- This topic has 18,300 replies, 268 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Hi, Ed,
Sorry, but your case doesn’t hold any water. It looks like copied it from some online source who really doesn’t know Greek grammar.
Hi Hoghead1,
Not at all, I do my own study
EDJ….YOU AND MARTY, both have it right, Jesus was “the” CHRISTO’S, or the “Anointed” one of God, and that anointing was GOD the FATHER who by that process was ‘IN”, the man JESUS. When Thomas came to finally see that, then it dawned on him, like, “O” , I get it! “my lord “AND” my God”. “God was “IN” the anointed Jesus reconciling the world unto himself”, which made him the “CHRISTO’S of God, but never himself the God who dwelt “in” him.
Where Phil 2:1-11 Says he “existed”, remember Paul was speaking about his past earthly existence, not before his earthly existence. When PAUL wrote that, Jesus was no longer on the earth, he was in heaven, so Jesus’ past would be when he was on earth, not before any previous earth existence . Trentarians who are preexistences, force that text to say what it is in fact not saying at all.
Good to see brothers and sisters who stand in the truth and are sound in their understanding of scriptures.
peace and love to you and yours. ……..gene
Hi, Ed,
Sorry, but your case doesn’t hold any water. It looks like copied it from some online source who really doesn’t know Greek grammar.
Hi Hoghead1,
Not at all, I do my own study
Hi Hoghead1,
After rereading the last three pages, I believe you are
mistakenly attributing T8’s post to me. I do not
believe as T8 does. You may be making
that incorrect assumption as well.____________
God bless
Ed JHi, Ed,
Sorry, if I may have gotten some posts confused. I didn’t have time to look back at them. But if your post was the one arguing about the indefinite article in John 1, then yes, it does appear you are simply repeating some online source. If t8 is the one who posted that material, my same response applies there.
Hi, Ed,
Passages such as Jn. 14:10-11 and also Jn. 14:20 are those used to support the Trinity, however. You would know tht, had you reread anything on the doctrines and rationale for the Trinity.
Hi, Ed,
2 Cor. 5:19 is a major passage Trinitarians appeal to. In that you missed this point her and in another post, that tells me you are not familiar with Trinitarian doctrines.
Hi, Ed,
I didn’t say you didn’t do your own study. The issue is, Study of what? What sources do you use? I have yet to see you demonstrate any knowledge or study of any Trinitarian writings or doctrines or solid sources of biblical scholarship.
HI, 942767,
Sorry, no takers here. First, you affirm predestination, which is neither a rational teaching nor a biblical one. Secondly, you overlook biblical passages that speak of Christ as the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning creation and its ultimate culmination.
Also, I don’t have the time to look at material on youtube, which may or may not be solid material, to start with. My advice is skip all that junk. Read major historical works, such as Augustine’s “De Trinitate.”
HI, t8,
Generally, scholars understand Philippians to be claiming that Christ preexisted as God and that the surrendered certain privileges of such divinity in order to accomplish his mission. That is based on a keener understanding of the Greek here than what you have. That is way some Bible translations simply read “who being in very nature God.”
HI, t8,
OK, so at what point prior to creation did Christ come along? Why? How? At what point did God teh Father come along? If the Son is not eternal, then neither is the Father, as you can’t be a Father without a Son? So, what was leading up to these major changes in God prior to creation? What would you call God prior to being either Father and Son?
Hi hoghead,
If you understood the manifestations of the Spirit of God you would not need to devise a trinity.
HI, t8,
Generally, scholars understand Philippians to be claiming that Christ preexisted as God and that the surrendered certain privileges of such divinity in order to accomplish his mission. That is based on a keener understanding of the Greek here than what you have. That is way some Bible translations simply read “who being in very nature God.”
Generally scientists understand that variation of species is proof of evolution. Many generally believe there is no God. Personally, I do not put too much trust in the wise of this world. Scripture says many are puffed up with pride and yet God reveals his truth to the humble. That is why many so-called experts cannot grasp the truth. God generally does not reveal truths to the proud, even though they attain lots of knowedge.
Always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.
Back to Philippians, it is clear to the unbiased that it doesn’t say that Jesus is God. The form of something is different to the person. It speaks of nature, body, shape only. Obviously the son of God would have God’s form if he wholly came from God. From what other nature was there? Further, we can partake in this divine nature too.
HI, t8,
OK, so at what point prior to creation did Christ come along? Why? How? At what point did God teh Father come along? If the Son is not eternal, then neither is the Father, as you can’t be a Father without a Son? So, what was leading up to these major changes in God prior to creation? What would you call God prior to being either Father and Son?
