- This topic has 18,300 replies, 268 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Hi,
Adam was a son of God so all men are sons of God in one way.God said to Moses in Ex 4.22
” Then you shall say to Pharaoh
' Israel is My son, My firstborn. So I said to you
'Let My son go that he may serve me'
But you have refused to let him go. Behold I will kill your son, your firstborn”
God again claims his status as Father of the Jewish people in Hosea 11.1” When Israel was a youth I loved him, out of Egypt I called my son”
This is quoted a a prophecy about the Son of God Jesus in Mt 2.15 but also applies to Israel.
The Israelites also claimed God as their Father.
Is 63.16
” For you Lord are our Father, though Abraham dopes not know us and Israel does not recognise us, You, O Lord, are our Father, our redeemer from of old is Your name”
Is 64.8
” But now, O Lord, You are our Father, we are the clay and you our potter and all of us are the work of Your hand”
Paul also emphasisied this point speaking in Athens to the unbelieving gentiles
Acts 17.28
” For we also are His children”But God did not regard their behaviours as evidence of their derivation from Him as their Father effectively disowning His children and the adultery of idolatry.
Jer3.4
” Have you not just now called to me
'My Father, You are the friend of my youth?…' I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce..”So when the Jews claimed God was their Father Jesus told them it was not so but Satan was their Father. He also queried whether they could call Abraham their Father. This is becuse faithfulness and obedience is what proves the relationship of men with their God and not just heredity.
Yet, as Luke 15 and the Prodigal son shows, God is willing to come running down the road to meet his children who have repented and sought reconciliation with Him. He is ready to restore all rights and privileges immediately. He still shows the heart of a true Father if His children respond to his pleas.
Quote (t8 @ June 12 2005,01:33) Quote (epistemaniac @ June 12 2005,20:12) thanks t8… I had already begun to have a look at that document, unfortuantely I did not get very far before I became a bit disgusted with the faulty reasoning and improper use of the Scriptures…. but I think I will continue to go through it… it s a good exercise… going through what I have thus far reminds me of time I spent going through the atrocious tract put out by the Watchtower called “Should You Believe in the Trinity?” The tract is filled with all kinds of nonsense, but, as I mentioned, going through something like that, along with what appears to be going on in the document you link to, is just good practice…. blessings
faulty reasoning?I'm all ears.
We know that even the gospel is non-sense to those who are perishing. Nonsense can also mean that one has no understanding of it.
lol… really? all ears? well we can hope….
let me first say that some of the same sorts of fallacious reasoning can be found in your response…. now while it is of course the case that …..the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God….. that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that I see faulty reasoning in the adobe file you referred me to regarding Trinitarianism! lol… you seem to equate disagreement with that article as some sort of disagreement with the Gospel… Non Sequitur….
and… since you are all ears…. the problem with the article begins rather quickly…. an early disparaging remark says
“I think it would be safe to say that many Christians who accept the doctrine of the Trinity, also remain confused and even those who have a deeper understanding of it, will admit that they do not understand it completely when challenged. The normal answer is that the Trinity is hard to understand because God is beyond our thinking.”And….? the point here is…..? What? That because we (Trinitarians) claim to not fully understand the doctrine that it is therefore…. what? … false? Please. Show me a man who says he fully comprehends God and I will show you a liar. No finite human can understand an infinite God, period, does that mean we should doubt that the doctrine “God exists” simply because we do not understand it? Yet this is what the allusion says… and many many Arians/Modalists make this claim either explicitly, or implicitly, as has been done in this “article”, that simply because the claim is made to not fully understand the doctrine of the Trinity that it is therefore suspect. However, that just does not follow.
Moving on then…
For some reason or another, the author of the article says “Have you ever been confused by the following scriptures.”… and then goes on to cite 1 Jn 4:12 which says that no one has ever seen God… and several other scriptures that speak of God’s incorporeal nature… thankfully I give the author credit for pointing out that these verses are speaking of the Father’s relationship to time and space, the article states “This does seem confusing but the word “God” in these verses are of course referring to the Father as the following scriptures will prove.” Well done.
Then follows the statement
“This next scripture would have to be one of the most ignored verses in the Bible, because it does not fit in with most peoples theology.”
What?!?!? What does this have to do with the above point, that the Son reveals the Father, and that one of the attributes of the Father is invisibility?
