The Trinity Doctrine

Participant

To t8,

Just a quick question:

Where is it in the Bible that says ‘God can not even look upon sin’?

To the Globster,

Thx dude for the reply to my other question regarding the ‘man’ Jesus:) mucho appreciano!

August 21, 2003 at 8:35 pm#15476

Participant

GJG, I tried to find that verse but I couldn’t, maybe T8 can help you on that one.

However I did find another verse which clearly indicates that Jesus has existed eternally:

Micah 5:2-3

But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity. Therefore, He will give them up until the time When she who is in labor has borne a child.

This seems to be conclusive that Jesus has existed eternally and therefore must be of one substance with the Father.

Be Well.

August 22, 2003 at 1:55 am#15464

Participant

Habakkuk 1:13
Your eyes are too pure to look on evil; you cannot tolerate wrong…

So I should have said that God cannot look upon evil.

Mark 15:34
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?”–which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”[ 15:34 Psalm 22:1]

It has been said by some that God who cannot look upon evil had to turn away when Jesus took the sin of the world upon himself. I think this is correct, although there is much more to this verse than appears on the surface. But that is a different subject.

TO GJG,

Your quotes are in gray

Hi all,

So do we all maybe agree that the 'man' Jesus was born as a man: conception, development, birth, death…etc?

The vessel was made of created substance?

Yes I agree that Jesus was born a Man and walked this earth as a man. But I am not sure what you mean by “the Man Jesus was born as a man”. Surely he was born a man, which made him a man? Don't want to be picky, but I need to clarify this in case I am opening myself up to something I will regret later.

To Global

However as I mentioned before, since the word “God” is a class of being and not a name it would be better to interpret it as –

Your reasoning rests on the precepts of the Trinity doctrine itself. You need to believe this in order to make your argument work. Why can't we use scripture to prove it, then build from there? Paul says that there is one God, the Father and one Lord the Lord Jesus Christ.

Again I think it is better to read the scriptures and build a picture from that, than start with a picture and place each scripture into that picture.

Using scripture I have found that Jesus is the Image of God and we are the Image of Christ. That is good enough for me. I know that I am not Christ in the same way that Jesus is not God.

I would like to respond to your other points in another post. Your advice on discovering what the Logos means seems good to me.

August 22, 2003 at 6:20 am#15516

Participant

To Global,

Your quotes are in gray.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God the Father, and the Word was God the Father. He was in the beginning with God the Father.”

I agree with your deduction. This is what I am saying. I believe that God became a Father when he begat a Son. The Father is the Most High God.

However as I mentioned before, since the word “God” is a class of being and not a name it would be better to interpret it as

I do not agree that God is a class of Being. God is one person, not one class. Man is a class of being and there are many of us. I don't think we can compare Man with God in the numerical or classification sense.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (proper name of the Father), and the Word was God (lesser class of being).”

The Word God and Logos is preceeded with an article “The, (Ton)”. Therefore it is talking about a specific person. Except the part that says “the Word was GOD”. There is no article preceeding the word GOD and according to what I have read from Hebrew (Jews) no article means an adjective. Anyway even if it says the Word was God (literally God), that still backs up the fact that Jesus is not God. WAS means not now, rather in the past and I am saying that Jesus came from God, God is his source.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (equal class of being God), and the Word was God (equal class of being God).”

Doesn't this contradict the trinity doctrine though? The Word WAS God is different to the Trinity view that the Word IS God.

Revelation 22:13
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Now lets read Revelation 22:13 in the light of Revelation 3:14
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

What gives you the impression that this verse is talking about Christ?

So the expression, “In the beginning was the Word,” shows His Eternity, so “was in the beginning with God,” has declared to us His Co-eternity.

The same word in the beginning is mentioned in the following verse:
1 John 3:8
He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work.

The word beginning doesn't point to eternity past, rather a fixed point. All beginnings have a start. Thats what beginning means. I think the beginning that is being referred to is before the creation of the universe. The verse you quoted also shows this. SETUP FROM ETERNITY, before the earth was made.

Proverbs 8:23
I was set up from eternity, and of old before the earth was made.