God became a Father when he begat a son. That doesn’t mean that God is not eternal.
At what point did Jesus appear. Well he was born as a man. However, his origin is of ancient times. It seems that he is between God and the cosmos.
He existed in the form of God. He emptied himself and came in the flesh. He died, rose again, and is seated at the right-hand of God in the glory he had with him before the cosmos.
Father > Son of God/Word > Cosmos
In Mathematics there are different kinds of infinity. There is the traditional understanding that we would usually apply to God as ‘eternal’. No beginning or end.
There is also the infinite that has a beginning but no end. That more describes us which we call ‘eternal life’.
The head of woman is the man, the head of the man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God. Here you can see the divine order.
The woman came from the man. Mankind was created by God through the son of God/Word. And Christ came from God. And God came from no one. He is the originator. All else including Christ are images of this God. He is aptly named the Father.
And who was with the Father in the beginning?
The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.
I have yet to see you demonstrate any knowledge or study of any Trinitarian writings or doctrines or solid sources of biblical scholarship.
If understanding scripture was hard and we needed to rely on experts to interpret it for us, then we would need to put our trust in man. But scripture is not hard to understand if you have the Spirit and hear the voice of the shepherd. It is easy and clear.
There is one God the Father. He sent his son into the world to save sinners. Those who have the son have life. We do not need doctrines like the Trinity, Binity, Oneness, Aliens, or whatever else people say God is. These arguments lie outside scripture of which I don’t have a problem with, but when they contradict scripture, then I have a problem.
It is clear from scripture for example that no one can see God. And Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
God is invisible and Jesus is not. Most just ignore such scriptures because they believe that Jesus is God and it doesn’t fit their paradigm.
How many scholars have you read that teach that God is invisible and no man can see him?
1 John 4:12 (English-NIV)
No one has ever seen God; ….1 Timothy 1:17 (English-NIV)
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.
Amen.1 Timothy 6:15-16 (English-NIV)
15 which God will bring about in his own time, God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords,
16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.John 6:46 (English-NIV)
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.John 5:37 (English-NIV)
And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me.
You have never heard his voice nor seen his form.John 1:18 (English-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.Notice that the last scripture confirms that it is God who is invisible, not the son.
This is but one point among hundreds that I could point out that are largely ignored because the Doctrine of the Trinity has captured many minds.
HI, t8,
Your reference to science seems way off topic, not an analogous situation. The rest of your post shows you want to unduly attack the “experts” as being all “biased” simply because they do not agree with your views. so, forget it. No takers here.
HI again, t8,
Sorry, t8, that really doesn’t answer any of my questions. If anything, your response makes your position appear even more untenable, as now you feel teh Father isn’t eternal either. So if the Father and Son aren’t eternal, who or what is?
HI again, t8,
It takes a lot more to really dig into the depths of Scripture than just the mere conviction you are right because you believe you were moved by the Spirit. Every kook and nutcase and fanatic in the book claims that they are right. that they and they alone were truly moved by the Spirit. So forget that kind of argument. Doesn’t even begin to cut it with me. I want to see a solid case made, a solid rational argument presented, before I take seriously what some Tom, Dick, or Harry out there claims about Scripture. That means I need to see some real expertise shown. Given that Scripture is generally presented in translation form, and given that translations never do justice to the original text, I am not impressed with anyone unless I am pretty sure they can read the Bible in the original languages. That’s why I listen to the biblical scholars, not opinionated laity and other amateurs. I realize you and some other members here really enjoy downing scholars, major church fathers, theologians. However, all that really goes to prove is how arrogant you are.
Hi again, t8,
You can go on an anti-intellectual rant all you want about the “wisdom of the world.” All you have presented is a bogus argument. that backfires on you. You, too, are part of the wisdom of the world and so have done nothing but state you own homespun opinions of the Trinity. I can’t think of a faster way to be pulled off track from Scripture than listening to the opinions of a bunch of self-appointed bar-stool apostles who think they are so much more motivated and guided by the Spirit than anyone else and so really have no need to study or respect any form of scholarship, especially that represented by the church fathers and other great thinkers, and believe themselves to be especially empowered by God to cast aspersion on the Christian religion by attacking central teachings such as the Trinity.
Your reference to science seems way off topic, not an analogous situation
You missed the point then. I established that mainstream science and religious experts believe many things contrary to what scripture says. Thus you either trust in the scriptures or you trust in the opinions of so-called experts. Of course this is not true with all so-called experts as some scientists believe in God and some biblical scholars believe that the Father is the one true God.
My point stands about pride among the learned being an issue.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
