The Trinity Doctrine

[Cubes]

Quote (Guest @ Feb. 18 2005,19:40)

Cubes et al, when someone can answer these questions logically and cogently for me, then I will agree that the Trinity doctrine is flawed. Until someone does, I will stand with the 99% majority. Quote 1. If Jesus is not God, then why is He called God by: the Father (Heb 1:8), Paul (Ti 2:13), John (Jn 1:1), Thomas (Jn 20:28)? 2. If Jesus is not God, why is He named great God in Ti 2:13, Mighty God in Is 9:6?, and the Almighty in Rev 1:8. 3. Why is Jesus named YHWH in some Old Testament escatological prophecies, e.g. Zech 14? 4. Why are Old Testament passages, which refer to YHWH, e.g Isaiah 40:3, applied to Jesus by New Testament writers (Mark 1:3)? 5. Why are Old Testament passages, which refer to YHWH, e.g Jer. 31:33, applied to the Holy Spirit by New Testament writers (Heb 10:15-17)? (also, Ps 95:11 and Heb 3:7-11) 6. Why is a plural (not a singular or even a dual) noun used when refering to God in Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7, Isaiah 6:8? 7. Why are the Father and the Holy Spirit mentioned in the same triadic verses? e.g. 2 Cor 13:14, 1 Pet 1:2. (wouldn't this be redundant if the Holy Spirit is simply the Spirit of the Father?) 8. How is it that the Old Testament teaches that God will judge the world, e.g. 1 Chr 16:33, but the New Testament teaches that Jesus alone will be the judge (Matt 25:31, Jn 12:48, Acts 10:42, Acts 17:31, Rom 14:10, 2 Cor 5:10)?

Hello MM,

I owe you a response to Zechariah 14, although I believe Nick explained it effectively, in a nutshell.  Let me see If I can add to what he said:

i)  If we hold that as Jesus said, no man has seen God but the son (who is in the bosom of the father…he has declared him), then we must agree that God is Invisible and exceedingly awesome for us to behold in everyway.  Who can tell the myriads of ways by which God accomplishes his purposes?  Above all though, he sent Jesus our Lord, his own son, who was entrusted with far greater responsibilities towards mankind than all these (eg. angels, prophets, apostles, kings, widows, etc).  (John 3:16).

********
ii)  Jesus quoted Isaiah 61 in Luke 4:18-20 as follows:  

18  The Spirit of the LORD is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor.  He has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
19  to preach the acceptable year of the LORD.
20  Then he closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down.  
And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on him.
 

Isaiah 61:1-2

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, because the Lord has anointed Me to preach good tidings to the poor; he has sent me to heal the broken hearted , to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; to problaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn.

********

It is clear from Jesus' quotation in Luke 4:18-20 that he did not consider himself to be the LORD GOD, but rather as the one anointed by God to carry forth the mission.  

Why did I choose this verse to explain Zechariah 14?  The first sentence of the chapter struck me, “Behold the day of the LORD is coming,…”  The bible speaks of the day of the LORD/Lord.  If this chapter signifies the end times, then it can be tied into Isaiah 61, Mark 13, Matthew 24, 2 Pet 3, etc.

Now on that day, it would be Jesus returning to earth like a thief in the night to take his saints with him, but it IS nevertheless, the day of the LORD (Father) as per Isaiah 61:1-2.  Don't forget that Jesus says that only the Father knows of that day.  But the Father has put Christ in charge of it, so he will be standing in proxy to the Father as he does in all things.  

Also, here are some interesting facts about glory, so that when we exalt Jesus, it is ultimately to the Father's glory.  He wants us to dig his son (to put it in 1970s terms).  He is awfully proud of his son and likes to show him off (this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased).  If that is not a proud papa, I don't know of another.

********
1Th 2:12 That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.

1Th 2:20 For ye are our glory and joy.

1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

2Cr 8:23 Whether [any do enquire] of Titus, [he is] my partner and fellowhelper concerning you: or our brethren [be enquired of, they are] the messengers of the churches, [and] the glory of Christ.