It just shows that Jesus prexisted before the universe. It in no way shows that Jesus is God and that he existed with God for all eternity. Jesus was given life by the Father and Jesus can give that life to whomever. Remember that we who are saved have eternal life. But we haven't existed with God for all eternity. We had a beginning, a start. A son is a son for a reason and a Father is a Father for a reason.

John 5:26
For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

God is the source and God of Jesus. Jesus is not God himself as the following verse shows.

1 Corinthians 15:27
For he “has put everything under his feet.”[ 15:27 Psalm 8:6] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.

August 22, 2003 at 8:42 am#15493

Participant

Quote

Quote: from global on 3:35 pm on Aug. 21, 2003
GJG, I tried to find that verse but I couldn’t, maybe T8 can help you on that one.

However I did find another verse which clearly indicates that Jesus has existed eternally:

Micah 5:2-3

This seems to be conclusive that Jesus has existed eternally and therefore must be of one substance with the Father.

Be Well.

To Global,

Thx for lookin anyway:)

Eternal substance of Jesus:

Indeed the Divine nature of Jesus is eternal. The very same substance that is the eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, Spirit; God! ONE SUBSTANCE!

Just a quick question:

There seems to be much evidence of the Holy Ghost(Holy Spirit, Spirit of God) being the very same substance that is the above mentioned Spirit; God. ===== What is your view regarding this reasoning?

Looking 4ward to ur reply dude:)

August 22, 2003 at 9:17 am#15551

Participant

To t8,

Regarding the eyes of God:

I think we both agree that God is the invisible, eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, spirit. Therefore God cannot have eyes as such, due to Him being the Spirit being, without any physical form. Because He is omnipresent, God must surely be EVERYWHERE.

So I sorta believe that God looks at ALL things at all times. I think even Satan went before God to discuss Job.

Consider the following:

Prov 15:3
3 The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.
KJV

Amos 9:8
8 Behold, the eyes of the Lord GOD are upon the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from off the face of the earth; saving that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith the LORD.
KJV

If I have mistaken the meaning of your previous post, than I apologize. Feel free to correct me if this is the case.:)

Regarding the ‘man’ Jesus:

I was kinda asking whether Jesus dual-nature (humanity clothed in Divinity), is something we agree on or not. Specificaly the part where Jesus was born fully man; concieved, developed, born, lived a mortal life, died. So that the One Spirit that is God is the same substance that indwelled Jesus; perfect man-very God?

Look 4ward 2 ur reply:)

August 22, 2003 at 12:16 pm#15530

Participant

To GJG,

Regarding the eyes of God: I never said anything about the eyes of God, the scriptures do. I am not saying God has eyes. I quoted a scripture, up to you how you interpret it. I don’t think God has eyes either, but I also do not think he is blind.

Also regarding the God/Man Oneness doctrine. First of all, a man is a soul and a living man on earth is a soul housed in a body with a spirit inside the soul. Now you correctly point out that Christ has a body and a spirit. But you completely ignore the soul. The soul is who men really are. We are not our body.

If Christ is God’s Spirit clothed in flesh, then he is not a man like us. We are body soul and spirit. Your belief ignores Jesus as a person and makes Christ into a God and Flesh union.

August 22, 2003 at 8:11 pm#15587

Participant

Hi T8,

It is natural that you try to defend your position, but I think if you look again at what you have written in your last post you will agree that it is obviously wrong.

You said –

“I do not agree that God is a class of Being. God is one person, not one class. Man is a class of being and there are many of us. I don’t think we can compare Man with God in the numerical or classification sense.”

Everything must BE something. Everything that exists falls into some category or class. A class can have many members or just one member. For example the Universe is a class which has just one member (although it has been postulated that there could be more than one universe).

Humans fall into a class with many members. Some polytheistic religions e.g Hinduism believe that God is a class which has many members.

You and I believe that God is a class which has just one member, but it is undeniable that God is a class of being. It is undeniable that God is not a proper name, God’s name is Jehovah (or Yahveh).

Therefore when you say –

“Your reasoning ( that God is a class of being) rests on the precepts of the Trinity doctrine itself. You need to believe this in order to make your argument work.”

