The Trinity Doctrine

[Anonymous]

Quote

DVD, If your last post addressed to me was meant to answer the scriptures that I laid out for you in a previous post, then you have missed the point entirely.  The scriptures that I posted were not merely exercises in using different titles for Father and Son.  They are scriptures that show the New testament writers' understanding that God is a separate being from the Lord Yeshua the Messiah.  (Note that the title “Lord” does not mean “God”.)  For example, look at the passage in 1 Timothy. 1 Timothy 5:12 “I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality.” Notice that Paul is appealing to three different witnesses, one of whom is God while the other two are not.  This is not just a matter of different titles for Father and Son.  This is Paul making a clear distinction between the one he calls God and Yeshua. But since you are fond of direct questions and direct answers, let us make this matter even simpler.  Does your god have a god over him, or is your god the God of all? I would remind you not to “throw away certain scriptures in favor of your doctrine”, particularly the following two: Matthew 27:46 “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, 'Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?' that is, 'My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?'” Revelation 3:12 “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.” By the way, given how fond you are of quick answers to direct questions, I am surprised that you still have not answered my direct question about who died on the cross.  I gave you two choices: Yeshua only, or YHWH.  (Or, if you prefer, Jesus only, or God.)  You have yet to give me your direct answer.

[Cubes]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2005,21:19)

Hi cubes, I can read if with the comma, if the “maker” applies to “Israel”. Anyway good post.

Thanks, Nick.

You mean the LORD as Israel's maker? It took some reading and re-reading for me to get that and then it made sense but I am sure I'll ran into something like that again before too long and will submit it for discussion if ok.

[Anonymous]

Very unlikely, I dont think Israel is ever referred to using a masculine pronoun elsewhere in the Bible.

[NickHassan]

Hi Yellow,
Does it not say in Ex 4.22
“Israel is My son, My firstborn”?

[epistemaniac]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2005,11:39)

Hi, It would be good to get past trinity and move into study of the lovely gospel. But it remains a roadblock that some cannot pass. That is because it distorts the understanding of the whole bible. If we discuss God then those who accept the trinity theory have to try and work out which member of their trinity is being spoken of. The strange thing is though whenever both God and Jesus Christ are mentioned in the same verse it seems immediately plain to them that it is the Father who is being spoken of. For example Rom 7,4 ” Therefore my brethren, you also were made to die to the law through the body of Christ so that you might be joined to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God” It fits so beautifully with Jn 15.1f ” I am the true vine and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that does not bear fruit He takes away;and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit” So it is plain to all that combining the verses here, God means the Father and Jesus Christ is the vine and we are the branches. So Jesus is not part of the Father but we are part of him and in him we serve the Father. It is really simpler than many imagine. God always means the Father.

I agree Nick, if you would only come to understand the biblical doctrines as presented, realize that the Trinity is in fact nothing short of the biblical doctrine on the systematic theology category “theology proper”, then we could move on…. but… to be honest, at this point I see little hope for that happening…. but as in evangelization… my task is to be obedient to God, and leave the results to Him… that’s a rather freeing idea, isn't it? Doesn't remove my solemn and somber responsibility and duty to continue to defend the glorious truths of Scripture, as best as this sinner saved by grace is able anyways… and to do as my Lord asks me insofar as the command to be ready to give a reason for the hope that is within me goes… then my duty has been discharged…

You said “If we discuss God then those who accept the trinity theory have to try and work out which member of their trinity is being spoken of.”
LOL… really? Trinitarians everywhere will be glad to know of your insight on this matter, I am sure.

