Home Debates Trinity Debate – John 17:3 Page 34

Trinity Debate – John 17:3

Subject:  John 17:3 disproves the Trinity Doctrine
Date: Mar. 18 2007
Debaters: t8  & Is 1: 18

t8

We are all familiar with the Trinity doctrine and many here do not believe in it but think it is a false doctrine and even perhaps part of the great falling away prophesied in scripture.

As part of a challenge from Is 1:18 (a member here, not the scripture) I will be posting 12 scriptures over the coming weeks (perhaps months) to show how the Trinity doctrine contradicts scripture and therefore proving it to be a false doctrine.

The first scripture I would like to bring out into the light is John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

This scripture clearly talks about the only true God and in addition to that, Jesus Christ who (that true God) has sent.

Trying to fit this scripture into a Trinity template seems impossible in that Jesus Christ is NOT being referred to as the True God in this scripture. So if Jesus is also God (as Trinitarians say) then that leaves us with John 17:3 saying that Jesus is a false God, (if we also say that there are no other gods except false ones), as the ONLY TRUE GOD is reserved for the one who sent him.

Now a possible rebuttal from a Trinitarian could be that Jesus is not the only True God here because it is referring to him as a man as Trinitarians say that Jesus is both God and Man. But if this argument is made by Is 1:18, then he is admitting that Jesus is not always the only True God and therefore the Trinity is not always a Trinity as would be concluded when reading John 17:3. Such a rebuttal is ridiculous if we consider that God changes not and that God is not a man that he should lie.

Secondly, the Trinity doctrine breaks this scripture if we think of God as a Trinity in that it would read as “the only true ‘Trinity’ and Jesus Christ whom the ‘Trinity’ has sent.

We know that such a notion makes no sense so the word ‘God’ must of course be referring to the Father as hundreds of other similar verses do and to further support this, we know that the Father sent his son into this world.

If a Trinitarian argued that the only true God i.e., that The Father, Son, Spirit decided among themselves that the Jesus part of the Trinity would come to earth, then that would be reading way too much into what the scripture actually says and you would end up connecting dots that cannot justifiably be connected. It would be unreasonable to teach this angle because it actually doesn’t say such a thing. Such a rebuttal is pure assumption and quite ridiculous because the text itself is quite simple and clear. i.e., that the ONLY TRUE GOD (one true God) sent another (his son) into the world. It truly is no more complicated than that.

Such a rebuttal also requires that one start with the Trinity doctrine first and then force the scripture to fit it, rather than the scripture teaching us what it is saying. In other words it is similar to the way you get vinegar from a sponge. In order to do that, you must first soak the sponge in vinegar.

I conclude with an important point regarding John 17:3 that is often overlooked. The fact that we can know the one true God and the one he sent is of paramount importance because we are told that this is “eternal life” and therefore it would be reckless to try and change its simple and straight forward meaning.

My final note is to watch that Is 1:18’s rebuttal is focussed around John 17:3. I wouldn’t put it past him to create a diversion and start talking about the possibility or non-possibility of other gods. But the point in hand here is that John 17:3 says that the only true God sent Jesus, so let us see how he opposes this.



Is 1:18

Nice opening post t8. You have raised some interesting points. Thank you, by the way, for agreeing to debate me, I appreciate the opportunity and hope that it can be as amicable as is possible and conducted in good faith. With that in mind let me start by complimenting you. One of the things I do respect about you is that your theology, as much as I disagree with it, is your own, and I know that the material I will be reading over the next few weeks will be of your own making. Okay, enough of this sycophancy…..

:D

My rebuttal will be subdivided into three main sections:

1. The logical dilemma of the reading a Unitaritarian “statement of exclusion” into John 17:3
2. Some contextual issues
3. My interpretation of John 17:3

I’m going to try to keep my posts short and succinct, as I know people rarely read long posts through and sometimes the key messages can get lost in extraneous detail.

Section 1. The logical dilemma of the reading a Unitaritarian “statement of exclusion” into John 17:3

Let me start this section by stating what Yeshua doesn’t say in John 17:3:

He doesn’t say:

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, a god, whom You have sent.

or this:

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ a lower class of being, whom You have sent.

and He definitely didn’t say this:

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ , an untrue God.

So, on the face of it, this verse, in and of itself, is NOT a true refutation of the trinity doctrine. Why? Because clearly a contra-distinction in ontology between the Father and Himself was not being drawn by Yeshua. There is not mention of “what” Yeshua is in the verse. He simply describes Himself with his Earthly name, followed by the mention of His being sent. So because there is no mention of a contrast in ontology in the verse, I dispute that it’s an exclusionist statement at all….and let’s not lose sight of this – “eternal” life is “knowing” The Father and the Son. If Yeshua was contrasting His very being with the Father, highlighting the disparity and His own inferiority, wouldn’t His equating of the importance of relationship of believers with the Fatherand Himself in the context of salvation be more than a little presumptuous, audacious, even blasphemous? If His implication was that eternal life is predicated on having a relationship with the One true God and a lesser being, then wasn’t Yeshua, in effect, endorsing a breach of the first commandment?

But let’s imagine, just for a moment, that that is indeed what Yeshua meant to affirm – that the Father is the true God, to the preclusion of Himself. Does this precept fit harmoniously within the framework of scripture? Or even within the framework of your personal Christology t8?

I say no. There is a dilemma invoked by this precept that should not be ignored.

There is no doubt that the word “God” (Gr. theos) is applied to Yeshua in the NT (notably: John 1:1, 20:28, Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, Hebrews 1:8…). Although obfuscatory tactics are often employed to diminish the impact of these statements.  You yourself might have in the past argued that the writer, in using “theos”, intended to denote something other than “divinity” in many of them, like an allusion to His “authority” for instance. I, of course, disagree with this as the context of the passages make it plain that ontological statements were being made, but for the sake of argument and brevity I’ll take just one example – John 1:1:-

This following quotation comes from your own writings (emphasis mine):

 

Quote
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was god.This verse mentions God as a person, except for the last word ‘god’ which is talking about the nature of God. i.e., In the beginning was the Divinity and the Word was with the Divinity and the word was divine. The verse says that the Word existed with God as another identity and he had the nature of that God.

From here

So here we have an unequivocal statement by you, t8, asserting that the word “theos” in John 1:1c is in fact a reference to His very nature. The word choices in your statement (“divine” and “nature”) were emphatically ontological ones, in that they spoke of the very essence of His being. What you actually expressed was – the reason He was called “God” by John was a function of His divine nature! But there is only one divine being t8, YHWH. There is no other God, and none even like YHWH….. 

Isaiah 46:9
Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me.

So herein lies a quandry….was YHWH telling the truth when He stated “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me“? I say yes. He is in a metaphysical category by Himself, an utterly unique being.

BTW, the semantic argument in which you attempted to delineate “nature” and “identity” is really just smoke and mirrors IMO. These are not in mutually exclusive categories, one cannot meaningfully co-exist without the other in the context of ontology (the nature of ‘beings’). All humans have human nature – and they are human in identity. If they do not have human nature (i.e. are not a human being) then they cannot be considered to be human at all. It is our nature that defines our being and identity. If Yeshua had/has divine nature, as you propose was described in John 1:1, then He was “God” in identity…..or do we have two divine beings existing “in the beginning” but only one of them was divine in identity?  How implausible.

Anyway, here is your dilemma t8.

On one hand you hold up John 17:3 as a proof text, emphatically affirming that it shows that the Father of Yeshua is “the only true God” (The Greek word for “true” (Gr. alethinos) carries the meaning “real” or “genuine.”) – to the exclusion of the Son. But on the other you concede that Yeshua is called “God” in scriptureand acknowledge that the word “theos” was used by John in reference to His very nature. Can you see the dilemma? If not, here it is. You can’t have it both ways t8. If the Son is called “God” in an ontological sense (which is exactly what you expressed in you writing “who is Jesus” and subsequently in MB posts), but there isonly One ”true” God – then Yeshua is, by default, a false god.. Looked at objectively, no other conclusion is acceptable.

To say otherwise is to acknowledge that John 1:1 teaches that two Gods inhabited the timeless environ of “the beginning” (i.e. before the advent of time itself), co-existing eternally (The Logos “was”[Gr. En – imperfect of eimi – denotes continuous action of the Logos existing in the past] in the beginning) in relationship (The Logos was “with” [pros] God), and that 1 Corinthians 8:6 teaches a True and false god in fact created “all things”. Which aside from being overt polytheism is also clearly ludicrous. Did a false god lay the foundation of the Earth? Were the Heavens the work of false god’s hands? (Hebrews 1:10). How about the prospect of honouring a false god “even as” (i.e. in exactly the same way as) we honour the True one (John 5:23) at the judgement? It’s untenable for a monotheistic Christian, who interprets John 17:3 the way you do, to even contemplate these things, and yet these are the tangible implications and outworkings of such a position.