Is obviously incorrect, that God is a class of being does not depend on the precept of the Trinity nor on your precept or any other precept it is simply a fact.

You said –

“The Word God and Logos is preceeded with an article "The, (Ton)". Therefore it is talking about a specific person. Except the part that says "the Word was GOD". There is no article preceeding the word GOD and according to what I have read from Hebrew (Jews) no article means an adjective.”

This comment shows your complete misunderstanding of grammar. The word "God" or "man" is always a noun. The word deity in Col 2:9 is a noun in the Greek: "in Him all the fullness of Deity [noun] dwells in bodily form". Deity describes not an action but a state of being God vs. man. These are all concepts within the function of a noun. The word "Theos" is used in John 1:1 to describe "God" as a class of being, just as "man" is used in Gen 5:2 to describe is a class of being.

I think I have previously posted enough evidence from world renowned experts on this verse to show that there is absolutely no justification to assume any change in meaning to the word “theos” based on whether the article is present or not, but in any case what difference would it make?

Jehovah is called ‘a God". In Ge 16:13; Dt 32:4; 1 Sa 2:3; 1 Sa 17:46; 1 Ch 17:24; Ne 9:17; Ps 5:4; Ps 7:11; Ps 68:20; Ps 86:15; Ps 89:7; Is 30:18; Is 45:15; Je 23:23; Je 51:56; Da 2:28; Mic 7:18; Luke 20:38; 1 Cor 14:33.

Jesus is called "THE GOD" (ie: theos with the definite article just as in the expression "and the word was with THE GOD" in John 1:1) in the following passages: John 20:28; Tit 2:13; 2 Pe 1:1; 1 John 5:20.

In John 3:2; 13:3; Rom 1:21; 1 Thess 1:9; Heb 9:14; 1 Pe 4:11, "theos" is found twice, once with the definite article and once without yet no-one ever suggests that it should be translated differently in these verses.

If John wanted to convey that Jesus had divine qualities, he would have used the adjective for "divine" [theios] as in Acts 17:29 and 2 Pe 1:3. Instead, John used the word for God, "theos".

The fact is that the Trinitarian translation is the only consistent and correct treatment of Jn. 1.1.

Any other treatment is simply wrong.

You said –

“Doesn’t this contradict the trinity doctrine though? The Word WAS God is different to the Trinity view that the Word IS God.”

This is just desperate, John is describing the Word before the incarnation so the whole passage is written in the past tense. If we accepted this as a valid argument we would have apply it to your interpretation aswell, i.e that Jesus no longer has the “nature” of God now because Jn. 1.1 is written in the past tense, so what would Jesus be for you then if he isn’t God and doesn’t have the divine nature?

You said –

“Revelation 22:13
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Now lets read Revelation 22:13 in the light of Revelation 3:14
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God”

This argument is also self defeating. If God the Father is also called “the beginning and the end” then clearly the words “the beginning” must mean something other than “the first thing created”.

Actually in each of these cases, the Greek word used is arché, a word listed in Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words as having such varied meanings as “beginning”, “power”, “magistrate”, and “ruler”. It is the root of our words “archbishop” and “architect”, and other words referring to someone who is chief over others.

Hence, the New International Version says at Rev 3.14 that Christ is “the Ruler of God’s creation.”

Youngs Literal Version says –

Revelation 3:14
‘And to the messenger of the assembly of the Laodiceans write: These things saith the Amen, the witness — the faithful and true — the chief of the creation of God;

So there is no basis for claiming that Rev 3.14 makes Jesus a created being.

You said –

Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

What gives you the impression that this verse is talking about Christ?

No, I know it is talking about the Father, I used it as an example that the phrase “from……..to” doesn’t actually mean from and to as actual moments in time, in the same way the phrase “in the beginning” doesn’t mean an actual moment in time either.

You said –

“The word beginning doesn’t point to eternity past, rather a fixed point. All beginnings have a start. Thats what beginning means.”

Then why is God the Father called “the beginning”?

You said –

“Proverbs 8:23
I was set up from eternity, and of old before the earth was made.

It just shows that Jesus prexisted before the universe.”

And does –

Micah 5:2-3
…..His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.

just show pre-existence aswell? You see, I read it and see the word “eternity” not “created before the universe”.

