- This topic has 18,301 replies, 269 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Mr. Steve @ Sep. 19 2007,06:37) WJ; You have a lot to say. You asked a question. What more do you have to believe to be saved? Answer- Jesus is the Son of God. A son has a beginning. Christ never claimed to be eternal. When you state that Christ is eternal you deny his sonship. However, I like much of what you wrote that focuses on how God is fully manifest in Christ.
Take care,
Steven
mr steveSons are born. Sons have a beginning.
When you say “Jesus” was a son before he was born a Son, then you are saying Jesus was born again.
This would be in my opinion “Reincarnation”.
Please show me a scripture where Jesus is called the “Son of God' prior to his coming in the flesh.
Lk 1:35
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.Jesus was not born twice.
He was the Word that was with God and the Word that was God!
Mic 5:2
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 18 2007,16:36) kejonn Thanks for your response!
As you know I disagree in all points. It seems we are rehashing the same things!
Yes, the horse IS gathering flies. Maybe we need to start getting into topics where we do agree, eh? But that would make for boring “debate”….Quote I will comment on this.. The septuagint does not define “Logos” because the revelation of Jesus being called “Logos” hadnt come yet. Jesus wasnt born yet and the NT hadnt been written yet. John obviously used the word differently in the following passages.
Interesting, but expected. “logos” is “logos”. Why some new definition? In the Hebrew, “logos” is “dabar”, and is used many times in the Masoretic OT. Never once was it attributed to some “person” or “entity”. If God cannot change, then how can something be “new” about God after 4000 years?Quote John 1:1, is not found there. Neither is these… 1 Jn 1:
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word (Logos) of life;
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen [it], and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship [is] with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.John says he looked upon and heard and handled the “Word” of life.
“which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled,”“OF THE WORD OF LIFE”
The context plainly shows that the Word is Jesus that was with the Father from the beginning therfore defining the “Word” in John 1:1. He further clarifys that Jesus is the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father from the beginning.
So it would seem. Yet the writer of the epistles of John never says that the “Word of life” is indeed Yeshua. The bad thing about both the GoJ and the epistles of John is that the language could lead to many beliefs as the writer never plainly states that “Yeshua is the logos”. Thus both sides of the issue can claim the verses mean what they believe. Was the apostle John really that philosophical and obscure?Quote John also sees Yeshua with the name “Word of God”. So the “Logos” is also a name. Rev 19:13
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Finally, some clarity. But is “logos” a name or is “logos theos” a name? There is a difference. And as I've stated on several occasions, the Hebrew language and people were big on name meanings. Since Yeshua was the last real biblical prophet, he was the last to “officially” bring the “logos” of God to mankind. And he was the fulfillment of the “logos” of God as well. So his name could be seen as the fulfillment of the redemptive plan of God toward mankind.Hi All :
May we all be decreasing and be increasing in the word.I agree with that The son of God , Jesus pre-existed and is a separate person from our Father . Matt After this manner therefore pray ye:
5 ¶ And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Lk. 18.10-14 Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7 ¶ But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
9 After this manner therefore pray ye:
Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.10 Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done
in earth, as it is in heaven.11 Give us this day our daily bread.
12 And forgive us our debts,
as we forgive our debtors.13 And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil:
For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, 1 Chr. 29.11 for ever. Amen.14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Mk. 11.25, 26
The word OUR has a profound meaning. It includes you and Him and our Father ( Abba) The word Our means : of or relating to us or ourselves or ourself especially as possessors or possessor, agents or agent, or objects or object of an action .
Jesus came from glory to return to glory.Provb.8:22
22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, Rev. 3.14
before his works of old.23 I was set up from everlasting,
from the beginning,
or ever the earth was.24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth;
when there were no fountains abounding with water.25 Before the mountains were settled,
before the hills was I brought forth:26 while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields,
nor the highest part of the dust of the world.27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there:
when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:28 when he established the clouds above:
when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:29 when he gave to the sea his decree,
that the waters should not pass his commandment:
when he appointed the foundations of the earth:30 then I was by him,
as one brought up with him:
and I was daily his delight,
rejoicing always before him;[B]
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 18 2007,17:43) kejonn How come my test is not a good one but yours is?
Because substituting “Jesus” for “God” in verses that have them both — without the Father — show that “God” and “Jesus” cannot be logically substituted without major issues. But the substitution of “Jesus” for “God” where only “God” is mentioned is open to interpretation by whatever you believe.Quote But Jesus is “eternal” and “Immortal” and “Invisible”.
