The Trinity Doctrine

[Mercy]

H,

Amen! Well said! If only they could grasp that concept so much confusion would wash away.

[He’s Coming in the Clouds]

Amen Mercy. Yet, they refuse to believe it. It is sad. That is why we must continue to fight the good fight and try and undo the damage that has been done by the centuries of lies and deception. It is for that reason the Lord gave me the study on the 3 baptisms and the study on the son of perdition. They go hand in hand. For it started with the trinity and then came the changing of the baptisms, which created a church that had a form of godliness, but denied the power of the Holy Spirit.

The thread on the son of perdition showed how the Holy Spirit was removed and how it resulted in this man of sin, the son of perdition. This is a type of man, for the world is filled with many of the sons of perdition. 2 Thess. 2

I use to always believe this scripture pertained to the end of times, and it does in a sense, but the beginning of this prophetic prediction started even before the creation of the trinity doctrine, but close to the time of it's creation.

It started about the time of Constantine, the Emperor of Rome who claimed to be a believer, but was not. Unless he repented before his death. Even though he helped with stopping the persecuting of the saints, he also was responsible with infiltrating the empire of Rome into church affairs. He was clever though, he started with allowing the church influence into the affairs of the state and then eventually the Roman Empire used the cloak of the church to carry out their unholy deed. They were better know as the Holy Roman Empire.

[Artizan007]

If God is our saviour and besides him there is none, then how can we call Jesus our Saviour?

1. Is it that he is God?
2. Is it that He is God's Messenger of Salvation & Eternal Life
3. Is it because he as the second Adam, remained pure and sinless – therefore could redeem us back to his Father?
4. Is Jesus and the Father one in the same person?

I was in lectures today and the lecturer said that I was not saved because I did not believe that Jesus is God, I challenged him and said.. Give me a scripture that says I have to believe in Jesus as God to be saved… he gave me on in Titus. OUr Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. (Our Great God [the Father], and Saviour, Jesus Christ)

Jesus said himself in John 12, that he came under command, and that command from the Father was to bring eternal life… whose command and whose words did he speak… I will chance a guess, his Fathers. So Jesus is the way, but ultimately God is our salvation. Jesus brings us back to the Father.

What do others think?

Also… I asked is Jesus was a deity and they said yes, I then asked if the Father was a deity and they said yes, then I asked how two deities can be one deity and he changed to say they are three persons in ONE deity… funny that. But now I am going to hell… oh dear me.

[NickHassan]

Hi A7,
Welcome back,
Jesus is the vessel of the Father Saviour and thus he too is our saviour.

Titus 3
” 4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;”

And when the Word returns he will still be a vessel for God.

Titus 2

“13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; “
Titus does not tell us we must believe in any trinity God.

[The One]

Ambassador of Christ,

Jesus was God on earth!You cannot be a christian unless you believe that statement!But,Jesus' diety is derived from the Father.Jesus had no diety of his own.

The proof is in John 14:10 where our Lord says”…I do not speak on my own initiative,BUT THE FATHER ABIDING IN ME,DOES”HIS”WORKS.”

In Col.:1;15-18 it details Jesus' diefied attrbutes(of which there is NO doubt),but directly after in vs.19 it says”For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fulness to dwell in Him.”What fulness?!In Col.2:9 it says”For in Him all the fulness of diety dwelt in bodily form.”

This clearly says that those attributes Jesus possessed were given by the Father to Him.

It does not seem difficult to me to recognize that Jesus is not the Father,and as far as equality with God is concerned,
Is.53 calls our Lord a”servant of God”.Hebrews 7 talks of Christ as a high priest.Is the priest equal to the deity he serves?!

The scriptures say these things:
1) Jesus is at the right hand of the Father.That would make the Father superior because he is the center,and Jesus is at”His”right hand.This is not an equal position.

2)Jesus Himself,in John 17:3,while praying to the Father(vs.1)
makes the statement”Eternal life is this.That they(the apostles)may know you(the Father),the ONE AND ONLY GOD.”
So,our Lord calls the Father the one and only God,and
does not recognize Himself or the Holy Spirit in this statement as God.