I would also say, in finishing this section, that if we apply the same inductive logic you used with John 17:3 to prove that the Father alone is the One true God, YHWH, to the exclusion of Yeshua, then to be consistent, should we also accept that Yeshua is excluded from being considered a “Saviour” by Isaiah 43:11; 45:21; Hosea 13:4 and Jude 25?  And does Zechariah 14:9 exclude Yeshua from being considered a King? And on the flip side of the coin, since Yeshua is ascribed the titles “Only Master” (Jude 4, 2 Peter 2:1) and “Only Lord” (Jude 4, Ephesians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 8:4,6), is the Father excluded from being these things to us?

You can’t maintain that the principal exists in this verse, but not others where the word “only” is used in reference to an individual person. That’s inconsistent. If you read unipersonality into the John 17:3 text and apply the same principle of exclusion to other biblical passages, then what results is a whole complex of problematic biblical dilemmas…….

Section 2. Some contextual issues.

Here is the first 10 verses of the Chapter in John, please note the emphasised parts of the text:

John 17:1-10
1Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, 
2even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. 
3″This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 
4″I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. 
5″Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
6″I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. 
7″Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You; 
8for the words which You gave Me I have given to them; and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me. 
9″I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours; 
10and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine; and I have been glorified in them.

I assert that some of the highlighted statements above are utterly incompatible with the notion of a monarchial monotheism statement of exclusion in vs 3, while at least one would be genuinely absurd. 

 

  • In verse 1 Yeshua appeals to the Father to “glorify” Him. How temerarious and brazen would this be if Yeshua be speaking as a lower class of being to the infinite God?
  • In verse 5 we read that Yeshua, alluding to His pre-existent past, again appeals to the Father to “glorify” Him – but adds “with the “glory” (Gr. Doxa – dignity, glory (-ious), honour, praise, worship) which I had with You before the world was”. However, in Isaiah 42:8 YHWH said He would not give his glory to another. Now that is an exclusionist statement. What is a lesser being doing sharing “doxa” with the One true God? This puts you in an interesting paradox t8.
    Quote
    With thine own self (para seautw). “By the side of thyself.” Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. John 1:1) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John 1:14). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father’s side (para soi, with thee) “which I had” (h eixon, imperfect active of exw, I used to have, with attraction of case of hn to h because of doch), “before the world was” (pro tou ton kosmon einai), “before the being as to the world” – Robertson’s Word Pictures (NT)
  • In verse 10 we  truly have an absurd proclamation if Yeshua is not the true God. He said “and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine”. Would this not be the very epitome of redundancy if this verse was speaking of a finite being addressing the only SUPREME being, the Creator of everything?!?…..Couldn’t we liken this sentiment that Yeshua makes to say someone from the untouchable caste in India (the poorest of the poor) rocking up to Bill Gates and saying “everything I have is yours”?!?! I think it is the same, yet as an analogy falls infinitely short of the mark in impact. I mean what really can a lesser and finite being offer Him that He doesn;y already have?  I think that if Yeshua is not the true God then He has uttered what is perhaps the most ridiculous statement in history.So, I hope you can see that there are some contextual considerations in the John 17:3 prayer that should be taken into account when interpreting vs 3. Moreover, you should not read any verse in isolation from the rest of scripture. If the suspected meaning of the any verse does violence to the harmony of the all of the rest of biblical data relating to a particular topic, then this verse should be reevaluated – not all the others. That’s sound hermeneutics.

 

Section 3. My interpretation of John 17:3.

I think we both should endeavor to always provide our interpretation of the verses that are submitted to us. Just explaining why the other’s view is wrong isn’t really going to aid in progressing the discussion very far.

My interpretation is this: The overarching context of the seventeenth chapter of John is Yeshua submissively praying as a man to His Father. Yeshua was born a man under the Law (Galatians 4:4), and in that respect, was subject to all of it. His Father was also His God, and had He not been the Law would have been violated by Him, and Yeshua would not have been “without blemish”. So the statement He made in John 17:3 reflected this, and of course He was right – the Father is the only true God. But “eternal” life was predicated on “knowing” the Father and Son.

1 John 1:2-3
2and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us—
3what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

So in summary, what we are dealing with here is good evidence for the Father’s divinity and the Son’s humanity. But what we don’t have in John 17:3 is good evidence for the non-deity of the Son. If you argue that it is then would Yeshua calling someone “a true man” disprove His own humanity? No. Yet this is the essence of the argument you are using t8. The verse does not make an ontological contra-distinction between the two persons of the Father and Son, as the Son’s “being” is not even mentioned. Furthermore, given that you have previously acknowledged that the reason John ascribed the title “God” to the logos (in John 1:1) was due to His divine nature (in other words He was “God” in an ontological sense) the default position for your Yeshua is false God – if Yeshua made a statement of exclusion in John 17:3. If the Father is the only true God, all others are, by default, false ones. Then all kinds of problematic contradictions arise in scripture:

  • Were the apostles self declared “bond servants” to the One true God, as well as a false one (Acts 16:7, Romans 1:1, Titus, James 1:1)?
  • Did two beings, the True God and a false one, eternally co-exist in intimate fellowship “in the beginning” (John 1:1b)?
  • Did the True God along with a false one bring “all things” into existence (1 Corinthians 8:6)?
  • Is a false god really “in” the only True one (John 10:38; 14:10,11; 17:21)?
  • Should we honour a false God “even as” we honour the Only True God as Judge (John 5:23)?
  • Did the True God give a false one “all authority…..on Heaven and Earth” (Matthew 28:18)?The list goes on….

 

If there is a verse that teaches YHWH’s unipersonity, John 17:3 is not that verse. The false god implication bears no resemblance to the Yeshua described in the  New Testament scriptures. In the NT the Logos existed (Gr. huparcho – continuous state of existence) in the form (Gr. morphe –nature, essential attributes as shown in the form) of God (Phil 2:6) and “was God” (John 1:1c), “He” then became flesh and dwelt among us  (John 1:14), yet in Him the fullness of deity (Gr. theotes – the state of being God) dwelt bodily form…..Yeshua is the exact representation of His Father’s “hypostasis” (essence/substance) – Hebrews 1:3 (cf. 2 Cr 4:4)….not a false God t8, a genuine One.

Thus ends my first rebuttal, I’ll post my first proof text in three days.

Blessings

Discussion

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 20 posts - 661 through 680 (of 945 total)
123…333435…464748
  • Author
    Posts
  • July 17, 2007 at 1:31 am#60199
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    *A challenge for the Unitarians, Henotheist, and Arians*

    Please tell me based on the following scriptures how do you reconcile them from any other view but a Trinitarians?

    How do you explain the following scriptures?

    1 Cor 2:13
    *For by one Spirit* are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made *to drink into one Spirit*.

    Eph 4:4
    There is one body, and *one Spirit*, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

    II Cor 3:17
    Now the *Lord is that Spirit*: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

    Eph 2:18
    For through him we both have access by *one Spirit* unto the Father.

    We see many scriptures that show that Jesus – The Spirit of God – The Spirit of Christ – God – The Father – Spirit of him – The Spirit – His Spirit – Comforter – Holy Spirit that are terms being used in speaking of *God dwelling in our Body* the Temple of God, the Temple of the Holy Spirit or the Temple of Christ.

    That “ONE Spirit” is not only called the above, but also the following.

    *The Spirit of God*

    Matt 3:16, Matt 12:28, Rom 8:9,14, 15:19, 1 Cor 2:11, 14, 3:16, 7:40, 12:13,  Eph 4:30,  Jn 4:2

    *The Spirit of Jesus*

    Gal 4:6, Acts 16:7, Rom 8 9,10, 2 Cor 3:16-18, Phil 1:19, 1 Peter 1:11

    *The Holy Spirit or Comforter or Holy Ghost*

    Lk 3:16, 11:13, 1 Thess 4:8, Jn 14:16,26, 15:26, 16:13-15, Matt 28:19, Mark 1:8, 3:29, Lk 1:15, Jn 7:39, Jn 20:22, Acts 1:5, 1:8, 2:33, 10:38, 13:2

    These terms are used synonymously and are referring to the “ONE God”, and yet we know they are different persons.