Oh well. Not being sure how this ties in.. we press on…
Next the claim is “This next scripture would have to be one of the most ignored verses in the Bible, because it does not fit in with most peoples theology.”
And then 1 Cor. 8:5-6 is cited. Hmmm, what people would these be, this group of people who “ignore” this passage? Would they be Trinitarians perchance? : ) Funny, I have several thousand books in my own library, many of these books are commentaries, and just a cursory look at a few on 1 Cor. hardly reveals that there is any ignoring going on. So before we go on to say anything abut the theological content, we have to point out that this is just another example of the faulty reasoning I earlier spoke of. This comment amounts to nothing more than an ad hominem that can in no way be proven. How could one go about proving that 1 Cor. 8:5-6 is “one of the most ignored” passages any way!?!? No matter if one is Trinitarian or Arian, this reasoning process is faulty. You simply cannot prove that a given passage of the Bible is ignored without documenting exactly how this could be the case, and, in this case, documentation is impossible because it would be an attempt to prove a negative.
But, having my curiosity raised, lets move on a bit more and see what is said about “one of the most ignored passages in the Bible”! The claim is made:
“This scripture plainly points out that for us (believers) there is only one God the Father and Jesus is our only Lord.
You cannot make this scripture say anything else without misquoting it. It is very straight forward and to the point. The amazing thing about this scripture is the fact that it is not isolated. The Bible is full of scriptures that teach us that the Father is the one true God and Jesus Christ is his Son.”Great. Wonderful. Now… what is the point here? Who wants to “make it say anything else”? Those radical Trinitarians again? : ) The fact is, I, speaking as a Trinitarian, have no need or desire to “make it” say anything but what it says. However, the Arians do want to make it say what it doesn’t. How? Well, here’s how: The claim is made by many Arian group that this passage proves that Jesus is not God… right? There is only one God, and it’s the Father. That’s what all the fuss is about, right? The passage says
“For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth–as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”– yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.”The first thing to note for the Arian is this, that if their interpretation is true, they are in big trouble because it would prove far too much; that is because the verse says that since there is one God, the Father… therefore, according to them, Jesus cannot be God…. BUT! Look at the rest of the verse… IF that is what Paul was trying to say, speaking in absolute terms about roles and nature, then guess what, since we have only one God, and that’s the Father…. Then that also means we have only ONE Lord, and that’s none other than Jesus Christ!! LOL… Now, what Arian is going to want to agree to the idea that there is only one God, the Father, which is great…. However, the downside to this is that it just so happens that God the Father does not happen to be Lord… Why? Well the Bible clearly says that there is ONLY ONE LORD, and that is Jesus Christ, therefore, according to their reasoning processes, God the Fathe
r is not Lord! My my what a pickle! : ) Perhaps the Trinitarians aren’t ignoring the passage after all?At any rate, at least part of what Paul IS saying to the Corinthians is that there is only one true God as compared to the multitude of false gods worshipped in the port city of Corinth, after all… 1 Cor. chapter 8 IS devoted to speaking of false gods and the sacrifices offered to them, and what the believer should believe and act on in regard to the nature of those sacrifices… it is NOT a treatise on the nature of God! Here are the first 3 rules for hermeneutics guys… context, context, context…. : ) Don’t try to force the Scriptures to support your doctrines, when the passage is not dealing with the issue you are directly concerned with discussing.
I could go on to point out further fallacies, and probably will, since there seems to be no shortage of fodder from which to choose, I mean look, we are barely 2 pages into the document and look at the problems already evident!
Well let me close, for now with a few words in the article I COULD say Amen to:
“We know that scripture is here to guide us, teach us and correct us. If you find that scripture teaches contrary to any belief you hold then all I can say is that you need to humble yourself and align yourself with that truth and be encouraged that you are moving on in your faith. On the other hand, if the scriptures reinforce what we already believe, then we can be encouraged, knowing that our Father in heaven has already revealed those truths to us.”
Blessings
Quote (epistemaniac @ June 12 2005,06:01) Christ, who is the image of God the Son reveals the Father,
there is only one God the Father and Jesus is our only Lord.
the Father is the one true God and Jesus Christ is his Son
Hi E,These are your words.
We do not seek to prove The Son of God is not a divine being. He is. We just remind people that he is not his own Father. We say he is who he says he is, the Son of God, the image of that God. I would trust his words would you not? We agree the Father is the one true God and the Son reveals Him because he is filled with the Spirit of the Father.
