The Trinity Doctrine

[Tim2]

Phoenix,

I'm sorry but there must be some confusion.  I don't believe that Jesus is the Father.  I agree that Jesus is the Son of God.  You also seem to acknowledge that Jesus is God, based on John 20:28.  So, I hope, you believe

1.  Jesus is God.
2.  Jesus is the Son of God the Father.

So yes, please believe the Athanasian Creed, which here would mean, they are not two (or three, with the Spirit) gods, but one God.

Blessings,
Tim

[Phoenix]

Quote (Tim2 @ April 03 2007,09:07)

Phoenix, I'm sorry but there must be some confusion.  I don't believe that Jesus is the Father.  I agree that Jesus is the Son of God.  You also seem to acknowledge that Jesus is God, based on John 20:28.  So, I hope, you believe 1.  Jesus is God. 2.  Jesus is the Son of God the Father. So yes, please believe the Athanasian Creed, which here would mean, they are not two (or three, with the Spirit) gods, but one God. Blessings, Tim

Hi Tim

Yes I am confused. You just said you didnt believe that Jesus is the Father. But you have below that in Number 2 Jesus is the Son of God the Father

LOL c'mon Tim. Which one is it?

Hugs
Phoenix

Edit: I just seen this…

Quote

You also seem to acknowledge that Jesus is God, based on John 20:28

No I acknowledged how you saw it. I should have explained my answer more clearer. I did not mean that i agreed with you

[Tim2]

Ok, sorry, Phoenix, I believe that Jesus is the Son of the Father. This is asserted by Scripture. I also believe that Jesus is God. This is equally asserted by Scripture. Scripture also makes clear that Jesus is not the Father. These are three Scriptural assertions. How does it appear to you that I assert that Jesus is the Father? The only way I see that is if you believe that only the Father is God. But then you're ignoring the Scriptures that assert that Jesus is also the same God.

[NickHassan]

Hi tim,
So somehow the son of God is also the God he is the son of?
Mystery babylon.

[Phoenix]

Hi Tim

I am also sorry I misunderstood what you wrote. I wasnt sure if you did believe that Jesus is the Father or not.

Quote

The only way I see that is if you believe that only the Father is God.

Yes

Quote

But then you're ignoring the Scriptures that assert that Jesus is also the same God.

No, not ignoring. Well not trying to. I just refuse to think that the Father(God) is Jesus.

Hugs
Phoenix

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

My short answer is, the Son of God is the same God as His Father, but the Son is not the same person as His Father.

If you object, is it because of logic or Scripture? Scripture asserts that Jesus is God. It also asserts that the Father is the same God. Given these assertions, it is proper to give the Father and the Son each individually the title of God. So, given that the Father is God, it is proper to call Jesus the Son of God.

Tim

[WhatIsTrue]

Tim2,

Greetings!  Welcome aboard.

You seem like a thoughtful person who has seriously looked at both sides of this debate, so I wonder how you understand a verse like 1 Timothy 5:21, which reads,

“I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality.”

Here Paul is invoking three witnesses: God, Jesus, and the elect angels.  (As an enlightned Trinitarian, you would think that, while contemplating the magic number three, he would immediately seize upon the opportunity to appeal to the “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”.)  Why he does he call Jesus as a separate witness from God in this passage?  Is he being redundant?  Did he forget that Jesus is God?  Or, is he making a deliberate distinction here between the one he knows as God and the man, Jesus Christ, (1 Timothy 2:5)?

[Tim2]

Hi WhatisTrue,

Thanks, that's a good question.

I think the passage is consistent with Trinitarian doctrine at the most basic level. Since the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each individually God, it is proper to call any one of them God. So, my first impression is that Paul is probably referring to the Father with the title of God, and as he does in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (and many other places), he refers to Jesus with the title of Lord.

I'd also say that “Lord” is a title for God in both the Old and New Testaments, so the passage isn't necessarily claiming that Jesus is less than God. Moreover, YHWH is often translated as Lord in the New Testament, such as in Romans 10:13. So the title of Lord given to Jesus would support that He is God, YHWH.

Thanks,
Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim2,
Where does scripture state that Jesus is “the same God' as the Father?
How does that fit with him being the SON of God again?

[NickHassan]

Quote (Tim2 @ April 02 2007,23:33)

Hi WhatisTrue, Thanks, that's a good question.   I think the passage is consistent with Trinitarian doctrine at the most basic level.  Since the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each individually God, it is proper to call any one of them God.  So, my first impression is that Paul is probably referring to the Father with the title of God, and as he does in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (and many other places), he refers to Jesus with the title of Lord.   I'd also say that “Lord” is a title for God in both the Old and New Testaments, so the passage isn't necessarily claiming that Jesus is less than God.  Moreover, YHWH is often translated as Lord in the New Testament, such as in Romans 10:13.  So the title of Lord given to Jesus would support that He is God, YHWH. Thanks, Tim

Hi Tim2,
You would not need all these human rationalisations if you only accepted that Jesus is the Son of God.

