaying like the trinitarians tell you. He was actually praying to His Father because His Father is His God.

You were talking about Jesus praying in Gethsemane how he made it seem like he didn't know if it was possible for the cup to pass from him. Well I'll tell you the truth,Jesus really didn't know. Although Jesus might have been all knowing having omnicense while he was in heaven, he gave all His Godlike powers up so he could be born like a real human baby knowing nothing and having to learn everything so he could be tempted in all points like we are yet without sin.

Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Philipians 2:5-8

how could God die . ?

According to the Bible, there is no possible way that God the Father could die.

...our Lord Jesus Christ:Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate,[Supreme Ruler] the King of kings, and Lord of lords;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. 1st Timothy 6:15,16

We can see that this is talking about the Father only because no man hath seen Him but many men have seen Jesus. The Father could have never died but thank God He had an only begotten Son just like Him in every way who was willing to give up His God powers and be"...made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Hebrews 2:9

Please don't for a minute believe Trinitarians when they tell you that only Jesus's body died. I'll tell you the truth that if only Jesus body died then all we are left with is a human sacrifice and there is no hope for our salvation. Jesus died completely for you his body and soul so you might be saved.

Yet it pleased Yahweh to bruise him. He has caused him to suffer. When you make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed. He shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Yahweh shall prosper in his hand.After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light and be satisfied. My righteous servant will justify many by the knowledge of himself; and he will bear their iniquities.Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. Isaiah 53:10-12
"For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol[the grave]; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay."Psalms 16:10
The immortal Christ became mortal and died like all mortals and was unconcious sleeping in His grave waiting His resurrection. I believe the spirit of Christ inspired the Psalmist to write "I am shut up I can not come forth" Psalms 88:8

 

[herald]

Jesus emptied Himself to become man. If you do not believe that He is God, you are, still, in your sin. Only a pure and holy God could die for our sin.

 

[Imagican]

Jesus emptied Himself to become man. If you do not believe that He is God, you are, still, in your sin. Only a pure and holy God could die for our sin.

I challenge you to offer scriptural PROOF of what you have stated.

Christ stated that He is the "Son of God''. You SAY that He is God Himself. Yet Christ STATED that The Father, (God Himself), IS 'Greater than Himself'. OBVIOUSLY, If God CHOSE His Son to die for our sins, that IS ENOUGH.

Now, since God will not even LOOK upon sin, He certainly would NOT have 'taken ON' the sins of the world. That is WHY He sent HIS SON; to 'take on the flesh' and DIE for our sins, (suffer the sins of this world).

So, if you choose to make such bold claims, please, allow us the evidence of your statement scripturally.

What you have offered is little different than a 'church' that would tell some poor crippled girl that is not healed that it's HER fault for 'lack of faith'. That is not only 'dangerous theology', it is quite cruel and un-heart felt.

Scripture NEVER tells us that we 'MUST ACCEPT CHRIST AS GOD' in order to be cleansed of our sins. As a matter of FACT, it states that we must simply accept Christ into our hearts. And ALL that I have read in scripture concerning Christ is that He IS The SON of God. These words being HIS OWN admission.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[herald]

The Word of God says, that, Christ is God...If you don't believe His Word, then we have nothing to agree upon.

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and jusctice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform it." Isa 9:6,7.

 

[Imagican]

1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

Please note here; 'that DENIETH the Father AND The Son. this offers an UTTER distinction BETWEEN the TWO.

1 John 4:3
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

2 John 1:7
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Now, DO YOU confess that Jesus Christ, The Son of God HAS come in the flesh? I do. And note that the offering is that MANY DECIEVERS are in this world. This was written two thousand years ago. How many MORE do you reacon are in existence NOW?