We say he is the only begotten Son and not part of a committee God. If he is not the Son of God then he could not have come in the flesh and that is the test for antichrist doctrine. If he is still part of God, who you have said is the one true God is it a binity or a trinity that has come in the flesh?
1Cor 8 5
” For even if there rare so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords YET FOR US there is but one God , the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for him;and one Lord, Jesus Christ by whom are all things, and we exist through him”As you know these books were written to the saved.
There are many gods and lords, but they are not gods or lords for us to obey or worship. We are under the Lord Jesus Christ who is under his Lord and God, and our God, the Father.
To epistemaniac,
Quote that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that I see faulty reasoning in the adobe file you referred me to regarding Trinitarianism! lol… you seem to equate disagreement with that article as some sort of disagreement with the Gospel The point I was making is that nonsense to the reader doesn't make the writing wrong. I used an example of the gospel to prove my point about how one can see something as nonsense and yet it can be the words of life. You got the complete wrong end of the stick. So I have spelled it out for you. But in actual fact the gospel encompasses the truth that Jesus is the son of God. It doesn't encompass that teaching that says that Jesus is God.
Quote “I think it would be safe to say that many Christians who accept the doctrine of the Trinity, also remain confused and even those who have a deeper understanding of it, will admit that they do not understand it completely when challenged. The normal answer is that the Trinity is hard to understand because God is beyond our thinking.” And….? the point here is…..? What? That because we (Trinitarians) claim to not fully understand the doctrine that it is therefore…. what? … false?
Well I do like to leave the point open sometimes so that those who are searching may discover it for themselves. But for the sake of defending what is written I will spell it out for you.
- God is not the God of confusion.
- Anyone who teaches a doctrine that they do not understand is teaching nonsense. It is nonsensical to them, so how can they teach it?
- If you teach something that you do not understand, then by reason of your lack of understanding, you could be teaching lies as there is no way that you could know due to your lack of understanding what you are teaching.
- A teacher teaches because he knows what he is talking about. False teachers teach lies and expand on things they have know understanding of.
- We can only know that which God has revealed. This is what we teach from. If you go beyond that, then it will be wrong. If God didn't reveal it, then it comes from the spirit of man, not
God.
Quote Please. Show me a man who says he fully comprehends God and I will show you a liar. I am not showing you a man who fully comprehends God, I am showing you scripture. I teach that which is written and can be known. From scripture we can exhort, correct and rebuke. I am not saying I am infalliable and for that reason I stay away from man-made doctrines when I realise what they are. I do listen, but if a man has no understanding of scripture and does not bring up relevant or scriptural points (only opinions), then I have learned nothing from that person.
Quote No finite human can understand an infinite God, period, does that mean we should doubt that the doctrine “God exists” simply because we do not understand it? Of course not. It means that you shouldn't say this or that about God if it is not revealed. But God has revealed himself, so we can rightly say that he exists. He says that he is one, so we can teach that he is one. He says that he has a son, so we can teach that he has a son. And so on….
Quote For some reason or another, the author of the article says “Have you ever been confused by the following scriptures.”… and then goes on to cite 1 Jn 4:12 which says that no one has ever seen God… and several other scriptures that speak of God’s incorporeal nature… thankfully I give the author credit for pointing out that these verses are speaking of the Father’s relationship to time and space, the article states “This does seem confusing but the word “God” in these verses are of course referring to the Father as the following scriptures will prove.” Well done. Then follows the statement
“This next scripture would have to be one of the most ignored verses in the Bible, because it does not fit in with most peoples theology.”
What?!?!? What does this have to do with the above point, that the Son reveals the Father, and that one of the attributes of the Father is invisibility?
Simple, that if you believe that no one has seen God and you believe that Jesus is God, then you have a clear contradiction because Jesus is a visible being. If you understand that God is the Father you do not have a contradicition. Also the article goes on to show a pattern that the God being referred to in scripture is the Father. But perhaps you missed that??