[Tim2]

WhatIsTrue,

One more thing. No doubt you've noticed that Christ is at the forefront of Paul's theology, as he makes clear in Ephesians 1:10, for example. So I think Paul is always eager to center his message on Christ. I think Paul does this not only because he can (that is, because the Son is a separate person of the Trinity), but also because the Son is the person of the Trinity who has taken on the nature of man and become the mediator between God and man, and is thus our only way to God. Sorry if this isn't clear but do you see what I'm getting at? I think Paul is always trying to focus our attention on Christ as the way to God, so he often refers to “God” separately from Christ in reference to the Father, even though Jesus is also God, because it is through Jesus that we have access to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). Sorry if I'm not making sense, I'd be happy to discuss this more.

Blessings,
Tim

[Tim2]

Nick,

Romans 10:9-13 assert that Jesus is YHWH. This is why I think Jesus is the same God as the Father. Also, in Isaiah 44:6, YHWH declares that “there is no God besides Me.” So what other God could Jesus be?

Tim

[Phoenix]

Hi Tim

Please dont be disheartened because there are currently only non-trinitarians on this board right now. There are Trinitarians here but just not right now.

Hugs
Phoenix

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim 2,
Rom 10
8But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

14How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

So where is Jesus said to be our God here?

Are we allowed to decide by comparing with Is 44 with this that we now have proof Jesus is also his own father?

[Tim2]

Nick,

Romans 10:9 -“if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus.”
Romans 10:13 -“Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Romans 10:13 is quoting Joel 2:32, “Whoever calls on the name of YHWH will be delivered.”

So, Paul is referring to only one Lord being called on, right? And this Lord is YHWH, right? And this Lord is Jesus, right?

Tim

[Tim2]

Nick,

Jesus is not His own Father. I don't believe that.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim,
If Jesus was God before birth and came as God then he is indeed his own father.
But he is in fact the monogenes Son of God who was sent into the world.
Trinity was never found in the mouth of the one men call lord and master.
It comes instead from human masters we should not follow.

[WhatIsTrue]

Tim,

You wrote:

Quote

I think the passage is consistent with Trinitarian doctrine at the most basic level.  Since the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each individually God, it is proper to call any one of them God.  So, my first impression is that Paul is probably referring to the Father with the title of God, and as he does in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (and many other places), he refers to Jesus with the title of Lord.

That's a fair enough explanation, but I would assert that Paul is using extremely sloppy language here if that is his intent, especially considering the application.  He is calling on three distinct witnesses in his charge to Timothy, much the same as one would call on different witnesses in a trial.

For example, if I were to call as witnesses to the fact that I got married the presiding minister, Joe, and Tom, you would think me silly if I told you that Joe was in fact the presiding minister in attendance.   The natural assumption is that none of the three witnesses overlap in identity.  So given Paul's list, one would naturally assume that Jesus is neither God, nor one of the elect angels.  Otherwise, there would be no point in calling on him as a separate witness.

Also, if Paul is merely using the term “God” interchangeably with “the Father”, then we have him making the following statement:

“I charge you before the Father, the Son, and the ?elect angels? … .”

As a Trinitarian, why would Paul insult the Holy Spirit but substituting the elect angels in what should have been the most natural opportunity to invoke the Trinitarian formula?

I understand your point of view, but I think that it is a little weak here.

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim2,
You say
Romans 10:13 -“Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
“Romans 10:13 is quoting Joel 2:32, “Whoever calls on the name of YHWH will be delivered.”

The word used for LORD is kyrios and not YHWH and it is not shown as a quote in the KJV.

God has a son.

[Tim2]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 03 2007,00:17)

Hi Tim, If Jesus was God before birth and came as God then he is indeed his own father. But he is in fact the monogenes Son of God who was sent into the world. Trinity was never found in the mouth of the one men call lord and master. It comes instead from human masters we should not follow.

Hi Nick,

That first sentence sounds like an inference.  I don't have any problem with making inferences, but you said you do.  So if you are going to make inferences, please allow me to do the same, and let's debate the merit of each other's inferences.

Jesus was God before birth.  That is what John 1:1 says.  That is what Philippians 2:6 says.  And it's what Jesus says in Revelation 22:13.  

I understand you're confused by the fact that Jesus is both God and the Son of God, so I'll explain it for you as often as you would like me to.  The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.  Each of them can therefore be called God, as they are throughout Scripture (1 Corinthians 8:6, Titus 2:13, Acts 5:4).  Very frequently we see the Father given the title of God, and thus Jesus is called the Son of God, meaning “Son of God the Father” or “Son of the Father.”  This does not mean “Son of the Son.”  

I agree with you that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God who was sent into the world.

The word Trinity is not in the Bible.  But the doctrine of the Trinity is in the Bible.  The word Trinity is used as a title for the doctrine found in the Bible.  It is not necessary for you to use the word Trinity, but it is necessary for you to agree with the doctrine of the Trinity as stated in the ecumenical creeds because this is the doctrine of the Bible.

I admire your devotion to Solo Scriptura.  The Bible alone is the authority for the faith.  So please search the Scriptures to see if the doctrine of the three ecumenical creeds is contained in them.  And be willing to listen to what the church fathers have to say just as you would listen to what anyone else has to say.  God wants us to talk about the Bible to each other and even preserve our thoughts for thousands of years so that we can strengthen each other.

God bless you,
Tim

[Author]

Posts