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!

The Trinity

Please do not go on the defensive as no one is attacking you, but discussing with you as in how each of us understand the Trinity. I believe we are all discussing this topic rationally and you have done nothing to be banned. Like I told you, not everyone is going to agree with each other, but that does not make one right and the other wrong, but to discuss how we differ with another.
I appreciate that, brother.

My views on the Trinity have gotten me banned from other websites in times past. It is good to know that there isn't discrimination here.
 
I appreciate that, brother.

My views on the Trinity have gotten me banned from other websites in times past. It is good to know that there isn't discrimination here.
BTW, To let you know I am a sister :biggrin2

I will say though that the topic of the Trinity can bring the worst out in some people that we have seen so many times in the past and this should not be done, but to be only discuss.
 
So, do you believe that it was a 2nd God who descended and took on human flesh, or 1/3 of God?

If it was neither, then it was God (the Father, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6, James 3:9 (kjv)).

Even as we find written in 1 Timothy 3:16 (kjv)...

1Ti 3:16, And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
As I stated, within the one being that is God, there exists three coeternal, coequal persons. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have each always existed as fully and truly God, yet, the Father isn’t the Son, and neither are the Holy Spirit. All of the same essence but distinct one from the other.
So, no, it wasn't the Father who came down and took on human flesh, it was the eternal Son. Given what I have stated above, this means he was neither another God nor 1/3 of God. Look at the language Jesus uses (this is, of course, just a small sample):

Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Joh 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

Joh 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.

Joh 5:36 But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me.
Joh 5:37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen,

Joh 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.
Joh 6:39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.
Joh 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

Joh 8:16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me.
Joh 8:17 In your Law it is written that the testimony of two people is true.
Joh 8:18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.”

Joh 8:26 I have much to say about you and much to judge, but he who sent me is true, and I declare to the world what I have heard from him.”

Joh 8:29 And he who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to him.”

Joh 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

(All ESV.)

What your argument suggests is that you must believe that only the Father existed outside of time, for all eternity past, that the Son and the Holy Spirit are created. This means only the Father is God and there is no Trinity.

John 4:24 does in fact say that God is a Spirit. If you look back at verse 23, I believe that you will see that Jesus, in referring to God, is referring to the Father. God, in verse 24, also refers to the Son and the Holy Ghost as being a Spirit. But it certainly does not exclude the Father as being a Spirit, who is God.

Since there is one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4), I would say that the Father and the Son (and the Holy Ghost) are the same Spirit.

And in my scenario that I have set forth, how is the Holy Ghost some other Spirit? He is the same Spirit as the Father and the Son. For there is one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4) that is God (John 4:24); and the Holy Ghost is also God.
The Holy Spirit is the "Spirit" mentioned in Eph 4:4. Pretty much every time in the NT when it uses "Spirit," it is referring to the Holy Spirit, unless there is some other immediate context which shows otherwise.

You are going to have to figure out what I mean by "one eternal moment". I can't think of any other way to say what I am saying there.
If you don’t know what you mean, then I won't be able to figure it out.

I would say to this that the passage that you have referenced does not refer to the Son alone. It is referring to Jesus Christ.
Jesus is the Son alone. He continually refers to himself as the Son of God. John 1:1-18 also makes it clear that it was the Son who became incarnate, as do several other passages. Then there are numerous passages that refer to the Father and the Holy Spirit as being distinct from Jesus. Throughout the entire NT they are always made distinct.

According to Matthew 28:19, the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost have a singular name.

You can determine what that name is by comparing scripture with scripture (1 Corinthians 2:13).

Matthew 28:19 and Acts 2:38.
Yes, name is singular, precisely because there is one God who has always existed as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
 
Consider Colossians 2:8-9 (kjv)...

Col 2:8, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9, For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.


The Godhead being the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, this is saying that all three dwell in the Person of Jesus Christ bodily in all of "their" fulness.
Not necessarily. The idea is that it is the fullness of the divine nature that indwells Christ.

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, (ESV)

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, (NIV)

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, (NASB)

Therefore, there is a sense in which Jesus is the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.
There is a sense in which, yes, Jesus is said to be filled with the Spirit and says that the Father is in him and he in the Father, but that in no way means that Jesus can be said to be the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. These things speak of their unity and essential oneness of being, but they are all always kept distinct one from the other. The NT makes it clear that the Father sent the Son, in the person of Jesus Christ.

The Son released the Holy Ghost from His body at the juncture of Luke 23:46; which indicates a very clear distinction;
What makes you think that he was releasing the Holy Spirit?
 
So, no, it wasn't the Father who came down and took on human flesh, it was the eternal Son. Given what I have stated above, this means he was neither another God nor 1/3 of God. Look at the language Jesus uses (this is, of course, just a small sample):

So, if the Son was eternally begotten, as you are purporting, and was not begotten in the incarnation, as Luke 1:35 tells us, then He is a God that exists next to the Father and the Holy Ghost from the time of His begetting.

