GodsGrace
CF Ambassador
What or Who are the 7 spirits?no
Yes. One God. Three Persons. Seven Spirits.
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
What or Who are the 7 spirits?no
Yes. One God. Three Persons. Seven Spirits.
Taking your name in vain? Seriously? Care to address your hypocrisy which I pointed out, where you said Trinitarianism and Modalism are the same and that Modalism is a false cult, making Trinitarianism a false cult?Excuse Me! I am not a modalist. I resent being called one, and I am not prepared to discuss it further.
Thank you.
Maybe I should put in a complaint for taking my name in vain.
,
No, it definitely does not say that. The wording is chosen specifically to avoid such a conclusion.Free, I don't know how else to say this.
If the above, underlined by me, is correct, then there are THREE GODS.
To say that the one God exists as three persons or that the three persons exist as one God, is to say the same thing.God does not exist in 3 persons...
3 persons exist in One God.
No, it does not. There are three basic foundations of the Trinity:It doesn't matter if they're co-eternal, co-equal, co-substantial....
it would make 3 gods.
You cannot be serious. I bolded the portions of the two definitions which clearly show what the difference is, that was the whole point of bolding, and that was the second or third time doing so. Modalism is the belief that the one God is one person who reveals himself in three different modes or forms. Trinitarianism is the belief that God has always existed as three coequal persons, each truly God, but each distinct one from the other.What do you think is the major difference between modalism and trinitarianism?
No, it definitely does not say that. The wording is chosen specifically to avoid such a conclusion.
To say that the one God exists as three persons or that the three persons exist as one God, is to say the same thing.
No, it does not. There are three basic foundations of the Trinity:
1. Monotheism--there was, is, and ever will be only one God.
2. There are three divine persons.
3. The three persons are coequal and coeternal--there never was a time when all three did not exist.
That is what the Bible teaches or at least best summarizes all that the Bible teaches about the nature of God.
You cannot be serious. I bolded the portions of the two definitions which clearly show what the difference is, that was the whole point of bolding, and that was the second or third time doing so. Modalism is the belief that the one God is one person who reveals himself in three different modes or forms. Trinitarianism is the belief that God has always existed as three coequal persons, each truly God, but each distinct one from the other.
No, it definitely does not say that. The wording is chosen specifically to avoid such a conclusion.
To say that the one God exists as three persons or that the three persons exist as one God, is to say the same thing.
No, it does not. There are three basic foundations of the Trinity:
1. Monotheism--there was, is, and ever will be only one God.
2. There are three divine persons.
3. The three persons are coequal and coeternal--there never was a time when all three did not exist.
That is what the Bible teaches or at least best summarizes all that the Bible teaches about the nature of God.
You cannot be serious. I bolded the portions of the two definitions which clearly show what the difference is, that was the whole point of bolding, and that was the second or third time doing so. Modalism is the belief that the one God is one person who reveals himself in three different modes or forms. Trinitarianism is the belief that God has always existed as three coequal persons, each truly God, but each distinct one from the other.
No, it is the same thing.This is not correct. It is not the same thing.
In one way there is only One God.
In the other way there are 3 gods in 3 different persons.
They are of the same substance. "Person" is just a human word to approximate the individual personhood of each.I agree with the above.
BUT
What is a person?
They have the same nature.
They are all within the same God.
No, that would not be correct. That would be Modalism; that is one person who has different roles and not three distinct persons. It would also open the door to God being any number of different things, since those are just arbitrary roles (why not include husband, engineer, co-worker, father-in-law, brother-in-law, etc.).Your last sentence is correct.
Thinking on the modes or forms.
Do you think it's correct to say that God is like a man that:
IS A FATHER
IS AN UNCLE
IS A BROTHER
??
You're right.No, it is the same thing.
They are of the same substance. "Person" is just a human word to approximate the individual personhood of each.
No, that would not be correct. That would be Modalism; that is one person who has different roles and not three distinct persons. It would also open the door to God being any number of different things, since those are just arbitrary roles (why not include husband, engineer, co-worker, father-in-law, brother-in-law, etc.).
What or Who are the 7 spirits?
Yes.What? No.
Yeah, every analogy is going to break down at some point. That water exsits in three forms is Modalism since the same water molecules in a cup can't exist as all three at once. However, water can exist as solid, liquid, and gas simultaneously at a specific temperature and pressure, know as the triple-point of water. It is better (I think the best analogy for the Trinity) although still limited.You're right.