Scripture to support this? I know you believe that in your heart, but Berean souls need more. When has Yeshua ever been called “invisible”, “immortal”, or even — without implication — “eternal”?Quote Does he live in your heart? Can you see him or his Spirit. 2 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?Can believers see him when he stands in their midst?
Not as they did in the 1st century. The response to Thomas wasJoh 20:29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”
So we know Yeshua through scripture and he Holy Spirit. But that does not mean he is invisible because Stephen saw him.
Act 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God;
Note that Stephen did not see God, but he did see the glory of God. Thus, to Stephen, God was still invisible yet His glory could be seen. But the same is not said of Yeshua — Stephen did not see the glory of Yeshua, but Yeshua himself. So, no, Yeshua is not “invisible”.
And he is not immortal in the same sense that God is. God has never died but Yeshua did. The Bible never says that he body he assumed died, but that he died. No escaping this scripturally. Therefore, Yeshua is not eternally immortal. He has only inherited immortality through his redemptive act at Calvary.
Quote Matt 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.Can we see him with us?
Matt 28:20
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.The word immortal is 'aphthartos' which means…
1) uncorrupted, not liable to corruption or decay, imperishable
a) of things
2) immortal
a) of the risen dead
Paul wrote this after his ressurrection.
Besides you should look at the context of the verse…
12 And I thank Christ Jesus *our Lord*, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
14 And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus *came into the world* (hello Unitarians ) to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.
17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.Who is the King Paul was describing? Tell me how he suddenly jumps to the Father in verse 17 without mentioning the Father in the previous 5 verses?
Context kejonn.
Context may indeed lead one to believe that Yeshua is spoken of in v17. Yet, when in any scripture is Yeshua called “invisible”? People saw him, therefore he is not “invisible”. And he died, so he can't be called the only “immortal” being, can he? Only the Father has never died while Yeshua, the Son of God has. You may want to say it was only his body that dies, but he spoke in Revelation of being dead, and he did not say “my flesh tent died”. He died. Not immortal. Not any more than the immortality we inherit.Quote So you didnt perform the test.
As I said, it is much more open to interpretation by your own beliefs.Quote I said…
“Find any scripure that uses the word “God” without the Father or Jesus, and insert the name Jesus and see if there is one scripture that would not fit or could not be ascribed to Jesus.”Over 1300 times the word God “Theos” is found in NT scriptures, and only 268 times the word Father “Pater” is found and almost invariably when the Father is mentioned the Son is there.
975 times the word Jesus “Yĕhowshuwa`” is found.
Over 700 times the word Lord “Kurios” is found and I havnt counted them yet but venture to say that almost all are ascribed to Yeshua.
Did you know that there is much evidence that YHWH originally made its way into the original translations of the Septuagint? And that over time, Gentile Christians changed “YHWH” to “kurios” because “YHWH” was foreign to them? So this is not a valid line of reasoning. The Jews never really accepted the Septuagint but Gentile Christians were not so hesitant.Quote Just something to think about. Truly the Gospel is the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Gospel of God!
1 Thes 1:8
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:1 Tim 1:12
According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
13 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
In the case of the NT, the Gospel of God is the Gospel of Yeshua. Do you even se
e the word “gospel” in the OT? But does this prove the trinity? Where is the “Gospel of the Holy Spirit”?Hi kejonn,
There is not a seperate gospel for the Holy Ghost, for the holy men of God inspired by the Holy Spirit wrote the bible . Genisis 1:1 . and the spirit of the God moved upon the face of the earth. The spirit from Gen to Rev. ….peace …..to all here is something to think about. In Rev 5:6..>And I looked and behold in the midst of the throne and the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had Slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of GOD sent out into all the earth. verse 7..>Then He came and took the scroll out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne.
Now does the Lamb (Jesus) seem as the same person who sits on the Throne (GOD).
why is Jesus protrayed as a Lamb Slain here. It's because Jesus put His will to death, which ultimately to his physical death also. Complete submission to God the Father. And as a result the Father gave the fullness of the spirits of God. His portrayal as a slain Lamb shows his submissiveness to the One and ONLY GOD. And as a result He was worthy to Take the book from the Fathers right hand. It is obiveous here that they are not the same persons. And the portrayal of Jesus as a Slain Lamb also shows that He did not preexist in any capacity before his being born on earth, at least it's not represented here……..gene
Quote (kejonn @ Sep. 19 2007,13:37) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 18 2007,16:36) kejonn Thanks for your response!