And, if Jesus is not the Father, then He is a 2nd God or else He is 1/3 of God as the Father being 1/3 of God, the Son being 1/3 of God, and the Holy Ghost being 1/3 of God.

Or else you have the Father being God and Jesus being a 2nd God begotten next to Him, and the Holy Ghost being a third God.

This is why I say that there are certain Tritheists who hide behind the label of Trinitarian. They do not believe that the members of the Trinity are distinct but they believe that they are separate.

Jesus being begotten in the incarnation means that there is one God and that He is distinct from Himself in that He became a Man and the Person He became is not the same Person as who He was before He became flesh; because He is come in the flesh.

While He is the same Spirit...and therefore in a very real sense, He is the same Person.

Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Joh 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

Joh 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.

Joh 5:36 But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me.
Joh 5:37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen,

Joh 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.
Joh 6:39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.
Joh 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

Joh 8:16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me.
Joh 8:17 In your Law it is written that the testimony of two people is true.
Joh 8:18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.”

Joh 8:26 I have much to say about you and much to judge, but he who sent me is true, and I declare to the world what I have heard from him.”

Joh 8:29 And he who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to him.”

Joh 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

(All ESV.)

No one here is denying that Jesus is the Son of God.

But I would point out to you this scripture.

Jhn 14:7, If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Jhn 14:8, Philip saith unto him, Lord,
shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Jhn 14:9, Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known
me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Jhn 14:10, Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Jhn 14:11, Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.



What your argument suggests is that you must believe that only the Father existed outside of time, for all eternity past, that the Son and the Holy Spirit are created.

See Romans 1:3, Matthew 1:20, Luke 1:35.

Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh and conceived of the Holy Ghost.

The Father, the Holy Ghost, took on an added nature of human flesh and this is the origin of the Son.

Jesus, after dying on the Cross, ascended to fill all things (Ephesians 4:10). Thus He exists outside of time, in eternity past and eternity future.

This means only the Father is God and there is no Trinity.

The Son and the Holy Ghost are continuations of the Father; while they are distinctly not the Father in that the Son is in flesh and the Holy Ghost has lived a human life and therefore understands humanity in an experiential manner.

And I would say also that the Son and the Holy Ghost are eternally God and distinct from the Father.

The Holy Spirit is the "Spirit" mentioned in Eph 4:4.

The Father is a Spirit according to John 4:23-24. I would also refer you to post #2 in this thread and would encourage you to study out the scriptures that I have referenced in that post.

https://christianforums.net/threads/the-trinity.92500/post-1703155

Jesus is the Son alone.

See below. The name of Jesus Christ belongs not only to the Son but also to the Father and the Holy Ghost.

Yes, name is singular, precisely because there is one God who has always existed as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Yes, and when you compare Matthew 28:19 to Acts 2:38 (using the hermeneutic of 1 Corinthians 2:13), I believe that you will find that the singular name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is Jesus Christ.

Not necessarily. The idea is that it is the fullness of the divine nature that indwells Christ.

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, (ESV)

Is not the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Deity?

But you have made a crucial error in rejecting the kjv's rendering of Colossians 2:9.

For in doing so you are heaping to yourself teachers (in the translators of other versions) to tell you what your itching ears want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3).

There is a sense in which, yes, Jesus is said to be filled with the Spirit and says that the Father is in him and he in the Father, but that in no way means that Jesus can be said to be the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. These things speak of their unity and essential oneness of being, but they are all always kept distinct one from the other.

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are in fact distinct from one another; however there is also a sense in which they are absolutely one.

What makes you think that he was releasing the Holy Spirit?
Jesus was releasing His Spirit back to the Father. Jesus, being God, His Spirit is the Holy Ghost (see Matthew 1:20, Luke 1:35); for He was conceived of the Holy Ghost.
 
So, if the Son was eternally begotten, as you are purporting, and was not begotten in the incarnation, as Luke 1:35 tells us, then He is a God that exists next to the Father and the Holy Ghost from the time of His begetting.

And, if Jesus is not the Father, then He is a 2nd God or else He is 1/3 of God as the Father being 1/3 of God, the Son being 1/3 of God, and the Holy Ghost being 1/3 of God.

Or else you have the Father being God and Jesus being a 2nd God begotten next to Him, and the Holy Ghost being a third God.
You previously stated: "I think that I do have a pretty good grasp of an understanding of the Trinity . . . I think that I understand the basics of it in full and not in part."

However, you don't seem to. You are making up a definition of the Trinity that is not what has been historically accepted as orthodox teaching. There was no time when the Son did not exist, that is precisely what being of the same essence or substance of the Father and the Holy Spirit entails.

What that does not do is mean that the Son is another God nor that he is 1/3 of God. That is simply not what the doctrine of the Trinity states. I have given a simple definition a couple of times and monotheism is absolutely foundational. That is the first foundation. The second is that there are three divine persons, and the third that all three are coequal and coeternal.

This is why I say that there are certain Tritheists who hide behind the label of Trinitarian. They do not believe that the members of the Trinity are distinct but they believe that they are separate.
Then you misunderstand the doctrine of the Trinity.