Quote How could one go about proving that 1 Cor. 8:5-6 is “one of the most ignored” passages any way!?!? No matter if one is Trinitarian or Arian, this reasoning process is faulty. Well if scripture says that there is one God the Father and you believe that God is the Father and also the Son etc, then I would say that you are ignoring that scriptural truth. The fact that most Christians believe in the Trinity, should show that such a conclusion is not beyond reason. I think there are something like 1 billion Catholics who by reason of them being Catholic should believe in the Trinity doctrine. They should also believe in Mary as the Mother of God, that assumption can be understood if you believe in the Trinity doctrine that Jesus is God, therefore Mary the Mother of Jesus must be the Mother of God. But if we understand that Jesus is the son of God, then Mary is Jesus mother in the fleshly sense. She gave birth to the son of God, not God himself. God is not a man and God cannot die. So if we both agree that most Christians believe in the Trinity Doctrine, then most Christians are ignoring the truth that the Father is the one true God.
Quote “This scripture plainly points out that for us (believers) there is only one God the Father and Jesus is our only Lord.
You cannot make this scripture say anything else without misquoting it. It is very straight forward and to the point. The amazing thing about this scripture is the fact that it is not isolated. The Bible is full of scriptures that teach us that the Father is the one true God and Jesus Christ is his Son.”Great. Wonderful. Now… what is the point here? Who wants to “make it say anything else”? Those radical Trinitarians again? : ) The fact is, I, speaking as a Trinitarian, have no need or desire to “make it” say anything but what it says. However, the Arians do want to make it say what it doesn’t. How? Well, here’s how: The claim is made by many Arian group that this passage proves that Jesus is not God… right? There is only one God, and it’s the Father. That’s what all the fuss is about, right? The passage says
Simple, the Trinity doctrine teaches that 3 persons make up one God. On the contrary, scripture says that only the Father is God (Almighty) and Jesus is our Lord. Try fitting that into most creeds. The Trinity doctrine clearly does not teach that. I would have thought that any reader would have picked it up. But I spell it out for you once again. If God were a Trinity surely you would see clear teaching on it in such places in scripture. Instead we see time and time again that the Father is the Almighty God and him alone.
Quote The first thing to note for the Arian is this… There are no Arians here, that I know of.
Quote At any rate, at least part of what Paul IS saying to the Corinthians is that there is only one true God as compared to the multitude of false gods worshipped in the port city of Corinth, after all… 1 Cor. chapter 8 IS devoted to speaking of false gods and the sacrifices offered to them, and what the believer should believe and act on in regard to the nature of those sacrifices… it is NOT a treatise on the nature of God! Here are the first 3 rules for hermeneutics guys… context, context, context…. : ) Don’t try to force the Scriptures to support your doctrines, when the passage is not dealing with the issue you are directly concerned with discussing. Correct and who is the true God, it is the Father, not a trinune God. Exactly the point that was being driven home. Context context context is that the true God is the Father. To make Jesus that God also is not context is it? The context that God is being spoken of is the Father. If you do not believe me, then try this simple but effective exercise. Replace the word 'God' for the word 'Trinity' where God is mentoned in scripture, then see how confusing your doctrine becomes. E.g., For the Trinity so loved the world that the Trinity gave his only begotten son….
Doesn't that make 4.
Quote I could go on to point out further fallacies, and probably will, since there seems to be no shortage of fodder from which to choose, I mean look, we are barely 2 pages into the document and look at the problems already evident! Nonsense to you because you do not understand what is written. I have had to spell it out for you, but that is not a reflection of your intellect, rather your heart my friend.
Quote “We know that scripture is here to guide us, teach us and correct us. If you find that scripture teaches contrary to any belief you hold then all I can say is that you need to humble yourself and align yourself with that truth and be encouraged that you are moving on in your faith. On the other hand, if the scriptures reinforce what we already believe, then we can be encouraged, knowing that our Father in heaven has already revealed those truths to us.” Amen to that too.
t8,
Define the Gospel for me please.Nick!! LOL… you said “We do not seek to prove The Son of God is not a divine being. He is. We just remind people that he is not his own Father.”
See!!!! LOL… there we go again Nick.. and the hits just keep on coming!!…. I know that there is great enjoyment in the erecting and defeating of straw men, but in the end, not really a whole lot more gets accomplished, other than some personal satisfaction at “another job well done”!!
As if Trinitarians teach that Jesus is His own Father! PLEASE…..:D 
ok… please please please track down for me any reputable trinitarian theologian who teaches that Jesus is His own Father… now THAT is a worthy endeavor!! lol…. it should keep you busy for quite a long time too!!Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 12 2005,01:37) Hi E,
Is Jesus the Son of God?