Hbr 1:3 Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

********

Glory ultimately belongs to the Father, through his son.  It's interesting how glory works, isn't it?  We are the glory of Christ.  Christ is the glory of God.  Our children are our glory.  Woman is the glory of man.  I believe that the Father and his son have glories that we cannot fathom, but that the creation although is far less in glory to them, is a means by which some measure of their glory is manifested to us.

Hope this helps.

[Ben Elohim]

Quote (t8 @ Feb. 22 2005,10:39)

Quote (Ben Elohim @ Feb. 22 2005,19:11) Since you say spirit and body are mutually exclusive things, not only in this age but in the age to come, please reconcile for me these two passages and then perhaps you will see: 1. See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” (Luke 24:39). 2. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. (1 Corinthians 15:44-45; v. 45 translated as you like it). To Ben Elohim, Not to argue with you, I ask the following question. Jesus had the same body after the resurrection and it appears that the law of electromagnetism had no power over his body as he walked through physical objects. But does Jesus have this same body in Heaven now? He was resurrected to the earth before being taken up into Heaven. So it may be possible that the earthly body was for the earth. I often read descriptions of Christ in Heaven such as hair as white as snow, face shining like the sun and legs like bronze heated up in a furnace. Is that the same body?

Yes, same body.

BTW, you are only presuming that Jesus “walked through” physical things. The Bible never says that.

However, we are to understand that the resurrection body is not bound to the cosmic laws of nature. this is what Paul means when he says we believers are set free from the stoicheia of the cosmos (laws of nature). We are seated with Christ and are positionally in him who is above all angelic rule.

[Ben Elohim]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 22 2005,18:19)

Hi BE, In the Lk 24.39 verse the disciples were discussing the fact that they thought Jesus was a ghost. Is that you understanding of “SPIRIT”? “The last Adam became a life giving spirit” does not mean that he was transformed into a life giving spirit after his death. That is reading too much into the verse that is not shown. He became a life giving spirit in his earthly ministry when he was baptised by the Spirit.

You have yet to explain these two verses Nick. I did not ask you what 1 Corinthians does not mean but what it does mean with the Lukan verse in also view. It says in this verse that he was raised a life-giving spirit but you insist this does not mean he is a life-giving spirit. Perhaps you would like to explain this.

[Ben Elohim]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 22 2005,18:11)

Quote (Ben Elohim @ Feb. 22 2005,07:27) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 22 2005,02:08) Hi BE, If a person is just a body with a spirit then we have nothing to fear from the warning given by Jesus? Mt 10.28″ Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul;but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell” People can kill what you are but they cannot kill who you are. Jesus is saying you can kill someone's body but not their person. You cannot kill the WHO. You can only kill the WHAT. Perhaps you need to explain how it is that Jesus laid down his soul unto death if you wish to believe a soul cannot be dead but remains alive? Hi, We know that the same word can be translated as LIFE or SOUL The life is that of natural human life. The meanings are not interchangeable but are quite separate. Some have tried to muddy the water by swapping those meanings in this forum. Clearly in the verse quoted 'Life' was appropriate. Which version does your quote come from? KJV?

The Greek word psyche and Hebrew word nephesh do not have two separate meanings simply because you discovered that translators have used two different words to translate these original Greek and Hebrew words. A word translated does not amount to a word defined. People commonly make this mistake when they do not fully understand the nature of translating other languages and the limitations translations have. Basically, you are commiting a fallacy of word equivocation.

You could translate the original word as “soul” in every single case in the Bible and it would be more accurately and literally correct. When translators use the word “life” instead it does not mean this word precisely means “life” but is a way for translators to capture the idea of the words without literally translating it. For example, to take someone's soul means to take someone's life but it does not mean “soul” and “life” are the same thing. It is merely two different ways to describe the death event and they have simply used a convention that is more common to our modern English speaking ears rather than literally translating the word.