    The Apostles speak of them interchangeably! And clearly they are not always referring to the Father or to the Son, for they may be saying “Spirit of Christ” “Spirit of Jesus” “Spirit of God” “The Spirit” “Holy Spirit” Spirit of the Son” “His Spirit” “Holy Ghost” “One Spirit” “Spirit” “Comforter” “Spirit of Truth” “Finger of God” “Living Water” “Life giving Spirit”

    Yet the Word clearly says there is only “One Spirit”. Since we know there is only “One God”, then we have to conclude that the “One Spirit” is the “One God”.

    The following scriptures bear this oot…

    Rom 8:
    9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the *Spirit of God* dwell in you. Now if any man have not the *Spirit of Christ*, he is none of his.
    10 And if *Christ be in you*, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
    11 But if the *Spirit of him* that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by *his Spirit* that dwelleth in you.

    Now we see most of the terms I mentioned earlier in Rom 8:9,10,11. A close look at these scriptures shows Paul uses the terms interchangeably to describe the “One Spirit”.

    They are all living within us!

    Look and see!

    *Father*

    II Cor 6:16
    And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as *God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them*; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

    *Son*.

    II Cor 13:5
    Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates?

    *Holy Spirit*.
    I Cor 6:
    19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the *Holy Ghost which is in you*, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
    20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

    Jn 14:
    16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you *another Comforter*, that he may abide with you for ever;
    17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

    Jn 16:
    14 *He shall glorify me*: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
    15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that *he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you*.

    These words are interchageable and mean one thing, that there is three persons that dwell in us!

    If you think the Spirit is the personal Spirit of the Father then how do you explain this scripture…

    Gal 4:6
    And because ye are sons, *God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father*.

    Does the Father cry Father?

    And how about this…

    Jn 16:
    13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: 1. for he shall not speak of himself; but 2. whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
    14 He shall glorify me: 3. for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
    15 4. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

    1. Does the Father speak of himsel?

    2. Does the Father speak only what he hears?

    3. Does the Father take from Jesus and show it to us?

    4. Does he give all things to Jesus then take from Jesus and shew to us!

    Is the Father subservient to Jesus? ???

    Jesus baptises in the Holy Spirit and fire!

    Imagine that! Can a mere man do that!

    The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit divinely and unequelly and wonderfully joined together as ONE!

    God dwells in us!

    God = Father, Son And Holy Ghost!

    This is scriptural!

    Matt 28:
    18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
    19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the *name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost*.
    :D :D :D

    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.*
    9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
    10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

    Should we rather ignore or throw these scriptures out and cling to man made doctrines?

    :O

    July 17, 2007 at 1:41 am#60201
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    There is trinity view of Scripture.
    Trinity is foreign to scripture.

    July 17, 2007 at 3:36 am#60214
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 15 2007,08:04)
    Ignatius again, is a desciple of John and his writings are not disputed. He was a contemperary of Paul and the other Apostles. So I agree that his writtings didnt become cannonical, but they are significant just as other historical facts are.


    Hang on WorshippingJesus.

    Look at what you wrote and then look at what Ignatius wrote:

    I have learned that certain of the ministers of Satan have wished to disturb you, some of them asserting that Jesus was born [only] in appearance, was crucified in appearance, and died in appearance, others that He is not the Son the Creator, and others that He is Himself God over all. (To the Tarsians, II).

    ….And that He Himself is not God over all, and the Father, but His Son, He says, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. And again, “When all things shall be subjected unto Him, then shall He also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” Wherefore it is One [God] who put all things under, and who is all in all, and another [His Son] to whom they were subdued, who also Himself, along with all other things, becomes subject [to the former]. (To the Tarsians, V; cf. 1 Cor 15:24-28).

    …How could such a one be a mere man, receiving the beginning of His existence from Mary, and not rather God the Word, and the only-begotten Son? For “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” And in another place, “The Lord created Me, the beginning of His ways, for His ways, for His works. Before the world did He found Me, and before all the hills did He beget Me. (To the Tarsians, VI).

    …As Paul admonished you. For if there is one God of the universe, the Father of Christ, “of whom are all things; ” and one Lord Jesus Christ, our [Lord], “by whom are all things; ” and also one Holy Spirit…. For “there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is through all, and in all. (To the Philippians).

    You can't just dodge this and expect people to take you seriously WJ. It doesn't work like that. You need to be accountable to what you have written. You say that Ignatius was a contemporary of Paul and the other Apostles and agree that his writings didn't become canonical, but are significant.

    What is your account then?

    Have you changed your doctrine?
    or
    Have you changed your mind about Ignatius?
    or
    What?

    July 17, 2007 at 3:46 am#60215
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    It is no great discovery that the Spirit of God is joined as one with God.
    It would be alarming if it was not so.

    July 17, 2007 at 4:55 am#60221
    kejonn
    Participant

    WJ,
    All of those verses, one short answer:

    Matthew 11:27 – “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

    Includes the Holy Spirit. The now share the Holy Spirit. After all, the Spirit was involved in his conception, just seems the natural progession.

    Hope you didn't spend too much time getting all of that together.

    Father=God
    Jesus=Lord
    Holy Spirit=Common Bond between them and all believers.

    Jhn 17:20 “I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;

    Jhn 17:21 that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

    Jhn 17:22 “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one;

    Jhn 17:23 I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

    Jhn 17:24 “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

    Jhn 17:25 “O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me;

    Jhn 17:26 and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”

    July 17, 2007 at 7:06 am#60244
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    T8

    I wasn’t trying to dodge a thing.

    Besides, its funny how you mention dodging things, when you had never answered my questions about the Spirit way back even after you said you would!

    The reason I posted about the Spirit was because most of the post was already written and I didn’t have time to start on the response to your post but was saving it for tonight.

    LOL. Isnt this strange coming from the one who was always making excuses about why he couldnt post for lack of time! :)

    Anyway here it is.

    You say…

    Quote

    Have a closer read. Ignatius taught that the Father is the most High God. He says that it was ministers of Satan that say that “Jesus is God over all”.

    If Ignatius in this statement means what you are trying to say, then he contradicts himself or he is a polytheist. Not to mention t8, he surely dosnt take your Henotheistic view.

    First of all in your quote he says…

    Quote

    How could such a one be a mere man, receiving the beginning of His existence from Mary, and not rather God the Word, and the only-begotten Son? For “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    Take note t8, he dosnt translate John 1:1 like you do. “And the Word was divine”.

    Now notice he followed up on it again…

    Quote

    The Evangelists, too, when they declared that the one Father was the only true God, **did not omit** what concerned our Lord, **but wrote**: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the **Word was God**.

    Again, he does not change Johns words in Jn 1:1 and mistranslate it “The Word was divine”. In fact he says…

    The Evangelists, too, when they declared that the one Father was the only true God, **did not omit** what concerned our Lord, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the **Word was God**.
    ,

    Notice they didnt “Omit” Jesus as being “True God”, but quotes John saying Jesus was God!

    Furthermore he goes on to contradict your Henotheistic view concerning Jesus being the creator, which we know that God alone created all things, for he says…

    Quote
    The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

    ”

    Notice the word “BY”, recognize the word “Dia” t8?

    Then he goes into the incarnation of the Word/God…

    Quote
    And concerning the incarnation: “The Word,” says, “became flesh, and dwelt among us.” And again: “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” And those very apostles, who said “that there is one God,” said also that “there is one Mediator between God and men.” Nor were they ashamed of the incarnation and the passion. For what says “The man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself” for the life and salvation of the world. Whosoever, therefore, declares that there is but one God, only so as to “take away the *divinity* of Christ”, “is a devil”, and an enemy of all righteousness.

    He has already said the Word was God, and God is the Word!

    So is he contradicting himself when he says there is “One God”?

    No in fact he says…
    Whosoever, therefore, declares that there is but one God, only so as to “take away the *divinity* of Christ”, “is a devil”, and an enemy of all righteousness

    Its pretty obvious what divinity means to Ignatius t8, for so far he has said the “Word was God”, twice, and called him God the Word once. If he believed that the Word divinity meant any thing less than God, he would have not used the term without changing Jn 1:1 from “The Word was God” to your faulty translation, “The Word was divine”.

    Ignatius is not describing a lessor being in John 1:1!

    Do you think Ignatius is a Polytheist, or a Henotheist?