You said –

“God is the source and God of Jesus. Jesus is not God himself as the following verse shows.

1 Corinthians 15:27
For he "has put everything under his feet."[ 15:27 Psalm 8:6] Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. “

This verse shows Jesus is not the Father, not that Jesus isn’t God.

I look forward to your other answers

Be Well.

(Edited by global at 6:06 pm on Aug. 22, 2003)

(Edited by global at 6:16 pm on Aug. 22, 2003)

August 22, 2003 at 8:50 pm#15568

Participant

Hi GJG,

You said –

“To Global,

Eternal substance of Jesus:

Indeed the Divine nature of Jesus is eternal. The very same substance that is the eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, Spirit; God! ONE SUBSTANCE!

Just a quick question:

There seems to be much evidence of the Holy Ghost(Holy Spirit, Spirit of God) being the very same substance that is the above mentioned Spirit; God. ===== What is your view regarding this reasoning?

Looking 4ward to ur reply dude “

Yes, I very much agree that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all the same substance.

In the case of human beings our “substance” is only capable of expression in one person, but for God his substance is capable of expression in three persons.

We should understand these as being real distinct persons, not just different modes of expression which God adopts like masks at different times.

I say this because the Bible clearly shows that all three have their own personality, and talk of each other and to each other as distinct persons, yet each one is also shown to be individually divine, so for me the Trinity is the inevitable conclusion.

The person of Christ however is not only of one substance with the other two persons of the Trinity, but also of one substance with man, so he is the mediator between God and man. He is perfectly God and yet perfectly man, two substances in one person.

This is taught in

Colossians 2:9
For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

And yet we have seen before that all the fullness of humanity was in him aswell. This is the mystery of the Incarnation.

Regarding the Holy Spirit he is obviously much more than an impersonal force or God’s power etc for example –

He can be sad Eph 4.30
He speaks Acts 13.2
Lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God Acts. 5.4
He teaches Luke 12.12
He teaches what he hears Jn 16.13
He reminds the Apostles what Jesus said Jn 14.26

He also possesses divine characteristics –

He is omniscient and reveals secrets known only to God I Cor 2.10
He distributes charismata I Cor 12.11
He gives salvation II Cor 3.9
The work of justification and sanctification are attributed to him, I Cor 6.11, Rom 15.16, while in other passages the same works are attributed to Christ, I Cor 1.2, Gal 2.17

Be Well

(Edited by global at 5:05 pm on Aug. 22, 2003)

August 22, 2003 at 11:03 pm#15365

Participant

<a name="part9">BIBLICAL ARGUMENTS PART IX</a>

Matthew 28:19
"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

That "the Father" and "the Son" are distinct Persons follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the other by the conjunctions "and . . . and" is evidence that we have here a Third Person co-ordinate with the Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures.

The phrase "in the name" (eis to onoma) affirms alike the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature.

Among the Jews and in the Apostolic Church the Divine name was representative of God. It is incredible that the phrase "in the name" should be here employed, were not all the Persons mentioned equally Divine.

Moreover, the use of the singular, "name," and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed.

Another consideration may here be added. Baptism, with its formal renunciation of Satan and his works, was understood to be the rejection of the idolatry of paganism and the solemn consecration of the baptised to the one true God (Tert., "De spect.", iv; Justin, "Apol.", I, iv).

The act of consecration was the invocation over them of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The supposition that they regarded the Second and Third Persons as created beings, and were in fact consecrating themselves to the service of creatures, is manifestly absurd.

The doxology

In regard to Christ, the Apostles employ modes of speech which, to men brought up in the Hebrew faith, necessarily signified belief in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use of the Doxology in reference to Him. The Doxology, "To Him be glory for ever and ever" (cf. I Chronicles 16:38; 29:11; Psalm 103:31; 28:2), is an expression of praise offered to God alone.

In the New Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father, but to Jesus Christ (II Timothy 4:18; II Peter 3:18; Revelations 1:6; Hebrews 13:20-21), and to God the Father and Christ in conjunction (Revelations 5:13, 7:10).