The Hebrew word for soul is nephesh. It does not mean “life.” That would be the Hebrew word chayyah. The Greek word for soul is psyche. It does not mean “life.” That would be the Greek word zoe. Psyche and Nephesh do not mean both “soul” OR “life” as you are promoting. They simply mean “soul” and chayyah and zoe are the words which mean “life.”

So when Jesus literally says he will give up his soul it does not literally say he will give up his life although the general idea amounts to the same thing and that is why translators do this, not because these words mean “life.” To give up your soul means to allow the body and spirit to separate unto death. A soul is an entity that has life. And that is why these two ideas are intimately related but yet are not the same thing.

You have to remember that translators are not always giving you precise definitions of words with English words (this is impossible anyway because perfect word matches between languages seldom exist). They are rather trying to capture an idea. While the ancients referring to death as giving up your soul; we talk about giving up our life and so your translators have opted for that route for the common reader. But the literal renderings would not be “life” in these cases but “soul,” a soul being that which is a something that happens to have something else – life, dust that has life is a soul, dust that has chayyah by the power of ruach is a nephesh and dust that has zoe by the power of pneuma is a psyche.

[NickHassan]

Hi BE,
So you do agree Life as Psyche is a better translation here? And do you agree Jesus has shown us in Mt 10 28 that body and soul are separate entities? Otherwise why mention both if they are the same thing?
Zoe refers to eternal life.

[Ben Elohim]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 22 2005,19:32)

Hi BE, So you do agree Life as Psyche is a better translation here? And do you agree Jesus has shown us in Mt 10 28 that body and soul are separate entities? Otherwise why mention both if they are the same thing? Zoe refers to eternal life.

Nick: So you do agree Life as Psyche is a better translation here?

BE: No I do not agree it is a “better” translation. It is an acceptable translation of an intended idea. It does not capture the meaning of the word pysche but captures the meaning of an event.

Nick: And do you agree Jesus has shown us in Mt 10 28 that body and soul are separate entities?

BE: No I do not agree that Matthew 10:28 are separate “entities” as if they are two separate substances of a human being. Body is WHAT we are (that would be an entity, substance). Soul is WHO we are (that would not be an entity or substance). No one can kill WHOness; we can only kill WHATness and that is Jesus' point. At the funeral, WHO the person was still remains and this is what we talk about in the eulogy.

Nick: Otherwise why mention both if they are the same thing?

BE: You are confused. They are not the same thing. Soul does not equal Body. We are souls of flesh. We are souls that are flesh. We are a WHO of WHAT, persons of flesh, souls of flesh. A soul is not a thing in addition to a body. It is a body of dust that is a WHO. Dust that has no spirit is not a who, not a soul. A rock is not a who and so is not a soul.

A soul is not equal to dust or dust equal to soul. A soul is dust that is alive and has spirit in it or had spirit in it. A soul is the phenonmena of living dust not the inherent dust itself. IF dust has spirit in it then that dust is a soul not because dust is a soul but because dust with life-making spirit makes that dust a soul in the same say a bulb that has energy makes it a light. That bulb itself is not equal to light.

Nick: Zoe refers to eternal life.

BE: That is incorrect Nick. Zoe refers to any kind of life. Eternal life is aionic zoe.

[Ben Elohim]

/?>

[NickHassan]

Hi BE,
We are not lightbulbs. And we are not rocks of course. Neither are we living dust.

We are God's marvellous created beings that have more dimensions than these objects.

If you agree we are a WHAT and a WHO why is it difficult to see the WHO lives inside the WHAT??

[Ben Elohim]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 22 2005,20:29)

Hi BE, We are not lightbulbs. And we are not rocks of course. Neither are we living dust. We are God's marvellous created beings that have more dimensions than these objects. If you agree we are a WHAT and a WHO why is it difficult to see the WHO lives inside the WHAT??

Nick: We are not lightbulbs

BE: It is an analogy to help you understand Nick. And it works perfectly.

Nick: And we are not rocks of course. Neither are we living dust.

BE: You err because you do not know the Scriptures.