    Now backing up a little, he being a Monotheistic Jew knowing the Hebrew scriptures says…

    Quote
    For Moses, the faithful servant of God, when he said, “The Lord thy God is one Lord,” and thus proclaimed that there was only one God, did also forthwith confess also our Lord [Jesus] when he said, “The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord.” And again, “And God said, “Let us” make man after our image: and “so God” made man, after the image of God made He him.” And further “In the image of God made He man.” And that [the Son] was to be made man, he says, “A prophet shall the Lord [YAHWEH] raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me.” (To the Antiochians, II).

    Here we see him quoting Moses saying there is “One Lord, One God”, yet at the same time speaks of the “Lord Jesus” being the one who brought the judgment to Sodom and Gomorrah and then saying “God” created and “Let us” make man in our Image!

    How do you explain this t8?

    Ignatius is a Monotheist!

    He reafirms his Monotheistic view to the Philipians…

    Quote
    There is then One God and Father, and not two or three (or another smaller god or divine being), One who is, and there is no other besides Him, the only true One. For “the Lord [YAHWEH] thy God,” saith, “is one Lord.” And again, “Hath not “one God” created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word.

    Here he says there is “None Beside him”, and yet he calls Jesus “God the Word”!

    There it is again t8. God the Word! Jesus. Is he a Polytheist or Henotheist?

    I think not. Then he goes on to summarize his position as a Trinitarian…

    Quote
    For “the only-begotten Son,” saith, “who is in the bosom of the Father.” And again, “One Lord Jesus Christ.” And in another place, “What is His name, or what His Son's name, that we may know? ” And there is also one Paraclete. For “there is also,” saith, “one Spirit,” since “we have been called in one hope of our calling.” And again, “We have drunk of one Spirit,” with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts “worketh one and the se
    lf-same Spirit.”There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete    . Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” not unto one having three names, nor into three who became incarnate, but into **three [persons] possessed of equal honour [one name]**

    Notice the three persons possessed of equal honour [One Name]. What name is that?

    So again t8, he contradicts your teaching that the Holy Spirit is the “Personal” Spirit of the Father!

    Also, now I will post a few statements of Ignatius that you didn’t post and let the readers judge…

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

    being blessed in the greatness and fulness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and *Jesus Christ, our God*: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace*.

    Being the followers of God, and stirring up yourselves *by the blood of God* (see Acts 20:28), ye have perfectly accomplished the work which was beseeming to you.

    There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; *God existing in flesh* (1 Tim 3:16) ; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.

    We have also as a Physician *the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ*, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, Or, “before the ages. but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh. John i. 14. Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passible body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.

    For he who shall both “do and teach, the same shall be great in the kingdom. Matt. v. 19. *Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ*, the Son of the living God, first did and then taught, as Luke testifies, “whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches.
    *For our God, Jesus Christ*, was, according to the appointment Or, “economy,” or “dispensation.” Comp. Col. i. 25; 1 Tim. i. 4. of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water.

    Hence worldly wisdom became folly; conjuration was seen to be mere trifling; and magic became utterly ridiculous. Every law of wickedness vanished away; the darkness of ignorance was dispersed; and tyrannical authority was destroyed, *God being manifested as a man, and man displaying power as God.

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians

    He, being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, *was God the Word,* the only-begotten Son, and remains the same for ever; for “of His kingdom there shall be no end,

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.iii.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians

    For they *alienate Christ from the Father*, and the law from Christ. They also calumniate His being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross; they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; *and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists*. Some of them say that *the Son is a mere man*, and that *the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person*, and that *the creation is the work of God, not by Christ*, but by some other strange power.

    Be on your guard, therefore, against such persons. And this will be the case with you if you are not puffed up, and continue in intimate union with *Jesus Christ our God*, and the bishop, and the enactments of the apostles.

    For indeed God and man are not the same. *He truly assumed a body; for “the Word was made flesh*, John i. 14. and lived upon earth without sin.

    Mary then did truly conceive a *body which had God inhabiting it*. And *God the Word* was truly born of the Virgin, having clothed Himself with a body of like passions with our own. *He who forms all men in the womb, was Himself really in the womb, and made for Himself a body of the seed of the Virgin*, but without any intercourse of man. He was carried in the womb, even as we are, for the usual period of time; and was really born, as we also are;
    and was in reality nourished with milk, and partook of common meat and drink, even as we do. And when He had lived among men for thirty years, He was baptized by John, really and not in appearance; and when He had preached the Gospel three years, and done signs and wonders, He who was Himself the Judge was judged by the Jews, falsely so called, and by Pilate the governor; was scourged, was smitten on the cheek, was spit upon; He wore a crown of thorns and a purple robe; He was condemned: He was crucified in reality, and not in appearance, not in imagination, not in deceit. He really died, and was buried, and rose from the dead,

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.iv.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans

    Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that willeth all things which are according to* the love of Jesus Christ our God*

    …who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, abundance of happiness unblameably, in* Jesus Christ our God*.

    the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who formed all things that are according to the faith and love of *Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour;*

    *For our God, Jesus Christ*, now that He is with [or in] the Father, is all the more revealed [in his glory]. Christianity is not a thing of silence only, but also of [manifest] greatness.

    Permit me to be an imitator of *the passion of Christ, my God*. If any one has Him within himself, let him consider what I desire, and let him have sympathy with me, as knowing how I am straitened.

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.v.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians

    Since, also, there is but *one unbegotten Being, God, even the Father*; and *one only-begotten Son, God, the Word and man*; and *one Comforter, the Spirit of truth*; and also one preaching, and one faith, and one baptism;

    If any one confesses *the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost*, and praises the creation, but calls the incarnation merely an appearance, and is ashamed of the passion, such an one has denied the faith, not less than the Jews who killed Christ. If any one confesses these things, and that *God the Word did dwell in a human body, being within it as the Word*, even as the soul also is in the body, *because it was God that inhabited it, and not a human soul*, but affirms that unlawful unions are a good thing, and places the highest happiness in pleasure, as does the man who is falsely called a Nicolaitan, this per
    son can neither be a lover of God, nor a lover of Christ, but is a corrupter of his own flesh, and therefore void of the Holy Spirit, and a stranger to Christ.

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.vi.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnæans

    *I GLORIFY God, even Jesus Christ*, who has given you such wisdom.

    *I give glory to Jesus Christ the God* who
    bestowed such wisdom upon you; for I have perceived
    that ye are established in faith immovable, being as
    it were nailed on the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ,

    being fully persuaded, in very truth, with respect to our Lord Jesus Christ, that He was the Son of God, “the first-born of every creature, *God the Word, the only-begotten Son*, and was of the seed of David according to the flesh, by the Virgin Mary; was baptized by John, that all righteousness might be fulfilled  by Him; that He lived a life of

    For a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have. And He says to Thomas, “Reach hither
    thy finger into the print of the nails, and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into My side; and immediately they believed that He was Christ. Wherefore *Thomas also says to Him, “My Lord, and my God*. And on this account also did they despise death, for it were too little to say, indignities and stripes.

    For what does it profit, if any one commends me, *but blasphemes my Lord, not owning Him to be God incarnate?* He that does not confess this, has in fact altogether denied Him, being enveloped in death. I have not, however, thought good to write the names of such persons, inasmuch as *they are unbelievers*; and far be it from me to make any mention of them, until they repent.

    Ye have done well in receiving Philo and Rheus Agathopus as *servants of Christ our God*, who have followed me for the sake of God, and who give thanks to the Lord in your behalf, because ye have in every way refreshed them.

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.vii.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp

    To Polycarp
    8:3  I bid you farewell always *in our God Jesus
    Christ*    , in whom abide ye in the unity and supervision
    of God. I salute Alce, a name very dear to me.  

    Grace shall be with him for ever, and with Polycarp that sends him. I pray for your happiness *for ever in our God, Jesus Christ*, by whom continue ye in the unity and under the protection of God, I salute Alce, my dearly beloved.  

    Look for Christ, the Son of God; who was before time, yet appeared in time; who was invisible by nature, yet visible in the flesh; who was impalpable, and could not be touched, as being without a body, but for our sakes became such, might be touched and handled in the body; *who was impassible as God, but became passible for our sakes as man; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes.*

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.viii.html
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text….ts.html
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text….ot.html
    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.ii.html

    Its quite obvious Ignatius was not a Henotheist, nor a Polytheist, nor a Unitarian. This man of God was a contemporary of John and Paul and quoted such as we have the Word now!

    How do you explain this t8?

    His view seems to align with Jesus and John and Paul and Thomas and Mattew and the Trinitarians.

    But it sure dosnt line up with yours!

    So goes the the fallacious claim that the Trinity was invented by Athanasius!