You said “The strange thing is though whenever both God and Jesus Christ are mentioned in the same verse it seems immediately plain to them that it is the Father who is being spoken of.
For example
Rom 7,4
” Therefore my brethren, you also were made to die to the law through the body of Christ so that you might be joined to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God””
Its immediately clear to…. Who Nick? You? Well you are hardly in a position to say what is immediately clear to the Trinitarian, now are you? You have already demonstrated misunderstanding after misunderstanding in this area, I expect this will continue until you allow the Trinitarian to speak for themselves.
As it is, you are creating unnecessary problems for yourself… and while I know that you have to in order to continue your campaign against the biblical doctrine of the Trinity Nick, but really… come on now…. This is too much…. Sigh…
Anyway, in this passage Paul is speaking of the believer’s union with Christ doe to the atonement, so that, based on this union, we may bear fruit for God the Father.

Now that’s not too tough, is it?

Actually Nick, it is good that you brought up Ro 7, in particular v4ff, because it is yet another wonderful attestation to Paul teaching the Trinity:
Rom 7:4-6 ESV Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ (this is the Son Nick), so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. (this is the Father Nick) (5) For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. (6) But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit. (and this is the Holy Spirit Nick)
Bless you for showing this doctrine to us again and again! How clear and simple is the Word of God when we allow it to speak for itself! When we do not try to force any unbiblical notions on the Scriptures, trying to make the Scriptures say only what we want it to say… that we do not try and force it to say something just because we do not particularly or fully understand its teachings… that’s where faith comes in… we are thankful for God’s special revelation to us and we need to study to show ourselves approved, but ultimately we come to rest in the security of the Triune God of the universe, that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit will accept us in all our finiteness.

Anyway, your point that Trinitarians say “whenever both God and Jesus Christ are mentioned in the same verse it seems immediately plain to them that it is the Father who is being spoken of.” … is patently and now, demonstrably false.

You say “It fits so beautifully with Jn 15.1f
” I am the true vine and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that does not bear fruit He takes away;and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit”

So it is plain to all that combining the verses here, God means the Father and Jesus Christ is the vine and we are the branches.

So Jesus is not part of the Father but we are part of him and in him we serve the Father.

It is really simpler than many imagine. God always means the Father.”

Not sure why you think this in some way supports your earlier assertion that “whenever both God and Jesus Christ are mentioned in the same verse it seems immediately plain to them that it is the Father who is being spoken of.”

It also seems rather odd that you bring up a passage that does not speak of the Son and God, but speaks precisely of the Son and the Father.
So this Trinitarian has to wonder at your earlier accusation again… that we “have to work out which member of their trinity is being spoken of”…. Hmmmm… well it just doesn’t take any working out here at all now does it Nick? The passage says Joh 15:1-2 ESV I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. (2) Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit.”

Well… not that this is very difficult or anything… that it just doesn’t take much working out or anything, let me spell it out for you:

Jesus is the Vine, that means “the Son”
The Father is the vinedresser

Whew!!! Tough one Nick!! Glad I did not come across any tough questions like this in Systematic theology class… how in the world would I have ever made it LOL!!!

[epistemaniac]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2005,07:56)

Quote (epistemaniac @ June 12 2005,11:40) “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! Hi E, This is the part you seem to have misunderstood as requested.

ok Nick… thanks for pointing this out… I seem to have lost track of that particular discussion… so what is your point here? What is it that I do not understand, or what have you not understood about what I have said so that I may try and make it clearer?

blessings

[NickHassan]

Hi E,
Is Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God or is he that God or part of that God? Who came in the flesh E? Was it Jesus Christ the Son of God, or the Father of Jesus Christ or a trinity?

[Anonymous]

Quote (Guest @ June 15 2005,04:33)

Very unlikely, I dont think Israel is ever referred to using a masculine pronoun elsewhere in the Bible.

Greetings

In Isaiah 45:11 the masculine pronoun is clearly used in ref. to Israel. Why?
Israel is a name of a man (AKA Jacob); whose name is also used to label the nation that comes from his descendants.
(Gen 35:10)  And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel.

It is therefore a male name, and hence is always used with a masculine pronoun.

Also Jacob & Israel are used synonymously throughout scripture, and the masculine pronoun is therefore used in ref. to both names; this is also seen in Hebraic parallelisms.

In contrast, other countries and cities are generally referred to with a feminine pronoun, e.g. Jerusalem, Samaria, etc.