God made the dust alive by breathing a spirit into it and when he did make that dust alive that dust became a living soul.

Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis 2:7).

For dust you are, And to dust you shall return. (Genesis 3:19).

For He Himself knows our frame; He knows that we are but dust. (Psalm 103:104).

then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (Eccl 12:7).

For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts; for all is vanity. All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. (Ecclesiastes 3:19-20).

Nick: We are God's marvellous created beings that have more dimensions than these objects.

BE: We are not products of your imagination Nick. We are what we are and what God says we are. See above verses.

Nick: If you agree we are a WHAT and a WHO why is it difficult to see the WHO lives inside the WHAT??

BE: Because that is not what the Bible says. It does not say we are a WHO that lives inside a WHAT. It says we are WHO's that are WHATs. We are souls of dust, not souls inside of dust.

This dust is a person. Just get someone to poke you and you will see they poked a person, a soul.

[NickHassan]

Hi BE,
Why highlight the flesh? Jesus didn't

Jn 6.63″ The flesh profits nothing..”

The WHAT is only a shell for our real nature. Man BECAME a living soul.The dust fades into the background in importance for us as beings. Certainly it holds the key to physical life and if it is destroyed the soul is forced to sleep. Butb it does not control our lives. If it did we would livwe according to it's lusts and scripture is strongly against that. We feed it and care for it to stop it dying for that is the will of God for all his creation but it is only a shelter for us in this world.
Ecclesiastes focuses on natural 'body' human and animal life and not on the soul so no conclusions about the soul can be drawn from it. It does not discuss life beyond the grave in any depth. It is a perspective from nature. Even it questions too if man follows the same fate as animals.

[Ben Elohim]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 22 2005,21:20)

Hi BE, Why highlight the flesh? Jesus didn't Jn 6.63″ The flesh profits nothing..” The WHAT is only a shell for our real nature. Man BECAME a living soul.The dust fades into the background in importance for us as beings. Certainly it holds the key to physical life and if it is destroyed the soul is forced to sleep. Butb it does not control our lives. If it did we would livwe according to it's lusts and scripture is strongly against that. We feed it and care for it to stop it dying for that is the will of God for all his creation but it is only a shelter for us in this world. Ecclesiastes focuses on natural 'body' human and animal life and not on the soul so no conclusions about the soul can be drawn from it. It does not discuss life beyond the grave in any depth. It is a perspective from nature. Even it questions too if man follows the same fate as animals.

Nick: Why highlight the flesh? Jesus didn't

Jn 6.63″ The flesh profits nothing..”

BE: What does that have to do with anything we are talking about here?

Nick:
The WHAT is only a shell for our real nature.

BE: That is not a Hebrew or Christian belief but a belief introduced by pagans and Gnostics Nick. You will find absolutely no Biblical evidence whatsoever that our “real nature” is something other than dust. Dust we are and to dust we shall return. God said it and that settles it.

Nick: Man BECAME a living soul.The dust fades into the background in importance for us as beings. Certainly it holds the key to physical life and if it is destroyed the soul is forced to sleep. Butb it does not control our lives. If it did we would livwe according to it's lusts and scripture is strongly against that. We feed it and care for it to stop it dying for that is the will of God for all his creation but it is only a shelter for us in this world.

BE: Jesus said we need to deny our SELF. That IS denying the flesh because flesh is what we are – dust – and flesh is what where sin originates in us with its lusts.

And if we put off the flesh and deny ourSELF in this manner, God will redeem and glorify us, that is, redeem and glorify these bodies of flesh – US – the resurrection of the body.

I suggest you post your replies under the thread “What is man?” This tangential issue is messing up the subject of this thread.

[NickHassan]

Hi MM,
If Jesus is part of a trinity and is the God of the Old Testament then he is not what he said he is, the unique and separate Son of God.

I believe him.

Shouldn't you?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Ben Elohim @ Feb. 23 2005,13:46)

Yes, same body.

To Ben Elohim,

Can I have a scripture to prove that?

