Trinity (Part 1)

This topic contains 9,997 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Admin 10 years, 5 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #15519
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    To GJG & Larry Gibbons,

    Thx for your Posts and advice.

    Yes Larry as you pointed out, I have a problem with Jesus being the Father, or the name of God being Jesus. I do not believe that these conclusions are scriptural. Can I first establish what I understand your beliefs to be, by listing them below. If I have got it wrong, then I apologise in advance and you can post the amendments.

    • The Father is the Most High God
    • The Word/Logos was the thought that existed in God's mind only
    • In time, God clothed this Logos/thought in flesh and this resulted in the birth of Jesus Christ on earth
    • This miracle was accomplished by God's Spirit and Mary, Jesus mother
    • The Holy Spirit is God's Spirit, so they are same person
    • Jesus has a dual nature. On one hand he is a man (but perfect) and he is also the Father who indwells him. So Jesus is God x humanity in one being
    • Therefore in this scenario, it is safe to conclude that Jesus is the Father clothed in humanity or human nature/flesh
    • If so, it becomes evident that Jesus is the Father
    • Hence GJG believed that the name of God was Jesus, but has since ammended that belief to a similar belief to Larry i.e. Jesus is the name of the union of humanity and God, who came to earth to save us
    • Larry slightly differs as he believes that Jesus is the name of the humanity part only with regards to the God/Human who came to earth to save us

    Could you both let me know if I have interpretted your views correctly. Once this has been accomplished then we can move on from there if that's ok.

    #15455
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    Hi T8, thanks for your reply, I will try and respond in more detail to the points you have raised about the Church later, but first I will finish my biblical arguments about the Trinity.

    I only want to comment now that there are a few problems with the quotes you have posted :

    Yes, the Trinity was not taught by the Apostles. But Paul warned us in Acts 20:29-31
    29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock.
    30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.
    31 So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.

    1) the nature of this apostacy is not specified, so we cannot certainly identify it with any particular belief.

    2)we know that even in the time of the Apostles there were heretics. How did the Church identify who was a heretic in the Apostolic era? The people with authority in the Church decided who was and who wasn’t preaching the Gospel as they had received it, and the natural assumption is that they continued doing this in subsequent eras. I see no evidence that the structure of the Church was completely obliterated at any time to allow a complete corruption of its teachings.

    3) The example of the wolves and sheep given by St. Paul indicates that any heresies would draw some of the flock away, but would not completely overcome the Church. Just as when wolves attack a flock of sheep they may take a few sheep, but never the whole flock. I dont think Paul meant to imply that a heresy would arise that would completely destroy the Church, or he would have used a different example.

    Finally your statement –

    The true Church is not a denominational organisation like we see in the world. It is not made up of worldly positions and doesn’t have a business like infrastructure and as such records of heresies or other such things.

    This seems to contradict the clear testimony of the New Testament that the Church did indeed have a clear structure of elders, bishops, those who had authority, and also records of heresies since even the Apostles declared some people to be heretics.

    #15472
     GJG 
    Participant
    • Topics started 4
    • Total replies 110

    To Larry Gibbons & t8,

    Thank you for the replies.

    I must firstly confess that I am not fully versed in the complete ‘how’ and ‘why’ God remains the same one God, as I am relatively new to this teaching.  So I can only give my view from a limited understanding.:

    Indeed: The Mighty God in Christ; Jehova-Saviour!

    I am not too sure about Jesus recieving the indwelling at the baptism, due to these points:

    It was necessary for Jesus to be baptized that He might fulfill all righteousness.  He certainly was not baptized for His sins, but that He might fulfill the OT scriptures, and set an example for His church.  In like manner, it was necassary, for Him to be anointed as the priests and kings were anointed in the OT.  However, remember that Jesus Christ was the Word-incarnate FROM THE CONCEPTION in the womb of Mary.  The anointing was there for the purpose as the baptism – in fulfillment of scripture.

    Likewise, even as a twelve year old boy Jesus was doing the will of His Heavenly Father:

    Luke 2:49   And He said to them, "Why did you seek Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?"   NKJV

    I am at present unaware of any scripture that suggests the indwelling happened at the baptism.

    I may be wrong, your thoughts?

    Regarding Jesus being the name of God:

    I suppose my answer to this is based mostly upon common sense, using the words in my Bible.  

    Everything in our known reality has a name because it is of created substance.  Do you know of anything that does not have a name?  God the omnipresent, invisible  Spirit is uncreated and more to the point: without a beginning.  Thus, it is logical  for anyone to understand that before creation He was without a name.

    Yet, throughout history God has accepted many titles that describe WHAT He is:

    Mighty God, Jehova, Jealous, Wonderful, Counselor, Alpha & Omega, Beginning & the End………etc.  He is all of these titles and more.  

    Being the unchanging Spirit that God is, the same as He was before creation, how can this uncreated substance recieve a name?

    Answer:  BY MANIFESTING HIMSELF IN A CREATED PERSON, AND THEREBY TAKE UNTO HIMELF HIS OWN PERSONAL NAME. Uncreated, being clothed in created substance.

    Is there any other way for God to recieve His own personal name?

    Just my thoughts:)

    Look 4ward 2 ur reply

    #15424
     GJG 
    Participant
    • Topics started 4
    • Total replies 110

    Quote
    Quote: from t8 on 11:27 pm on Aug. 6, 2003
    To GJG & Larry Gibbons,

    Thx for your Posts and advice.

    Yes Larry as you pointed out, I have a problem with Jesus being the Father, or the name of God being Jesus. I do not believe that these conclusions are scriptural. Can I first establish what I understand your beliefs to be, by listing them below. If I have got it wrong, then I apologise in advance and you can post the amendments.
    <ul>
    <li>The Father is the Most High God</li>
    <li>The Word/Logos was the thought that existed in God’s mind only</li>
    <li>In time, God clothed this Logos/thought in flesh and this resulted in the birth of Jesus Christ on earth</li>
    <li>This miracle was accomplished by God’s Spirit and Mary, Jesus mother</li>
    <li>The Holy Spirit is God’s Spirit, so they are same person</li>
    <li>Jesus has a dual nature. On one hand he is a man (but perfect) and he is also the Father who indwells him. So Jesus is God x humanity in one being</li>
    <li>Therefore in this scenario, it is safe to conclude that Jesus is the Father clothed in humanity or human nature/flesh</li>
    <li>If so, it becomes evident that Jesus is the Father</li>
    <li>Hence GJG believed that the name of God was Jesus, but has since ammended that belief to a similar belief to Larry i.e. Jesus is the name of the union of humanity and God, who came to earth to save us</li>
    <li>Larry slightly differs as he believes that Jesus is the name of the humanity part only with regards to the God/Human who came to earth to save us</li>
    </ul>

    Could you both let me know if I have interpretted your views correctly. Once this has been accomplished then we can move on from there if that’s ok.

    To t8,

    Your suggestion is a sound one.:)

    By reading the words in your post, it seems as if that pretty much sums up my view.

    If I have come across as being impolite in any previous posts, I apologize:)

    I am looking forward to moving ahead:)

    #15441
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    <a name=part5>Biblical Arguments Part V</a>

    The summary now addresses the question of John 1.1

    John 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    John 1:2
    He was in the beginning with God.

    John 1:3
    All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

    These verses obviously pose a problem for Arians and they usually make a special effort to “explain” them. The summary devotes a whole section to this verse.

    Arians usually attempt to offer seemingly impressive alternative “translations” or “interpretations” of the original Greek to show that this verse doesn’t mean that the Word is literally God, or that he has eternally been with God.

    I could also post impressive explanations of Greek grammar which show that not only is the only possible translation of John 1.1 as shown above but that also the only reasonable explanation of this verse is that the Word is literally God and has existed eternally with God.

    However, for those of us who are not scholars of ancient Greek we do not need to attempt an analysis of these translations or explanations.

    We only need to note that no scholars of any importance can be quoted by the Arians in support of their  alternative translations, and that their translation of this verse is never found in any Bibles of any prestige.

    Indeed, so embarrasing is this this lack of scholastic support for their interpretation of this verse, that some Arians have even resorted to mis-quoting respected authorities to make it seem that they supported alternative translations when in fact they didn’t. This is particularly common amoungst Jehovah’s Witnesses –

    “…….another trait common to Jehovah’s Witnesses, that of half quoting or misquoting a recognized authority to bolster their ungrammatical renditions. On page 776 of the appendix to the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures when quoting Dr. Robertson’s words, ‘among the ancient writers ho theos was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods,’ they fail to note that in the second sentence following, Dr. Robertson says, ‘In the New Testament, however, while we have pros ton theon (John 1:1-2) it is far more common to find simply theos, especially in the Epistles.’
    In other words, the writers of the New Testament frequently do not use the article with theos and yet the meaning is perfectly clear in the context, namely that the One True God is intended.”

    And

    “In conclusion, the position of the writers of this note is made clear at page 774 of the appendix to the New World Translation. of the Christian Greek Scriptures; according to them it is ‘unreasonable’ that the Word (Christ) should be the God with whom He was (John 1:1). Their own manifestly erring reason is made the criterion for determining Scriptural truth. One need only note the obvious misuse in their quotation from Dana and Mantey (the New World Translation of the Christian. Greek Scriptures, pp. 774-775). Mantey clearly means that the Word was Deity in accord with the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, but the writers have dragged in the interpretation ‘a god’ to suit their own purpose, which purpose is the denial of Christ’s Deity, and as a result a denial of the Word of God. The late Dr. Mantey publicly stated that he was quoted out of` context and he personally wrote the Watchtower, declaring ‘there is no statement in our grammar that was ever meant to imply that ‘a god’ was a permissible translation in John 1 :1 and it is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 The Word was a god’ (Michael Van Buskirk, The Scholastic Dishonesty of the Watchtower, P.O. Box 2067, Costa Mesa, CA 92626: CARIS, 1976, p. 11)." (The Kingdom of the Cults, P. 85-87)”

    On page 1 of this debate, a Jehovahs Witness posted a list of Bibles which have alternative translations of John 1.1 –

    “Notice, too, how other translations render this part of the verse:

    1808: "and the word was a god." The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

    1864: "and a god was the word." The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

    1928: "and the Word was a divine being." La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.

    1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

    1946: "and of a divine kind was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.

    1950: "and the Word was a god." New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

    1958: "and the Word was a God." The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

    1975: "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.

    1978: "and godlike kind was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider. “

    Let us examine the credibilty of these so called alternative translations –

    First Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text. What does corrected text mean? Mr. Thomas Belsham after Archbishop Newcome’s death, altered Newcome’s text! [See page 394, "Manual of Biblical Bibliography".] This altered text dishonoring Archbishop Newcome’s careful scholarship also provided a basis for the New World Translation’s "…and the Word was a god".(see also the Kingdom Interlinear Translation, page 1160, 1969 ed.) Archbishop Newcome certainly never said, the Word was "a god".

    This Bible was subsequently printed and distributed by a unitarian organisation. (Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge and the Practice of Virtue, by the Distribution of Books)

    Conclusion: not credible.

    The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

    Produced by a Christadelphian named Benjamin Wilson, with no credentials in Greek.

    Conclusion: not credible

    The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

    Goodspeed, Edgar: The Complete Bible, an American Translation, by Edgar Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith. Greek into English but a two man translation, whereas all other major translations had between 40-100 different scholars involved in the translation. Goodspeed was a liberal theologian. Smith, J. M. Powis: The Complete Bible, an American Translation, by Edgar Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith. Smith was a professor in a radical liberal institution, the University of Chicago. His attitude toward the virgin birth is evidenced by the way he translated Isaiah 7:14 – "A young woman is with child …" The Complete Bible renders Matthew 1:23 as "A maiden will become pregnant …" – again denying the virgin birth. Even if one might debate whether the Hebrew word has to mean virgin, there is no question that the Greek word parthenos in the passage in Matthew means virgin. This is scholarly consensus. His formulation of Matthew 1:23 is unquestionably a mistranslation. Smith regards the miracles of the Bible, such as Jesus’ virgin birth, His raising of the dead, and others as mere myth or legend.