Or is he God Himself.Or is he part of God Himself?
He said he is the Son of God.Is there any Son that remains part of his Father? After all all Father/Son family relationships date back to this one[Eph 3.14]?Is Jesus then not the only begotten Son of God as scripture claims but still part of that God as trinity? Scripture says God is the Father and God of Jesus Christ and the source of His Spirit and not a committee.
Eph 1.17
“.that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him”He calls God his Father. Is he his own Father if they are of the same substance?
Nick, on a more productive note, you asked“Is Jesus the Son of God?
Or is he God Himself.”Answer: Yes
“Or is he part of God Himself?”
Well I do not think you could rightly put it that way… no… God is one in essence, so there are no “parts” of God floating around anywhere…“He said he is the Son of God.”
Hey! Something we can agree on!! lol.. yep… Jesus said He is the Son of God… yessiree He did…“Is there any Son that remains part of his Father? After all all Father/Son family relationships date back to this one[Eph 3.14]?”
I think that any attempt to try and exhaustively define God by attempting to equate Him with human beings, their attributes and relationships, etc, is doomed to failure.“Is Jesus then not the only begotten Son of God as scripture claims but still part of that God as trinity?”
Yep! You get an “A” and a gold star Nick!“Scripture says God is the Father and God of Jesus Christ and the source of His Spirit and not a committee.”
Ok Nick, you have got it partly right… Scripture does describe God as Father, but I have never read a verse that specifically says Book/Chapter/Verse “God is the Father and God of Jesus Christ and the source of His Spirit and not a committee”
Could you please give me that reference Nick.. I like to look these things up myself… you know, the whole noble Berean thing… thanks…At any rate, Trinitarians DO NOT believe that the Trinity constitutes some sort of “committee”… thats the sort of sloppy straw man accusations that plague the “article”… who write that article any way? do you know?
As far as Eph 1:17 goes.. yes… Paul says the Father is Jesus' “God”… something that Arians have, seemingly, a great difficulty with is that verse like this IN NO WAY affects the doctrine of the Trinity in a negative way… so why they are pointed out repeatedly is beyond me…. remember… please… Trinitarians affirm that Jesus was both God and man… so, as a man He could well say that God the Father was “His” God.. so what if He does?
“I believe that our Lord Jesus Christ was begotten, not created, very God of very God, truly God, truly man.”
This was used to refute Arians going on 2000 years ago now people.. come on… this is basic basic stuff…. you will never refute the Trinity by trying to point out that Jesus had a real human nature and that He responded to the Father in ways that indicated that fact….
“He calls God his Father. Is he his own Father if they are of the same substance?”
And there we have it again…. these rather silly questions that, I don't know why, must seem profound… “oh if Jesus was God, who ruled the universe when He died and was in the tomb”… or another classic “if Jesus was God, did He pray to Himself?” or how about the all time hit “if Jesus was God then He must have to worship Himself!” …. come on Nick, don't be absurd…. Jesus was not His own Father lol… you are equivocating here… trying to import human relationships into that of the divine…. there is just no finding an exact match for the divine and the finite human…, so your “trick questions” don't trick anyone, except, well, maybe you…. I mean, all my sarcasticness aside… you can think that the doctrine of the Trinity is unbiblical or whatever… fine… but do not sully the discussion with silly questions and with attempts to compare the way God has His being with that of the way humans do… yes we were created in God's image… of course… but that hardly means that there is a 1 to 1 ration of attributes now does there? I mean, I do not see Arians saying that humans are omniscient just because God is and they were created in God's image.. so they must be omniscient too! So just because Jesus calls God “Father”, it hardly means that we ought to think in human terms just because Jesus uses this phraseology… I mean really… if you pursued that line of thinking then you would have to join up with the Mormons in thinking that since Jehovah is Jesus' Father, Jesus must then have a mother too! No… the comparing of human familial and societal relationships with the relationship that exists between Jesus and Jehovah just don't cut it…. simply because a human relationship amounts to a certain thing, it just does not follow that we can say the same for the divine relationship… and this is true whether one is a Trinitarian or not!
Hi E,
So you say you “know” God is triune. You agree you do not understand this but you explain that by saying nobody can understand God. That is circuitous confusion. If you cannot prove something how can you know it so well as you claim. You cannot have it both ways-say you cannot understand God but know God is triune without clear backup from scripture.Where did you find this information? Is it written in the words of The OT? Is it in the teachings of Jesus Christ or the apostles. Or did you derive it yourself. Do you believe it because everyone does, or you denomination taught you? Or have you had special visions or revelation to make this strange matter so clear to you?