3)The apostles Paul and Peter both recognize the Father as Jesus'God( 2Cor.1:3,2Cor.11:30-31,Eph.1:3,Col.1:3,1pET.1:3)
and the Hebrew writer says the following in 2:11″For both He who sanctifies(Jesus)and those who are sanctified(us)ARE
ALL FROM ONE FATHER;which for this reason He(Jesus)is not ashamed to call them brethren.”Again,more evidence to support the Father as God,and Jesus as His Son(just as we are”sons”of God)

God/the Father is the power.Jesus,and we,are the result.But
be assured,the scriptures,Jesus,the apostles….all recognize the Father as”the”God. I worship the same God as Abraham,Moses,Isaiah,David,Jesus,Peter,Paul&Mary……..and if we put anyone in His place…we commit idolatry.

[NickHassan]

amen

[NickHassan]

When you have the time casey.

[Cubes]

Jesus and the scribe agree:  Jesus is not the God of Heaven and Earth and neither the Father nor he, is a part of any Trinity.

Mark 12:28 Then one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, *perceiving that He had answered them well, asked Him, “Which is the first commandment of all?”
29 Jesus answered him, “The *first of all the commandments is: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' *This is the first commandment. 31 And the second, like it, is this: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'* There is no other commandment greater than these.”

32 So the scribe said to Him, “Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God, and there is no other but He. 33 And to love Him with all the heart, with all the understanding, *with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
34 Now when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, He said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.”
But after that no one dared question Him.

[NickHassan]

amen

[Elidad]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 10 2006,08:34)