    Conclusion: not credible

    New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

    The Jehovahs Witnesses own “translation”.

    Translated by a committee of 5, none of whom had any qualifications in Greek or Hebrew.

    Dr. Julius Mantey one of the leading Greek scholars of the world, author if the Hellenistic Greek Reader and co-author of A Manual Grammar of The Greek New Testament had this to say about the New World Translation:

    " I have never read any New Testament so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures…. it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a
    translation."

    Dr. Metzger, professor of New Testament language and literature at Princetown Theological Seminary and author of The Text of The New Testament, observes.

    " The Jehovah’s Witnesses have incorporated in their translations of the New Testament several quite erroneous rendering of the Greek."

    Dr. Robert Countess wrote his dissertation for his Ph.D. in Greek in the New World Translation. He concluded the the Jehovah’s Witness’s translation:

    "Has been largely unsuccessful in keeping doctrinal considerations from influencing the actual translation.It must be viewed as a radically biased piece of work. At some points it is actually dishonest. Ant others it is neither modern nor scholarly. And interwoven throughout its fabric is inconsistent application of its own principles."

    Conclusion: not credible

    The other Bibles quoted are such obscure/foreign versions I have been unable to find any information about them, if indeed they do exist.

    Conclusion: not credible

    On the other hand, we can look at the credentials of well known Bibles which correctly translate John 1.1 (which I posted earlier)

    New International Version Bible – translation committee of 115 scholars.

    King James Version – translation committee of 54 scholars.

    New King James Version – 119 scholars.

    New American Standard Bible – 54 scholars

    Contemporary English Version – 100+ scholars

    English Standard Version – 100+ scholars

    New Jerusalem Bible – 36 scholars

    etc. etc.

    We can also see some opinions of recognized Greek scholars on John 1.1 –

    James Moffatt: "’The Word was God…And the Word became flesh,’ simply means "The word was divine…And the Word became human.’ The Nicene faith, in the Chalcedon definition, was intended to conserve both of these truths against theories that failed to present Jesus as truly God and truly man…" Jesus Christ the Same (Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1945), p.61.

    Henry Alford: "Theos must then be taken as implying God, in substance and essence,–not ho theos, ‘the Father,’ in person. It does not = theios, nor is it to be rendered a God–but, as in sarx egeneto, sarx expresses that state into which the Divine Word entered by a definite act, so in theos en, theos expresses that essence which was His en arche:–that He was very God. So that this first verse might be connected thus: the Logos was from eternity,–was with God (the Father),–and was Himself God." Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary, Vol. I, Part II (Guardian Press, 1975; originally published 1871), p. 681.

    Donald Guthrie: "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into thinking that the correct understanding of the statement would be that ‘the word was a God’ (or divine), but this is grammatically indefensible since Theos is a predicate." New Testament Theology (InterVarsity Press, 1981), p. 327.

    Julius R. Mantey: "Since Colwell’s and Harner’s article in JBL, especially that of Harner, it is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 "The Word was a god." Word-order has made obsolete and incorrect such a rendering… In view of the preceding facts, especially because you have been quoting me out of context, I herewith request you not to quote the Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament again, which you have been doing for 24 years." Letter from Mantey to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. "A Grossly Misleading Translation… John 1:1, which reads ‘In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.’ is shockingly mistranslated, "Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god,’ in a New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, published under the auspices of Jehovah’s Witnesses." Statement by J. R. Mantey, published in various sources.

    B. F. Westcott: "The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in v.24. It is necessarily without the article (theos not ho theos) inasmuch as it describes the nature of the Word and does not identify His Person… No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word." The Gospel According to St. John (Eerdmans, 1958 reprint), p. 3.

    Bruce Metzger: "It must be stated quite frankly that, if the Jehovah’s Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists… As a matter of solid fact, however, such a rendering is a frightful mistranslation." "The Jehovah’s Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Theology Today (April 1953), p. 75.

    Randolph O. Yeager: "Only sophomores in Greek grammar are going to translate ‘…and the Word was a God.’ The article with logos, shows that logos is the subject of the verb en and the fact that theos is without the article designates it as the predicate nominative. The emphatic position of theos demands that we translate ‘…and the Word was God.’ John is not saying as Jehovah’s Witnesses are fond of teaching that Jesus was only one of many Gods. He is saying precisely the opposite." The Renaissance New Testament, Vol. 4 (Renaissance Press, 1980), p.4.

    E. C. Colwell: "…predicate nouns preceding the verb cannot be regarded as indefinite or qualitative simply because they lack the article; it could be regarded as indefinite or qualitative only if this is demanded by the context and in the case of John 1:1c this is not so." "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, 52 (1933), p. 20.

    Who are these scholars? Many of them are world-renowned Greek scholars whose works the Jehovah’s Witnesses themselves have quoted in their publications, notably Robertson, Harner, and Mantey, in defense of their "a god" translation of John 1:1! Westcott is the Greek scholar who with Hort edited the Greek text of the New Testament used by the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Yeager is a professor of Greek and the star pupil of Julius Mantey. Metzger is the world’s leading scholar on the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament.

    It is scholars of this caliber who insist that the words of John 1:1 cannot be taken to mean anything less than that the Word is the one true Almighty God.

    More later.

    Be Well.

    #15359
     GJG 
    Participant
    • Topics started 4
    • Total replies 110

    :)

    #15392
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    <a name="part6">Biblical Arguments part VI</a>

    The summary offers us this paraphrase of John 1.1 –

    John 1:1 (English-NIV)
    1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    If we change the word ‘Word’ for Eve and God for ‘Adam’ we get the following: In the beginning was Eve. And Eve was with Adam, and Eve was Adam. She was in the beginning with Adam.
    We can see here that Eve came from Adam but Eve isn’t Adam. Likewise we know that Jesus came from God, but does John 1:1 say that Jesus is God??

    However, this paraphrase commits the error of substituting the word Adam for God. God is a class of being, it is not a proper name, like Adam.

    Therefore the correct paraphrase would be –

    In the beginning was EVE, and EVE was with MAN, and EVE was MAN. SHE was in the beginning with MAN.

    Just as "man" can refer specifically to male to the exclusion of female, So also God can refer to the Father to the exclusion of the Son. However, just as "man" can include both male and female as a class of being, (Gen 5:2 "He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man"), so too "God" can include both Father and Son as a class of being, as in John 1:1.

    The paraphrase given in the summary misrepresents Trinitarians as Modalists, i.e is saying that the Father is the same person as the Son.

    Another common mistake is the Adoptionist or Logos theology position as currently taught by Christadelphians, which would paraphrase as –

    In the beginning, God had a plan to eventually create EVE, and EVE, as God imagined, was with MAN, and EVE, as God imagined, was MAN. v1-2 … Finally, the thought/plan became flesh when EVE was actually created. v14

    Meaning –

    "In the beginning God had a fore-ordained plan in his mind (logos). And this fore-ordained plan was with God, and this plan was as inseparable from God as is a thought from the person thinking it – thus the plan was God." v1-2 … "And Jesus Christ came into personal existence for the first time at His conception, being a creature based upon God’s fore-ordained plan in the beginning. Now God’s plan was materialized in all its fulness."

    Christadelphians would argue that the phrase, "the Word was with God" does not mean the Son and the Father are distinct. "Word" (Gr. logos) simply means "something said" and refers to God’s speaking in creation ("In the beginning" – cp. Gen 1:1,3).

    However this position can also be shown to be incorrect as the word "with" (Gr. pros) means "to, towards" when used with the accusative as it is here (Thayer, p.541). The word is generally translated "to" or "toward" (NKJV) or "unto" (KJV; see John 1:29,42,47; 2:3; 3:2,4,20,26). So this phrase cannot be referring to "something said" coming FROM God.

    So we can see that the Trinitarian position is the only logical and consistent interpretation of John 1.1 which  defines the word "God" [theos] in John 1:1-2 with the identical definition throughout (God, as a class of being, not as a name).

    "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (equal class of being God), and the Word was God (equal class of being God)."

    That the word God here refers to class of being and not as a name was confirmed by some of the expert opinions I posted in Part V –

    Henry Alford: "Theos must then be taken as implying God, in substance and essence,–not ho theos, ‘the Father,’ in person. “

    I will take the opportunity to post some more expert opinions here –

    Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California: "I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah’s Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar."

    Dr. J. J. Griesbach (whose Greek text – not the English part – is used in the Emphatic Diaglott): "So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favor of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth."

    Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach: "No justification whatsoever for translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as ‘the Word was a god.’ There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct….I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian."

    Dr. B. F. Wescott (whose Greek text – not the English part – is used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation): "The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in IV.24. It is necessarily without the article…No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word…in the third clause ‘the Word’ is declared to be ‘God’ and so included in the unity of the Godhead."

    Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar of the University of Glasgow, Scotland: "The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: ‘…the Word was a god, ‘ a translation which is grammatically impossible…It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."

    Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England: "Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with ‘God’ in the phrase ‘And the Word was God.’ Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction…’a god’ would be totally indefensible." [Barclay and Bruce are generally regarded as Great Britain’s leading Greek scholars. Both have New Testament translations in print!]

    Need I continue?

    If an impartial and objective person genuinely seeking the truth were asked to choose between the position of the scholars and prestigious Bibles I have listed above, or to accept the position of amateur Arian linguists, or translations such as the New World Translation is there any doubt which one they would choose?

    I believe that the matter of John 1.1 is now so clearly beyond all doubt that if someone were to continue arguing for any alternative translation we would have to ask if it was possible to convince them by any means at all. There are some people who still insist the Earth is flat, despite the irrefutable evidence to the contrary, and it is simply impossible to convince that sort of person of anything.

    More later.

    Be Well.

    #15257
     Larry Gibbons 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 14

    T8, I appreciated the way you spelled out what you assume I believe. You are right on the mark except for the three following conclusions you mention:

    1. Jesus has a dual nature. On one hand he is a man (but perfect) and he is also the Father who indwells him. So Jesus is God x humanity in one being.

    You conclude that Jesus is also the Father. By no means! He is the SON, the man that God used to reveal Himself. As I’ve noted in previous posts, the scriptures point to both our Father and His Son, a team working together, working to accomplish our redemption (See II Cor. 5:19, "God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.") Each needed the other. God could not be tempted nor die. Jesus needed the wisdom and power provided by God’s spirit in him. Each can rightfully be called our savior. A question: Did Jesus do the miracles, appear to be omniscient, and declare the truth or was it God in him? John 14:10 shows it was his Father in him that did the works. Remember John 7:16, "Jesus answered them, and said, ‘My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.’"

    2. Jesus has a dual nature. On one hand he is a man (but perfect) and he is also the Father who indwells him. So Jesus is God x humanity in one being

    Again, Jesus is NOT the Father. He is ONE with his Father in will and purpose only (John 4:34). As one who confessed to be meek and lowly, he walked in total dependence and confident trust in his Father, providing the perfect example of how we are also to walk with God. Though he is the Firsborn, the chosen Messiah annointed by God, he is not ashamed to call us brethren for our relationship to God is like his own.

    3. Therefore in this scenario, it is safe to conclude that Jesus is the Father clothed in humanity or human nature/flesh

    No, just the opposite. The Father is clothed in the humanity of His Son; only in this sense can we use the term God incarnate.

    I hope this is helpful.

    May Paul’s prayer in Col 1:9 be true of all of us.

    #15241
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    To Larry Gibbons,

    Ok so you believe that Jesus is actually a seperate person to the Father. So we have the Father and Son as 2 different persons and the Son has the Fathers Spirit inside him (similar to us having the Spirit). Is this your view?