Jesus being begotten in the incarnation means that there is one God and that He is distinct from Himself in that He became a Man and the Person He became is not the same Person as who He was before He became flesh; because He is come in the flesh.

While He is the same Spirit...and therefore in a very real sense, He is the same Person.
Then you believe in Modalism, or some form of it, not Trinitarianism.

No one here is denying that Jesus is the Son of God.
In essence you are. No father can be his own son, nor a son his own father, even when it comes to God.

But I would point out to you this scripture.

Jhn 14:7, If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Jhn 14:8, Philip saith unto him, Lord,
shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Jhn 14:9, Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known
me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Jhn 14:10, Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Jhn 14:11, Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
I have already addressed that passage. In no way does that mean that Jesus is the Father.

See Romans 1:3, Matthew 1:20, Luke 1:35.

Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh and conceived of the Holy Ghost.

The Father, the Holy Ghost, took on an added nature of human flesh and this is the origin of the Son.

Jesus, after dying on the Cross, ascended to fill all things (Ephesians 4:10). Thus He exists outside of time, in eternity past and eternity future.



The Son and the Holy Ghost are continuations of the Father; while they are distinctly not the Father in that the Son is in flesh and the Holy Ghost has lived a human life and therefore understands humanity in an experiential manner.
Again, this is not Trinitarianism, this is a form of Modalism. John 1:1-18, Phil 2:5-8, and Col 1:15-17, among others, show that the Son has always existed, just as the Father has, and just as the Holy Spirit has.

And I would say also that the Son and the Holy Ghost are eternally God and distinct from the Father.
That's a logical impossibility. You have already said the Son is created, which removes all possbility that he can be said to be "eternally God."

The Father is a Spirit according to John 4:23-24. I would also refer you to post #2 in this thread and would encourage you to study out the scriptures that I have referenced in that post.

https://christianforums.net/threads/the-trinity.92500/post-1703155
Which is irrelevant to the Holy Spirit being the Spirit mentioned in Eph 4:4 and numerous other places in the NT. The Father is spirit and the Holy Spirit is spirit, the Son no longer is, being the God-man.
https://christianforums.net/threads/the-trinity.92500/post-1703155
See below. The name of Jesus Christ belongs not only to the Son but also to the Father and the Holy Ghost.



Yes, and when you compare Matthew 28:19 to Acts 2:38 (using the hermeneutic of 1 Corinthians 2:13), I believe that you will find that the singular name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is Jesus Christ.
Whatever "name" is referring to, the name of God is not Jesus Christ; it is YHWH. So, if any argument is to be made to a specific name, it would be Yahweh. Here is what M. R. Vincent says about the "name" in Matt 28:19:

"In Act_2:38, however, Peter says, “Be baptized upon (ἐπὶ) the name of Jesus Christ; and in Act_10:48, he commands Cornelius and his friends to be baptized in (ἐν) the name of the Lord. To be baptized upon the name is to be baptized on the confession of that which the name implies: on the ground of the name; so that the name Jesus, as the contents of the faith and confession, is the ground upon which the becoming baptized rests. In the name (ἐν) has reference to the sphere within which alone true baptism is accomplished. The name is not the mere designation, a sense which would give to the baptismal formula merely the force of a charm. The name, as in the Lord's Prayer (“Hallowed be thy name”), is the expression of the sum total of the divine Being: not his designation as God or Lord, but the formula in which all his attributes and characteristics are summed up. It is equivalent to his person. The finite mind can deal with him only through his name; but his name is of no avail detached from his nature. When one is baptized into the name of the Trinity, he professes to acknowledge and appropriate God in all that he is and in all that he does for man. He recognizes and depends upon God the Father as his Creator and Preserver; receives Jesus Christ as his only Mediator and Redeemer, and his pattern of life; and confesses the Holy Spirit as his Sanctifier and Comforter."

Something else to consider is that Matt 28:19 is about going into all the world, where many different gods were believed in and there largely was ignorance of the true God of the Jews. Acts 2:38, on the other hand, is stated directly to Jews, who accepted the Father but didn't accept Jesus as the Messiah.

I've seen people justify all manner of unbiblical belief using 1 Cor 2:13 as a hermeneutic.

Is not the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Deity?
Again, it is speaking of his nature, not who is in him.

But you have made a crucial error in rejecting the kjv's rendering of Colossians 2:9.

For in doing so you are heaping to yourself teachers (in the translators of other versions) to tell you what your itching ears want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3).
No, I am not. The KJV is a good but inferior translation. But that is for another thread.

Jesus was releasing His Spirit back to the Father. Jesus, being God, His Spirit is the Holy Ghost (see Matthew 1:20, Luke 1:35); for He was conceived of the Holy Ghost.
Again, what makes you think that he was releasing the Holy Spirit? Jesus gave up his spirit, yes, but that was not the Holy Spirit. There is nothing in the context to suggest this was the Holy Spirit.
 