As you know I disagree in all points. It seems we are rehashing the same things!
Yes, the horse IS gathering flies. Maybe we need to start getting into topics where we do agree, eh? But that would make for boring “debate”….Quote I will comment on this.. The septuagint does not define “Logos” because the revelation of Jesus being called “Logos” hadnt come yet. Jesus wasnt born yet and the NT hadnt been written yet. John obviously used the word differently in the following passages.
Interesting, but expected. “logos” is “logos”. Why some new definition? In the Hebrew, “logos” is “dabar”, and is used many times in the Masoretic OT. Never once was it attributed to some “person” or “entity”. If God cannot change, then how can something be “new” about God after 4000 years?Quote John 1:1, is not found there. Neither is these… 1 Jn 1:
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word (Logos) of life;
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen [it], and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship [is] with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.John says he looked upon and heard and handled the “Word” of life.
“which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled,”“OF THE WORD OF LIFE”
The context plainly shows that the Word is Jesus that was with the Father from the beginning therfore defining the “Word” in John 1:1. He further clarifys that Jesus is the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father from the beginning.
So it would seem. Yet the writer of the epistles of John never says that the “Word of life” is indeed Yeshua. The bad thing about both the GoJ and the epistles of John is that the language could lead to many beliefs as the writer never plainly states that “Yeshua is the logos”. Thus both sides of the issue can claim the verses mean what they believe. Was the apostle John really that philosophical and obscure?Quote John also sees Yeshua with the name “Word of God”. So the “Logos” is also a name. Rev 19:13
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Finally, some clarity. But is “logos” a name or is “logos theos” a name? There is a difference. And as I've stated on several occasions, the Hebrew language and people were big on name meanings. Since Yeshua was the last real biblical prophet, he was the last to “officially” bring the “logos” of God to mankind. And he was the fulfillment of the “logos” of God as well. So his name could be seen as the fulfillment of the redemptive plan of God toward mankind.
kejonnYou said…
Quote
Interesting, but expected. “logos” is “logos”. Why some new definition? In the Hebrew, “logos” is “dabar”, and is used many times in the Masoretic OT. Never once was it attributed to some “person” or “entity”. If God cannot change, then how can something be “new” about God after 4000 years?How about the “New Testament”, after 4000 years its “New” isnt it? How about the “New Commandments” and the “New Covenant” and the “New Birth” and the “New man” and the “New heavens and the New earth”?
Here we go again. Lets doubt the words of the beloved John who used the “Word” Logos, by revelation and inspiration of the Holy Spirit in a different way than the OT “debar”.
Of course John was wrong and the translators, well they were biased.
I showed you how unambiguously 1 Jn 1:1-3 John refers to Yeshua as Logos. You cast shadow on it without giving me any interpretation that could be different.
Just like you do on John 1:1.
I showed you the context of 1 Tim 1:14-17 and your response is…
Quote Context may indeed lead one to believe that Yeshua is spoken of in v17. Yet, when in any scripture is Yeshua called “invisible….”? You say… “Yet, when in any scripture is Yeshua called “invisible….?”
You just read it in verse 17 of 1st Timothy.
It is you who always talks about context.
You take my last 2 post and dissect the response skipping over parts by breaking it up and going to another point and ignoring points that I made.
You dont address the context or substance of my post just parts.
I appologize to you for letting myself engage in debate with you again.
I cannot and will not play by your rules.
Blessings
kejonn
Sorry about the last post.
I was tired and just got frustrated!
I will finish my response. Just not tonight. I am tired.
Blessings
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 19 2007,01:43) kejonn Sorry about the last post.
I was tired and just got frustrated!
I will finish my response. Just not tonight. I am tired.
Blessings
That is OK, I recall what occurred last time. But this time there was nothing said about scripture being potentially corrupt over the course of time. I merely said that the statements are not as plain as one would have you believe. For instance, let's look at the first 3 verses of John 1 (KJV)Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jhn 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Jhn 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.Now, I don't have the English translations of the Bible before the KJV readily available, but they did translate “him” in these verses as “it”. This was both the Geneva and Bishop's Bible. The Greek word “autos” used can be translated as “he, she, it”. So when the KJV translators changed it from “it” to “he”, it was they who redefined “logos”. IOW, “logos” when from a neuter to masculine, thus taking on a life of its own. But even if we use “him”, we have the fact that “logos” is God according to John 1:1.
As far as John 1:3 is concerned, all one has to do is look back to Genesis 1 and see the numerous times verses read “And God said”. Thus God's “word” created, did it not?