    Also if my memory serves me correctly, I  think that you mentioned on your web site that Jesus came into existence at his birth on earth. Previous to that, he only  existed as the Logos which is a thought within God before that. Forgive me if I am off track here.

    #15286
     Larry Gibbons 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 14

    T8, you got it. That’s exactly what I mean. It helps reconcile so many otherwise hard to understand scriptures and brings home to my heart the full meaning of John 17:3. Christ is not only the perfect image of God in revealing his Father but he is the perfect model of what God intends for us to be in His Son.

    #15272
     Larry Gibbons 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 14

    To GJG:

    Thanks for your response. I think it’s really helpful to zero in on the most salient points so let me pretty much center on one paragraph from you post:

    It was necessary for Jesus to be baptized that He might fulfill all righteousness. He certainly was not baptized for His sins, but that He might fulfill the OT scriptures, and set an example for His church. In like manner, it was necessary, for Him to be anointed as the priests and kings were anointed in the OT. [Certainly Jesus was anointed. He was THE Anointed One, I am convinced when he was baptized by the holy spirit.] However, remember that Jesus Christ was the Word-incarnate FROM THE CONCEPTION in the womb of Mary. The anointing was there for the purpose as the baptism – in fulfillment of scripture.

    First, respective to how and when Jesus was indwelled by God’s spirit in all its fullness, as distinguished from the love relationship he had from his earliest childhood, let me urge you to carefully read Matt. 3:13-4-19 concerning his baptism by John when God’s spirit is said to have descended upon him and the heavens were opened, then his temptations in the wilderness, followed by his return to Galilee where he first preached and called his disciples. Surely, this marked the beginning of his ministry when God empowered him by His spirit.

    I think we need to remember that Jesus was not born God, as so many believe. If he were God, he could not be man, not when the attributes of the two natures are opposite. Really, everything I read of him attests to his having led a normal, though certainly an exemplary life. We know from Luke that he grew in stature and wisdom and favor with God and man, as we might rightfully expect. I may speculate but one would think Mary would have shared the revelation the angel Gabriel had made to her, and doubtless Jesus from his earliest years would have studied the scriptures, made well aware of all that had been prophesied about him. It’s not surprising that by the age of twelve he astonished the teachers in Jerusalem, even at that age determined to be seeking his Father’s will. Yet, as a model of patience, so uncharacteristic of us, he waited until his appointed hour had come when he was likely 30 years old. Scripture refers to him as the last Adam. The first Adam was certainly not God, and neither was Jesus. Unlike the first Adam, who succumbed to temptation, Jesus was made perfect through his sufferings, truly a life giving spirit. I hope this is helpful, at least in clarifying where I’m coming from.

    Second, respecting the name of God, allow me to point out some key verses in the O.T. that shed light on this. We read in Gen. 1:1 that, “In the beginning God [Elohym] created the heavens and the earth.” The plural noun elohym certainly speaks of God’s power as attested to by His creation but falls short of revealing other such characteristics as His love and mercy. What would we do if God, as an invisible, unchanging eternal spirit, had not revealed Himself by His Son? Creation and conscience attest to Him but without His condescending to reveal Himself on our level, we would be left helpless to really know him. Still, he would exist, and as we discover, He assigned Himself a name, even if only for our benefit.

    It’s not until Genesis 2:4 when God began dealing with man in His creation that we see Him referred to by the name LORD God. He would be called by this name repeatedly and consistently in the O.T., and in Exodus 3:14, 15 He sheds amazing light upon it. Let me quote the NKJV text:

    And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" Moreover God said to Moses, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’”

    As you likely know, “I AM” in the Hebrew came to be translated as Yahweh or Jehovah. Note then that God instructed Moses to tell Israel that the LORD [Jehovah] God [Elohym], the God of your fathers has sent me. Now, God has many titles, but He declares that “This is my name forever,” this was the way He was to be remembered by His people.

    Let me explain why I find this so fascinating. If you use a literal version of the Bible such as the KJV, NKJV, NASV, etc. you will find the words Lord God capitalized in two different ways. Why? Because two different Hebrew word couplings translate identically into English. One of them, as noted above is LORD God, that is, Jehovah Elohym. The other is Lord GOD, that is, in the Hebrew, Adonai Jehovah. We find it first used in Genesis 15:2 when God spoke to Abraham. The point is that each of these two different word couplings are used some 300 times in the O.T. giving us a way to know whether God the Father or His Son is being referred to in many passages that would otherwise be unclear. Without saying more here, let me encourage you to visit my website, http://thehighwaytoheaven.com and click on “One God, Two Names.” At the end of that short article a hyperlink will take you to a subweb that explains all this in detail. You will see how the dual nature of Christ is even found in the Old Testament.

    I know this is new and perhaps difficult to grasp from this limited sketch, but I trust any effort you spend investigating this will prove to be a real blessing.

    #15345
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    To Global,

    Your quotes are in gray.

    1) the nature of this apostacy is not specified, so we cannot certainly identify it with any particular belief.

    So why is this verse mentioned at all? I think it is written so we do not follow doctrines and teachings blindly. It was also written so we realise that deception will come and it will be very big. This helps us to be on guard and to pray always and to not be surprised when God shows us that something is wrong, even if it is accepted by many.

    I find that most people who believe in the Trinity (including myself once) seem to think that it could not possibly be wrong given it's wide spread acceptance, but Paul's warning about the Apostacy at least makes it possible that the Trinity doctrine could be error. I also think that just as many do not question the Theory of Evolution, there are also many who do not question the Trinity doctrine. This lack of questioning is a major reason why people end up deceived.

    Now we know that this Apostacy is described as a great Apostacy and we do know that the trinity is also a very big doctrine. Strange thing is that this doctrine wasn't taught by Jesus and the Apostles. This doctrine is considered foundational by most Christians and most of these Christians happen to belong to one organisation, namely the Roman Catholic Church.

    When we look at the fruits of this particular organisation, we see that tens of millions of people have been murdered in the name of preserving the Trinity doctrine and others. One can only conclude that this bad fruit could not possibly come from a good tree and it certainly looks obvious to any clear thinking (non-indoctrinated) person that God could not have inspired such things.

    If the thought of the Trinity doctrine being wrong still seems preposterous to you, then I want to remind you that such wide spread acceptance has been wrong before.

    Luke 20:46
    “Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted in the marketplaces and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets.

    Now who would have thought that the teachers of the Law, the very people who you would think would be the experts of the Law are the very people that Jesus condemned. Yet if people judged by the fruit and not by the outward appearance, Jesus wouldn't have needed to warn people to beware of the Pharisees doctrine.

    I cannot stress enough, that we should judge by the fruit.

    2) we know that even in the time of the Apostles there were heretics. How did the Church identify who was a heretic in the Apostolic era? The people with authority in the Church decided who was and who wasn't preaching the Gospel as they had received it, and the natural assumption is that they continued doing this in subsequent eras. I see no evidence that the structure of the Church was completely obliterated at any time to allow a complete corruption of its teachings.

    Paul warned us about to reject those who preach another gospel. If it wasn't the one that he or the other Apostles taught, then we are to reject their message. We shouldn't even invite such a person into our house. I would suppose that the Apostles and other trustworthy believers would have warned the flock of such people. But I doubt that there was some kind of register that listed such people, I would suppose that it was word of mouth and relevant to each area.

    3) The example of the wolves and sheep given by St. Paul indicates that any heresies would draw some of the flock away, but would not completely overcome the Church. Just as when wolves attack a flock of sheep they may take a few sheep, but never the whole flock. I dont think Paul meant to imply that a heresy would arise that would completely destroy the Church, or he would have used a different example.

    The Church has not been completely overcome. How do I know this? Because of the wide spread acceptance among Christians that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. This is the declaration that Jesus built his Church on. I think that most trinitarians even believe this. Other true doctrines may be lost and false doctrines may be introduced that decieve many, but this foundational doctrine has clearly stood the test of time. The gates of #### will not prevail against the true Church and the Church is clearly not perfect, rather we are being perfected.

    The true Church is not a denominational organisation like we see in the world. It is not made up of worldly positions and doesn't have a business like infrastructure and as such records of heresies or other such things.

    This seems to contradict the clear testimony of the New Testament that the Church did indeed have a clear structure of elders, bishops, those who had authority, and also records of heresies since even the Apostles declared some people to be heretics.

    Yes the Church has a structure, even a hierachy. Christ -> 5 fold ministry -> disciples -> converts. What I actually said was a worldly structure such as we see in a business. These are those man made organisations that build buildings up to Heaven and they love to make a name for themselves. Many denominations are run like businesses and would cease to exist if they ran out of money. History is full of events where denominations clearly love money and will go to extraordinary lengths to get it.

    This could not happen to the true Church because the true Church is a term that describes all those that belong to God and believe in his Son. In fact it is Jesus who builds his own Church and he is the Head and we are the body. We are the living stones that make up the Church. It isn't some kind of organisation that builds buildings to her own glory and has a fallable man as CEO.

    One is spiritual and the other is carnal.

    #15302
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    To Larry Gibbons & GJG,

    I am assuming that we all believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

    Before I post again I just want to check one thing with Larry. I know that you believe that Jesus pre existed as the Word and the Word existed in the mind of God only. But then you say the following:

    The point is that each of these two different word couplings are used some 300 times in the O.T. giving us a way to know whether God the Father or His Son is being referred to in many passages that would otherwise be unclear.

    So are you saying that the Son pre existed before birth on the earth or that he was still at that point in the mind of God only. Just not sure of your stance here.

    Thx

    #15393
     GJG 
    Participant
    • Topics started 4
    • Total replies 110

    To Larry Gibbons,

    Dual nature at conception, or just humanity?

    There is clear reference to Jesus being more than a mere, mortal babe while still in the womb of His mother.  The unborn babe Jesus had a supernatural effect towards the unborn ‘John the Baptist’, not to mention, the mother being filled with the Holy Ghost:  

    Luke 1:39-44
    39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40 where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42 In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.  NIV

    Would this event have occurred if the unborn baby Jesus had been a mere, mortal child?  

     Further along in the next chapter we find more evidence of this unborn babe, Jesus, being more than just a mere, mortal child:

    Luke 2:25-35
    25 Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. 26 It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. 27 Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, 28 Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:

    29 "Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
    you now dismiss your servant in peace.
    30 For my eyes have seen your salvation,
    31 which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
    32 a light for revelation to the Gentiles
    and for glory to your people Israel."

    33 The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him. NIV

    The scriptures are clear here in that the unborn child is indeed the Christ: The anointed one.

    I must point out that, although the parents of Jesus had been visited by the angle of the Lord, they still at this stage were unable to comprehend the ways of Jesus.  Yet the boy Jesus Himself was aware of the truth behind His being.  Even at the age of twelve Jesus hinted at His role. The Bible is clear that only those who have the Spirit of God are able to see the truth within His greater plan; Jesus knew scriptural truth, because He had the Spirit of truth within Him, but His parents had not been filled with the Holy Ghost (Spirit of truth).  Thus, the boy Jesus could not have been taught scriptural truth regarding His role in the Divine plan.  Only the Holy Ghost within Him could have done this:

    Luke 2:42-50
    42 And when He was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem according to the custom of the feast. 43 When they had finished the days, as they returned, the Boy Jesus lingered behind in Jerusalem. And Joseph and His mother did not know it; 44 but supposing Him to have been in the company, they went a day’s journey, and sought Him among their relatives and acquaintances. 45 So when they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem, seeking Him. 46 Now so it was that after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers. 48 So when they saw Him, they were amazed; and His mother said to Him, "Son, why have You done this to us? Look, Your father and I have sought You anxiously." 49 And He said to them, "Why did you seek Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?" 50 But they did not understand the statement which He spoke to them.    NKJV

    With these few example we see that Jesus was indeed born with the dual nature of Divinity (Spirit of God) clothed in humanity.  This is evident when we see that, before His baptism, the boy Jesus was much more than a mere, mortal child.  Just like the man Jesus, He affected others around Him in ways that cannot be explained using natural terms.