Quote (Elidad @ Sep. 10 2006,09:49) Hi Is 1:18. I think your response is avoiding the issue. It was your previous comments that gave rise to the points I raised. I have read back through your thoughts that are suppose to address them, and have come away with the same questions. Hi Elidad, I wasn't being evasive, but as I was pressed for time and honestly thought you were asking me to address issues that were clearly explained in my previous post, I was unwilling (at the time) to re-iterate it all. But since you honestly can't see the answers I will give them to you. Quote 1: Jesus existed as God (I take that to mean within the trinity) before He took it upon Himself to become a man. Is this right? As I understand it Yahshua was with God, and was God: Is 1:18, I ask you, does that statement make any sense? You say Jesus was “with: what He “was”. This sounds a bit like saying, “Elidad was “with” himself and “was” himself”. Seems to me if Jesus wasn’t with himself, He would be beside himself. I find it very difficult to take a statement like that serious. How about “Elidad was “with” the President and “was” the President. If I made a statement like that to a group of students, they would certainly conclude that I was beside myself, and probably roll their eyes and doubt my sanity. I have no difficulty understanding John 1:1 when “word” is not a being, but rather God's creative thought as viewed and foreseen in the person of His Son. God's thoughts are with Him and are Him in every sense. The same as yours and my thoughts are with each of us and in effect are us. “As we think in our hearts. so are we” (Proverbs 23:7). John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Greek word for “with” ( pros) means “to, towards” (i.e. face to face in relationship) when used with the accusative as it is here (Thayer, p.541). The word is generally translated “to” or “toward” (NKJV) or “unto” (KJV; see John 1:29,42,47; 2:3; 3:2,4,20,26). So this phrase cannot be referring to “something said”, or an abstract concept such as a plan/purpose/wisdom/power coming from God. Moreover, the verb “was” (Gr: eimi) in John 1:1b is the used in the imperfect tense. That denotes a continuous action of the Word being in the past, or simply put: whenever the “beginning” was, the logos was already in existence. By using this construction John was making it clear that logos is without a beginning. So I assert that the Logos was “pros” theos and “eimi” theos, and that the Logos became flesh – as described in John 14 and Phil 2:7-8. Speaking of John 1:14, the juxtaposition of the two words used to describe the pre-incarnate existence of the Word (John 1:1a) and His incarnation is (vs 14), I think, very provocative. As I previuosly mentioned the Greek word for “was” in John 1:1a is the imperfect verb “eimi” (continuous action, perpetuity), BUT John used the aorist verb “egeneto” to designate the incarnation in v 14 which, in contrast, happened at a fixed point in time). By using this contradistinction in terminology John delineated the eternal logos from the temporal nature of the “things” He created. So the Greek in John 1:1 tells us that the pre-incarnate Yahshua was both towards God (in relationship), and always was God, and that at a fixed point in time he became flesh. Deity put on humanity. Understand? Sorry Is 1:18 I don’t understand. No matter how you might like to twist and dance with the statement made by the Apostle John in John 1:1 a “word” is a “word”. It is no an actual being or a person, but rather a being/person in “word”, in “thought”. There have been rheems written on the meaning of this verse, as you evidently well know, and the vast majority of them do violence to the fact, that a word is understood in the Hebrew sense, as God’s creative activity and it is consistently used in that sense throughout the Old Testament. If the “word” is the Son in a pre-human existence, then both the Father and the Son are equally entitled to be thought of as the Supreme Deity. To do such, in effect makes absolute nonsense of the term “Son” as applied to Christ. Quote 2: Upon becoming a man He “emptied” himself of what it was He was before. Can we say, divested Himself of everything that made Him God (part of the Trinity) before, so that he could be “truly” a man in every sense of the term. Is this right? No, that is not my understanding of the kenosis as was unambiguously explained in my post: Is 1:18. You say it was unambiguously explained, but I have looked back through your posts and can’t find where this has occurred. The trouble is Is 1:18 you try to cover too much ground in your posts and end up getting your readers totally befuddled. “The Logos who existed in the from of God, emptied Himself and took on the form of a bond servant. He was made for a little while lower than the angels (positionally/functionally – not ontologically). So according to my viewpoint the man Yahshua was annointed by His Father. I surmise that the independant usage of his divine attributes, privileges, prerogatives were restored. What He emptied Himself of to become a man were returned.” Hold on a minute Is 1:18. I am lead to understand that Jesus was 100% God and 100% man but you are now saying that he let go of some of the factors that contributed to Him being 100% God. You say they were attributes, privileges and prerogatives. Call them what you may, it is quite clear that without them, He was no longer equal with God. How could He be, if to be a man He had to ‘give up’ some of the things He had when He was 100% God. It seems like we end up with Jesus being less than 100% God, shall we say 95% and 100% man. If this is the case then the ground under trinitarian thinking is shifting once again, to accommodate this juxtaposition. Whatever it was he “gave up”, it evidently prevented Him from being ‘God’ in the fullest/truest sense. Right? His ability to be “all knowing” must have been one of the attributes He “gave up”, if this is what He really did in your viewpoint, as He is recorded as saying that He didn’t know the day nor the hour when He would be returning to the earth (Matthew 24:26 & Mark 13:32) This limitation of His knowledge must have been a continuing factor as we read in the opening of the Book of Revelation that Christ, after He ascended to Heaven, was still dependant upon receiving the Revelation, that He made known to John, from God (His Father) Revelation 1:1 “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him …….” May I ask , who gave what to whom here, if the trinity is comprised of three co-equals? If one party had something that the other didn’t, doesn’t that destroy co-equality? Quote 3.Therefore when He “emptied” Himself, He was no longer God (no longer part of the trinity), He was now man. Is this right? No it's not accurate. Deity divested himself of the independant usage of the divine attributes, privileges, prerogative and put on humanity. The pre-incarnate Logos did not relinquish deity….how in reality could that be possible anyway? You can't extinguish divinity if you have it intrinsically. Paul affirmed in the strongest language possible that Yahshua was walking deity: If God dwells in us (1 John 4:12) and the Holy Spirit dwells in us (2 Timothy 1:14) are we not walking as Christ walked? In other words, in the same way that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself (2 Corinthains 5:19) God is in us. Does that also make us Deity? On the basis of your reasoning, it must? Anyway, what do you think Deity means? If you contend that it means Supreme Being, then you are asking me to understand that the Supreme Being, relinquished part of His office or functionality so that He could turn into a man. Is that right? Sounds like a line out of Greek mythology to me. Colossians 2:9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form. “For in Him dwells (katoikei) all the fullness (pleroma) of the Deity (theotes) bodily (somatikos).” katoikeo – meaning “to permanently settle down in a dwelling.” The verb is in the present tense, showing durative action pleroma – indicating that which “is filled up.” somatikos – meaning “corporeally” or “physically” theotes – used as an abstract noun for ‘theos’. Theotes is the key word in this verse. Joseph H. Thayer, the Unitarian scholar, defines theotes in his lexicon as follows: “Theotes…(deitas, Tertullian, Augustine) deity i.e. the state of being God, Godhead: Col 2:9” Vine’s Expository Dictionary of NT words, in exegeting Col 2:9, records this: ”…But in the second passage (Col. 2:9), Paul is declaring that in the Son there dwells all the fullness of absolute Godhead; they were no mere rays of Divine glory which gilded Him, lighting up His Person for a season and with a splendor not His own; but He was, and is, absolute and perfect God; and the Apostle uses theotes to express this essential and personal Godhead of the Son” (Trench, Syn. ii). Theotes indicates the “Divine” essence of Godhood, the personality of God; theiotes, the attributes of God, His “Divine” nature and properties. A.T Robertson who is widely recognized as the worlds most authoritative grammarian said in his scholarly book Word Pictures In The New Testament: Is 1:18 If you would stop listening to the voices of all these other people you keep referring to and quoting from, and listen to what the Holy Spirit has to say, then I believe you would be able to see that trinitarian theology is another case of “the Emperor has no clothes”. “There dwells (at home) in Christ not one or more aspects of the Godhead (the very essence of God, from ‘Theos,’ deity) and not to be confused with ‘Theiotes’ in Romans 1:20 (from ‘Theios,’ the quality of God, divinity), here only in N.T. as ‘Theiote’ only in Romans 1:20. The distinction is observed in Lucian and Plutarch. ‘Theiotes’ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions.” Yahshua clearly did not relinquish His deity, not in Paul's mind anyway. Quote 4. Trinitarian theology informs me that Christ was 100% man and 100% God, in spite of the fact that no other man has ever been 100% God and 100% man. Therefore He wasn't made like unto His brethren in all respects (Heb 2:17). Contrary to what Scripture says in this regard, He was actually not fully man, if trinitarian theology is correct. Is this right? This is a non sequitur Elidad. How can I address an illogically-framed question? Maybe I need to reword this so you can understand what I am driving at. Lets’ put it this way. Scripture informs us that Christ was made like unto His brethren in all things (Hebrews 2:17) How can this statement be true, if Jesus was 100% God and 100 man? Such must surely make Him, something that none of His brethren ever were. Also it says that He was “tempted in all points as we are” (Hebrews 4:15) How could this be true, if in effect He was really something other than what we are. If He was 100% God and 100% man, then His temptations would bear no resemblance to our own, and it could not be truly said of Him that “He was touched with the feeling of our infirmities”. The Scriptures inform me that Christ was 100% man and that God dwelt in Him in the fullest sense, in exactly the same way that God desires to dwell in us. That did not make Him the Supreme being any more than such happening makes us. Quote 5. When Jesus “emptied” himself, He was no longer God, but now man. Therefore He must have shed or “emptied” His 100% God aspect, so that He could be 100% man. Is this right? Deity put on humanity (John 1:1-14, Phil 2:5-8, 1 Cr 8:9). I tend to think that Scripture puts it the other way around. Humanity putting on Deity. “In Him the fullness of God, dwelt bodily” (Colossians 2:9) Does not God want us to take on His nature to the full, so that we can be like him, as to character and nature? Are we not to “put on Christ”? (Galatians 3:27) In so doing, we take on the character of God in the same way that he has shown to us. Quote 6. Thus if Jesus was Yahweh, before He was man, what was left of Yahweh whilst He stepped into His new role? Evidently from your theology, Jesus could not be both God and Man, whilst He was a man, because He had “emptied” Himself of what He was before? he he…evidently from your interpretation of my theology, “Jesus could not be both God and Man”. You say He emptied Himself of his Deity to become a man – I categorically dispute that and offer Col 2:9 as my substantive evidence. Quote 7. Thus Jesus, whilst He was on earth as a man, had to depend on the other two characters who made up the tri-unity, which had now become a bi-unity to carry on the God role and give Jesus His instructions. Is this right? Yes – IMHO Yahshua divested Himself of the “independant usage of his divine attributes, privileges, prerogatives” that were intrinsically His before His incarnation. And operated by the Holy Spirit while on Earth and before His death. Are not we suppose to operate the same way? Quote 8. Whilst Jesus, was on earth, as a man, He prayed to the other remaining parties in the trinity, because He was no longer there as part of the God team. He had left and came to earth, to plead for the souls of men, and pay the price for sin. Is this right? I believe I have answered this question already. Quote 9. Thus in Hebrews 1:8, according to you, we have God (Yahweh) still in heaven, overseeing the affairs of heaven and earth, making or “appointing” Jesus as God whilst He was on earth, because He was no longer God, in the sense that He was before He came to earth. Now, if this appointing of Jesus to be God didn't apply whilst He was on earth, but only applied after, He ascended back to heaven, as some say, then He wasn't in any sense God, whilst He was on earth. Is this right? No, incorrect. Yahshua was never appointed “God” if by God you mean divine being. No where in scripture are we told this. The word was (Gr. eimi; imperfect tense verb = continuous action, perpetuity) God. He did not become 'theos' at a fixed point in time, that's unscriptural and patently ludicrous…. Quote So this leaves us with one of two conclusions, either you are not making yourself very clear, or I am just plain stupid, which has to be the bottom line of your last post. I am quite happy to be considered plain stupid, if that's where wrestling with your viewpoints places me. I did not intimate that you were stupid. Im sorry if you formed this conclusion from my post. Quote When some one has to resort to words that the Holy Spirit didn't use within Scripture, to explain what we need to know about issues relevant to salvation, then you have lost me. I don't think in reality anyone absolutely restricts themselves to biblical language when discussing soteriology or any other theological topic. Salvation can be explained