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
God said it and it was done. So thus far we have a general summarization of the Genesis creation account. The same is evident of John 1:4-5.
And we also have this:
Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, And by the breath of His mouth all their host.
How does this disagree with John 1:3? But do we see some pre-existent Yeshua in Psalm 33:6?
But then we have John 1:14. I showed you evidence that the Messiah was spoken of throughout the OT. You know that. And where did these prophecies come from? Why the very words of God! The phrase “word of the LORD” occurs in 239 OT verses, and several times it was related to prophets or other men of God:
Gen 15:1 After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision, saying, “Do not fear, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great.”
Gen 15:4 Then behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, “This man will not be your heir; but one who will come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir.”1Sa 15:10 Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying,
2Sa 24:11 When David arose in the morning, the word of the LORD came to the prophet Gad, David's seer, saying,
1Ki 6:11 Now the word of the LORD came to Solomon saying,
1Ki 13:18 He said to him, “I also am a prophet like you, and an angel spoke to me by the word of the LORD, saying, 'Bring him back with you to your house, that he may eat bread and drink water.' ” But he lied to him.
These are but a few to give you an idea. If you go back an look at the related passages, is there any indication that the “word of the LORD” was some type of entity? No, and the very last verse I listed above helps to clarify this with the phrase “an angel spoke to me by the word of the LORD”.
Thus, we see that the “word of the LORD” was very real and active among the OT people, but we never see a single instance where this “word” was some type of being. But people want to take this “word”, seen throughout the OT, and turn it into the pre-existent Son of God when all they have is what they want to read into John 1:1-14.
As far as “New Testament” and “New Covenant”, how does this change God? God made a covenant with Abraham, He made a covenant with Noah, and He made a covenant with the children of Israel under Moses. So new covenants were not a change of God, but a renewed agreement with His ever changing people.
But if we make the “logos” into a “being” of God as opposed to the manner in which it is presented in the OT, we do indeed change God, do we not? Can you show me the pre-existent Yeshua in any single instance related to the “word of the LORD” in the OT?
In the end, I am not casting any doubt on scripture, just the way some would interpret it. Even 1 Timothy 1:14-17. I accept the verses “as is”. I merely said that the context might lead one to believe it was speaking of Yeshua, but the words used v17 had never been attributed to him outside of the verse. Thus, the overall biblical context says this is God, the Father, being referred to in v17. This verse also is in the form of a closing statement, because it ends with “Amen”. It is therefore an exclamation by Paul of thanks to God. Let's look at some of the words:
- “immortal” – 1Ti 6:16 who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.
- “invisible” – 1 Tim 6:16 above and
Jhn 1:18(KJV) No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Col 1:15(KJV) Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Hbr 11:27(KJV) By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.
- “only God” –
Jhn 5:44 “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?
Jud 1:25 to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.
Psa 86:10 For You are great and do wondrous deeds; You alone are God.
So, as you can see, biblical context shows that 1 Tim 1:16 belongs to God alone, and not the Son of God.
{Col. 1:18, Col. 1:15, Rev. 3:14, Gen. 1:26,Proverb 8:22-30,John 1:1
Using the Moffatt version of the Bible for Proverb is recommended, it explains it better.The Word was a Spirit, the Spokesman of God and yes He was the Son of God then already. God the Father gave Him Life. He was not created out of the dust of the earth then. He came forth from God. Making Him the Son of God. While we are the adopted Sons of God. He was the FIRSTBORN OF ALL CREATURES. is PRETTY PLAIN TO SEE, I THINK.
From the James Moffat Bible
Prov. 8:22 THE ETERNAL FORMED ME FIRST OF HIS CREATION, FIRST OF ALL HIS WORKS IN DAYS OF OLD;”} IM4TRUTHIM4Truth,
Thank you for your insight on wisdom in Proverbs.
I have read Proverbs before and I know that wisdom of God was with God in Genesis 1:26 Let Us make man.
I can see now how you put the spirit of wisdom as Jesus before he came down to earth. Wisdom has it's own spirit seperate from God then and when it was sent?
When I read Jesus' prayer in John 17 he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he shared with the Father before the world even existed.
The Proverbs, and Jesus's prayer together shows evidencee that he was with the Father! Thanks for putting a light on these scriptures for me!
seeking the truth
Thank you for your compliment, but all the Honor and thanks go to God, because He has revealed it to us. And I am very pleased to see the Holy Spirit working in God's called out Christians. I am also very surprised that you understood it so quickly, it took me awhile. That is so wonderful how God is working with you.With all my Love and Peace Mrs.:D
Peace and love to all my brothers in Christ.