    Also, if the boy Jesus did not have the Spirit of God, then who did He belong to as a child, the things of the world or the things of God?  Certainly throughout puberty, an ordinary healthy young man would be unable to remain totally sinless.  Unless of course, this growing youngster had the very same power from on high (Holy Ghost), that was also given to empower those in the upper room.

    Conclusion:  For Jesus to remain perfectly sinless as a child, He must have had unnatural self control.  The Bible is also clear that this boy was flesh and blood like you and I, being obedient to his parents, yet had knowledge of things that could only have been given by supernatural means.  For the boy Jesus to not have the Spirit of God, there would immediately be the issue of ownership:  How could He be of God and of the world at the same time?  Thus, even as a boy, Jesus did indeed have the Spirit of His Father within Him:

    Luke 1:35   And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.  KJV

    Please point out any discrepancies if you find any.
    Your thoughts are welcome

    BTW:  I think that maybe it is neither Biblically nor grammatically correct to use the term ‘person’ when referring to Deity.

    #15360
     GJG 
    Participant
    • Topics started 4
    • Total replies 110

    Quote
    Quote: from t8 on 2:00 am on Aug. 8, 2003
    To Larry Gibbons & GJG,

    I am assuming that we all believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

    Before I post again I just want to check one thing with Larry. I know that you believe that Jesus pre existed as the Word and the Word existed in the mind of God only. But then you say the following:

    <font color=blue>The point is that each of these two different word couplings are used some 300 times in the O.T. giving us a way to know whether God the Father or His Son is being referred to in many passages that would otherwise be unclear. </font>

    So are you saying that the Son pre existed before birth on the earth or that he was still at that point in the mind of God only. Just not sure of your stance here.

    Thx

    Yep, I agree with that:)

    #15134
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    Hi T8, thanks for answering again.

    You said –

    “Strange thing is that this doctrine wasn’t taught by Jesus and the Apostles.”

    Well, we are discussing that now, and I think I am making a reasonably good job of showing that it was, although I haven’t finished yet.

    You said –

    “tens of millions of people have been murdered in the name of preserving the Trinity doctrine and others”

    Can you prove or justify that claim?

    You said –

    “this bad fruit could not possibly come from a good tree”

    Can you think of any religion or Christian denomination which at some time has not had blood on its hands?

    You said –

    “God could not have inspired such things”

    Jesus said –

    Matthew 10:34
    Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

    You said –

    “If the thought of the Trinity doctrine being wrong still seems preposterous to you”

    It is not seeming less preposterous because so far I have seen nothing in the summary of points that necessarily precludes the Trinity.

    You said –

    Paul warned us about to reject those who preach another gospel. If it wasn’t the one that he or the other Apostles taught, then we are to reject their message. We shouldn’t even invite such a person into our house. I would suppose that the Apostles and other trustworthy believers would have warned the flock of such people. But I doubt that there was some kind of register that listed such people, I would suppose that it was word of mouth and relevant to each area.

    Come on T8, are you seriously proposing this as a serious argument? A Church which has a written list of heretical beliefs is less valid because you “suppose” that the Apostles only had word of mouth lists?

    I would like to address the Church structure issue when I have finished with the Trinity as this seems to be a different issue, however for now I would ask you to keep an open mind and not reject the Trinity just because it is taught by nominations which you seem to dislike.

    Accepting the Trinity does not mean you have to accept any particular nomination.

    Be Well.

    #15129
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    To Global,

    Your quote about all religions having blood on their hands, should prove that you need to see things differently.

    No murderer has eternal life inside them and to justify that with any religion proves a false religion or a religion that cannot offer eternal life. Those who murder in the name of God whether they are Moslem, Catholic, Protestant or whatever are not real followers of Christ. That is impossible. They are those who put the Way into disrepute because they pretend to be of God, but are not. They are of their father the Devil who was the murderer from the beginning.

    I am talking about spiritual things and then you talk about the importance of carnal things like Christian records and certain kinds of infrastructure that resemble the Roman Catholic traditions.

    Did Jesus write anything down and list all those who rejected him and did he list all the false doctrines out there. No he doesn't need to. He knows that God his Father is all knowing. Jesus is the light and darkness cannot comprehend him.

    Jesus is the Head of the true Church (The Body of Christ) and he clearly doesn't structure or run his Church the way that worldly businesses are run or denominations. That should be clear to any person who has true understanding.

    Why would the true Church need a Roman Catholic (worldly) style infrastructure. If Jesus knows everybody's heart and we are being led by the Spirit, then darkness won't have a chance. Darkness is the lack of light anyway.

    The Five Fold ministry is part of the true structure, not a bunch of priests who aren't allowed to marry and the obvious problems that come with these “Do not touch, do not taste” man made commandments. Come on, do you really expect me to consider that any good could come from the Roman Catholic Church.

    Mark 10:18
    “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good–except God alone.

    Your requests for some kind of structure and records in dealing with Heretics is actually found in scripture and stands to this day.  But as I said before, you are looking for the Roman Catholic equivalent if it exists and this shows your Roman thinking, which is of no importance to me. It may be possible that some of these things are spoken of in some writings, but a systematic recording of lies and doctrine of demons seems to contradict the following advice:

    Romans 16:19
    ……….. but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil.

    I will spell it out for you so there is no mistaking my point. Such things will not exist as they do in the Roman Catholic Church because one is carnal and the other spiritual. We do not need these kinds of records, they are irrelevant to a Church who's head is Christ and who's members are lead by the Spirit. The Church is a completely different concept from anything in the world. It is not of this world.

    Anyway we can talk about denominations and their foundations (creeds) till the cows come home, I will leave it there as far as denominations go and let the readers make up their own mind. If you or anyone else wishes to continue with this subject, then I think we should start up a new discussion and I can include the information you are after with regards to the sins of the Roman Catholic Church etc from Encyclopaedia's and the like. It could be called “Will the true Church please stand up”, or something like that.

    My next Post to you will be based on scriptural evidence and will be the reply to your points.

    #15425
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    Hi T8,

    I think if we are going to make any progress in this discussion we really need to stick to facts and not just simply state our opinions.

    You began your argument against the Trinity by claiming it was an invention which didn’t arise until several centuries after Christ.

    I then posted historical EVIDENCE which showed that the Trinity doctrine existed from the first century.

    You then admitted that it may have arisen earlier but that it was a corruption of the true teachings.

    I asked you for some historical evidence that the Arian doctrine was at ANY time or in ANY place the dominant doctrine or for any records which showed it was accepted by the Church leaders.

    You now claim that such evidence doesn’t exist because it would be “a systematic recording of lies and doctrine of demons”.

    Quite frankly this argument borders on the ludicrous.

    I have a simpler explanation for why the information I asked you for does not exist. It is not because there has been some systematic conspiracy for the total manipulation of history by the Roman Catholic Church.

    It is simply because the Arian doctrine was never the mainstream doctrine of the Church while the Trinity doctrine was, and you can find no information to the contrary.

    Also, the idea that the Church does not have a formal structure did not exist until after the Reformation and is based on the theology of some radical Protestant theologians. It is a doctrine of man, not of the God and by following man made teachings and creeds you are following the doctrines of demons.

    This shows your Protestant thinking which is of no importance to me.

    You are following the great Apostacy which was prophesied by Paul when he said –

    Acts 20:29-31
    29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock.
    30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.
    31 So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.

    And Peter warned –

    2 Peter 2:1-3
    1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them bringing swift destruction on themselves.
    2 Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
    3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

    How right they were, for history has been filled with false teachers trying to snatch the flock away – arians, modalists, adoptionists, gnostics, arminians, cathars, calvinists, lutherans, mormons, jehovahs witnesses, moonies, scientologists etc. etc. etc.

    I look forward to your scriptural arguments as well as to any further factual information you can offer.

    Be Well.

    #15442
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    BIBLICAL ARGUMENTS PART VII

    The summary addresses the question of the triadic passages, i.e verses where the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned together.

    It gives this example:

    Ephesians 1:17 (English-NIV)
    I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better.
    Some may say this scripture shows us the trinity.

    And then says:

    Here are some commonly used scriptures that are used in this way:
    „h 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 mentions the Spirit, Lord and God;
    „h 2 Corinthians 13:14 lists Christ, God and the Holy Ghost [Spirit];
    „h Galatians 4:4-6 lists God, Son and Spirit of his Son;
    „h Ephesians 4:4-6 lists Spirit, Lord and God and
    „h 1 Peter 1:2 lists God, Spirit and Jesus Christ.
    If we were to accept such logic as proof of the Trinity, then maybe we should be led to believe that Peter, James and John are a Trinity because they are listed together. (See Luke 9:28.)

    In fact we can identitfy 58 Triadic passages in the Bible which mention the Father, Son and Holy Spirit (I have listed them all below) and 8 Triadic passages referring to Peter James and John:

    1. Matthew 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
    2. Matthew 17:1 Six days later Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John his brother, and led them up on a high mountain by themselves.
    3. Mark 5:37 And He allowed no one to accompany Him, except Peter and James and John the brother of James.
    4. Mark 9:2 Six days later, Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John, and brought them up on a high mountain by themselves. And He was transfigured before them;
    5. Mark 13:3 As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were questioning Him privately,
    6. Mark 14:33 And He took with Him Peter and James and John, and began to be very distressed and troubled.
    7. Luke 8:51 When He came to the house, He did not allow anyone to enter with Him, except Peter and John and James, and the girl¡¦s father and mother.
    8. Luke 9:28 Some eight days after these sayings, He took along Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray.

    I am quite glad you brought up these verses, for as you will see, the triadic passages of PJJ, reinforce the power of the 58 Trinity triadic passages that mention the FSHS (Father, Son and Holy Spirit).

    The PJJ triadic passages, do not prove PJJ are God, they only prove there is a reason behind why they are always grouped in sets of three. It is up to us to discover why God went out of His way to establish a pattern with the PJJ triadic passages.

    Likewise the FSHS triadic passages do not tell us that the "three are one" etc. All they tell you is that there is something special and unique about the sets of three persons who are grouped together as a set. Triadic passages are powerful, because they prove, by WAY OF PATTERN, that the three persons have a special and unique working arrangement.

    It is well known that PJJ shared a special relationship with Jesus, being his innermost circle of human co-workers. In the case of PJJ, they are called the "sons of thunder" and yes, they form a trinity of sorts indeed! They were their own unique subset of 3 disciples. This is proven in Mark 3:14-19, where the "sons of thunder" are singled out as a "trinity" within the listing of all the twelve apostles.

    The triadic passages prove that EACH MEMBER IS A PERSON. If the Holy Spirit is a person, Trinity is true and its game over for the Arians! This is one of the reasons the triadic passages are powerful. It is about as likely that the Holy Spirit is not a person, but electricity, as John is not a person, but is a personification of the disciples love and devotion and faith to the Lord.

    But if John is a person, then so is the Holy Spirit a person! The patterns of triadic passages always group persons together. Remember, all a Trinitarian must prove is that all three members of the trinity are persons (specifically the Holy Spirit) and Jehovah¡¦s Witness and Christadelphian theology crumbles further into finer dust, than what it already is!

    The key point is that Anti-Trinitarians are forced to group two persons with a non-personal thing (Holy Spirit = electricity). According to the Arians, God established a 58 fold pattern of "person, person, thing". Arians will hunt hard to find "that one verse" that will group "two persons and the Bible" together, thinking such is even remotely relevant as a rebuttal.

    But these individual verses never form a pattern, with multiple repeated uses as do the triadic passages. When you see an elephant in the clouds it is merely a co-incidence, but 58 elephants in the clouds at the same time chained together trunk to tail, is a divine pattern! It is all about the clear and unmistakable pattern. It is the 8 fold pattern of the PJJ verses and the 58 fold pattern of FSHS that should send shock waves up every Arians spine!