None of the statements above offer that we MUST confess that Christ IS God HImself. Never ONCE have I found a statement telling us to BELIEVE Christ IS God Himself. While many insist that they have found INDIRECT evidence to use in such a claim, NEVER is it outright stated that Jesus IS God Himself. As a matter of FACT, I could probably spend a couple of DAYS compilling evidence who's indication is that Christ IS simply WHO He stated He IS. Not only the words of Christ Himself, but of the apostles as well. ALMOST every epistle of Paul starts something like this:

Colossians 1

1Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother,

2To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

3We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,

Now, if these words do not CLEARLY offer the distinction between GOD; The Father AND Jesus Christ, they are simply NOT being read clearly.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[mutzrein]

Jesus emptied Himself to become man. If you do not believe that He is God, you are, still, in your sin. Only a pure and holy God could die for our sin.

I too would like to see what scripture you have that supports these claims:

If you do not believe that Jesus is God, you are still in your sin.
Only a pure God could die for your sin.

 

[herald]

The Triune God is one in essence, three in person.

The Scripture refers to Jesus as God, and the Holy Spirit as God.Rev 1:8;John 8:58;John 1:3;Mt 1:23;Col 1:15;1 Tim 6:15;Isa 9:6;Acts 5:3,4.

In the Greek, the 2 Tim 3:16 reads, "Every Scripture is God breathed..."

God Spoke The Worlds Into Existence: "Through faith we understand that they worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." Heb 11:3.

The Word = The law: In Psalm 119, the word,"Word," is used interchangeably with, "law," "commandments," "judgments," "precepts," "statutes," "testimonies."

In John 3:3, Jesus said, "Verily, verily I say unto you, "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

We are Born again by His Word: ""Being born again not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever." 1 Pe 1:23;Ja 1:18;John 15:3;Eph 5:25,26.

Obeying His Word keeps us from sin: "Thy Word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against Thee." Ps 119:11.

His Word Guides Us: "Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Ps 119:105,67,103.

His Word Is Bread To Our Spirit: Jesus said, "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matt 4:4.

"...I have esteemed the Words of His mouth more than my necessary food." Job 23:12.

"Thy Words were found and I did eat them; and Thy Word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of my heart..." Jer 15:16.

Faith Comes by His Word: "So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God." Rom 10:17.

The Roman Centurion...said...but, speak the Word, only, and my servant shall be healed." Mt 8:8.
Jesus responded, "Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel." Mt 8:10.

Healing And Deliverance Come By His Word: "He sent His Word and healed them and delivered them from their destructions." Ps 107:20.

Tradition Renders The Word of God Useless: Mt 15:1-9.

Those Who Obey God's Word Are More Blessed Than Mary: "...a certain woman said unto Him, Blessed is the womb that bare Thee, and the paps which Thou hast sucked." But, He (Jesus) said, Yea, rather, blessed are they that hear the Word of God and keep it." Lu 11:27,28.

We Are To Tremble At His Word: "...but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at My Word." Isa 66:2.

Jesus Quoted Scripture In Spiritual Warfare With Satan: "It is written..." Matt 4:4,7.10.

"And take the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God." Eph 5:17.

"For the Word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Heb 4:12.

We Are To Search The Scriptures To Verify What We Are Taught: "The Bereans were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the Word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11.

The Disciples Spoke The Word of God: "...ye received the Word of God, which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in Truth, the Word of God..." 1 Thess 2:13.

Men Are Martyred For The Word Of God: "And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the Word of God..." Rev 6:9.

And Most Significant of All - Jesus is THE WORD OF GOD. John 1; 1 John 1:1;1 John 5:7.

"And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood, and HIS NAME IS CALLED THE WORD OF GOD." Rev 19:13.

 

[mutzrein]

The Triune God is one in essence, three in person.

The Scripture refers to Jesus as God, and the Holy Spirit as God.Rev 1:8;John 8:58;John 1:3;Mt 1:23;Col 1:15;1 Tim 6:15;Isa 9:6;Acts 5:3,4.

Where does scripture state what you have asserted below?

If you do not believe that Jesus is God, you are still in your sin.
Only a pure God could die for your sin.

 

[herald]

Could any sinner die for your sin??? I think not. Everyone of us were in the loins of Adam, when he sinned. We are born into sin...If you do not believe that, you are lost.