I was raised under trinity based religions and have only recently begun to question its
authenticity, since I started reading these boards. Im not even sure I see the trinity as I was taught
but more so how I interpreted from my own person study. Please let me know if I properly
understand it.I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are individual entities but seen as One in God’s eyes.
I believe that Jesus was with God before he was born and put off his heavenly form and powers
to become a mortal thereby becoming the only begotten Son. He is not God in heaven, but Gods
Son who is given authority of God. He is also God’s heir and our Lord thus becoming our God
or more accurately our bridge to God. I’ve never really put words to it but God sent his son Jesus
not only to provide salvation but to be our God, not necessarily taking the place of God in
heaven, but to be His co-ruler. We the church are Jesus inheritance or the bride of Christ. Since
we belong to Him does that not make Him our God. I feel that God sees Jesus as part of himself
and has no problem with man calling Him God. Nor do I believe He has any problem if I see Him
as One or as Three as long as I understand that the Three cannot be separated.Question: Do I believe in the trinity or not? Im not sure.
I do know I love Him.Romans 15:5-8 (King James Version)
5Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another
according to Christ Jesus:
6That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ.
7Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.Quote But Jesus is “eternal” and “Immortal” and “Invisible”.
He is the visible image of the ivisible God.Jesus isn't invisible, he is visible.
It is God who is invisible.
Quote (Kolumbo @ Sep. 19 2007,20:50) Peace and love to all my brothers in Christ. I was raised under trinity based religions and have only recently begun to question its
authenticity, since I started reading these boards.
This can be viewed in two different ways: (1) God led you here so you read more on the Trinity or (2) don't let the words of uninspired (at least I don't make the claim) mortals (us) sway you from how God works in your life. The important thing is to pray about this study and read scripture with an open heart and mind, and try to leave preconceived notions at the door. It is difficult but it can be done.Quote Im not even sure I see the trinity as I was taught
but more so how I interpreted from my own person study. Please let me know if I properly
understand it.I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are individual entities but seen as One in God’s eyes.
I believe that Jesus was with God before he was born and put off his heavenly form and powers
to become a mortal thereby becoming the only begotten Son. He is not God in heaven, but Gods
Son who is given authority of God. He is also God’s heir and our Lord thus becoming our God
or more accurately our bridge to God. I’ve never really put words to it but God sent his son Jesus
not only to provide salvation but to be our God, not necessarily taking the place of God in
heaven, but to be His co-ruler. We the church are Jesus inheritance or the bride of Christ. Since
we belong to Him does that not make Him our God. I feel that God sees Jesus as part of himself
and has no problem with man calling Him God. Nor do I believe He has any problem if I see Him
as One or as Three as long as I understand that the Three cannot be separated.
This is actually pretty accurate as far as I am concerned. I don't know if trinitarians would agree, but what you say here doesn't really agree with the mainstream tenets of the trinity. Maybe WJ will help us understand.Quote Question: Do I believe in the trinity or not? Im not sure.
I do know I love Him.
That is the most important part. God is love!Quote Romans 15:5-8 (King James Version)
5Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another
according to Christ Jesus:
6That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ.
7Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.
All scripture is good! Just be careful Kolumbo…we can get pretty deep here and many of the posts will test your faith. If you are a new Christian, I warn you more sternly because we have many opposing views on here. You need to know that God wants you to be here at this point of your walk. If what we discuss makes you uncomfortable, you need to go to God in prayer and make sure this place is for you. I don't know the “age” of my brethren here but I've been a child of God for 20+ years, and if I recall correctly, WJ has been His child for 37+ years. So we tend to get into many deep subjects, although we tend to hand around the trinity thread.Welcome to the board!
Quote (kejonn @ Sep. 20 2007,14:22) Quote (Kolumbo @ Sep. 19 2007,20:50) Peace and love to all my brothers in Christ. I was raised under trinity based religions and have only recently begun to question its
authenticity, since I started reading these boards.
This can be viewed in two different ways: (1) God led you here so you read more on the Trinity or (2) don't let the words of uninspired (at least I don't make the claim) mortals (us) sway you from how God works in your life. The important thing is to pray about this study and read scripture with an open heart and mind, and try to leave preconceived notions at the door. It is difficult but it can be done.Quote Im not even sure I see the trinity as I was taught
but more so how I interpreted from my own person study. Please let me know if I properly
understand it.I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are individual entities but seen as One in God’s eyes.