If it is a theory derived by you or others from scripture have you thought through the implications? Do you worship and pray to a trinity? If you do not then you should if you really believe in it. Does your theory enable you to have a family reltionship with God or does God become a little more distant, indistinct and different? If you believe there are three in one why are you so free to separate them and even speak of God [which you define as trinity] as the Father?
Does God mind that you redefine Him in a different way from how He presents Himself to the Jews? If you fear God you will consider this matter too. Condescension towards those who study scripture to find truth because they believe that is where truth is to be found does your cause no good.
I believe you did not understand when you replied that Jesus is not the only begotten Son. Did he have a will of his own?-that is surely a sign of separate nature as is the fact he said he had life in himself.
Your bluster suggests you are trying to hide your lack of proof behind it. We agree that scripture does not mention the word trinity even once. Do you believe scripture is the only truly reliable source of truth about God. If so why is scripture so taciturn to reveal something you and millions of others are convinced is true but not revealed about God ?
Hello EpisteManiac:
As the son, God begat him (Matt 1)
As the word, he was with God and spoken by him at his will to make the worlds (John 1:1, 3, Col 1:16)
As the heir of all things, God appointed him (Hebrews 1:1-6)
As Lord of creation, God exalted him (Eph 1:22, Acts 2:36, Phil 2:9-11, Hebrews 1)
As having eternal life in himself, God gave it him… (John 5:26)
As Messiah, God anointed and sent him… (Luke 4:18)
As the Lamb, God gave him to the world (John 3:16, Hebrews)
As High Priest, God appointed him (Hebrews).But of Jesus' own accord, he laid down his life for us. And not being a rebel, he loves God and does the will of God just as we are called to do and for all his personal way of being, God has given him to sit at his own right hand. We too are called to have this mind of Christ and can sit with him in heavenly places if we do.
Zech 12.10: “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on ME, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for HIM as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.
Note:
1) YHWH is speaking (He pours out the Spirit).
2) YHWH is 'looked upon' by the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
3) YHWH is 'pierced' by the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
4) It switches to a 3rd person, in the middle of the sentence(!) “mourn for HIM”
5) Remember, God the Father has NEVER been seen, nor can be 'pierced'!
Yes FYI,
Jn 19.34f says that it is Jesus Christ who is pierced and v 37 quotes this scripture in Zech 12 to confirm it.
Is 53.5
” He was pierced through for our transgressions”
Rev 1.7
” behold he is coming with the clouds and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over him”So who comes again? Is it a trinity? Does a trinity look like Jesus? Or is it the Father? No God is invisible. Or is Jesus the Father-that would fit with oneness theology but not trinity theory surely? Or are you suggesting the terms are able to be mixed and matched as they are all of one substance?
No .Scripture says it is Jesus Christ who returns and he who says “they will look on me whom they have pierced”.YHWH has not been pierced but has poured out His Spirit [and not another person].Put “Jesus” in the verse and it still reads well.
Malachi 3:1 – Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, He shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Isaiah 40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. 4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain: 5 And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.Note:
1) YHWH is speaking in both verses
2) YHWH is who we 'seek' and 'delight in'
3) The 'way' was prepared for YHWH 'our God'
4) YHWH came and stood in 'His temple'
5) Mal 3:1 switches to 3rd person, in the middle of the sentence(!) “behold, He shall come…”
6) YHWH was the 'Messenger' of the covenant – NOT a delagate
7) 'the glory of YHWH' was revealed
8) YHWH shares His glory with noone
9) YHWH did not send a delegate – He promised to and came PERSONALLY
10) YHWH alone is our redeemer and saviour – NOT a delegate
11) Remember, God the Father has NEVER been seen!Hi FYI,
So God sends John. Then the magnificent vessel, the messenger of the covenant, the son of God, carries God, as His indwelling Spirit, to His temple.Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 12 2005,22:25) Hi FYI,
So God sends John. Then the magnificent vessel, the messenger of the covenant, the son of God, carries God, as His indwelling Spirit, to His temple.