    Just as there is a specific purpose and reason why PJJ are mentioned together in an 8 fold pattern of verses, so too there is a specific purpose and reason why the FFHS are mentioned together in a 58 fold pattern of verses.

    Patterns are in scripture for reasons. Now the divine trinity (FSHS) proves there is a special and unique relationship between the three persons mentioned. Even a simple overview shows that they are seen as equal partners in the purpose, plan, providence, love care and salvation of man.

    If the Holy Spirit is "mere electricity", the triadic passages establish a pattern for a most unusual group: "two persons and a thing". Arian theology really has no way of accounting for the triadic passages. Why would God go out of his way to establish a pattern of the "Father, Son and the Father¡¦s power"? There simply is not reasonable explanation.

    Trinitarians, on the other hand view the pattern of 58 triadic passages as exactly what you would expect, given the assumption of the trinity.

    So your statement: " If we were to accept such logic as proof of the Trinity, then maybe we should be led to believe that Peter, James and John are a Trinity because they are listed together¡¨ is clearly in error because there was great significance attached to the grouping of PJJ: They were openly recognized by the other disciples as being special and were allowed access to places by Jesus that the other nine apostles were barred.

    The 58 Triadic Passages ¡V

    9. Isaiah 48:16 "And now the Lord God has sent Me, and His Spirit." (verses 12-13 actually identify the speaker in v16 "ME" as being the creator YHWH. Jesus what actually was sent, is called the creator in the New Testament: Jn 1:3; Col 1:16; Heb 1:10-12. The natural reading of Isa 48:16, is that the sender is the Father. The Jews simply had no way to explain how both the sender and the one sent (ME) could both be YHWH. This is a good example of doctrinal development between the Old and New Testament. Christians can easily make sense of the passage! So Isa 48:16 has YHWH sending another who is also YHWH. Of course Trinitarians know that all three members of the Godhead are called "YHWH". Anti-Trinitarians, can do no better than the Jews in explaining how the send and the one sent are both called YHWH in Isa 48:16! Combined with Isa 61:1, it is clear that the ME is Jesus!)
    10. Isaiah 61:1: "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, Because the Lord (YHWH) has anointed me To bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to captives And freedom to prisoners; " (This is a certified triadic passage because Jesus applied the text to Himself in Luke 4:18-30)
    11. Isaiah 63:8-10: "For He said, "Surely, they are My people, Sons who will not deal fa
    lsely." So He became their Savior. In all their affliction He was afflicted, And the angel of His presence [lit: face] saved them; In His love and in His mercy He redeemed them, And He lifted them and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled And grieved His Holy Spirit" (The angel of His face is YHWH himself not a created angel: Ex 23:14-15, 20-23; 14:19; Num 20:16; Ex 33:12. Trinitarians expect to find this kind of passage in the Old Testament, that would not be fully understood until the mystery was revealed about the Trinity in the New Testament.)
    12. Matthew 3:13-17; Luke 3:21-22: After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."
    13. Matthew 28:19: "baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"
    14. Luke 1:35: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. "
    15. Luke 4:1-12: "Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led around by the Spirit in the wilderness for forty days, ¡K Jesus answered him, "It is written , ¡¥You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only."
    16. John 14:16: "I will ask the Father , and He will give you another Helper , that He may be with you forever"
    17. John 20:21-22: "So Jesus said to them again, " Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit ."
    18. Acts 1:7-8: "He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority ; but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you
    19. Acts 2:33: "Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. "
    20. Acts 2:38-39: "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."
    21. Acts 5:30-32: "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross… "And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him."
    22. Acts 7:55: "But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God"
    23. Acts 10:38: "You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power"
    24. Acts 10:44-48: "While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message ¡K and exalting God ¡K And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
    25. Acts 11:15-17: "the Holy Spirit fell upon them ¡K Therefore God gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ?"
    26. Acts 15:8-11: "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit ¡K we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus"
    27. Acts 20:27-28: "For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. "Be on guard ¡K for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. "
    28. Acts 28:25-31: "The Holy Spirit rightly spoke through Isaiah the prophet to your fathers ¡K this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles ¡K preaching the kingdom of God and teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ"
    29. Romans 1:1-4: "Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning His Son, ¡K who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord, "
    30. Romans 5:5-6: "the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us. For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. "
    31. Romans 8:2-4: "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. ¡K God ¡K sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh ¡K walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. "
    32. Romans 8:9 "indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. "
    33. Romans 8:14-17: "For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. ¡K you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!" The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ"
    34. Romans 8:26-30: "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness ¡K the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words ¡K God causes all things to work together for good ¡K predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son"
    35. Romans 15:16: "to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. "
    36. Romans 15:30: "Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me,"
    37. 1 Corinthians 2:2-5: "For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified¡K in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would ¡K rest on the power of God."
    38. 1 Corinthians 6:11: "inherit the kingdom of God. ¡K you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God."
    39. 1 Corinthians 12:4-6: "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. "
    40. 1 Corinthians 12:11-12,18: "But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. ¡K But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired."
    41. 2 Corinthians 1:21-22: "Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge. "
    42. 2 Corinthians 3:3-4: "written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God ¡K Such confidence we have through Christ toward God."
    43. 2 Corinthians 13:14 "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all."
    44. Galatians 3:1-5: "Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified ¡K does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you"
    45. Galatians 3:14: "The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith ¡K in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."
    46. Galatians 4:4-6: "God sent forth His Son ¡K God has sent forth the Spirit of H
    is Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"
    47. Ephesians 1:3-13: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, " ¡K "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace " ¡K "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation¡Xhaving also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, "
    48. Ephesians 2:18: "for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. "
    49. Ephesians 2:19-22: "God¡¦s household ¡K Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone ¡K a holy temple in the Lord ¡K dwelling of God in the Spirit."
    50. Ephesians 3:16-17: "that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith"
    51. Ephesians 4:4-6: "one Spirit ¡K one Lord ¡K one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all."
    52. Ephesians 4:30-32: "Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption ¡K forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you."
    53. Ephesians 5:18-20: "be filled with the Spirit ¡K singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father"
    54. 1 Thessalonians 1:3-6: "hope in our Lord Jesus Christ in the presence of our God and Father ¡Kin power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction ¡K with the joy of the Holy Spirit"
    55. 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14: "always give thanks to God ¡K beloved by the Lord ¡K sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth ¡K the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. "
    56. Titus 3:4-6: "the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, ¡K according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior"
    57. Hebrews 2:3-4: "salvation first spoken through the Lord ¡K God also testifying ¡K gifts of the Holy Spirit"
    58. Hebrews 9:14: "how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God"
    59. Hebrews 10:29-31: "trampled under foot the Son of God ¡K has insulted the Spirit of grace ¡K It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God. "
    60. 1 Peter 1:2: "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood"
    61. 1 Peter 3:18: "For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; "
    62. 1 Peter 4:14: "If you are reviled for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. "
    63. 1 John 3:23-24: "we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ ¡K He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us."
    64. 1 John 4:2: "By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God"
    65. 1 John 4:13-14: "He has given us of His Spirit. We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. "
    66. Jude 20-21: "praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life. "

    More Later.

    Be Well.

    #15456
     global 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 86

    <a name="historicalevidence">FURTHER HISTORICAL EVIDENCE OF BELIEF IN THE TRINITY AMOUNGST THE FIRST CHRISTIANS.</a>

    50 AD The Huleatt Manuscript

    50 AD The Huleatt Manuscript "She poured it [the perfume] over his [Jesus’] hair when he sat at the table. But, when the disciples saw it, they were indignant. . . . God, aware of this, said to them: ‘Why do you trouble this woman? She has done [a beautiful thing for me.] . . . Then one of the Twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priest and said, ‘What will you give me for my work?’ [Matt. 26:7-15]" (Huleatt fragments 1-3).
    74 AD The Letter of Barnabas

    74 AD The Letter of Barnabas "And further, my brethren, if the Lord [Jesus] endured to suffer for our soul, he being the Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, ‘Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness,’ understand how it was that he endured to suffer at the hand of men" (Letter of Barnabas 5).
    80 AD Hermas

    80 AD Hermas "The Son of God is older than all his creation, so that he became the Father’s adviser in his creation. Therefore also he is ancient" (The Shepherd 12).
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch

    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "We have also a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin." (Letter to the Ephesians.)
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "By the will of the Father and of Jesus Christ our God." (Letter to the Ephesians)
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "Ignatius, who is also Theophorus, unto her that hath found mercy in the bountifulness of the Father Most High and of Jesus Christ His only Son; to the church that is beloved and enlightened through the will of Him who willed all things that are, by faith and love towards Jesus Christ our God; even unto her that hath the presidency in the country of the region of the Romans…" (Letter to the Romans 1)
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "Nothing visible is good. For our God Jesus Christ, being in the Father, is the more plainly visible. The Work is not of persuasiveness, but Christianity is a thing of might, whensoever it is hated by the world." (Letter to the Romans)
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "I give glory to Jesus Christ the God who bestowed such wisdom upon you" (Letter to the Smyraeans)
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "Jesus Christ . . . was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed. . . . Jesus Christ . . . came forth from one Father and is with and has gone to one [Father]. . .. [T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is his eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased him that sent him" (Letter to the Magnesians 6-8).
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . predestined from eternity for a glory that is lasting and unchanging, united and chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father and Jesus Christ our God" (Letter to the Ephesians 1).
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit" (Letter to the Ephesians, 18:2).
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "[T]o the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God, by the will of him that has willed everything which is" (Letter to the Romans 1).
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "There is then one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]. For "the Lord thy God," saith [the Scripture], "is one Lord." And again, "Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word. For "the only-begotten Son," saith [the Scripture], "who is in the bosom of the Father." And again, "One Lord Jesus Christ." And in another place, "What is His name, or what His Son’s name, that we may know? " And there is also one Paraclete. For "there is also," saith [the Scripture], "one Spirit," since "we have been called in one hope of our calling." And again, "We have drunk of one Spirit," with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts [possessed by believers] "worketh one and the self-same Spirit." There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour." (Letter to the Philadelphians 2).
    100 AD Ignatius of Antioch "Chapter VI.-Abstain from the Poison of Heretics. "I therefore, yet not I, but the love of Jesus Christ, entreat you that ye use Christian nourishment only, and abstain from herbage of a different kind; I mean heresy. For those [that are given to this] mix up Jesus Christ with their own poison, speaking things which are unworthy of credit, like those who administer a deadly drug in sweet wine, which he who is ignorant of does greedily take, with a fatal pleasure leading to his own death. I therefore, yet not I, out the love of Jesus Christ, "entreat you that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment." For there are some vain talkers and deceivers, not Christians, but Christ-betrayers, bearing about the name of Christ in deceit, and "corrupting the word" of the Gospel; while they intermix the poison of their deceit with their persuasive talk, as if they mingled aconite with sweet wine, that so he who drinks, being deceived in his taste by the very great sweetness of the draught, may incautiously meet with his death. One of the ancients gives us this advice, "Let no man be called good who mixes good with evil." For they speak of Christ, not that they may preach Christ, but that they may reject Christ; and they speak of the law, not that they may establish the law, but that they may proclaim things contrary to it. For they alienate Christ from the Father, and the law from Christ. They also calumniate His being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross; they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists. Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power." (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians, Chap. VI)
    140 AD Aristides

    140 AD Aristides "[Christians] are they who, above every people of the Earth, have found the truth, for they acknowledge God, the creator and maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit" (Apology 16).
    150 AD Justin Martyr