I believe that Jesus was with God before he was born and put off his heavenly form and powers
to become a mortal thereby becoming the only begotten Son. He is not God in heaven, but Gods
Son who is given authority of God. He is also God’s heir and our Lord thus becoming our God
or more accurately our bridge to God. I’ve never really put words to it but God sent his son Jesus
not only to provide salvation but to be our God, not necessarily taking the place of God in
heaven, but to be His co-ruler. We the church are Jesus inheritance or the bride of Christ. Since
we belong to Him does that not make Him our God. I feel that God sees Jesus as part of himself
and has no problem with man calling Him God. Nor do I believe He has any problem if I see Him
as One or as Three as long as I understand that the Three cannot be separated.
This is actually pretty accurate as far as I am concerned. I don't know if trinitarians would agree, but what you say here doesn't really agree with the mainstream tenets of the trinity. Maybe WJ will help us understand.Quote Question: Do I believe in the trinity or not? Im not sure.
I do know I love Him.
That is the most important part. God is love!Quote Romans 15:5-8 (King James Version)
5Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another
according to Christ Jesus:
6That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ.
7Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.
All scripture is good! Just be careful Kolumbo…we can get pretty deep here and many of the posts will test your faith. If you are a new Christian, I warn you more sternly because we have many opposing views on here. You need to know that God wants you to be here at this point of your walk. If what we discuss makes you uncomfortable, you need to go to God in prayer and make sure this place is for you. I don't know the “age” of my brethren here but I've been a child of God for 20+ years, and if I recall correctly, WJ has been His child for 37+ years. So we tend to get into many deep subjects, although we tend to hand around the trinity thread.Welcome to the board!
Good advice kejonn.Thanks t8! This board is the place I come to not forsake the assembling of ourselves together! I've been searching for a place of corporate worship lately but have found that many churches in my area won't welcome a non-trinitarian
. But I'm feeling more and more led to return to worship as in the book of ActsAct 5:42 And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.
I have been thinking about offering Bible study at my home on Saturday mornings or Friday nights. I know of a few people who would likely attend from my last church. They didn't care that I stopped believing in the trinity — they loved me for who I am. Just like God!
Good one kejonn.
I meet regularly with believers here in NZ and we are looking at the elementary teachings about Christ and then onto the foundational doctrines after that.
I have brought some teachings on these subjects already and all who attend are welcoming of what I have to say, because they seem to of the same mind regarding the experience and things they have seen in different denominations they have attended over the years.
It's a great thing because many are being led to question at this time and we all come from different backgrounds. E.g., what is the Church, what is the foundation? etc.
I personally believe that God is doing this because there will come a time when many believers will for whatever reason not be able to attend a denomination and instead of thinking the Church is dead, they will see the real body of Christ building on the true foundation as a light in a dark generation. It is also God's will that the bride be without spot and blemish and there is much that needs to change for that to happen.
For those who are not received anywhere because they reject the false foundation of the Trinity, then my advice is to make disciples and then you will have fellowship.
Paul had to do this. He went to areas where people obviously didn't believe the elementary teachings of Christ and he made disciples and then made sure that they had other believers come and minster to them.
The world is the harvest and even within denominations there is a harvest to be had.
Not all who attend a denomination are true believers and not all believers attend a denomination either.
As the Church we are simply to recognise each other and let the gifts and ministries work. We should also keep greedy hands away from what God is doing. From what I understand, most revivals ended when men stepped in and tried to take the glory.
This is why humility is important. God will and is doing a great work. We only need to be obedient and humble and do all in the name of Jesus and not our own name.
If we truly will not stop till we have the truth, then we will have the truth. Of course the most important thing is that we have fellowship with God each day. This is what I am conscience of the most at the moment. It is all good to want the truth. But there is a difference in knowing truth and knowing THE truth.
If we know Christ, then we know THE truth and we will love all truth.
Matthew 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.T8, have you ever seen Yeshua at a prayer meeting you attended?
It's a yes or no question….
No. I have also not seen an angel either. In fact I haven't even seen the queen of England or the Paul who wrote much of the NT.
Yet they are all visible beings. Angels are usually hidden from the world for good reason, the Queen has never invited me over for a cup of tea, and Paul lived in a different generation to mine.
But no man has seen God and can ever see God.
Yet men have seen Jesus and I will see him as he is one day too. In fact I also hope to meet Paul too, and I will also see and meet angels.
Can't wait.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