Israel seeing that it is a man's name is an exception; the nation is always referred to with a masculine pronoun; e.g.

(Isa 45:11)  Thus saith YAHWEH, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, …

(Hosea 8:14)  For Israel hath forgotten his Maker, and buildeth temples; and Judah hath multiplied fenced cities: but I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour the palaces thereof.

(Isa 44:6)  Thus saith YAHWEH the King of Israel, and his redeemer YAHWEH of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
(Compare Isa 44:23-24 Thus saith YAHWEH, thy redeemer
and compare (Isa 49:7)  Thus saith YAHWEH, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One,
i.e. YAHWEH GOD is Israel's Holy One & Israel's Redeemer)

(Psa 25:22)  Redeem Israel, O God, out of all his troubles.

(Psa 130:7-8)  Let Israel hope in YAHWEH: for with YAHWEH there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption. 8 And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.

(Isa 49:7)  Thus saith YAHWEH, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, …

(Jer 50:19)  And I will bring Israel again to his habitation, and he shall feed on Carmel and Bashan, and his soul shall be satisfied upon mount Ephraim and Gilead.

(Hosea 10:1)  Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself: according to the multitude of his fruit he hath increased the altars; according to the goodness of his land they have made goodly images.

(Hosea 14:5-6)  I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon. 6 His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his smell as Lebanon.

(Micah 3:8)  But truly I am full of power by the spirit of YAHWEH, and of judgment, and of might, to declare unto Jacob his transgression, and to Israel his sin.

ETC ETC …

[Anonymous]

Quote (Guest @ June 14 2005,05:17)

nick wrote: [/quote] You actually gave me a statement of faith, not the Gospel as described in the NT. These two points are, to varying degrees, consistent with the Bible's account: 1. fully fulfilled the Law and the prophecies about him including his suffering and death. 2. Following his death he was resurrected by his Father These things you have added to it: 1. Since the fall of Adam man has had a problem. Only the God of Love could bridge this divide. He sent His only begotten Son from heaven to die for us and restore that relationship. 2. The Son of God came and fully shared our human state as a son of David being conceived and born of the Spirit of God and Mary. He was filled with the Spirit of God, his Father, at his baptism. 3. He was utterly submissive to God and showed the nature and power of his Father on earth healing all who asked and setting free those who were under the power of Satan. 4. He brought the forgiveness of God to men and passed that task on to his anointed followers to continue that work of establishing the kingdom of God on earth. They carry on this work even now. 5. given far greater glory and is now at the right hand of God in heaven. 6. Now forgiveness is preached in his name. He is the only way to God and all who wish can be forgiven and established in him as he is in the Father, now, for eternity. 7. He said you must be born again of water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom and nothing has changed since those words were spoken. 8. He will return to rescue his brothers and set up the 1000yr reign where the earth will be restored to order. Then will come the second resurrection and the Judgement of mankind. 9. Then the kingdom will be handed back to his God and Father and his people will enjoy the fruit of his labour of love for God and us forever.

Excellent post!

[Cubes]

Hi Adam Pastor,

Thanks for your post, particularly on Is 45:11… using the contrast easily helped me see the association that time. I had come to read “The Holy One of Israel” as a title like the LORD of Hosts and so in that particular instance did not readily make the association with “his” as meaning Israel… although now it makes perfect sense. I still question the comma though. If the comma is kept, the “and” should be dropped in the translation I used.

Thus saith the LORD, The Holy One of Israel, [and]his Maker. because I generally see “and” as meaning .additionally. But no matter, I am glad others see it for what it means and that we've come to the right conclusion.

[NickHassan]

Hi DVD,

I am trying imagine how trinitarians see Jesus in relationship to God.

Is it like how my finger relates to my body? My right index finger is fully connected and has never been separated from me. It shares the same skin and bones and nerves and blood supply? However that skin and those bones and nerves are unique to that part of my body and are not completely easily interchangeble with my leg or ear. It cannot exist without the rest of me staying connected to it. It has exactly the same genes and it serves me perfectly responding to my needs instantly and without discussion or demur?