    150 AD Justin Martyr "The Father of the universe has a Son, who also being the first begotten Word of God, is even God." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 63)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch, 36)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "Moreover, in the diapsalm of the forty-sixth Psalm, reference is thus made to Christ: ‘God went up with a shout, the Lord with the sound of a trumpet." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 37)
    150 AD Justin Martyr quotes Hebrews 1:8 to prove the Deity of Christ. "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever." (Dialogue with
    Trypho, ch 56)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Christ] is witnessed to by Him who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ." – Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 63.
    150 AD Justin Martyr in Chap. LXVI. He (Justin) Proves From Isaiah That God Was Born From A Virgin. (Chapter Title, Chap. LXVI)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "And Trypho said, "You endeavor to prove an incredible and well-nigh impossible thing;[namely], that God endured to be born and become man…some Scriptures which we mention, and which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, to be worshipped, and [to be called] God, and which I have already recited to you, do refer indeed to Christ." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 68)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "But if you knew, Trypho," continued I, "who He is that is called at one time the Angel of great counsel, and a Man by Ezekiel, and like the Son of man by Daniel, and a Child by Isaiah, and Christ and God to be worshipped by David, and Christ and a Stone by many, and Wisdom by Solomon, and Joseph and Judah and a Star by Moses, and the East by Zechariah, and the Suffering One and Jacob and Israel by Isaiah again, and a Rod, and Flower, and Corner Stone, and Son of God, you would not have blasphemed Him who has now come, and been born, and suffered, and ascended to heaven; who shall also come again, and then your twelve tribes shall mourn. For if you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God. For Moses says somewhere in Exodus the following: `The Lord spake to Moses, and said to him, I am the Lord, and I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, being their God; and my name I revealed not to them, and I established my covenant with them.’ And thus again he says, `A man wrestled with Jacob,’ and asserts it was God; narrating that Jacob said, `I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.’" (Dialogue of Justin with Trypho, A Jew, Chap. CXXVI [See also The First Apology of Justin, Chap. XIII; XXII; LXIII; Dialogue of Justin with Trypho, A Jew, Chap. XXXVI; XLVIII; LVI; LIX; LXI; C; CV; CXXV; CXXVIII)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the onlybegotten Son. We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the onlybegotten 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 passible 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. (long versionThe Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Chap. VII. See also Chap. XV; XVIII; XIX; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians, chap.VI; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians, Chap. X; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans (Introduction); The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, Chap. IV; VI; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, Chap. I; III; V)
    [Trypho to Justin] "…you say that this Christ existed as God before the ages, and that He submitted to be born and become man" – Dialogue with Trypho, ch.48.
    150 AD Justin Martyr "We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God Himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the Mystery which lies therein" (First Apology 13:5-6).
    150 AD Justin Martyr "Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being His Word and first-begotten, and power; and, becoming man according to His will, He taught us these things for the conversion and restoration of the human race" (First Apology 23).
    150 AD Justin Martyr "But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 6) Notice what else Justin say: "Worship God alone." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 16) "Whence to God alone we render worship." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 17)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "God begot before all creatures a Beginning, who was a certain rational power from himself and whom the Holy Spirit calls . . . sometimes the Son, . . . sometimes Lord and Word … We see things happen similarly among ourselves, for whenever we utter some word, we beget a word, yet not by any cutting off, which would diminish the word in us when we utter it. We see a similar occurrence when one fire enkindles another. It is not diminished through the enkindling of the other, but remains as it was" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 61).
    150 AD Justin Martyr "God speaks in the creation of man with the very same design, in the following words: ‘Let us make man after our image and likeness’ . . . I shall quote again the words narrated by Moses himself, from which we can indisputably learn that [God] conversed with someone numerically distinct from himself and also a rational being. . . . But this Offspring who was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with him" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 62).
    150 AD Justin Martyr [Note: Justin never says Jesus is a created angel. Justin never refers to Jesus as an angel before creation, although JW’s will falsely affirm such from the text below. Justin, however, does refer to Jesus as the "angel of the Lord" after creation in various appearances to man. Many but not all Trinitarians would have no problem affirming, along side of Justin, that Jesus as uncreated God, was referred to as the Angel of Jehovah.] "HOW GOD APPEARED TO MOSES. And all the Jews even now teach that the nameless God spake to Moses; whence the Spirit of prophecy, accusing them by Isaiah the prophet mentioned above, said "The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know Me, and My people do not understand." And Jesus the Christ, because the Jews knew not what the Father was, and what the Son, in like manner accused them; and Himself said, "No one knoweth the Father, but the Son; nor the Son, but the Father, and they to whom the Son revealeth Him." Now the Word of God is His Son, as we have before said. And He is called Angel and Apostle; for He declares whatever we ought to know, and is sent forth to declare whatever is revealed; as our Lord Himself says, "He that heareth Me, heareth Him that sent Me." From the writings of Moses also this will be manifest; for thus it is written in them, "And the Angel of God spake to Moses, in a flame of fire out of the bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, the God of thy fathers; go down into Egypt, and bring forth My people." And if you wish to learn what follows, you can do so from the same writings; for it is impossible to relate the whole here. But so much is written for the sake of proving that Jesus the Christ is the Son of God and His Apostle, being of old the Word, and appearing sometimes in the form of fire, and sometimes in the likeness of angels; but now, by the will of God, having become man for the human race, He endured all the sufferings which the devils instigated the senseless Jews to inflict upon Him; who, though they have it expressly affirmed in the writings of Moses, "And the angel of God spake to Moses in a flame of fire in a bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham,
    and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," yet maintain that He who said this was the Father and Creator of the universe. Whence also the Spirit of prophecy rebukes them, and says, "Israel doth not know Me, my people have not understood Me." And again, Jesus, as we have already shown, while He was with them, said, "No one knoweth the Father, but the Son; nor the Son but the Father, and those to whom the Son will reveal Him." The Jews, accordingly, being throughout of opinion that it was the Father of the universe who spake to Moses, though He who spake to him was indeed the Son of God, who is called both Angel and Apostle, are justly charged, both by the Spirit of prophecy and by Christ Himself, with knowing neither the Father nor the Son. For they who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have become acquainted with the Father, nor to know that the Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God. And of old He appeared in the shape of fire and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to the other prophets; but now in the times of your reign, having, as we before said, become Man by a virgin, according to the counsel of the Father, for the salvation of those who believe on Him, He endured both to be set at nought and to suffer, that by dying and rising again He might conquer death. And that which was said out of the bush to Moses, "I am that I am, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and the God of your fathers," this signified that they, even though dead, are let in existence, and are men belonging to Christ Himself. For they were the first of all men to busy themselves in the search after God; Abraham being the father of Isaac, and Isaac of Jacob, as Moses wrote." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 63)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "It is not on this ground solely," I said, "that it must be admitted absolutely that some other one is called Lord by the Holy Spirit besides Him who is considered Maker of all things; not solely [for what is said] by Moses, but also [for what is said] by David. For there is written by him: ‘The Lord says to my Lord, Sit on My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool,’ as I have already quoted. And again, in other words: ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." (Dialog of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, ch 56)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "Then I replied, "Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things, — numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will. For I affirm that He has never at any time done anything which He who made the world — above whom there is no other God — has not wished Him both to do and to engage Himself with." (Dialog of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, ch 56)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "… even so here, the Scripture, in announcing that the Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses, and in afterwards declaring him to be Lord and God, speaks of the same One, whom it declares by the many testimonies already quoted to be minister to God, who is above the world, above whom there is no other [God]." (Dialog of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, ch 60)
    150 AD Justin Martyr "I shall give you another testimony, my friends," said I, "from the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave (Nun). For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father’s will, and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will; just as we see happening among ourselves: for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out: and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, …" (Dialog of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, ch 60)
    150 AD Polycarp of Smyrna

    150 AD Polycarp of Smyrna "I praise you for all things, I bless you, I glorify you, along with the everlasting and heavenly Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, with whom, to you and the Holy Spirit, be glory both now and to all coming ages. Amen" (Martyrdom of Polycarp 14).
    160 AD Mathetes

    160 AD Mathetes "[The Father] sent the Word that he might be manifested to the world . . . This is he who was from the beginning, who appeared as if new, and was found old . . . This is he who, being from everlasting, is today called the Son" (Letter to Diognetus 11).
    170 AD Tatian the Syrian

    170 AD Tatian the Syrian "We are not playing the fool, you Greeks, nor do we talk nonsense, when we report that God was born in the form of a man" (Address to the Greeks 21).
    177 AD Athenagoras

    177 AD Athenagoras "The Son of God is the Word of the Father in thought and actuality. By him and through him all things were made, the Father and the Son being one. Since the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son by the unity and power of the Spirit, the Mind and Word of the Father is the Son of God. And if, in your exceedingly great wisdom, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by `the Son,’ I will tell you briefly: He is the first- begotten of the Father, not as having been produced, for from the beginning God had the Word in himself, God being eternal mind and eternally rational, but as coming forth to be the model and energizing force of all material things" (Plea for the Christians 10:2-4).
    177 AD Melito of Sardis

    177 AD Melito of Sardis "It is no way necessary in dealing with persons of intelligence to adduce the actions of Christ after his baptism as proof that his soul and his body, his human nature, were like ours, real and not phantasmal. The activities of Christ after his baptism, and especially his miracles, gave indication and assurance to the world of the deity hidden in his flesh. Being God and likewise perfect man, he gave positive indications of his two natures: of his deity, by the miracles during the three years following after his baptism, of his humanity, in the thirty years which came before his baptism, during which, by reason of his condition according to the flesh, he concealed the signs of his deity, although he was the true God existing before the ages" (Fragment in Anastasius of Sinai’s The Guide 13).
    180 AD Theophilus of Antioch

    180 AD Theophilus of Antioch Chapter XV. – Of the Fourth Day. "On the fourth day the luminaries were made; because God, who possesses foreknowledge, knew the follies of the vain philosophers, that they were going to say, that the things which grow on the earth are produced from the heavenly bodies, so as to exclude God. In order, therefore, that the truth might be obvious, the plants and seeds were produced prior to the heavenly bodies, for what is posterior cannot produce that which is prior. And these contain the pattern and type of a great mystery. For the sun is a type of God, and the moon of man. And as the sun far surpasses the moon in power and glory, so far does God surpass man. And as the sun remains ever full, never becoming less, so does God always abide perfect, being full of all power, and understanding, and wisdom, and immortality, and all good. But the moon wanes monthly, and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is born again, and is crescent, for a pattern of the future resurrection. In like manner also the three
    days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity,. of God, and His Word, and His wisdom." [Triavdo" The earliest use of this word "Trinity." It seems to have been used by this writer in his lost works, also; and, as a learned friends suggests, the use he makes of it is familiar. He does not lug it in as something novel: "types of the Trinity," he says, illustrating an accepted word, not introducing a new one.] "And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man. Wherefore also on the fourth day the lights were made. The disposition of the stars, too, contains a type of the arrangement and order of the righteous and pious, and of those who keep the law and commandments of God. For the brilliant and bright stars are an imitation of the prophets, and therefore they remain fixed, not declining, nor passing from place to place. And those which hold the second place in brightness, are types of the people of the righteous. And those, again, which change their position, and flee from place to place, which also are cared planets, they too are a type of the men who have wandered from God, abandoning His law and commandments." (180 AD, Theophilus of Antioch Chapter XV. – Of the Fourth Day, To Autolycus 2:15)
    180 AD Irenaeus