You previously stated: "I think that I do have a pretty good grasp of an understanding of the Trinity . . . I think that I understand the basics of it in full and not in part."

However, you don't seem to. You are making up a definition of the Trinity that is not what has been historically accepted as orthodox teaching. There was no time when the Son did not exist, that is precisely what being of the same essence or substance of the Father and the Holy Spirit entails.

My definition of the Trinity does not depart from the creeds except where the holy scriptures clearly contradict them.

(in one case, where it becomes clear that Jesus was not eternally begotten but was begotten in the incarnation, Luke 1:35)

And I have spent many years reading my Bible with the idea of the Trinity on the backburner of my thinking, seeking to understand that doctrine in particular as I have read.

So, I get my understanding from the Bible.

Then you misunderstand the doctrine of the Trinity.

So, you believe that the Trinity has the members as separate rather than distinct?

That places you as a Tritheist; and therefore you are the one who misunderstands.

Then you believe in Modalism, or some form of it, not Trinitarianism.

Nope; for I believe in a distinction between the Persons of the Trinity.

In essence you are. No father can be his own son, nor a son his own father, even when it comes to God.

Nope, with God all things are possible (Luke 1:37).

I have already addressed that passage. In no way does that mean that Jesus is the Father.

No, you have not addressed this passage (John 14:7-11).

You need to go through it line by line and show in what manner it is that it does not show that Jesus is the Father.

Jesus said, Have I been so long with you and you have not known me, Philip?

In response to Philip's query, Shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

I think that 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 may be at play if you cannot see the clear meaning of this passage.

Again, this is not Trinitarianism, this is a form of Modalism. John 1:1-18, Phil 2:5-8, and Col 1:15-17, among others, show that the Son has always existed, just as the Father has, and just as the Holy Spirit has.

I am not denying that the Son (defined here as Jesus Christ) has always existed.

That's a logical impossibility. You have already said the Son is created, which removes all possbility that he can be said to be "eternally God."

Jesus ascended to dwell in eternity, outside of time (Ephesians 4:10); so He is eternally God.

And also, in His pre-incarnate form He is a Spirit who inhabits eternity (Isaiah 57:15).

Which is irrelevant to the Holy Spirit being the Spirit mentioned in Eph 4:4 and numerous other places in the NT. The Father is spirit and the Holy Spirit is spirit, the Son no longer is, being the God-man.

The Son is also a Spirit (come in the flesh), being God, John 4:24.

Whatever "name" is referring to, the name of God is not Jesus Christ; it is YHWH. So, if any argument is to be made to a specific name, it would be Yahweh.

So, it appears that you have deeper problems, if you do not believe that Jesus is God.

Jhn 8:24, I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Because if Jesus is God, then the name of God is Jesus Christ.

Here is what M. R. Vincent says about the "name" in Matt 28:19:

"In Act_2:38, however, Peter says, “Be baptized upon (ἐπὶ) the name of Jesus Christ; and in Act_10:48, he commands Cornelius and his friends to be baptized in (ἐν) the name of the Lord. To be baptized upon the name is to be baptized on the confession of that which the name implies: on the ground of the name; so that the name Jesus, as the contents of the faith and confession, is the ground upon which the becoming baptized rests. In the name (ἐν) has reference to the sphere within which alone true baptism is accomplished. The name is not the mere designation, a sense which would give to the baptismal formula merely the force of a charm. The name, as in the Lord's Prayer (“Hallowed be thy name”), is the expression of the sum total of the divine Being: not his designation as God or Lord, but the formula in which all his attributes and characteristics are summed up. It is equivalent to his person. The finite mind can deal with him only through his name; but his name is of no avail detached from his nature. When one is baptized into the name of the Trinity, he professes to acknowledge and appropriate God in all that he is and in all that he does for man. He recognizes and depends upon God the Father as his Creator and Preserver; receives Jesus Christ as his only Mediator and Redeemer, and his pattern of life; and confesses the Holy Spirit as his Sanctifier and Comforter."

You can trust in men as to what you will believe concerning scripture; I will trust in the Holy Ghost and a literal interpretation.

I've seen people justify all manner of unbiblical belief using 1 Cor 2:13 as a hermeneutic.

So, the Holy Ghost teaches that which is unbiblical?

1Co 2:13, Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

Give one example of an unbiblical teaching that comes from this hermeneutic.

Again, it is speaking of his nature, not who is in him.

It is speaking of who is in Him.

No, I am not. The KJV is a good but inferior translation. But that is for another thread.

I do not believe that the kjv is inferior but that it is superior to all other translations. Go ahead and start the thread.

Again, what makes you think that he was releasing the Holy Spirit? Jesus gave up his spirit, yes, but that was not the Holy Spirit. There is nothing in the context to suggest this was the Holy Spirit.
The Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit according to Romans 8:9. The Spirit of God.
 
Last edited:
It may be better for all involved for us to cease from arguing at this point.