in both simple or more complex language. I don't need to use “ontological”, but its a good word in that it captures the essense of a concept that would otherwise require more than one word to properly convey…. Quote A factor in arguments advanced by trinitarians always seems to be the use of terminology that doesn't readily compute with the man on the street, like ontological. Tell me how many Christians really know what this word means? I have just asked two Christians who are immediately available to me, who have been Christians for some considerable time, if they could tell me what ontological means. Guess what, they said they had never heard of the word. he he…try here I don't think that sophisticated language is exclusively used by trinitarians. Unitarians, like yourself, have been known to use it. Quote So perhaps, if you like to pitch your understandings at a lower level, I might be able to properly understand them and respond in a more meaningful manner. Hopefully I have made myself clearer in this post. I don't try to deliberately use words in an obfuscatory manner, quite the opposite actually. People explain themselves in different ways I suppose Quote You ask me to comment on other points that you have raised, but I see no good reason to do this, if we can't get some basic understandings sorted out about what words used by the Holy Spirit mean, and what we are to understand from them. Well gee Elidad, you were quite insistent that I answer you questions (which I have), so let's be fair about this…. Quote Hebrews 1:8-9 states quite clearly to me that Father (Yahweh) said to His Son, “Your throne O God (Yashua) is forever, and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore, God, (the Father-yahweh) Your God (the Father-Yahweh) has annointed You with the oil gladness more than your companions” This tells us why the Father (Yahweh) has annointed Yashua and given Him a name above every name (Philippians 2:9) rather than Moses or anyone else. Hebrews 2:9 But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone. Quote For His absolute obedience, He was highly exhalted. Was Moses absolutely obedient to all things that the Father required and expected? No! That's is why all the questions you raise in respect to Moses, are quite irrelevant. Okay Elidad, let's assume for your sake that Phil 2:9 & 10 are purely a function of Yahshua's obedience and i'll take them off the list. That still leaves these eight legitimate questions: 1. Was Moses said to be with God in the beginning (John 1:1)? No! Why? Because Moses was not God’s son. Also which “beginning” are you referring to? I thought John clarified this in his other letter 1 John 1:1 2. Was Moses credited for making “all things” (Col 1:16)? No! Why? Because Moses was not the person God had purposed to work with and through, to effect His plan and purpose on planet earth. His Son had been foreseen for this role. 3. Is Moses credited for “upholding all things” (Heb 1:3)? No! Why? Because Moses as you know, did not “uphold all things” In what way do you think Jesus “upholds all things”? Whilst you are reading that particular verse, you might like to explain to me why Jesus sits on the right hand of the Majesty on High, if He is in effect, the Majesty on High. Surely this denotes position of authority, and it is evidently not a position of equal authority. Seems to indicate to me that He has been placed as second in command. In other words, He does not sit in the top seat, because that is occupied by His Father. 4. Did Moses claim he could raise himself from the dead, like Yahshua did (John 2:19-21)? No! Why? Because Moses was not obedient unto death. The fact that Christ didn’t sin was the factor that prevented the grave from holding Him. It was His sinless life that gave Him the power to rise from the dead. The power came from His obedient life. We read in Acts 2:24 that it was God, His Father who raised Him up from death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it (death that is) It was such that enabled the Father to raise Him from death? If you like to look up all the instances of the word ‘raised’ in the New Testament, you will find that it was His Father who raised Him from the dead. Raised Him because the power to do so, came from His Son’s obedient life. Thus Jesus could rightfully say that He had the power to lay down His life and take it up again. And all who walk as He walk, can make the same claim. 5. Do NT authors apply OT references of YHWH directly to Moses (Heb 1:10)? No! Why? Because Moses, was not the promised Messiah, the Seed of the Women, the Seed of Abraham, the Son of David who is the Saviour of the world. 6. Was Moses said to have fulfilled prophecies that YHWH made OF HIMSELF (John 19:37)? No! Why? Because Moses was not the promised Messiah and the promised Messiah never made prophesies of Himself. His Father (YHWH) made prophecies about the Messiah, who was to be His Son. (2 Samuel 7:14 and 1 Chronicles 17:13) 7. Will it be that everyone that all who call on the name of Moses be saved (Rom 1:13)? No! Why? Because Moses was not given a name which is above every name. Philippians 2:9-10 inform us that God, the Father highly exalted His Son an placed Him in a position that will call for every knee to bow to Him. 8. Are titles that are exclusively YHWH's applied to Moses (e.g. Alpha and Omega, Rev 22:13)?[/color] No! Why? Because Moses is not the Alpha and Omega of God’s plan and purpose with planet earth, His Son Jesus is.Titles of YHWH are applied to Jesus in the sense of Agency, the same way the title of a large organisation was applied to me when I was about the organisation's business. Angels in the Old Testament, acting for YHWH, were spoken about/referred to as though they were in effect YHWH. The same is very much true for His son. You have no solid basis for refusing to answer these questions, nor for refusing to offer comments on Hebrews 3:1-6. As for Hebrews 3:1-6 it speaks clearly for itself. Verse 1 spells it out very clearly. Rather than it saying that Jesus is God, it says, “He (Jesus) is the Apostle and High Priest of our confession” I confess likewise. Quote Christ achieved where Adam and all his prodgeny failed; Moses included. Christ showed us, that what His Father expected of Adam was possible and He, in effect, showed us how to live in total harmony with His Fathers precepts. Amen. It is reassuring that we are in common agreement on this ALL IMPORTANT aspect of the work of the Father through His son Christ Jesus; “for God (the Father) was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19) Quote If this is not true, then the Father has no basis for judgement of our failures. He looks at us but sees Christ's righteousness, is how I would put it. Then on this basis we don't have to be too careful about how we walk or conduct ourselves, as God can't really see what we are doing, if we are hiding behind Christ? Quote Thus Is 1:18, you can continue with your intellectually confounding comments, or we can get back to basics. If you wish to continue to talk over my head, then there is not much else I can say. Do you read me? He he, hopefully I have demystified them a little for you. I have answered all your questions Elidad, now will you return the favour? Do hope Is 1:18 that my above thoughts go some way toward returning “the favour” Blessings