    180 AD Irenaeus "…so that He indeed who made all things can alone, together with His Word, properly be termed God and Lord: but the things which have been made cannot have this term applied to them, neither should they justly assume that appellation which belongs to the Creator." – Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 8, section 3.
    180 AD Irenaeus "But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues…" (Against Heresies, Book II, ch. 30, section 9)
    180 AD Irenaeus "Christ Jesus is our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King." (Against Heresies, Book I, ch. 10, section 1)
    180 AD Irenaeus "For I have shown from the scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth. Now, the scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like others, He had been a mere man. (Irenaeus Against Heresies, chapter xix.2)
    180 AD Irenaeus "For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the Earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, Father Almighty, the creator of heaven and Earth and sea and all that is in them; and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who announced through the prophets the dispensations and the comings, and the birth from a Virgin, and the passion, and the Resurrection from the dead, and the bodily Ascension into heaven of the beloved Christ Jesus our Lord, and his coming from heaven in the glory of the Father to re-establish all things; and the raising up again of all flesh of all humanity, in order that to Jesus Christ our Lord and God and Savior and King, in accord with the approval of the invisible Father, every knee shall bend of those in heaven and on Earth and under the earth . . . " (Against Heresies 1:10:1).
    180 AD Irenaeus "[The Gnostics] transfer the generation of the uttered word of men to the eternal Word of God, attributing to him a beginning of utterance and a coming into being . . . In what manner, then, would the word of God–indeed, the great God himself, since he is the Word–differ from the word of men?" (Against Heresies 2:13:8).
    180 AD Irenaeus "Nevertheless, what cannot be said of anyone else who ever lived, that he is himself in his own right God and Lord . . . may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth" (Against Heresies, 3:19:1).
    180 AD Irenaeus "It was not angels, therefore, who made us nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor anyone else . . . For God did not stand in need of these in order to the accomplishing of what he had himself determined with himself beforehand should be done, as if he did not possess his own hands. For with him [the Father] were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, he made all things, to whom also he speaks, saying, ‘Let us make man in our image and likeness’ [Gen. 1:26" (Against Heresies 4:20:1).
    180 AD Irenaeus [Quoting John 1:1] "’…and the Word was God,’ of course, for that which is begotten of God is God." (Against Heresies, Book I, ch. 8, section 5)
    180 AD Irenaeus "And again when the Son speaks to Moses, He says, ‘I am come down to deliver this people,’ (Exodus 3:8 – the burning bush). For it is He who descended and ascended for the salvation of men." (Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 6, section 2)
    180 AD Irenaeus "Proofs From The Apostolic Writings, That Jesus Christ Was One And The Same, The Only Begotten Son Of God, Perfect God And Perfect Man." (Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 16, Chapter Title)
    180 AD Irenaeus [in reference to Jesus] "For I have shown from the Scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself,…Now, the Scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like others, He had been a mere man." (Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 19, section 2)
    180 AD Irenaeus "God, then, was made man, and the Lord did Himself save us, giving us the token of the Virgin." (Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 21, section 1)
    180 AD Irenaeus "Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spake to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers." (Against Heresies, Book IV, ch. 5, section 2)
    180 AD Irenaeus "And for this reason all spake with Christ when He was present [upon earth], and they named Him God." (Against Heresies, Book IV, ch.6, section 6)
    180 AD Irenaeus "God formed man…it was not angels, therefore, who made us…neither had angels power to make an image of God." (Against Heresies, Book IV, ch. 20, section 1)
    180 AD Irenaeus "Wherefore the prophets, receiving the prophetic gift from the same Word, announced His advent according to the flesh, by which the blending and communion of God and man took place according to the good pleasure of the Father, the Word of God foretelling from the beginning that God should be seen by men, and hold converse with them upon earth." (Against Heresies, Book IV, ch. 20, section 4)
    180 AD Irenaeus "The Word, that is, the Son, was always with the Father." (Against Heresies, Book IV, ch. 20, section 3)
    180 AD Irenaeus "Christ Jesus, the Son of God, because of His surpassing love for His creation, condescended to be born of the virgin." (Against Heresies, Book III, ch. 4, section 2)
    180 AD Irenaeus "Therefore neither would the Lord, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the apostles, have ever named as God, definitely and absolutely, him who was not God, unless he were truly God; nor would they have named any one in his own person Lord, except God the Father ruling over all, and His Son who has received dominion from His Father over all creation, as this passage has it: "The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool." Here the [Scripture] represents to us the Father addressing the Son; He who gave Him the inheritance o
    f the heathen, and subjected to Him all His enemies. Since, therefore, the Father is truly Lord, and the Son truly Lord, the Holy Spirit has fitly designated them by the title of Lord. And again, referring to the destruction of the Sodomites, the Scripture says, "Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the LORD out of heaven." For it here points out that the Son, who had also been talking with Abraham, had received power to judge the Sodomites for their wickedness. And this [text following] does declare the same truth: "Thy throne, O God; is for ever and ever; the scepter of Thy kingdom is a right scepter. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity: therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee." For the Spirit designates both [of them] by the name, of God — both Him who is anointed as Son, and Him who does anoint, that is, the Father." (Book 3, ch 6)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria

    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria [note: Clement NEVER calls Jesus a creature.] "There was then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreated." (Fragments, Part I, section III)
    "that so great a work was accomplished in so brief a space by the Lord, who, though despised as to appearance, was in reality adored, the expiator of sin, the Saviour, the clement, the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God, not disbelieved in by all when He was first preached, nor altogether unknown when, assuming the character of man, and fashioning Himself in flesh, He enacted the drama of human salvation: for He was a true champion and a fellow-champion with [ie. God among creatures, not that Jesus is classed as a creature] the creature." (Exhortations, Chap 10)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father." (Stromata, Book V, ch. 14)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "When [John] says: ‘What was from the beginning [1 John 1:1],’ he touches upon the generation without beginning of the Son, who is co-equal with the Father. ‘Was,’ therefore, is indicative of an eternity without a beginning, just as the Word Himself, that is the Son, being one with the Father in regard to equality of substance, is eternal and uncreated. That the word always existed is signified by the saying: ‘In the beginning was the Word’ [John 1:1]." (fragment in Eusebius History, Bk 6 Ch 14; Jurgens, p. 188)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria ‘For both are one — that is, God. For He has said, "In the beginning the Word was in God, and the Word was God." (The Instructor, Book 1, ch 8)
    190 AD Clement of Alexandria "Despised as to appearance but in reality adored, [Jesus is] the Expiator, the Savior, the Soother, the Divine Word, he that is quite evidently true God, he that is put on a level with the Lord of the universe because he was his Son." (Exhortation to the Greeks, 10:110:1).
    190 AD Clement of Alexandria "The Word, then, the Christ, is the cause both of our ancient beginning, for lie was in God, and of our well-being. And now this same Word has appeared as man. He alone is both God and man, and the source of all our good things" (Exhortation to the Greeks 1:7:1).
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "Now, O you, my children, our Instructor is like His Father God, whose son He is, sinless, blameless, and with a soul devoid of passion; God in the form of man, stainless, the minister of His Father’s will, the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at the Father’s right hand, and with the form of God is God." (Instructor, Book I, ch. 2)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "His Son Jesus, the Word of God, is our Instructor…. He is God and Creator." (Instructor, Book I, ch. 11)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "This is the New Song, the manifestation of the Word that was in the beginning, and before the beginning. The Savior, who existed before, has in recent days appeared. He, who is in Him that truly is, has appeared; for the Word, who "was with God," and by whom all things were created, has appeared as our Teacher. The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught us to live well when He appeared as our Teacher; that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never ends." (Exhortation To The Heathen, ch 2)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first (for He was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, He alone being both, both God and man" (Exhortation To The Heathen, ch 2)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "For it was not without divine care that so great a work was accomplished in so brief a space by the Lord, who, though despised as to appearance, was in reality adored, the expiator of sin, the Savior, the clement, the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made [made = appointed not created, ie. made king after resurrection.] equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God, not disbelieved in by all when He was first preached, nor altogether unknown when, assuming the character of man, and fashioning Himself in flesh" (Exhortation To The Heathen, ch 10)
    190 AD Clement Of Alexandria "Now, O you, my children, our Instructor is like His Father God, whose son He is, sinless, blameless, and with a soul devoid of passion; God in the form of man, stainless, the minister of His Father’s will, the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at the Father’s right hand, and with the form of God is God." (The Instructor, Book 1, ch 2)
    200 AD Tertullian

    200 AD Tertullian "Never did any angel descend for the purpose of being crucified, of tasting death, and of rising again from the dead." (The Flesh of Christ, ch 6)
    200 AD Tertullian "All the Scriptures give clear proof of the Trinity, and it is from these that our principle is deduced…the distinction of the Trinity is quite clearly displayed." (Against Praxeas, ch 11)
    200 AD Tertullian "The origins of both his substances display him as man and as God: from the one, born, and from the other, not born" (The Flesh of Christ, 5:6-7).
    200 AD Tertullian "[God speaks in the plural ‘Let us make man in our image’] because already there was attached to Him his Son, a second person, his own Word, and a third, the Spirit in the Word….one substance in three coherent persons. He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit." (Against Praxeas, ch 12)
    200 AD Tertullian "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person, as it is said, ‘I and my Father are One’ [John 10:30], in respect of unity of Being not singularity of number" (Against Praxeas, 25)
    200 AD Tertullian "As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Against Praxeas, by Tertullian)
    200 AD Tertullian "So too, that which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God; and the two are
    one…. In his birth he is God and man united." (Apology, ch 21)
    200 AD Tertullian "There is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or oikonomia, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her — being both Man and God, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead; who sent also from heaven from the Father, according to His own promise, the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. That this rule of faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older heretics." (Against Praxeas, ch 2)
    200 AD Tertullian "That there are two Gods and two Lords, however, is a statement which we will never allow to issue from our mouth; not as if the Father and the Son were not God, nor the Spirit God, and each of them God; but formerly two were spoken of as Gods and two as Lords, so that when Christ would come, he might both be acknowledged as God and be called Lord, because he is the Son of him who is both God and Lord" (Against Praxeas 13:6)
    200 AD Tertullian "The Spirit is God, and the Word is God, because proceeding from God, but yet is not actually the very same as He from whom He proceeds.." (Against Praxeas, ch 26)
    200 AD Tertullian "For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a judge previous to sin" (Against Hermogones, Ch 3)
    200 AD Tertullian "He will be God, and the Word – the Son of God. We see plainly the twofold state, which is not confounded, but conjoined in One Person – Jesus, God and Man.." (Against Praxeas, ch 27)
    200 AD Tertullian "God alone is without sin. The only man who is without sin is Christ; for Christ is also God" (The Soul 41:3)
    200 AD Tertullian "We do indeed believe that there is only one God, but we believe that under this dispensation, or, as we say, oikonomia, there is also a Son of this one only God, his Word, who proceeded from him and through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made. . . . We believe he was sent down by the Father, in accord with his own promise, the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the Sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father and the Son, and in the Holy Spirit. . . . this rule of faith has been present since the beginning of the Gospel, before even the earlier heretics" … "And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the Three are the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in Being, but in form; not in power, but in kind; of one Being, however, and one condition and one power, because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Against Praxeas 2).
    200 AD Tertullian "While keeping to this demurrer always, there must, nevertheless, be place for reviewing for the sake of the instruction and protection of various persons. Otherwise it might seem that each perverse opinion is not examined but simply prejudged and condemned. This is especially so in the case of the present heresy [Sabellianism], which considers itself to have the pure truth when it supposes that one cannot believe in the one only God in any way other than by saying that Father, Son, and Spirit are the selfsame person. As if one were not all . . . through the unity of substance" (Against Praxeas 2:3-4)
    200 AD Tertullian "Keep always in mind the rule of faith which I profess and by which I bear witness that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are inseparable from each other, and then you will understand what is meant by it. Observe now that I say the Father is other [distinct], the Son is other, and the Spirit is other. This statement is wrongly understood by every uneducated or perversely disposed individual, as if it meant diversity and implied by that diversity a separation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (Against Praxeas, 9)
    200 AD Tertullian "[W]hen God says, ‘Let there be light’ [Gen. 1:3], this is the perfect nativity of the Word, while he is proceeding from God. . . . Thus, the Father makes him equal to himself, and the Son, by proceeding from him, was made the first-begotten, since he was begotten before all things, and the only-begotten, because he alone was begotten of God, in a manner peculiar to himself, from the womb of his own heart, to which even the Father himself gives witness: ‘My heart has poured forth my finest Word’ [Ps. 45:1Against Praxeas 7:1).
    200 AD Tertullian "… it is not by division that He is different, but by distinction; because the Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being. For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: "My Father is greater than I." In the Psalm His inferiority is described as being "a little lower than the angels." Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and He who is begotten is another; He, too, who sends is one, and He who is sent is another" (Against Praxeas, by Tertullian)
    200 AD Tertullian [Just as JW’s attribute words to Tertullian that he never said. We draw your attention to the fact that the quoted words (from "Should you believe in the trinity", Watchtower booklet), "There was a time when the Son was not" are not Tertullian’s, but those of Bishop Kaye in his appendix section on Tertullian. (Bishop Kaye, Account of the Writings of Tertullian, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol 3, p 1181). Kaye, Tertullian, some Trinitarians and all Modalists teach that Jesus was eternally pre-existent as God, and that the title of "Son" was first applied to Jesus after his incarnation. Just as a man cannot be called a father, until after he has a son, so too Jesus cannot be called a Son until after he was physically born via incarnation. This is the gist of what Kaye is saying Tertullian taught. To support this, notice this comment by Tertullian,] "For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a judge previous to sin" (Against Hermogones, Ch 3) see next quote:
    200 AD Tertullian [Interesting that Tertullian being a modalist, not only says there was a time before the Son became the Son, so too a time before God was the Father] Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge; but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son; the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father. In this way He was not Lord previous to those things of which He was to be the Lord. But He was only to become Lord at some future time: just as He became the Father by the Son, and a Judge by sin, so also did He become Lord by means of those things which He had made, in order that they might serve Him. (Tertullian, Against Hermogenes, chapter 3)
    200 AD Tertullian "For before all things God was alone — being in Himself and for Himself universe, and space, and all things. Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed i
    n Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. For God is rational, and Reason was first in Him; and so all things were from Himself. This Reason is His own Thought (or Consciousness) which the Greeks call , by which term we also designate Word or Discourse and therefore it is now usual with our people, owing to the mere simple interpretation of the term, to say that the Word was in the beginning with God;" (Against Praxeas, by Tertullian)
    200 AD Hippolytus

