Was jesus God

[francisdesales]

God loves us. So much so that He became one of us. To suffer and die to save us. That should move men to some serious thought about who God is. He is not some strict Father waiting for us to mess up so He can cast lightning bolts at us. He is not some Being who uses us for His own purposes. HE IS WILLING TO SUFFER FOR US OUT OF LOVE!

God didn't send a representative down here, a "mere" prophet. He came Himself, subjecting Himself to ALL the problems that we face as humans. As such, He is a most wonderful mediator, this Jesus Christ, God AND man.

I could never understand how Trinitarians can make statements such as some from the quote above. I've heard not only Catholic, but non-Catholic Trinitarians make them.

Thank you for your response...

Why can you not understand why we make these statements? If Jesus is not God, then God HIMSELF did not come to save us. He sent an intermediary to do the "dirty work". If you think about it, that is a vast difference - God becoming man, taking on the suffering and punishment that is due mankind. Thus, our knowledge of WHO God is is based upon this crucial Trinitarian understanding. Like I said before, Trinity is not some just a dogma, but is based on our EXPERIENCE of the God who loves - even becoming one of us.

Here is the logical problem. Trinitarians say that there's one God and that He is a Trinity. This Trinitarian God, the only God, consists of three Divine Persons. So why do Trinitarians say that HE is a Trinity. Why do Trinitarians not say "THEY are a Trinity"?

Logical problem... You will never fully understand this "logical problem" because it is based upon a mysterious relationship dealing with an infinite Being. We have only been revealed bits and pieces of Who God is. Thus, trying to base your understanding of God entirely upon logic will fail.

Now to your newest line of attacks. I see that you have some umbrage over the use of pronouns. Well, Paidion, we are dealing with Something that human pronouns cannot fully encompass. In human conversation, we understand that each human has a nature and a person. One of each.

HOWEVER, when we describe humanity as a unified whole, do we not continue to use the singular sense? Mankind, refering to billions of people, is a thought of in the singular sense. Even describing a group of people calls for the use of a singular pronoun.

The Catholic Church teaches that she is the true Church instituted by Christ.

Consider the sentence. Singular noun. Singular verb - and yet, we know that the Catholic Church has more than one member.

As such, even in describing human things, we CAN use singular pronouns to describe a "body" of people. Or a three-some of persons...

The useage of the singular or plural is dependent upon the sense of the sentence and the meaning in the mind of the author. Thus, if I say "HE is a Trinity", I am refering to the Godhead in the singular, since there is only one God. If I say "They are a Trinity", no doubt I would be accused of Trithesism by you...

Thus, I see this line of attack as semantics.

But worse! In the quote above, Francis asserts that God "became one of us." What? The Trinity became one of us? I thought it was only the Son who became one of us? Francis also states that God didn't send a representative down here, but He [God] came Himself. What??? The Trinity came down and was born as a human being? Was it not the Son of God who became a human being?

God did become one of us. I didn't say the entire Trinity became man, did I? The entire Divine Nature is found within each Person of the Trinity. They do not share Divinity, they do not split Divinity. They each are fully divine. Thus, when ONE does an act, GOD does the Act since the entire divinity is doing the Act. Only the Son became man, but the Divine nature in its entirety became man because the Son is the PERFECT IMAGE of God.

Oh, but you say, The Son of God Is God, and so God became a human being. WHAT???? The Son of God is the Trinity? If you don't mean that the Son of God is the Trinity, then what DO you mean?
If you are using "God" in a different sense than Trinity, when you say "The Father is God; The Son is God; The Holy Spirit is God," then you must believe in three Gods.

The Son of God is not the "Trinity". Each of the Trinity possesses the Divine Nature, totally undivided in its entirety. The Persons are distinct in only ORIGIN. Thus, the Son does not do a Divine Work WITHOUT the Spirit and Father being present. Jesus Himself said that He can do nothing without the Father. Thus, if Jesus is Divine, and Jesus is distinct from the Father, this verse tells us that Trinitarians are not Tritheists, because this verse, among others, tells us that the Father and Son do not do separate works, meaning there is only one Divine Will, one Divine Nature.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

The simple acquire folly. Truly, if a man would be faithful to the knowledge of who Jesus was, then he would build on what was revealed to Peter. He would make it his rock. It would be the foundation of the church. But it isn't. Instead the faithless build on their own inventions. Why? Because they are faithless. Because they can't even be faithful in the smallest detail. Because the fear of God isn't in them. Because they love their own inventions more than they love God.

Knowing the fear of God, no man would try to build on the 'Trinity', no matter what any so called church said. No rational man would. But the faithless aren't rational. And so they build their house on sand.

Saying that God loves man so much that He became one of us is building upon sand???

The devil is very active on these threads lately...

 

[Rick W]

Knowing the fear of God, no man would try to build on the 'Trinity', no matter what any so called church said. No rational man would. But the faithless aren't rational. And so they build their house on sand.

And that's just ONE example of why this thread has been locked.

viewtopic.php?t=11740