In certain texts the coordination of Father, Son, and Spirit leaves no possible doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Thus in II Corinthians 13:13, St. Paul writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all."

Here the construction shows that the Apostle is speaking of three distinct Persons. Moreover, since the names God and Holy Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ is also regarded as a Divine Person.

It is evident that, were the Spirit not a Person, Christ could not have spoken of His presence with the Apostles as comparable to His own presence with them (14:16). Again, were He not a Divine Person it could not have been expedient for the Apostles that Christ should leave them, and the Paraclete take His place (16:7).

Moreover, notwithstanding the neuter form of the word (pneuma), the pronoun used in His regard is the masculine ekeinos.

More soon.

Be Well.

August 23, 2003 at 5:26 am#15404

Participant

To Global,

The word class is classification and we use it to group together likeness within created things. e.g Man is in the same class as Ape or in school we are in the same class as people our own age in School. But to say that the bible teaches that God is a classification is incorrect. God is above our classification policies. God is a person, an eternal Spirit whom we could not even guess, except by direct revelation by God himself either directly or via scripture or testimony. It is Man that classifies created things, but man should never classify God. God cannot not be figured out by man, we can only know him when the Spirit of God reveals him. So it is God who reveals himself, not man who reveals or classifies God. God is a person and he has no equal. He is the supreme being. It's simple, he has told us these things in scripture.

As far as Deity goes, we can choose the divine nature or our human nature. What nature we choose determines our destiny. How can human nature exist forever. Only if we choose the divine nature will we have eternal life. Now if I share in this divinity, does that make me “The Divine”. To be “divine” and to be “The Divine” is two different things. One gives the other receives. I have already demonstrated that Christ has the fullness of the deity within him, just as we (children of God) have the fullness of Christ within us and we know that we are not Christ. Your belief in the Trinity blinds you from seeing that we are the image of Christ and Christ is the image of God. The carnal mind cannot understand spiritual things. In some ways I feel that a carnal mind doesn't even deserve to know such things, but for the sake of the readers I will defend the truth of scripture, lest they be led astray by mens creeds and ideas.

Your comment “This comment shows your complete misunderstanding of grammar”, is wrong because I never said it was my interpretation. I gave at least 2 interpretations in my last post and more in my Trinity Writing. I said that Jewish people I have spoke to say that a word not proceeded by an article can mean an adjective. Like the difference that I spoke about in this Post, between “The Divine” and “divine”. I mean people use the word divine to explain anything that is good e.g that food is divine, but they are not saying that the thing is God himself. They are using it as an adjective, to say it is amazing or very good. I never said it was a fact, I said it is a possibility and still a good possibility at that. Of all the different possibilities none can be used to say that Jesus is God now. This is my point. John 1:1 doesn't teach a Trinity.

Also, Satan is called Theos and that instance of 'theos' is preceded by an article too. We are gods and so are idols. Depends on what kind of God you mean doesn't it? The Father is the Most High God. Jesus is not the Most High God. He is the Son of the Most High God. Again this is very simple to understand.

You know the scriptures say that God is the Most High and he is the source of all good things. Even Jesus says that he depends on God and that God is greater than himself. He teaches us that he came from God, and we also read in scripture that he is the only begotten. He is The Son of God. This truth is the foundation to Christ's Church. But this foundation is not enough for you. You need to add to that foundation that Jesus is God. This is not my problem. I wouldn't dare rebuild that foundation. I am only interested in building on the true foundation. I do not want to change the foundation itself. I also do not want to ignore the scriptures that show that God is greater than Jesus himself. I will not sacrifice truth for a man made doctrine.

Your quote: “The fact is that the Trinitarian translation is the only consistent and correct treatment of Jn. 1.1.” is indeed laughable. You haven't even got close to proving this. This shows me the kind of reasoning that Trinity people resort to. Brainwashing is powerful enough to make people ignore the obvious. e.g Those who believe evolution cannot see that God is obvious and you can argue with them till the cows come home too. The Trinity Doctrine is similar to the Theory of Evolution. People will defend it vigorously, even though it is completely contrary to the obvious truth.