Is that how you see the relationship between God and His Son, DVD or have I got it wrong again?

[NickHassan]

Hi,
1 Jn 4.7f
“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God for God is love. By this the love of God was manifested in us,that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through him. in this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
Beloved , if God so loved us , we also ought to love one another. No one has beheld God at any time; if we love one another God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us because He has given us of His Spirit, and we have beheld and bear witness that the Father has sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God. And we have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God ,and God abides in him”

So Jesus is the Son of God. God sent him.The Holy Spirit is His Spirit, God's Spirit.

Seems simple enough. Why is that not enough for some people?

[Anonymous]

Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh

1. Rom. 10:9-13: Note the repeated “for,” which links these verses closely together. The “Lord” of 10:13 must be the “Lord” of 10:9, 12.

2. Phil. 2:9-11. In context, the “name that is above every name” is “Lord” (vs. 11), i.e., Jehovah.

3. Heb. 1:10: Here God the Father addresses the Son as “Lord,” in a quotation from Psa. 102:25 (cf. 102:24, where the person addressed is called “God”). Since here the Father addresses the Son as “Lord,” this cannot be explained away as a text in which a creature addresses Christ as God/Lord in a merely representational sense.

4. 1 Pet. 2:3-4: This verse is nearly an exact quotation of Psa. 34:8a, where “Lord” is Jehovah. From 1 Pet. 2:4-8 it is also clear that “the Lord” in v. 3 is Jesus.

5. 1 Pet. 3:14-15: these verses are a clear reference to Isa. 8:12-13, where the one who is to be regarded as holy is Jehovah.

6. Texts where Jesus is spoken of as the “one Lord” (cf. Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29): 1 Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:5; cf. Rom. 10:12; 1 Cor. 12:5.

YHWH Reavealed

[NickHassan]

Hi FYI,
Jesus Christ is the Messiah and the Son of God, not God himself FYI.

[Artizan007]

Nick just a quick question,

You state that there is one God, the Father & One Lord, Jesus Christ the Messiah.

I see this in Scripture repeatedly and agree, but my question is this:

If there is but One Lord, Jesus Christ, how is it then that we call the Father, Lord as well? Does that not make two Lords. You used this same logic to prove that GOD is the Father only, because it says there is one God, the Father, yet Hebrews 1 states differently… so surely this rule of interpretation should apply in both instances. Hebrews 1 uses the title “LORD” for Jesus (v 10) and the title “God” for them both (v9b). How is it that they can be One God and One Lord if both are called Lord and God?

I am also not sure I agree on your theory that God begot a Son [in the beginning]. There is no one scripture that specifically states this point that I am aware of. Rather I feel it is speculation and based on assumptions. As far as I am aware of all scriptures in the Old Testament cannot prove that Jesus is eternally the Son of God. They are prophetic and point to a day when this is to take place. Not a day that has already happened but a future fulfillment.

If he was then surely he has been begotten twice and could not be that only begotten Son. He would have to be the second-born of God when born of Mary surely. This makes no sense nor does not line up with scripture as I know it. If sonship relates to his Deity or Divinity then Jesus' sonship has happened twice. Once sometime way back in the eternal past, for he was with God in the beginning as the Word, not as Son, and then when He was born of Mary 2000 years ish ago as the Son of the Highest. it states unto you is born THIS DAY … a Saviour. (Lk 2:11-24) I WILL BE a Father to Him and he SHALL BE to Me a Son.(Ps 2:7) Future not past.

I see he has a God, but Jesus is still called God in Hebrews. If he is as you say in previous posts, the only begotten God, then does that mean when he was born of Mary he was begotten again as the only begotten Son? I did see this which was interesting but i think it is a translation issue as most other versions do no say it this way.

heb1: 5 For to which of the angels said he at any time, You are my Son, [this day have I begotten you]? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? 6 And [again] when he brings in the [first-begotten] into the world, he said, And let all the angels of God worship him.