Saying God is like a man that is a husband, brother, father is NOT correct.
(I don't know that if God has revealed Himself completely...but we do know only what you've posted).
The water in 3 forms is also wrong.
The triangle is the best I could come up with.
Am reading that article you sent...
More tomorrow.
From M. R. Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament:Yes.
Revelation 3:1
To the angel of the church in Sardis write: He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars, says this: ‘I know your deeds, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead.
Revelation 4:5
Out from the throne come flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder. And there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God;
Revelation 5:6
And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth.
Isaiah 11:2
The (1) Spirit of the Lord will rest on Him, The spirit of (2) wisdom and (3) understanding, The spirit of (4) counsel and (5) strength, The spirit of (6) knowledge and the (7) fear of the Lord.
I agree. But why do you reject Trinitarianism and yet state here that God is triune? To say that God is triune is to say that God is a Trinity. They are one and the same.The Triune God is clearly seen in the Old Testament as is the deity of Jesus. The Holy Spirit is everywhere found, but the words 'is not' are absent.
Job_19:25 For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last, he will stand upon the earth.
Isa 41:14 Fear not, you worm Jacob, you men of Israel! I am the one who helps you, declares the LORD; your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel.
Isa_44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isa_49:7 Thus says the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nation, the servant of rulers: “Kings shall see and arise; princes, and they shall prostrate themselves; because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you.”
Isa_54:5 For your Maker is your husband, the LORD of hosts is his name; and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, the God of the whole earth he is called.
Isa_59:20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
Isa 9:6 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.
There is a great deal of suspicion regarding these “older” texts so it’s very likely that verse was in the original and purposely removed. Logical, it fits in with the flow of the writing. When removed there’s something missing. Those “older” texts have other verses, all referring to the deity of Christ, removed.I guess someone who didn’t like a particular verse in the Bible could make such a claim about any passage in the Bible.
Relying on someone’s opinion is not how we build a strong foundation of truth for our lives.
For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
1 John 5:7
The Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit are one.
Human imagination cannot add to nor take away from any part of this.
JLB
Yes, the God of their Fathers who exalted His Son to His right hand as "Prince" and Savior.The Triune God in all his contemporary fullness is clearly seen in the Old Testament along with Jesus. (Not modulism.) The Holy Spirit is everywhere found, but the words 'is not' are absent as we would expect.
Job_19:25 For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last, he will stand upon the earth.
Isa 41:14 Fear not, you worm Jacob, you men of Israel! I am the one who helps you, declares the LORD; your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel.
Isa_44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isa_49:7 Thus says the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nation, the servant of rulers: “Kings shall see arise; and princes, and they shall prostrate themselves; because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you.”
Isa_54:5 For your Maker is your husband, the LORD of hosts is his name; and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, the God of the whole earth he is called.
Isa_59:20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
Isa 9:6 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.
Not really.
You stated that the CC overtook the Christian church.
Do you mean forcefully?
Or do you mean that it just naturally succeeded the Christian church?
There's a big difference.
Here's what I believe:
Peter was one of the first Popes.
The Catholic Church is the first church.
Because it can be traced back to Peter.
The early Christian church was called the universalist church...which is what Catholic means.
How do YOU understand this?
It's simple history.
It would be best to start a new thread if you want to post your erroneous views of Bible translations, and we can discuss them there.There is a great deal of suspicion regarding these “older” texts so it’s very likely that verse was in the original and purposely removed. Logical, it fits in with the flow of the writing. When removed there’s something missing. Those “older” texts have other verses, all referring to the deity of Christ, removed.
Why do you keep on believing this contradiction? He cannot be both God and not God; that is irrational. As C. S. Lewis said, nonsense is still nonsense even if it is spoken of about God. If the Son is "all that the Father is," then he is fully deity in and of himself and is truly God.When I was asked if Jesus was God at that time an answer was given to me from above
The answer given from above.
He never dies
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.
It’s easy to employ that slur that if one is ignorant.It would be best to start a new thread if you want to post your erroneous views of Bible translations, and we can discuss them there.
First of all I get the impression that none of you have ever heard from Him.Why do you keep on believing this contradiction? He cannot be both God and not God; that is irrational. As C. S. Lewis said, nonsense is still nonsense even if it is spoken of about God. If the Son is "all that the Father is," then he is fully deity in and of himself and is truly God.