I think you believe that all who have the nature of God are God. This is true because we who belong to God have the nature of God and we are gods (theos) too. But this has absolutely nothing to do with a Trinity and never will. Are we The God because we are gods?

Your quote: “So there is no basis for claiming that Rev 3.14 makes Jesus a created being”.
I do not say that Jesus is a created being. I claim that he is between God and creation. The only Mediator, the firstborn, not first created. He came from God and was sent by God into this world. Again he is called the Son of God for a reason.

Your quote: Christ is the Ruler of God’s creation.
This is talking about 2 people. God and Christ. God created all things through Christ and for him. This is simple to understand.

Your arguments about beginning doesn't prove anything. God is eternal, he doesn't have a beginning? He is the first. Jesus existed before creation so he is the beginning in the sense that God created all creation through him.

Your quote: This verse shows Jesus is not the Father, not that Jesus isn’t God.
1 Corinthians 15:27
For he “has put everything under his feet.”[ 15:27 Psalm 8:6] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
Correct and incorrect. The Father is God, this verse shows that clearly. This is the distinction and clarity that I am trying to show you. If you ignore this verse, then how can you ever understand who Christ is. This verse is about as clear and direct as you can get. Remember that Jesus said if someone rose from the dead, they still wouldn't believe because of the hardness of their hearts. Proof is not enough to a person who doesn't want to know.

Global, can you disprove that Jesus is the image of God and we are the image of Christ?

August 23, 2003 at 7:15 am#15643

Participant

Quote

Quote: from t8 on 7:16 am on Aug. 22, 2003
To GJG,

If Christ is God’s Spirit clothed in flesh, then he is not a man like us. We are body soul and spirit. Your belief ignores Jesus as a person and makes Christ into a God and Flesh union.

To t8,

soz bout the eyes thing.

I agree when you say that Jesus was fully human (soul ‘n’ all). I believe Jesus also had the Spirit of God aswell. Kinda like born-again Spirit filled believers.

August 23, 2003 at 7:36 am#15329

Participant

To the Globster,

Thx 4 that reply,

Regarding the One substance:

Could it be that this One invisible, eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, spirit, known as God, is also the very same substance that is known as the Holy Ghost. The same Holy Ghost that Jesus also claims to be (His Divine nature). Maybe?

August 23, 2003 at 9:38 am#15607

Participant

To all,

Who does the ‘works’ (miracles), Jesus or God?

August 23, 2003 at 9:55 am#15628

Participant

To t8,

Do you agree that Jesus refers to Himself being the Holy Ghost?

August 23, 2003 at 10:06 am#15569

Participant

To Global,

Who abides in, or makes their abode with born-again Spirit filled believers? The Father, Son, or Holy Ghost?

August 24, 2003 at 1:39 am#15593

Participant

To GJG,

Your quotes are in gray

Who does the 'works' (miracles), Jesus or God?

Jesus said that he only speaks what his Father says and does what his Father does. So I can only assume that God does all good things. However God was in Christ drawing all men to himself. So God the Father used his Son to do all the miracles etc. If I do a miracle is it me or God?

To t8, Do you agree that Jesus refers to Himself being the Holy Ghost?

No.

Who abides in, or makes their abode with born-again Spirit filled believers? The Father, Son, or Holy Ghost?

I believe that it is the Spirit of God. But we must remember that Jesus is the Mediator between God and Men and the only way to God. So the Spirit comes from God, but through Christ. In this we can see that we can refer to the Spirit as the Spirit of Christ as well. The Father and the Son are one in Spirit and we can also partake of the Spirit of God and be one with them.

Even though we can be one. I am still me and Jesus is still the Son of God and God will always be God. He has no equal.

August 24, 2003 at 1:40 am#15533

Participant

To Global and other Trinitarians.

The idea that Jesus Christ is God is supported by John 1:1 according to many people. However the rest of the Gospel makes carfeful distinctions between Jesus and his Father as well as Jesus and God. This same careful distinction and separation is found throughout the rest of the New Testament too.

However the New Testament actually goes much further than merely distinguishing and separating the two.