Hi Is 1:18. Sorry for the long delay in responding, but circumstances have not allowed earlier attention. Trust that you will understand. Have inserted my comments above; highlighted green.

Perhaps I will conclude with a question. In Matthew 28:18 we read of Jesus stating, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.“

Who may I ask “gave” such authority to the resurrected Christ? Did He give it to Himself or did he obtain it from His Father? If He obtained it from His Father, how can it be said that they are co-equal and co-eternal? If such were the case, what would one have to give to the other, that the other did not already have?

Peace be with you and may truth as it is in Christ Jesus abound to us in everyway.

Elidad

[NickHassan]

Hi Henoch,
Do you think that God sent His Son into the world
so that men would say the Son was the God who sent him?

[epistemaniac]

Jesus is God!

Tit 2:13 ESV waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

2Pe 1:1 ESV Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ

1Jo 5:20 ESV And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

selah…. the word of God has spoken to the issue, the issue is closed….

blessings

[NickHassan]

Hi E,
Did Christ come as God in flesh and work in his own powers?

[NickHassan]

Hi,
Jesus never taught about a trinity God and neither did the apostles and prophets.
So to teach this one has to stand on the teachings of mere vain and ignorant men.
It came from the mouths of the enemies of God and we surely should not follow them.

[Worshipping Jesus]

I have spent hours reading the post! Questioning with an open mind what is the truth concerning the doctine of the trinity! I conclude that it is a mystery in which niether side does well to explain! However since it is important and I must choose, I choose the Trinity! There are lots of words that we use today to describe truth or our beliefs that we do not find in scripture, for insatance we know that God is every where, hence the word “Omnipresent”. So to say that the word trinity can not be found in scripture therefore it should not be believed is a weak argument! I appreciate the opportunity to use this forum and I leave you with this!….