For it is written,

Jer 4:3, For thus saith the LORD to the men of Judah and Jerusalem, Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns.
Jer 4:4, Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings.
 
heartwashed did you understand anything that I wrote in my post #5 or even taken the time to read all the scriptures found in the Bible I gave about Jesus and the Holy Spirit being the very Spirit of God?

Father, Son, Holy Spirit are separate, but yet co-equal by that of God's Spirit as all three work as one Spirit within the Godhead. It's kind of like 3-1 oil as it's all oil, but for various purposes.

Please go and take your time reading and studying all these scriptures and pray and ask the Holy Spirit for wisdom and understanding.

Scriptures that reference Jesus being referred to as God:
John 1:1-14; John 10:30; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8, 9; 1 John 5:7, 8, 20; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 13:14; Isaiah 9:6; 44:6; Luke 1:35; Matthew 1:23; 28:19; John 14:16, 17; Genesis 1:1, 2 (cross reference John 1:1-14); 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 4:4-6; Colossians 1:15-17; John 14:9-11; Philippians 2:5-8; Rev 1:8

Scriptures that reference the Holy Spirit as being God:
Psalms 139:7, 8; John 14:17; 16:13; Isaiah 40:13; 1 Corinthians 2:10, 11; Zechariah 4:6; Luke 1:35; Ephesians 4:4-6; Romans 5:5; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Ephesians 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; Titus 3:5; 2 Peter 1:21; Jude 1:20
 
My definition of the Trinity does not depart from the creeds except where the holy scriptures clearly contradict them.

(in one case, where it becomes clear that Jesus was not eternally begotten but was begotten in the incarnation, Luke 1:35)

And I have spent many years reading my Bible with the idea of the Trinity on the backburner of my thinking, seeking to understand that doctrine in particular as I have read.

So, I get my understanding from the Bible.
To think you're the only one, especially when your definition of the Trinity contradicts the doctrine of the Trinity as historically understood and believed, is a sign of spiritual pride. Your definition veers far from the creeds.

As for Luke 1:35, that is not where Jesus was begotten. I suspect your understanding of begotten isn't correct either.

So, you believe that the Trinity has the members as separate rather than distinct?
No, please read what I write. I have clearly said they are all of the same essence, that is, of one deity, and they are all distinct. What I have stated is what the creeds state: one God, three divine, coequal, coeternal persons.

That places you as a Tritheist; and therefore you are the one who misunderstands.
No, I clearly said there is only one God. That is absolutely foundational to the Trinity, but only one foundation.

Nope; for I believe in a distinction between the Persons of the Trinity.
If you don't believe that the Son has always existed eternally with the Father and the Holy Spirit, you are, by definition, not Trinitarian, whatever you may be. If you believe that there is one person who is God, who then took on human flesh, and that the Holy Spirit is his spirit, as you have said then you are, by definition a Modalist (of some form).

Nope, with God all things are possible (Luke 1:37).
Anything that is logically impossible is still impossible with God, simply because it is nonsense.

No, you have not addressed this passage (John 14:7-11).

You need to go through it line by line and show in what manner it is that it does not show that Jesus is the Father.

Jesus said, Have I been so long with you and you have not known me, Philip?

In response to Philip's query, Shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Yes, Jesus says that the Father is in him and he in the Father, but that in no way means that Jesus can be said to be the Father. These things speak of their unity and essential oneness of being, but they are all always kept distinct one from the other. The NT makes it clear that the Father sent the Son, in the person of Jesus Christ. You also didn't address my previous point on this issue, where I gave several passages, that Jesus says he was sent by the Father. That is proof enough that Jesus is not the Father but rather is the Son.

Look at what Jesus even says in John 14:12: "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father." (ESV)

He was sent by the Father, which means prior to the incarnation, and is returning to the Father. Note what Jesus says in John 17:5, "And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed." (ESV)

That is how Jesus could say he was sent by the Father, because as the Son, he existed prior to creation. That is in perfect agreement with John 1:1-18, Phil 2:5-8, and Col 1:15-17.

I think that 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 may be at play if you cannot see the clear meaning of this passage.
No, it isn't. The Trinity is impossible for finite minds to fully comprehend. Passages such as that are complicated because Jesus speaks of the utter closeness of himself with the Father. However, given the abundant evidence in the NT, we should conclude that Jesus isn't the Father, that the Son never was the Father.

He perfectly and fully expresses the Father, as the image of God, to us, so that we can look at Jesus and see the Father and know him. But, he is not the Father.

I am not denying that the Son (defined here as Jesus Christ) has always existed.
You are if you're denying that the Son existed in eternity past as distinct from the Father.

Jesus ascended to dwell in eternity, outside of time (Ephesians 4:10); so He is eternally God.
As the pre-incarnate Son, he existed outside of time, eternally as God. That is at the heart of Trinitarianism.

So, it appears that you have deeper problems, if you do not believe that Jesus is God.