I do not doubt it is the same body, but I want to see scriptural proof before accepting it whole heartedly.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Ben Elohim @ Feb. 23 2005,14:50)

We are souls of flesh.  We are souls that are flesh.  We are a WHO of WHAT, persons of flesh, souls of flesh.  A soul is not a thing in addition to a body.  It is a body of dust that is a WHO.  Dust that has no spirit is not a who, not a soul.  A rock is not a who and so is not a soul.

Hi BenE,

If our soul is the combination of flesh and Spirit/spirit, then do we get another soul when our bodies cease to be flesh, or when the spirit inhabits a non-fleshly body.

Also John saw the souls of those who were slain, under the alter of God. I assume that their bodies were in the ground at this point. Please explain.

Also God is a who, does he need a body to be a who?

If possible could you answer this in the 'What is Man' discussion. That way those who read these discussions will at least be able to find these posts under the correct discussion. It seems a bit of a waste to have this discussion hidden away in another subject.

Here is the link:

https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….5;st=80

thx

[Cubes]

Hi MM,

I attempted an answer to your question on Zechariah 14 on page 130 of this thread. Don't know if you saw it. Let us know if there is anything else lacking.

[Anonymous]

Hi Cubes,
Thanks, I hadn't noticed your post. I will digest it and get back to you.

[NickHassan]

Hi BE,
You say the body of Jesus in heaven is the same one he lived in on earth?The body he was born into was of the dust of the ground. It was perishable as was proven by the injuries it received.It was natural flesh and blood.

1Cor15.50″ Now I say this ,brethren, that FLESH AND BLOOD CANNOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM;nor does the PERISHABLE inherit the imperishable”

That applies to Jesus as well  as us. The man from heaven already wears his new spiritual body and we will bear his image.

[roberts]

Thank you for this forum and your time. The last posted message given is dated June 4, 2002. Why?

[Anonymous]

I think you'll find thats the beginning of the thread, not the end. Posts made on June 4 2002 are on pg 1 of this 132 pg thread. Hope this helps.

[Artizan007]

T8, BE, NH and RR

Please can you explain the following two verses in Revelations where Jesus and God seem to use the same title to explain their identy. I have been having discussions in college on the Trinity and everyday i find things that i have to think through on this subject:

Rev 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” declares the Lord God, the one who is, who was, and who is coming, the Almighty

This i can see is being spoken about the Father. Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

Rev 1:11 saying, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last; also, What you see, write in a scroll, and send to the seven churches of Asia: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea. 12 And I turned to see the voice which spoke with me. 13 And having turned, I saw seven golden lampstands, and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of man, having been clothed to the feet, and having been girded with a golden girdle at the breasts. 14 And the hairs of His head were white as white wool, as snow, and His eyes as a flame of fire; 15 and His feet like burnished brass having been fired in a furnace; and His voice as a sound of many waters; 16 and having in His right hand seven stars; and a sharp, two-edged sword proceeding out of His mouth, and His face shining as the sun in its power. 17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet, as dead. And He put His right hand on me, saying to me, Do not fear. I am the First and the Last, 18 and the Living One; and I became dead; and, behold, I am living forever and ever. Amen. And I have the keys to Hades, and of death.

Here both Christ and the Father call themselves the Alpha and Omega. Can you explain please. Does this not imply that they are in essence the same.

I can see that the Father is the beginning and the end, the one who was, and is, and who is coming. whereas, the words for Jesus state that the is the First and the Last. Does this mean the same thing or is there a difference in being here.

Also verse 9 Confuses me: It says that John was on the isle of patmos because of the Word of God (is this Jesus or should it have lower case and be the word of God) and because of the witness of Jesus. Greens Lit Translation.

1. Is Jesus not the Word of God or has this version been translated poorly.

2. Verse 10 says Spirit on the Lord's day is this another case where it should be a lower case? Is John talking about being in the HS or being in the spirit?

3. There are so many meanings for each word I look up when I use the Strongs Greek. How do I know which is correct use of the word?

[Author]

Posts