    :O   :D

    July 17, 2007 at 7:07 am#60246
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (kejonn @ July 17 2007,16:55)
    WJ,
    All of those verses, one short answer:

    Matthew 11:27 – “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

    Includes the Holy Spirit. The now share the Holy Spirit. After all, the Spirit was involved in his conception, just seems the natural progession.

    Hope you didn't spend too much time getting all of that together.

    Father=God
    Jesus=Lord
    Holy Spirit=Common Bond between them and all believers.

    Jhn 17:20   “I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;

    Jhn 17:21   that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

    Jhn 17:22   “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one;

    Jhn 17:23   I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

    Jhn 17:24   “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

    Jhn 17:25   “O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me;

    Jhn 17:26   and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”


    Kejonn

    Is that it?

    :D

    July 17, 2007 at 7:13 am#60250
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Kejonn

    I am disapointed!

    I was expecting a rather long and sarcastic response!

    Look again. You can do better than the previous response!

    *A challenge for the Unitarians, Henotheist, and Arians*

    Please tell me based on the following scriptures how do you reconcile them from any other view but a Trinitarians?

    How do you explain the following scriptures?

    1 Cor 2:13
    *For by one Spirit* are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made *to drink into one Spirit*.

    Eph 4:4
    There is one body, and *one Spirit*, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

    II Cor 3:17
    Now the *Lord is that Spirit*: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

    Eph 2:18
    For through him we both have access by *one Spirit* unto the Father.

    We see many scriptures that show that Jesus – The Spirit of God – The Spirit of Christ – God – The Father – Spirit of him – The Spirit – His Spirit – Comforter – Holy Spirit that are terms being used in speaking of *God dwelling in our Body* the Temple of God, the Temple of the Holy Spirit or the Temple of Christ.

    That “ONE Spirit” is not only called the above, but also the following.

    *The Spirit of God*

    Matt 3:16, Matt 12:28, Rom 8:9,14, 15:19, 1 Cor 2:11, 14, 3:16, 7:40, 12:13,  Eph 4:30,  Jn 4:2

    *The Spirit of Jesus*

    Gal 4:6, Acts 16:7, Rom 8 9,10, 2 Cor 3:16-18, Phil 1:19, 1 Peter 1:11

    *The Holy Spirit or Comforter or Holy Ghost*

    Lk 3:16, 11:13, 1 Thess 4:8, Jn 14:16,26, 15:26, 16:13-15, Matt 28:19, Mark 1:8, 3:29, Lk 1:15, Jn 7:39, Jn 20:22, Acts 1:5, 1:8, 2:33, 10:38, 13:2

    These terms are used synonymously and are referring to the “ONE God”, and yet we know they are different persons.

    The Apostles speak of them interchangeably! And clearly they are not always referring to the Father or to the Son, for they may be saying “Spirit of Christ” “Spirit of Jesus” “Spirit of God” “The Spirit” “Holy Spirit” Spirit of the Son” “His Spirit” “Holy Ghost” “One Spirit” “Spirit” “Comforter” “Spirit of Truth” “Finger of God” “Living Water” “Life giving Spirit”

    Yet the Word clearly says there is only “One Spirit”. Since we know there is only “One God”, then we have to conclude that the “One Spirit” is the “One God”.

    The following scriptures bear this oot…

    Rom 8:
    9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the *Spirit of God* dwell in you. Now if any man have not the *Spirit of Christ*, he is none of his.
    10 And if *Christ be in you*, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
    11 But if the *Spirit of him* that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by *his Spirit* that dwelleth in you.

    Now we see most of the terms I mentioned earlier in Rom 8:9,10,11. A close look at these scriptures shows Paul uses the terms interchangeably to describe the “One Spirit”.

    They are all living within us!

    Look and see!

    *Father*

    II Cor 6:16
    And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as *God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them*; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

    *Son*.

    II Cor 13:5
    Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates?

    *Holy Spirit*.
    I Cor 6:
    19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the *Holy Ghost which is in you*, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
    20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

    Jn 14:
    16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you *another Comforter*, that he may abide with you for ever;
    17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

    Jn 16:
    14 *He shall glorify me*: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
    15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that *he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you*.

    These words are interchageable and mean one thing, that there is three persons that dwell in us!

    If you think the Spirit is the personal Spirit of the Father then how do you explain this scripture…

    Gal 4:6
    And because ye are sons, *God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father*.

    Does the Father cry Father?

    And how about this…

    Jn 16:
    13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: 1. for he shall not speak of himself; but 2. whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
    14 He shall glorify me: 3. for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
    15 4. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

    1. Does the Father speak of himsel?

    2. Does the Father speak only what he hears?

    3. Does the Father take from Jesus and show it to us?

    4. Does he give all things to Jesus then take from Jesus and shew to us!

    Is the Father subservient to Jesus? ???

    Jesus baptises in the Holy Spirit and fire!

    Imagine that! Can a mere man do that!

    The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit divinely and unequelly and wonderfully joined together as ONE!

    God dwells in us!

    God = Father, Son And Holy Ghost!

    This is scriptural!

    Matt 28:
    18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
    19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the *name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost*.
    :D :D :D

    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.*
    9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
    10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

    Should we rather ignore or throw these scriptures out and cling to man made doctrines?

    :O

    July 17, 2007 at 8:02 am#60262
    Is 1:18
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 17 2007,19:07)

    Quote (kejonn @ July 17 2007,16:55)
    WJ,
    All of those verses, one short answer:

    Matthew 11:27 – “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

    Includes the Holy Spirit. The now share the Holy Spirit. After all, the Spirit was involved in his conception, just seems the natural progession.

    Hope you didn't spend too much time getting all of that together.

    Father=God
    Jesus=Lord
    Holy Spirit=Common Bond between them and all believers.

    Jhn 17:20   “I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;

    Jhn 17:21   that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

    Jhn 17:22   “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one;

    Jhn 17:23   I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

    Jhn 17:24   “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

    Jhn 17:25   “O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me;

    Jhn 17:26   and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”


    Kejonn

    Is that it?

    :D


    I agree with WJ. I don't think you addressed the issues at all kejonn.

    July 17, 2007 at 11:38 am#60309
    kejonn
    Participant

    WJ and Is,

    Yes, I did. What do I need to address? I provided the verse that shows the old adage: “what's mine is yours and what's yours is mine”. I could get detailed and provide lessons on many of the passages, and in particular Romans 8:9, but in the end the Holy Spirit originates from the Father but is shared by Yeshau, the monogenes Son who inherited all things from the Father. The only thing Yeshua did not inherit was certain rights and titles that he could never have, like being God and therefore being “God of gods”.

    I'm sorry if my answer does not satisfy you. In fact, if you look again at Romans 8:9, you would see that with the separation of “Spirit of God” and “Spirit of Christ” in the same verse, you would realize that both Yeshua and the Father influence you through their roles. Would “One God” need to make such distinction? Why the need to have Yeshua and God's Spirit, both the same but with each contributing a little different essence to our lives be necessary?

    There is a lesson for you in Romans 8:9-11, and it is not that the Holy Spirit being a third member of a triune God. Haha, in fact, by showing that Yeshua and God each own the Holy Spirit, one sees rather quickly that the Holy Spirit cannot be a third person, but a mutually shared essence. Where do we see “Spirit of God”, “Spirit of Christ” and “Spirit of Holy Spirit”? We don't. Ooops, you're theology stumbles again.

    Here is the lesson of Romans 8:9-11 – Having the Spirit of God means we are not in the flesh. Having the Spirit of Christ allows us to be more like Yeshua. We can't be like God because God was never flesh and never faced temptation and overcame. Yeshua did and he is our kindred, our brother, and the head of our collective body because he shares our humanity.

    Peace!

    July 17, 2007 at 11:51 am#60310
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Hey good post kejonn.

    :)

    July 17, 2007 at 11:54 am#60311
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 17 2007,19:06)
    T8

    I wasn’t trying to dodge a thing.

    Besides, its funny how you mention dodging things, when you had never answered my questions about the Spirit way back even after you said you would!

    The reason I posted about the Spirit was because most of the post was already written and I didn’t have time to start on the response to your post but was saving it for tonight.

    LOL. Isnt this strange coming from the one who was always making excuses about why he couldnt post for lack of time! :)

    Anyway here it is.

    You say…

    Quote

    Have a closer read. Ignatius taught that the Father is the most High God. He says that it was ministers of Satan that say that “Jesus is God over all”.

    If Ignatius in this statement means what you are trying to say, then he contradicts himself or he is a polytheist. Not to mention t8, he surely dosnt take your Henotheistic view.