Jhn 8:24, I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
Then you're not at all understanding what I have been saying, which isn't a surprise since you don't understand the doctrine of the Trinity either. Jesus is fully and truly God; I have made that very clear. Yet, the Father is also fully and truly God, and the Holy Spirit is fully and truly God. All being of the same substance, having coexisted for eternity past, and all are coequal. And, as I've stated, there is only one God.

Because if Jesus is God, then the name of God is Jesus Christ.
No. Jesus is one of a trinity (rather the whole point of the doctrine).

You can trust in men as to what you will believe concerning scripture; I will trust in the Holy Ghost and a literal interpretation.



So, the Holy Ghost teaches that which is unbiblical?

1Co 2:13, Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
I am saying that it is a misuse of Scripture and a misunderstanding of how the Holy Spirit most often teaches us. A hint is in the whole point of why God has gifted certain persons as teachers of Scripture. I trust what many men say, weighing it all, because that is biblical, it is the command of God for believers to listen to those he has gifted. And so, M. R. Vincent, as a NT scholar, and can shed light on things, especially expounding on the Greek.

Give one example of an unbiblical teaching that comes from this hermeneutic.
Well, I can see your unbiblical understanding of the Trinity. We have had many people on these forums at various times who believe all they need is the Holy Spirit, and believe everything they understand about Scripture is correct. Yet, they all contradict each other at various points. It's because they, like you, are ignoring God-given teachers and nearly two thousand years of teaching from theologians, pastors, teachers, and scholars.

At its core, Christianity is about community, and anyone who tries to do it alone is not only going against Scripture in doing so, and their understanding the Bible is most likely going to end up in error. We are meant for community and meant to come to an understanding of the Bible within that community, which includes all of Christian believers from past to present.

The Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit according to Romans 8:9. The Spirit of God.
Yes, the Holy Spirit is also mentioned as the Spirit of Christ, Spirit of Jesus, and the Spirit of God, but that only speaks to the closeness of relationship and oneness of essence of the three persons of the Trinity in community.
 
My definition of the Trinity does not depart from the creeds except where the holy scriptures clearly contradict them.

(in one case, where it becomes clear that Jesus was not eternally begotten but was begotten in the incarnation, Luke 1:35)

And I have spent many years reading my Bible with the idea of the Trinity on the backburner of my thinking, seeking to understand that doctrine in particular as I have read.

So, I get my understanding from the Bible.



So, you believe that the Trinity has the members as separate rather than distinct?

That places you as a Tritheist; and therefore you are the one who misunderstands.



Nope; for I believe in a distinction between the Persons of the Trinity.



Nope, with God all things are possible (Luke 1:37).



No, you have not addressed this passage (John 14:7-11).

You need to go through it line by line and show in what manner it is that it does not show that Jesus is the Father.

Jesus said, Have I been so long with you and you have not known me, Philip?

In response to Philip's query, Shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

I think that 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 may be at play if you cannot see the clear meaning of this passage.



I am not denying that the Son (defined here as Jesus Christ) has always existed.



Jesus ascended to dwell in eternity, outside of time (Ephesians 4:10); so He is eternally God.

And also, in His pre-incarnate form He is a Spirit who inhabits eternity (Isaiah 57:15).



The Son is also a Spirit (come in the flesh), being God, John 4:24.



So, it appears that you have deeper problems, if you do not believe that Jesus is God.

Jhn 8:24, I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Because if Jesus is God, then the name of God is Jesus Christ.



You can trust in men as to what you will believe concerning scripture; I will trust in the Holy Ghost and a literal interpretation.



So, the Holy Ghost teaches that which is unbiblical?

1Co 2:13, Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

Give one example of an unbiblical teaching that comes from this hermeneutic.



It is speaking of who is in Him.



I do not believe that the kjv is inferior but that it is superior to all other translations. Go ahead and start the thread.


The Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit according to Romans 8:9. The Spirit of God.
I'm very confused by your theology as you say Jesus was created, then say He is God, then say He is not God, but separate as in another person and then He ascended to dwell in eternity and so many other things you contradict yourself with, not realizing you are doing this. I'm sorry, but you are all over the place with this and it is we that contradicts scripture if we are not studying the full context. We can not make scripture line up with our thinking by using only parts of scripture that makes it look like it lines up with what we think we know as it takes the full of scripture and what has already been written that we need to line ourselves up with.



I do not mean to put you down, nor would I ever do such a thing, but it was you that said you had full understanding of the Trinity, but yet neglect to even read and study all those scriptures I have given you in post #5. No one is coming against you, but only trying to discuss with you according to what is written in the full context of scripture, not what man says.

I told you in the beginning that the Trinity is a very difficult subject as it has been discussed so many times on this board and I don't think any of us can understand it in it's full context without studying all the scriptures like the full list I have already given.
 
It may be better for all involved for us to cease from arguing at this point.

For it is written,

Jer 4:3, For thus saith the LORD to the men of Judah and Jerusalem, Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns.
Jer 4:4, Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings.
Free and I are not arguing with you, but only discussing that which has already been written within the full context of scripture and not in part of choosing scriptures trying to make them line up with our thinking like many try to do. I don't know what creeds you follow or what the name of the ministry you sit under, but whatever they are teaching you is very messed up and does not line up with scripture.
 