Malachi 3:1 – Behold, I (YHWH) will send my messenger (John the Baptist), and he shall prepare the way before Me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, He shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.Nowhere does the prophecy state that a “vessel” would be sent, but rather YHWH Himself!
And, so it was!
Rom. 4:8, “Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account.”
Psalm 32:2, “How blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity,
Rom. 9:29, “And just as Isaiah foretold, 'Except the Lord [kurios] of Sabaoth had left to us a posterity. We would have become as Sodom, and would have resembled Gomorrah.”
Isaiah 1:9, “Unless the Lord [YHWH] of hosts Had left us a few survivors, We would be like Sodom, We would be like Gomorrah.”
Rom. 10:13, “for 'Whoever will call upon the name of the Lord [kurios] will be saved.'”
Joel 2:32, “And it will come about that whoever calls on the name of the Lord [YHWH] will be delivered,”
Rom. 11:34, “For who has known the mind of the Lord [kurios], or who became His counselor?”
Isaiah 40:13, “Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord [YHWH], Or as His counselor has informed Him?”
Rom. 15:11, “And again, “Praise the Lord [kurios] all you Gentiles, and let all the peoples praise Him.”
Psalm 117:1, “Praise the Lord [YHWH], all nations; Laud Him, all peoples!”
1 Cor. 2:16, “For who has known the mind of the Lord [kurios], that he should instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.”
Isaiah 40:13, “Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord [YHWH], Or as His counselor has informed Him?”
1 Cor. 3:20, “The Lord [kurios] knows the reasonings of the wise, that they are useless.”
Psalm 94:11, “The Lord [YHWH] knows the thoughts of man, That they are a mere breath.”
1 Cor. 10:26, “for the earth is the Lord’s [kurios], and all it contains.”
Psalm 24:1, “The earth is the LORD’s [YHWH], and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it.”
2 Cor. 10:17, “But he who boasts, let him boast in the Lord [kurios].”
Jer. 9:24, “but let him who boasts boast of this, that he understands and knows Me, that I am the Lord [YHWH] who exercises lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things,” declares the Lord [YHWH].”Hi FYI,
Do you really think God will stand on the earth? Can the God who created the Sun, moon and stars fit into His creation? Jesus brought the presence of His Father to earth and that is why he was able to say
” He who has seen me has seen the Father”
He was not the Father but the Father did his work in him and through him as a vessel.There are plenty of scriptures proclaiming the servant sent by God. He is that vessel and was filled with God's Spirit of power and grace. God lives in heaven but came in his servant by His Spirit.
Coll 1.18
” For in him the fulness of deity dwells in bodily form”
Ps 2 Who do the nations rage against? but where is God?Hi,
Your reference address to CPRM I have visited. They do not seem to agree with Jesus that we need to be born again of water and the Spirit. Do you agree with him or them?Quote (epistemaniac @ June 12 2005,11:03) Nick!! LOL… you said “We do not seek to prove The Son of God is not a divine being. He is. We just remind people that he is not his own Father.” See!!!! LOL… there we go again Nick.. and the hits just keep on coming!!…. I know that there is great enjoyment in the erecting and defeating of straw men, but in the end, not really a whole lot more gets accomplished, other than some personal satisfaction at “another job well done”!!
As if Trinitarians teach that Jesus is His own Father! PLEASE…..:D ok… please please please track down for me any reputable trinitarian theologian who teaches that Jesus is His own Father… now THAT is a worthy endeavor!! lol…. it should keep you busy for quite a long time too!!
Hi,
If you teach that The Son of God is one in substance with the Father then you are saying they are one. Surely you must do so if you agree with the OT verse quoted by Jesus that “God is one”. So you are also saying they are not Father and Son but that one God.What father is one in substance with any of his sons? If the Son of God is begotten from God then how can they share the same substance and yet be separate? Please do not come up with the old excuse that no man can understand God.
We can understand what God has revealed.The problem with trinity theory is that it did not come from the teaching of God but has been derived from the speculations of men's minds.
Yes I do compare what God has said about Himself with the natural world because He did. Ephesians says all families derive from the family relationship between the Father and the Son.
Hi E,
Perhaps I should be more clear.Is Jesus Christ the God of the Old Testament?
Is the God of the Old Testament a trinity?
Where is it shown in the OT?
Or did this discovery only come to light after the death of the apostles?
Why has the theory changed so much since it's inception?Could it possibly be untrue perhaps?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