    First of all in your quote he says…

    Quote

    How could such a one be a mere man, receiving the beginning of His existence from Mary, and not rather God the Word, and the only-begotten Son? For “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    Take note t8, he dosnt translate John 1:1 like you do. “And the Word was divine”.

    Now notice he followed up on it again…

    Quote

    The Evangelists, too, when they declared that the one Father was the only true God, **did not omit** what concerned our Lord, **but wrote**: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the **Word was God**.

    Again, he does not change Johns words in Jn 1:1 and mistranslate it “The Word was divine”. In fact he says…

    The Evangelists, too, when they declared that the one Father was the only true God, **did not omit** what concerned our Lord, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the **Word was God**.
    ,

    Notice they didnt “Omit” Jesus as being “True God”, but quotes John saying Jesus was God!

    Furthermore he goes on to contradict your Henotheistic view concerning Jesus being the creator, which we know that God alone created all things, for he says…

    Quote
    The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

    ”

    Notice the word “BY”, recognize the word “Dia” t8?

    Then he goes into the incarnation of the Word/God…

    Quote
    And concerning the incarnation: “The Word,” says, “became flesh, and dwelt among us.” And again: “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” And those very apostles, who said “that there is one God,” said also that “there is one Mediator between God and men.” Nor were they ashamed of the incarnation and the passion. For what says “The man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself” for the life and salvation of the world. Whosoever, therefore, declares that there is but one God, only so as to “take away the *divinity* of Christ”, “is a devil”, and an enemy of all righteousness.

    He has already said the Word was God, and God is the Word!

    So is he contradicting himself when he says there is “One God”?

    No in fact he says…
    Whosoever, therefore, declares that there is but one God, only so as to “take away the *divinity* of Christ”, “is a devil”, and an enemy of all righteousness

    Its pretty obvious what divinity means to Ignatius t8, for so far he has said the “Word was God”, twice, and called him God the Word once. If he believed that the Word divinity meant any thing less than God, he would have not used the term without changing Jn 1:1 from “The Word was God” to your faulty translation, “The Word was divine”.

    Ignatius is not describing a lessor being in John 1:1!

    Do you think Ignatius is a Polytheist, or a Henotheist?

    Now backing up a little, he being a Monotheistic Jew knowing the Hebrew scriptures says…

    Quote
    For Moses, the faithful servant of God, when he said, “The Lord thy God is one Lord,” and thus proclaimed that there was only one God, did also forthwith confess also our Lord [Jesus] when he said, “The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord.” And again, “And God said, “Let us” make man after our image: and “so God” made man, after the image of God made He him.” And further “In the image of God made He man.” And that [the Son] was to be made man, he says, “A prophet shall the Lord [YAHWEH] raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me.” (To the Antiochians, II).

    Here we see him quoting Moses saying there is “One Lord, One God”, yet at the same time speaks of the “Lord Jesus” being the one who brought the judgment to Sodom and Gomorrah and then saying “God” created and “Let us” make man in our Image!

    How do you explain this t8?

    Ignatius is a Monotheist!

    He reafirms his Monotheistic view to the Philipians…

    Quote
    There is then One God and Father, and not two or three (or another smaller god or divine being), One who is, and there is no other besides Him, the only true One. For “the Lord [YAHWEH] thy God,” saith, “is one Lord.” And again, “Hath not “one God” created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word.

    Here he says there is “None Beside him”, and yet he calls Jesus “God the Word”!

    There it is again t8. God the Word! Jesus. Is he a Polytheist or Henotheist?

    I think not. Then he goes on to summarize his position as a Trinitarian…

    Quote
    For “the only-begotten Son,” saith, “who is in the bosom of the Father.” And again, “One Lord Jesus Christ.” And in another place, “What is His name, or what His Son's name, that we may know? ” And there is also one Paraclete. For “there i
    s also,” saith, “one Spirit    ,” since “we have been called in one hope of our calling.” And again, “We have drunk of one Spirit,” with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts “worketh one and the self-same Spirit.”There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” not unto one having three names, nor into three who became incarnate, but into **three [persons] possessed of equal honour [one name]**

    Notice the three persons possessed of equal honour [One Name]. What name is that?

    So again t8, he contradicts your teaching that the Holy Spirit is the “Personal” Spirit of the Father!

    Also, now I will post a few statements of Ignatius that you didn’t post and let the readers judge…

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

    being blessed in the greatness and fulness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and *Jesus Christ, our God*: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace*.

    Being the followers of God, and stirring up yourselves *by the blood of God* (see Acts 20:28), ye have perfectly accomplished the work which was beseeming to you.

    There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; *God existing in flesh* (1 Tim 3:16) ; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.

    We have also as a Physician *the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ*, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, Or, “before the ages. but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh. John i. 14. Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passible body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.

    For he who shall both “do and teach, the same shall be great in the kingdom. Matt. v. 19. *Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ*, the Son of the living God, first did and then taught, as Luke testifies, “whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches.
    *For our God, Jesus Christ*, was, according to the appointment Or, “economy,” or “dispensation.” Comp. Col. i. 25; 1 Tim. i. 4. of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water.

    Hence worldly wisdom became folly; conjuration was seen to be mere trifling; and magic became utterly ridiculous. Every law of wickedness vanished away; the darkness of ignorance was dispersed; and tyrannical authority was destroyed, *God being manifested as a man, and man displaying power as God.

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians

    He, being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, *was God the Word,* the only-begotten Son, and remains the same for ever; for “of His kingdom there shall be no end,

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.iii.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians

    For they *alienate Christ from the Father*, and the law from Christ. They also calumniate His being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross; they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; *and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists*. Some of them say that *the Son is a mere man*, and that *the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person*, and that *the creation is the work of God, not by Christ*, but by some other strange power.

    Be on your guard, therefore, against such persons. And this will be the case with you if you are not puffed up, and continue in intimate union with *Jesus Christ our God*, and the bishop, and the enactments of the apostles.

    For indeed God and man are not the same. *He truly assumed a body; for “the Word was made flesh*, John i. 14. and lived upon earth without sin.

    Mary then did truly conceive a *body which had God inhabiting it*. And *God the Word* was truly born of the Virgin, having clothed Himself with a body of like passions with our own. *He who forms all men in the womb, was Himself really in the womb, and made for Himself a body of the seed of the Virgin*, but without any intercourse of man. He was carried in the womb, even as we are, for the usual period of time; and was really born, as we also are;
    and was in reality nourished with milk, and partook of common meat and drink, even as we do. And when He had lived among men for thirty years, He was baptized by John, really and not in appearance; and when He had preached the Gospel three years, and done signs and wonders, He who was Himself the Judge was judged by the Jews, falsely so called, and by Pilate the governor; was scourged, was smitten on the cheek, was spit upon; He wore a crown of thorns and a purple robe; He was condemned: He was crucified in reality, and not in appearance, not in imagination, not in deceit. He really died, and was buried, and rose from the dead,

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.iv.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans

    Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that willeth all things which are according to* the love of Jesus Christ our God*

    …who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, abundance of happiness unblameably, in* Jesus Christ our God*.

    the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who formed all things that are according to the faith and love of *Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour;*

    *For our God, Jesus Christ*, now that He is with [or in] the Father, is all the more revealed [in his glory]. Christianity is not a thing of silence only, but also of [manifest] greatness.

    Permit me to be an imitator of *the passion of Christ, my God*. If any one has Him within himself, let him consider what I desire, and let him have sympathy with me, as knowing how I am straitened.

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.v.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians

    Since, also, there is but *one unbegotten Being, God, even the Father*; and *one only-begotten Son, God, the Word and man*; and *one Comforter, the Spirit of truth*; and also one preaching, and one faith, and one baptism;

    If any one confesses *the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost*, and praises the creation, but calls the incarnation merely an appearance, and is ashamed of the passion, such an one has denied the faith, not less than the Jews who killed Christ. If any one confesses these things, and that *God the Word did dwell in a human body, being within it as the Word*, even as the soul also is i
    n the body, *because it was God that inhabited it, and not a human soul*, but affirms that unlawful unions are a good thing, and places the highest happiness in pleasure, as does the man who is falsely called a Nicolaitan, this person can neither be a lover of God, nor a lover of Christ, but is a corrupter of his own flesh, and therefore void of the Holy Spirit, and a stranger to Christ.

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.vi.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnæans

    *I GLORIFY God, even Jesus Christ*, who has given you such wisdom.