@heartwashed did you understand anything that I wrote in my post #5 or even taken the time to read all the scriptures found in the Bible I gave about Jesus and the Holy Spirit being the very Spirit of God?

Father, Son, Holy Spirit are separate, but yet co-equal by that of God's Spirit as all three work as one Spirit within the Godhead. It's kind of like 3-1 oil as it's all oil, but for various purposes.

Please go and take your time reading and studying all these scriptures and pray and ask the Holy Spirit for wisdom and understanding.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not separate but distinct; even according to the creeds.

To think you're the only one, especially when your definition of the Trinity contradicts the doctrine of the Trinity as historically understood and believed, is a sign of spiritual pride. Your definition veers far from the creeds.

Nope.

No, please read what I write. I have clearly said they are all of the same essence, that is, of one deity, and they are all distinct. What I have stated is what the creeds state: one God, three divine, coequal, coeternal persons.

So, if each of them is not the same Spirit, the same Lord, and the same God, are they each 1/3 of God? or, is each one a separate God?

No, I clearly said there is only one God.

That would mean that each member of the Trinity is the same Spirit, the same Lord, and the same God.

If you don't believe that the Son has always existed eternally with the Father and the Holy Spirit, you are, by definition, not Trinitarian, whatever you may be. If you believe that there is one person who is God, who then took on human flesh, and that the Holy Spirit is his spirit, as you have said then you are, by definition a Modalist (of some form).

I believe that the Son is the Son in that He is come in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

So, if it is possible for a human being in the flesh to exist from everlasting to everlasting after ascending into heaven, then that is what I believe.

Anything that is logically impossible is still impossible with God, simply because it is nonsense.

What is logically impossible with man is not always impossible with God.

You also didn't address my previous point on this issue, where I gave several passages, that Jesus says he was sent by the Father. That is proof enough that Jesus is not the Father but rather is the Son.

I addressed it by telling you that no one is denying that Jesus is the Son of God.

He is come in the flesh.

Hebrews 10:5 tells us that a body was prepared for Him; I believe that this is the sense in which the Father sent the Son; by preparing for Him a human body.

Look at what Jesus even says in John 14:12: "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father." (ESV)

The Father did not VACATE ETERNITY when He descended to take on an added nature of human flesh.

He was sent by the Father, which means prior to the incarnation, and is returning to the Father. Note what Jesus says in John 17:5, "And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed." (ESV)

Jesus had that glory with Him before the world existed because in ascending, He would be ascending to again exist outside of time (Ephesians 4:10).

No, it isn't.

It is. I don't think that you are able to see that when Philip said, Shew us the Father, Jesus was surprised that Philip didn't understand that He was the Father ("How is that you have not known me, Philip?") in response to his query, shew us the Father.

Because you have a pre-conceived idea in your head that is based on what is historically believed about God instead of what is written in holy scripture.


You are if you're denying that the Son existed in eternity past as distinct from the Father.

No, I am not denying that.

As the pre-incarnate Son, he existed outside of time, eternally as God. That is at the heart of Trinitarianism.

Yes, His pre-incarnate form is that He is the Father (Isaiah 9:6, John 14:7-11).

Then you're not at all understanding what I have been saying, which isn't a surprise since you don't understand the doctrine of the Trinity either. Jesus is fully and truly God; I have made that very clear. Yet, the Father is also fully and truly God, and the Holy Spirit is fully and truly God. All being of the same substance, having coexisted for eternity past, and all are coequal. And, as I've stated, there is only one God.

So, it seems to me that you are purporting the idea that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are each 1/3 of God.

If the Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost are each fully God, in the scenario that you are setting forth, that is three Gods; unless the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are the same Spirit, the same Lord, and the same God. And does not the Bible teach us, in James 2:19, that there is one God?

I don't think that you are thinking about what you are saying but are just spouting a creed.

I do believe that the Lord wants us to understand what we believe in.

No. Jesus is one of a trinity (rather the whole point of the doctrine).

Again, the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost have a singular name according to Matthew 28:19.

The context, the name we are to baptize in.

Compare Acts 2:38 to find out that name; as it also declares what name we are to baptize in.

It's because they, like you, are ignoring God-given teachers and nearly two thousand years of teaching from theologians, pastors, teachers, and scholars.

Only when what they are saying is irrelevant to the discussion.

Yes, the Holy Spirit is also mentioned as the Spirit of Christ, Spirit of Jesus, and the Spirit of God, but that only speaks to the closeness of relationship and oneness of essence of the three persons of the Trinity in community.

So, I would ask you whether you believe that Jesus had a human spirit that was separate from the Spirit that we identify as "the Spirit of Christ".

I'm very confused by your theology as you say Jesus was created, then say He is God, then say He is not God, but separate as in another person
Romans 1:3 teaches that Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, that is, in His humanity. I do say that He is God; but I don't see where you find me teaching that He is not God.
 