There is only one God

The first step is to establish how many Gods exist: one! Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 45:5,14,18,21,22; 46:9; 47:8; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:5-6; Gal. 4:8-9
“I am the LORD, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God” (Isaiah 45:5).
“Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me,” (Isaiah 44:6).

“I am the Lord, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God, (Isaiah 55:5).

The Trinity

FATHER SON HOLY SPIRIT
Called God Phil. 1:2 John 1:1,14; Col. 2:9 Acts 5:3-4
Creator Isaiah 64:8 John 1:3; Col. 1:15-17 Job 33:4, 26:13
Resurrects 1 Thess. 1:10 John 2:19, 10:17 Rom. 8:11
Indwells 2 Cor. 6:16 Col. 1:27 John 14:17
Everywhere 1 Kings 8:27 Matt. 28:20 Psalm 139:7-10
All knowing 1 John 3:20 John 16:30; 21:17 1 Cor. 2:10-11
Sanctifies 1 Thess. 5:23 Heb. 2:11 1 Pet. 1:2
Life giver Gen. 2:7: John 5:21 John 1:3; 5:21 2 Cor. 3:6,8
Fellowship 1 John 1:3 1 Cor. 1:9 2 Cor. 13:14; Phil. 2:1
Eternal Psalm 90:2 Micah 5:1-2 Rom. 8:11; Heb. 9:14
A Will Luke 22:42 Luke 22:42 1 Cor. 12:11
Speaks Matt. 3:17; Luke 9:25 Luke 5:20; 7:48 Acts 8:29; 11:12; 13:2
Love John 3:16 Eph. 5:25 Rom. 15:30
Searches the heart Jer. 17:10 Rev. 2:23 1 Cor. 2:10
We belong to John 17:9 John 17:6 . . .
Savior
1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10 2 Tim. 1:10; Titus 1:4; 3:6 . . .
We serve Matt. 4:10 Col. 3:24 . . .
Believe in John 14:1 John 14:1 . . .
Gives joy . . .
John 15:11 John 14:7
Judges John 8:50 John 5:21,30 . . .

Therefore, the doctrine of the Trinity is arrived at by looking at the whole of scripture, not in a single verse. It is the doctrine that there is only one God, not three, and that the one God exists in three persons: Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. An analogy would be time. Time is past, present, and future. But, there are not three times, only one.

[/B]

[NickHassan]

Hi and welcome,
Logic applied to scripture is not sufficient for followers of Jesus.
He said he was the Son of God and not God himself and we should first believe him surely?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hey Nick!

Thanks for the welcome!

But I have to say that was a cute but lazy response to my post!

Why is it that you can't explain certain scriptures or just ignore them?

Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel “And” his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me,” (Isaiah 44:6).

Is Jesus the first and the last?

Is the Holy Spirit a person and what is his name?

Is God a Spirit and the Holy Spirit another spirit?

1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Col 1:27 To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: ….

Is it Jesus that lives in us? Or is it God that has come to dwell in us or is it a spirit that has no name?

It is a mystery beloved, but the truth is that if Jesus can be with us to the end of the world he must be one with God!

Bless you!

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
Short answer YES.
If you find any direct teaching from Jesus or the apostles or prophets that God is a trinity we are all ears.
But deriving ideas from scriptural comparison is not good evidence but only circumstantial and it would be ignored in a court of Law especially if the matter at hand was as vital as the nature of the God we fear.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hey My friend….

If you are all ears why do you refuse to answer my questions?

Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel “And” his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me,” (Isaiah 44:6).

Is Jesus the first and the last?

Is the Holy Spirit a person and what is his name?

Is God a Spirit and the Holy Spirit another spirit?

Is it Jesus that lives in us?

Or is it God that has come to dwell in us or is it a spirit that has no name?

Sincerely! Keith

[NickHassan]

Hi w,
I am all ears to see where God's Spirit in scripture says God is a trinity.
Only men say that and we should follow God's ways.

Who are the gods or elohim of 1Cor8, ps 97, 96 etc

Scripture says FOR US there is one God and one Lord.
The God of Jesus is our God.
He is the one that Jesus said true worshippers will worship in jn 4

[Author]

Posts