    *I give glory to Jesus Christ the God* who
    bestowed such wisdom upon you; for I have perceived
    that ye are established in faith immovable, being as
    it were nailed on the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ,

    being fully persuaded, in very truth, with respect to our Lord Jesus Christ, that He was the Son of God, “the first-born of every creature, *God the Word, the only-begotten Son*, and was of the seed of David according to the flesh, by the Virgin Mary; was baptized by John, that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him; that He lived a life of

    For a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have. And He says to Thomas, “Reach hither
    thy finger into the print of the nails, and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into My side; and immediately they believed that He was Christ. Wherefore *Thomas also says to Him, “My Lord, and my God*. And on this account also did they despise death, for it were too little to say, indignities and stripes.

    For what does it profit, if any one commends me, *but blasphemes my Lord, not owning Him to be God incarnate?* He that does not confess this, has in fact altogether denied Him, being enveloped in death. I have not, however, thought good to write the names of such persons, inasmuch as *they are unbelievers*; and far be it from me to make any mention of them, until they repent.

    Ye have done well in receiving Philo and Rheus Agathopus as *servants of Christ our God*, who have followed me for the sake of God, and who give thanks to the Lord in your behalf, because ye have in every way refreshed them.

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.vii.html

    The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp

    To Polycarp
    8:3 I bid you farewell always *in our God Jesus
    Christ*    , in whom abide ye in the unity and supervision
    of God. I salute Alce, a name very dear to me.

    Grace shall be with him for ever, and with Polycarp that sends him. I pray for your happiness *for ever in our God, Jesus Christ*, by whom continue ye in the unity and under the protection of God, I salute Alce, my dearly beloved.

    Look for Christ, the Son of God; who was before time, yet appeared in time; who was invisible by nature, yet visible in the flesh; who was impalpable, and could not be touched, as being without a body, but for our sakes became such, might be touched and handled in the body; *who was impassible as God, but became passible for our sakes as man; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes.*

    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.viii.html
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text….ts.html
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text….ot.html
    http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.ii.html

    Its quite obvious Ignatius was not a Henotheist, nor a Polytheist, nor a Unitarian. This man of God was a contemporary of John and Paul and quoted such as we have the Word now!

    How do you explain this t8?

    His view seems to align with Jesus and John and Paul and Thomas and Mattew and the Trinitarians.

    But it sure dosnt line up with yours!

    So goes the the fallacious claim that the Trinity was invented by Athanasius!

    :O :D


    The point is WJ,

    you quote this guy Ignatius and say that he was discipled by John and what he says is significant, and this same man calls you a servant of Satan because you say that Jesus is the Most High God, the very thing that he condemns in his teaching.

    Think about the implications here. His words condemn you, Isaiah, and CultB. He calls you guys Ministers of Satan
    NOTE: that I am not calling you this myself.

    Then he says that Jesus is God as you say. First thing you need to understand if you haven't thought of it already is that his writings needed to be translated and the translators put the capitals in. How do you know that it is not a qualitative view talking of Christ's nature. (Even scripture calls God's son and sons theos). After all if he is truly saying that Jesus is God Almighty, then by his own words he too is a minister of Satan.

    Ignatius said:
    I have learned that certain of the ministers of Satan have wished to disturb you, some of them asserting that Jesus was born [only] in appearance, was crucified in appearance, and died in appearance, others that He is not the Son the Creator, and others that He is Himself God over all. (To the Tarsians, II).

    So if Ignatius says that, then he couldn't be saying later that Jesus is the Most High God as you seem to think he is implying, when he says “Jesus is God” in his translated text.

    However if Ignatius actually said that ministers of Satan assert that Jesus is God over all and also said that Jesus is the Most High God/ YHWH as you are interpreting, then he was truly a double minded man.

    From all this I can only see 2 viable options.

    Ignatius uses the word 'theos' in the same way 'theos' in scripture is used for others who are not the true God and are sons, or he uses 'theos' as being the Most High God who is over all, and hence we would have a very confused man.

    What other option is there apart from tampering with the text or mistranslation?

    You should think seriously about this.

    Ignatius doesn't call me a Minister of Satan from what I can see because I believe that Jesus is a divine being and the son of God and not the God over all which lines up with what he teaches. I also hold that God is the Holy Spirit, that is what he is.

    But you indeed have a problem if Ignatius taught the truth. If you think he did, then you need to change and change quickly.

    Can you see that?

    July 17, 2007 at 12:07 pm#60312
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 17 2007,19:06)
    How do you explain this t8?

    His view seems to align with Jesus and John and Paul and Thomas and Mattew and the Trinitarians.

    But it sure dosnt line up with yours!

    So goes the the fallacious claim that the Trinity was invented by Athanasius!


    Hey WJ.

    It is good to see that you read Ignatius writings whom you promote. However you conveniently ignored that which condemned you and then focussed on that which you think condemns me.

    But what about taking the blinders off for a moment and you might see that I also believe that there is a Father, a son, and Spirit of God or Holy Spirit.

    Trinitarians are not unique in believing this. They are unique in the way that they say they are 3 person in one God substance and all 3 have been together for all eternity. In other words I think Trinitarians confuse nature with identity.

    Now it appears to me that Ignatius also believes that there is a Father, a son, and Spirit too. But he doesn't teach that all three make one Most High God.

    In fact of the son Ignatius says:

    And that He Himself is not God over all, and the Father, but His Son, He says, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. And again, “When all things shall be subjected unto Him, then shall He also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” Wherefore it is One [God] who put all things under, and who is all in all, and another [His Son] to whom they were subdued, who also Himself, along with all other things, becomes subject [to the former]. (To the Tarsians, V; cf. 1 Cor 15:24-28).

    and

    How could such a one be a mere man, receiving the beginning of His existence from Mary, and not rather God the Word, and the only-begotten Son? For “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” And in another place, “The Lord created Me, the beginning of His ways, for His ways, for His works. Before the world did He found Me, and before all the hills did He beget Me. (To the Tarsians, VI).

    That is hardly a trinity is it? Look at what he says about the son. i.e., “before all the hills did He beget Me”. He was created in the beginning and “The Lord created Me, the beginning of His ways, for His ways, for His works”. He even uses this to parallel John 1:1, so somehow I don't think that he is interpretting John 1:1 as you. For you would never parallel these scriptures together as the same thought.

    Think about it. He says that Jesus is begotten not only through Mary, but also before creation? Doesn't sound like the Trinity to me, (at least your version of it). And what's all this stuff about Jesus being subject to God if he is God?

    July 18, 2007 at 12:04 am#60383
    kejonn
    Participant

    Hey, Ignatius may turn out to be a good fella after all :p.

    July 18, 2007 at 12:50 am#60411
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    It wasn't just Ignatius who spoke like this, there were also many of the other pre-nicene writers too. These all sing the same tune that Jesus isn't the Most High God and that he was begotten as the son and even begotten as the Word before that. They say things like Jesus is second after God and was the first work of the Father.

    Clement (ca 85 A.D)
    How blessed and marvellous, beloved, are the gifts of God….The Creator and Father of all worlds ages, the Most Holy, alone knows their amount and their beauty. (35).

    Have we not one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? (46).

    Aristides (ca. 125 A.D)
    Now the Christians trace their origin from the Lord Jesus Christ. And He is acknowledged by the Holy Spirit to be the son of the Most High God, who came down from heaven for the salvation of men.(Apology 15).

    Justin Martyr (ca. 150 A.D)
    But both Him, and the Son, who came forth from Him, and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to him, and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and truth, and declaring without grudging to every one who wishes to learn, as we have been taught. (6)

    And that you will not succeed is declared by the Word, than whom, after God who begat him, we know there is no ruler more kingly and righteous. For as all shrink from succeeding to the poverty or sufferings or obscurity of their fathers, so whatever the Word forbids us to choose, the sensible man will not choose. That all these things should come to pass, I say, our Teacher foretold, he who is both Son and Apostle of God the Father of all and the Ruler, Jesus Christ, from whom also we have the name of Christians. (12).

    Our Teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judaea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar, and that we reasonably worship him, having learned that he is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third, we will prove. (13).

    And when we say also that the Word, who is the firstborn of God, was brought forth without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven… (21).

    Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being His Word and first-begotten. (23).

    For what is called by the Divine Spirit through the prophet “his robe,” are those men who believe in him in whom abides

    We believe in a crucified man, that he is the firstbegotten of the unbegotten God, and himself will pass judgment on the whole human race, unless we had found testimonies concerning him heralded before he came and was born as man. (53).