I submit to you the following.

There is one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4); the Father (John 4:23-24), the Son (Ephesians 3:17, Colossians 1:27, 1 John 5:12), and the Holy Ghost (John 7:39).

There is one Lord (Ephesians 4:5); the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21, 2 Corinthians 6:17-18), the Son (1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 12:3), and the Holy Ghost (2 Corinthians 3:17).

There is one God (Ephesians 4:6); the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6, James 3:9 (kjv)), the Son (Hebrews 1:8-9; John 8:58, Exodus 3:14; John 8:59, John 10:31-33; John 8:24), and the Holy Ghost (Acts 5:3-4, Romans 8:26-27).

There are not nine members in the Trinity.

Understand Ephesians 4:4-6 and 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 in light of the above information.

Posted in obedience to Titus 2:1.

I would say that God the Father is a Spirit (John 4:23-24) who descended and took on an added nature of human flesh after having lived one eternal moment,

Eph 3:11, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

Therefore Jesus and the Father are the same Spirit; as there is one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4); and God is that Spirit (John 4:24); Jesus being God; and there being one God (James 2:19).

The distinction between the Father and the Son being that the Father is a Spirit inhabiting eternity (Isaiah 57:15) without flesh while the Son is that same Spirit come in human flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

Also, the same Spirit was released into eternity to exist side-by-side with the Father when Jesus died on the Cross (Luke 23:46); being given the title of "Holy Ghost" and being distinct from the Father in that He has lived a human life and therefore understands humanity in an experiential manner.

Because the Father didn't VACATE ETERNITY when He descended into time to take on an added human nature.

That would be impossible; because by nature, if a Person inhabits eternity, they exist in eternity for ever; even from everlasting to everlasting (see Psalms 90:2).

The Holy Ghost, being released to the Father; and being the same Spirit as the Father (Ephesians 4:4), ascended to fill all things (Ephesians 4:10) as being in effect the Spirit of Jesus Christ, and therefore being Jesus Christ;

While the Person of the Son is perpetually come in human flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7) and is now therefore a Man sitting on the right hand of the throne of God.

As such, being finite in His humanity, He does not fill all things except in the Person of the Holy Ghost as well as in His pre-incarnate form.

I would suggest to you that you read these messages and be Bereans and see if the scriptures that I have referenced actually do say what I am saying that they say.

Because if what I am saying is backed up by holy scripture, then it is biblical doctrine;

Regardless of what has been taught by Christianity in times past on this subject.

Please note that just because something about the Trinity has been taught and accepted as the truth, does not make it biblical doctrine.

What Jehovah's Witnesses believe about the Trinity is taught and accepted by many of them as the truth.

I would also say that you might be hard-pressed to find any statement made by me that can be contradicted by any of the statements in the Trinitarian creeds; except it be for this one thing, that I said that Jesus was begotten in the incarnation (Luke 1:35).

Luk 1:35, And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Where does it say, anywhere in the Bible, that Jesus was begotten twice?
 
Last edited:
So, is it your contention that the Son existed in eternity as a Spirit next to the Father as a separate Person from the Father?

I would contend that if they are distinct rather than separate, there is a sense in which they can be one.

The same Spirit, the same Lord, and the same God.

But if they are separate, then that is two Spirits;

And your concept is contrary to holy scripture (Ephesians 4:4).

Because the Father is a Spirit (John 4:23-24).

And the Word is a Spirit (John 4:24).

Also, One who inhabits eternity by definition inhabits eternity for ever.

Therefore the Word would not be vacating eternity in descending to become human.

And therefore, when He ascends again to inhabit eternity (to fill all things, Ephesians 4:10),

You now have two Persons defined as the Word inhabiting the eternity.

And therefore your belief is not in the Trinity but in a Quadrinity.
 
Consider the following:


1Co 12:3, Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

There is one Lord (Ephesians 4:5); even the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21, 2 Corinthians 6:17-18). Yet no one can say that Jesus is the Lord except by the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3). And, Jesus is the one Lord of holy scripture (1 Corinthians 8:6).

I conclude that Jesus and the Father are the same Lord.

In light of Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21, and 2 Corinthians 6:17-18, I ask you, for_his_glory and Free,

Can you say that Jesus is the one Lord?

If you cannot, then you don't have the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3);

And therefore do not belong to Christ (Romans 8:9).
 
It seems to me that with the two of you, the only ground you have to stand on in any kind of refutation of my theology is based on a rejection of the kjv as being a valid translation of the Bible.

And that is what was prophesied in 2 Timothy 4:3.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that with the two of you, the only ground you have to stand on in any kind of refutation of my theology is based on a rejection of the kjv as being a valid translation of the Bible.

And that is what was prophesied in 2 Timothy 4:3.
Then you really haven't understood the discussion because the KJV has absolutely nothing to do with it.

So, does that make Him 1/3 of God or a 2nd God?
I've already answered this but the fact you even asked it once shows that you don't understand the doctrine of the Trinity.
 
Back
Top