In John 17:3 Jesus, in prayer to his Father, refers to him as “the only true God”. In John 20:17 the resurrected Jesus refers to his Father as ” my Father, and your Father; and… my God, and your God.” In I Corinthians 8:6 the Apostle Paul says of Christians, ” to us there is but one God, the Father.” In I Timothy 2:5 Paul states, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In Ephesians 1:17 Paul refers to the Father as ” the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory.” And in Revelation 3:12 the resurrected and glorified Jesus says, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.”

Back to John's Gospel we read the reason for his gospel. In John's own words he says in John 20:30-31.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. “

So John wrote this gospel so that we may come to the conclusion that Jesus is truly the Christ and the Son of God. In addition to this important truth we are also told that we may receive life through his name.

The Trinity doctrine is not the conclusion that one should draw from this writing. Belief that Jesus is the Christ and the Son is the foundation of true faith and Jesus built his Church on this truth. This is what I believe and declare to you. Jesus is the Son of the Living God and the Messiah.

Global can you prove that I am not a true believer because I do not believe in the Trinity Doctrine?

Now if we take John 1:1-2 and put the word Trinity where the word God is we get the following:

John 1:1-2
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with THE TRINITY, and the Word was THE TRINITY.
2 He was with THE TRINITY in the beginning.

The first thing we see is that the word “God” cannot mean the Trinity because if it did, then the Word was the Trinity (that makes Jesus the whole Trinity) and he was with the Trinity in the beginning (that makes 4).

This is not only complete nonsense but it actually contradicts the Trinity doctrine itself.

August 24, 2003 at 3:31 pm#15552

Participant

Quote

Quote: from t8 on 8:39 pm on Aug. 23, 2003
To GJG,

Your quotes are in gray

Who does the ‘works’ (miracles), Jesus or God?</a>

To t8, Do you agree that Jesus refers to Himself being the Holy Ghost?

No.

Who abides in, or makes their abode with born-again Spirit filled believers? The Father, Son, or Holy Ghost?

Even though we can be one. I am still me and Jesus is still the Son of God and God will always be God. He has no equal.

John 14

14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.
5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?
6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
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.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.
25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.
KJV

To t8,

I believe within this chapter alone, there is some evidence of Jesus making reference to Himself (His Divinity) being the Holy Ghost (Spirit of God). Obviously there is already much scriptural evidence pointing to Jesus (Divinity within) being the Spirit of God, as well as the Holy Ghost being that very same Spirit.

The opening sentence begins with Jesus giving the listeners the general idea of what this teaching will be; Jesus (Divinity within) is the Father, which is also the very same Holy Ghost (Spirit of God). He (Divinity within) and His Father are one and the same.

Jesus explains that by looking at Him, one is also looking at the Father, lining up with Jesus being the ‘image of the invisible God’. Jesus makes it clear that He is in the omnipresent Spirit God, while at the same time this very same substance that is God, is also dwelling within Him (Divinity clothed in humanity). Jesus stamps authority on this point when He says that the words He speaks are the same as His Fathers.

Jesus tells them that the Father dwelling in Him does the miracles, and then also tells them that it is He Himself who does the miracles. This point is also strengthened when Jesus says that after He is glorified, He will do whatever is asked in His name. Whatever Christians ask in His name, He will do.

The spirit of truth that ‘the world cannot receive’ and ‘neither knoweth him’ shows a remarkable similarity to the ‘Word’ in chapter one. Jesus tells them that the spirit of truth (Comforter) dwells ‘with’ them, and will later on, be ‘in’ them. The ‘truth’ we know as being the very same person that dwells with the listeners: Jesus; “I am the truth…”. This point is also strengthened when Jesus says that He will not leave them comfortless: “I will come to you”. This Comforter is of course the Holy Ghost.

Interestingly enough, in this chapter Jesus says that the Father will send the Comforter, yet in the following two chapters Jesus tells them that He Himself will send the Comforter. This again lines up with the scripture: “I and my Father are one”

So here we find: that Spirit which dwelleth in Jesus, is the very same Spirit that indwells believers as the Holy Ghost. The evidence in this one chapter, is compelling enough for one to understand that Jesus indeed claims to be the very same substance that is God, the same substance that also indwells believers.

Lookin 4ward 2 ur reply.

August 24, 2003 at 9:04 pm#15553