    Tatian (165 A.D)
    God was in the beginning, but the beginning, we have been taught, is the power of the Word. For the Lord of the universe, who is Himself the necessary basis of all being, inasmuch as no creature was yet in existence, was alone, but inasmuch as He was all powerful, Himself the necessary ground of things visible and invisible, with Him were all things; with Him, by Word-power, the Word himself also, who was in Him, subsists. And by His simple will the Word sprang forth, and the Word, not coming forth in vain, became the firstbegotten work of the Father . Him [the Word] we know to be the Beginning of the world (cf. Rev. 3:14). But He came into being by participation, not by cutting off, for what is cut off is separated from the original substance, but that which comes by participation, making its choice of function, does not render him deficient from whom it is taken. For just as from one torch many fires are lighted, but the light of the first torch is not lessened by the kindling of many torches, so the Word, coming forth from the Word-Power of the Father, has not divested of the Word-Power Him who begat Him.

    Athenagoras (ca. 175 A.D)
    And, the Son being in the Father and the Father in the Son, in oneness and power of Spirit, the knowledge and Word of the Father is the Son of God. But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [nous], had the Logos in Himself,

    Theophilus of Antioch (ca. 175 A.D)
    God made all things out of nothing, for nothing was coexisting with God, but He being His own place, and wanting nothing, and existing before the ages, willed to make man by whom He might be known, for him, therefore, He prepared the world. For he that is created is also needy, but He that is uncreated stands in need of nothing. God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bosom, begat him, emitting him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by him He made all things. He [the Word] is called “the Beginning” [arche],1 because he rules, and is Lord of all things fashioned by him. He, then, being Spirit of God, and arche, and wisdom, and Power of The Highest, came down upon the prophets, and through them spoke of the creation of the world and of all other things. For the prophets were not when the world came into existence, but the wisdom of God which was in him, and His holy Word which was always present with him. Wherein he speaks thus by the prophet Solomon: “When He prepared the heavens I was there, and when He appointed the foundations of the earth I was by Him as one brought up with Him.”

    Irenaeus (ca. 185 A.D)
    It is proper, then, that I should begin with the first and most important rule, that is, God the Creator, who made the heaven and the earth, and all things that are in it, whom these men blasphemously style the fruit of a defect, and to demonstrate that there is nothing either above Him or after Him, nor that, influenced by any one, but of His own free will, He created all things, since He is the Only God, the Only Lord, the Only Creator, the Only Father, Alone containing all things, and Himself commanding all things into existence. (Book II, 1).

    Beyond the primary Father, therefore, that is, the God who is over all… (Book II, 8).

    These [Apostles] have all declared to us that there is One God, Creator of heaven and earth, announced by the law and the prophets and one Christ the Son of God. If any one do not acknowledge these truths, he despises the companions of the Lord, and more, he despises Christ himself the Lord, and he even despises also the Father, and stands self-condemned, resisting and opposing his own salvation, as is the case with all heretics. (Book III, 1).

    that He was the Maker of all things, that He was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that He was the God of glory. Those who desire so may learn from the very words and Acts of the Apostles, and may contemplate the fact that this God is One, above whom is no other. But even if there were another god above Him, we should say, upon a comparison of the quantity, that the latter is superior to the former. For by deeds the better man appears, as I have already remarked; and, inasmuch as these men have no works of their father to adduce, the latter is shown to be God Alone.

    Clement of Alexandria (ca. 200)
    The nature of the Son, which is nearest to Him who is alone the Almighty One, is the most perfect, and most holy, and most powerful, and most noble, and most kingly, and most esteemed. This is the highest excellence, which orders all things in accordance with the Father's will. (Stromata, Book VII, 2).

    Those, then, who choose to belong to him, are those who are perfected through fa
    ith. He, the Son, is, by the will of the Almighty Father, the cause of all good things….being, then, the Father's power (Stromata, Book VII, 2).

    The Son is the power of God, as being the Father's most ancient Word before the making of all things. (Stromata, Book VII, 2).

    Now the energy of the Lord has a relationship to the Almighty, and the Son is, so to speak, an energy of the Father. (Stromata, Book VII, 2).

    The One Only Almighty, Good God from eternity to eternity saving by His Son. (Stromata, Book VII, 2).

    He is the true only-begotten, the express image of the glory of the Universal King and Almighty Father…. [the only-begotten] the Second Cause. (Stromata, Book VII, 3; Clement shortly after refers to the Father as the “First Cause”).

    July 18, 2007 at 4:01 am#60453
    OneLadyBand
    Participant

    Quote:
    Hi Is 1:18
    According to your post he is either God or a false God… what happened to Son of God??
    Hugs
    Phoenix

    Mary>>
    I agree.
    The idea that if Jesus is not Almighty God then he must be a “false god” is terribly misleading and ignorant of what the scriptures teach regarding the truly broad usage of the word “god”.

    According to Vine's, the term “god” simply means a person of authority, and can mean Almighy God, but is NOT EXCLUSIVE to that meaning, but takes in other persons of God-given authority, such as angels and even men (Psalm 82:1,6, quoted in Jn 10:34,35). They were “gods in their capacity as representatives of YHWH.
    In a similar way, Moses was told that he was to serve as “God” to Aaron and to Pharaoh.–
    Exodus 4:16 NASB
    16″Moreover, he shall speak for you to the people; and he will be as a mouth for you and you will be as God to him.

    Exodus 7 ASV
    1 And Jehovah said unto Moses, See, I have made thee as God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

    Also, nothing happened to the Son OF God, in my estimation. He is STILL the SON, and always will be.
    SONS are NEVER as old as their fathers, simply because their fathers begat them.
    This is why Jesus is called God's SON–he came into exisence AFTER the one whom HE ADDRESSES AS “MY GOD.”
    This, too, is why HE addresses God as “MY FATHER”: Fathers come before Sons and are ALWAYS older than they, and sons COME FROM fathers.

    Trinitarians call Jesus “God the Son,” and yet this phrase does not appear anywhere in scripture, nor does the concept that he is in any way EQUAL TO the one whom HE ADDRESSES AS “MY GOD.” (John 20:17)

    In Jn 20:17, the exalted, resurrected Jesus made it very plain to the woman that HE worshiped the SAME GOD that SHE worshiped.

    Are WE equal to those whom WE address as “MY GOD?” (John 20:17; Revelation 3:12;Heb 1:9).
    Neither is Jesus.

    Revelation 3:12 and Heb 1:9 were both written AFTER Jesus' death and exaltation to heaven, and yet, even now, Jesus STILL speaks of HIS FATHER as “MY GOD,” showing strongly his INEQUALITY to HIS GOD.
    Trintarians worship Jesus as if he were EQUAL TO HIS GOD.
    If he were, he would not address him as “MY GOD”.

    I still want to know HOW a person can worship a God who exists in three separate, distinct PERSONS who are all EQUAL, and still CLAIM to worship “one” God. That is a very awkward situation, since the Bible tells us that Almighty God is “one” (echad–one, a number).

    : )

    July 18, 2007 at 4:04 am#60454
    OneLadyBand
    Participant

    2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4:4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

    Haha, what's funny about this post is quoting 2 Timothy 4:3-4. The Trinity doctrine was written well after Paul wrote these words. Makes ya think, doesn't it?
    Physician, heal thyself.

    Mary>>>Heartily agreed! LOL

    : )

    July 18, 2007 at 5:14 am#60467
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    kejonn. The Holy Spirit may  represent the other Persons of the Godhead but He does not cease to be God as you seem to think. Does your lawyer cease to be himself when he represents you? You reason like a JW. Have you been a JW?        

    http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%2….m

    1. The Spirit Himself (Romans 8:16; 8:26)
    2. The Spirit of God (Romans 8:9; 8:14)
    3. The Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9)

    Isa 42:20  Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not.
    :O

    July 18, 2007 at 5:16 am#60469
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    What is a GODHEAD?

    July 18, 2007 at 5:21 am#60471
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    From the Jehovah's Witnesses sect's own Bible.

    NWT II Cor 3:17
    Now Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.

    JEHOVAH The Holy Spirit

    Compare
    Jer 31:33  But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD(JEHOVAH) I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
    Jer 31:34  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD (JEHOVAH): for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD (JEHOVAH)  : for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

    With
    Heb 10:15  Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
    Heb 10:16  This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
    Heb 10:17  And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

    Mat 13:15  For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

    :O

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 20 posts - 661 through 680 (of 945 total)
123…333435…464748
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

 

CREATE NEW TOPIC
POPULAR TOPICS
ACTIVE TOPICS
SITE SEARCH
SUPPORT US
REGISTER

Recent Replies

ALL REPLIES →

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
 Log in with Facebook
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

 Log in with Facebook
or

Create Account