I am still on a journey and am learning everyday so am open to your valued view on your oppinion regarding this point.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

Early Trinitarian Quotes:

There are cult groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century until after the time of the Council of Nicea (325). This council “was called by Emperor Constantine to deal with the error of Arianism [see page 45] which was threatening the unity of the Christian Church.”
The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea.

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.
“O Lord God almighty…I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever” (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.
“For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water” (First Apol., LXI).

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
“In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever” (n. 7; PG 5.988).
“We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.
“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: …one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all…'” (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
“We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation…[which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.
“If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority…There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father” (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).
“For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)
“Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification…” (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

If, as the anti-Trinitarians maintain, the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine and was never taught until the council of Nicea in 325, then why do these quotes exist? The answer is simple: the Trinity is a biblical doctrine and it was taught before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.
Part of the reason that the Trinity doctrine was not “officially” taught until the time of the Council of Nicea is because Christianity was illegal until shortly before the council. It wasn't really possible for official Christian groups to meet and discuss doctrine. For the most part, they were fearful of making public pronouncements concerning their faith.
Additionally, if a group had attacked the person of Adam, the early church would have responded with an official doctrine of who Adam was. As it was, the person of Christ was attacked. When the Church defended the deity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity was further defined.
The early church believed in the Trinity, as is evidenced by the quotes above, and it wasn't necessary to really make them official. It wasn't until errors started to creep in, that councils began to meet to discuss the Trinity as well as other doctrines that came under fire.

[NickHassan]

Hi FYI,
It is a strange new teaching not found in the Old or New Testaments and leads men away from the worship of the living God.

God is Lord of all, including Jesus Christ. Jesus is our Lord A7.More later-must away.

[Proclaimer]

To Artizan007,

Quote (Artizan007 @ June 18 2005,11:36)

f there is but One Lord, Jesus Christ, how is it then that we call the Father, Lord as well? Does that not make two Lords. You used this same logic to prove that GOD is the Father only, because it says there is one God, the Father, yet Hebrews 1 states differently… so surely this rule of interpretation should apply in both instances. Hebrews 1 uses the title “LORD” for Jesus (v 10) and the title “God” for them both (v9b). How is it that they can be One God and One Lord if both are called Lord and God?

YHWH is translated LORD and Lord in the New Testament is the following word:

Usage in the KJV:
Lord 667, lord 54, master 11, sir 6, Sir 6, misc 4

There are many lords, but for us there is the Lord Jesus. He is lord over God's Kingdom. Simarly Joseph was lord over Pharaoh's kingdom. He was given power to rule his kingdom.

Acts 2:36
“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

So he was made lord. But God wasn't made LORD was he?

We also must remember that Christ is a mystery that has been revealed to us. So there are bound to be things we do not understand.

Romans 16:25
Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past,

God bless.

[Anonymous]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 17 2005,20:52)

Hi FYI, It is a strange new teaching not found in the Old or New Testaments and leads men away from the worship of the living God. God is Lord of all, including Jesus Christ. Jesus is our Lord A7.More later-must away.

Nick,

You said “strange new teaching”. You don't say. Almost 6000 years now. What's “new” mean to you?

Are you insinuating that the universe is older than the bible states? Are you suggesting that the scientist are right and that the earth is billions of years old?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Artizan007 @ June 18 2005,11:36)

I am also not sure I agree on your theory that God begot a Son [in the beginning]. There is no one scripture that specifically states this point that I am aware of. Rather I feel it is speculation and based on assumptions. As far as I am aware of all scriptures in the Old Testament cannot prove that Jesus is eternally the Son of God. They are prophetic and point to a day when this is to take place. Not a day that has already happened but a future fulfillment.

To Artizan007,

We know that he is the son of God and it appears that he pre-existed as the Word. The points below were extrapolated from the proceeding verses:

[Author]

Posts