    200 AD Hippolytus "For who will not say that there is one God? Yet he will not on that account deny the economy (i.e., the number and disposition of persons in the Trinity)." (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)
    200 AD Hippolytus "As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine" (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)
    200 AD Hippolytus "Let us look next at the apostle’s word: "Whose are the fathers, of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever."(13) This word declares the mystery of the truth rightly and clearly. He who is over all is God; for thus He speaks boldly, "All things are delivered unto me of my Father."(14) He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God for ever. For to this effect John also has said, "Which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."(15) And well has he [John] named Christ the Almighty. For in this he has said only what Christ testifies of Himself. For Christ gave this testimony, and said, "All things are delivered unto me of my Father;"(16) and Christ rules all things, and has been appointed" (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus 6)
    200 AD Hippolytus "For Christ is the God above all, and He has arranged to wash away sin from human beings,(7) rendering regenerate the old man. And God called man His likeness from the beginning, and has evinced in a figure His love towards thee. And provided thou obeyest His solemn injunctions, and becomest a faithful follower of Him who is good, thou shall resemble Him, inasmuch as thou shall have honour conferred upon thee by Him. For the Deity, (by condescension,) does not diminish ought of the divinity of His divine(8) perfection; having made thee even God unto His glory" (Elucidations, Ch. 30, Author’s Concluding Address)
    200 AD Hippolytus "She hath mingled her wine" in the bowl, by which is meant, that the Saviour, uniting his Godhead, like pure wine, with the flesh in the Virgin, was born of her at once God and man without confusion of the one in the other. "And she hath furnished her table:" that denotes the promised knowledge of the Holy Trinity." (Hippolytus on Prov 9:1, fragment, "Wisdom hath builded her house.")
    200 AD Hippolytus "But there is also that which is more honourable than all–the fact that Christ, the Maker of all, came down as the rain, and was known as a spring, and diffused Himself as a river, and was baptized in the Jordan." (Discourse On The Holy Theophany)
    200 AD Hippolytus [Applying Rev 1:8 to Christ] "He who is over all, God blessed, has been born, and having been made man. He is God forever. For to this effect John also has said, ‘Which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.’ And well has he named Christ the Almighty." (Against Noetus, Part 6)
    200 AD Hippolytus "Beside Him there was nothing; but He [God], while existing alone, yet existed in plurality." (Against Noetus, Part 10)
    200 AD Hippolytus "Let us believe then, dear brethren, according to the tradition of the apostles, that God the Word came down from heaven,… He now, coming forth into the world, was manifested as God in a body, coming forth too as a perfect man.." (Against Noetus, Part 17)
    200 AD Hippolytus "The Logos is God, being the substance of God." (Refutation of all Heresies, Book X, ch 29)
    200 AD Hippolytus "For Christ is the God above all…" (Refutation of all Heresies, Book X, ch 30)
    200 AD Hippolytus "The Word alone of this God is from God himself, wherefore also the Word is God, being the Being of God. Now the world was made from nothing, wherefore it is not God" (Refutation of All Heresies 10:29).
    200 AD Hippolytus "Therefore, this sole and universal God, by reflecting, first brought forth the Word–not a word as in speech, but as a mental word, the reason for everything. . . . The Word was the cause of those things which came into existence, carrying out in himself the will of him by whom he was begotten. . . . Only [God’s] Word is from himself and is therefore also God, becoming the substance of God" … "For Christ is the God over all, who has arranged to wash away sin from mankind, rendering the old man new" (Refutation of All Heresies 10:33,34).
    200 AD Hippolytus "Thus, after the death of Zephyrinus, supposing that he had obtained (the position) after which he so eagerly pursued, he [Callistus] excommunicated Sabellius, as not entertaining orthodox opinions" (Refutation of All Heresies 9:7).
    200 AD Hippolytus "Against The Heresy Of One Noetus: 1. Some others are secretly introducing another doctrine, who have become disciples of one Noetus, who was a native of Smyrna, (and) lived not very long ago. This person was greatly puffed up and inflated with pride, being inspired by the conceit of a strange spirit. He alleged that Christ was the Father Himself, and that the Father Himself was born, and suffered, and died. Ye see what pride of heart and what a strange inflated spirit had insinuated themselves into him. Froth his other actions, then, the proof is already given us that he spoke not with a pure spirit; for he who blasphemes against the Holy Ghost is cast out from the holy inheritance. He alleged that he was himself Moses, and that Aaron was his brother. When the blessed presbyters heard this, they summoned him before the Church, and examined him. But he denied at first that he held such opinions. Afterwards, however, taking shelter among some, and having gathered round him some others who had embraced the same error, he wished thereafter to uphold his dogma openly as correct. And the blessed presbyters called him again before them, and examined him. But he stood out against them, saying, "What evil, then, am I doing in glorifying Christ?" And the presbyters replied to him, "We too know in truth one God; we know Christ; we know that the Son suffered even as He suffered, and died even as He died, and rose again on the third day, and is at the right hand of the Father, and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And these things which we have learned we allege." Then, after examining him, they expelled him from the Church. And he was carried to such a pitch of pride, that he established a school. 2. Now they [Noetus] seek to exhibit the foundation for their dogma by citing the word in the law, "I am the God of your fathers: ye shall have no other gods beside me;" and again in another passage, "I am the first," He saith, "and the last; and beside me there is none other." Thus they say they prove that God is one. And then they answer in this manner: "If therefore I acknowledge Christ to be God, He is the Father Himself, if He is indeed God; and Christ suffered, being Himself God; and consequently the Father suffered, for He was the Father Himself." But the case stands not thus; for the Scriptures do not set forth the matter in this manner. But they make use also of other testimonies, and say, Thus it is written: "This is our God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of Him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant (son), and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He show Himself upon earth, and conversed with men." You see, then, he says, that this is God, who is the
    only One, and who afterwards did show Himself, and con-versed with men." And in another place he says, "Egypt hath laboured; and the merchandise of Ethiopia and the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, (and they shall be slaves to thee); and they shall come after thee bound with manacles, and they shall fall down unto thee, because God is in thee; and they shall make supplication unto thee: and there is no God beside thee. For Thou art God, and we knew not; God of Israel, the Saviour." Do you see, he says, how the Scriptures proclaim one God? And as this is clearly exhibited, and these passages are testimonies to it, I am under necessity, he says, since one is acknowledged, to make this One the subject of suffering. For Christ was God, and suffered on account of us, being Himself the Father, that He might be able also to save us. And we cannot express ourselves otherwise, he says; for the apostle also acknowledges one God, when he says, "Whose are the fathers, (and) of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever." … "8. In this way, then, they choose to set forth these things, and they make use only of one class of passages; just in the same one-sided manner that Theodotus employed when he sought to prove that Christ was a mere man. But neither has the one party nor the other understood the matter rightly, as the Scriptures themselves confute their senselessness, and attest the truth. See, brethren, what a rash and audacious dogma they have introduced, when they say without shame, the Father is Himself Christ, Himself the Son, Himself was born, Himself suffered, Himself raised Himself. But it is not so. The Scriptures speak what is right; but Noetus is of a different mind from them. Yet, though Noetus does not understand the truth, the Scriptures are not at once to be repudiated. For who will not say that there is one God? Yet he will not on that account deny the economy (i.e., the number and disposition of persons in the Trinity). The proper way, therefore, to deal with the question is first of all to refute the interpretation put upon these passages by these men, and then to explain their real meaning. For it is right, in the first place, to expound the truth that the Father is one God, "of whom is every family," "by whom are all things, of whom are all things, and we in Him." (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)
    200 AD Hippolytus "Against The Heresy Of One Noetus: Many other passages, or rather all of them, attest the truth. A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three. But if he desires to learn how it is shown still that there is one God, let him know that His power is one. As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine. In these things, however, which are thus set forth by us, we are at one. For there is one God in whom we must believe, but unoriginated, impassible, immortal, doing all things as He wills, in the way He wills, and when He wills. What, then, will this Noetus, who knows nothing of the truth, dare to say to these things? And now, as Noetus has been confuted, let us turn to the exhibition of the truth itself, that we may establish the truth, against which all these mighty heresies have arisen without being able to state anything to the purpose. (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)
    200 AD Hippolytus "A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three. But if he desires to learn how it is shown still that there is one God, let him know that His power is one. As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine. In these things, however, which are thus set forth by us, we are at one. For there is one God in whom we must believe, but unoriginated, impassible, immortal, doing all things as He wills, in the way He wills, and when He wills." (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)
    200 AD Hippolytus "As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine" (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)
    225 AD Origen

    225 AD Origen "And that you may understand that the omnipotence of Father and Son is one and the same, as God and the Lord are one and the same with the Father, listen to the manner in which John speaks in the Apocalypse: "Thus saith the Lord God, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."(3) For who else was "He which is to come" than Christ? And as no one ought to be offended, seeing God is the Father, that the Saviour is also God; so also, since the Father is called omnipotent, no one ought to be offended that the Son of God is also cared omnipotent." (De Principis, On Christ, Book 1, Ch 2)
    225 AD Origen "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." (De Principis, Book I, ch. 3, section 7)
    225 AD Origen "Saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e., by the naming of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." (De Principis, Book I, ch. 3, section 2)
    225 AD Origen "The holy Apostles, in preaching the faith of Christ, treated with the utmost clarity of certain matters which they believed to be of absolute necessity to all believers…The specific points which are clearly handed down through the Apostolic preaching [are] these: First, that there is one God who created and arranged all things…Secondly, that Jesus Christ himself was born of the Father before all creatures…Although He was God, He took flesh, and having been made man, He remained what He was, God" (De Principis, Preface, sections 3 – 4)
    225 AD Origen "For we do not hold that which the heretics imagine: that the Son was procreated by the Father from non-existent substances, that is, from a substance outside Himself, so that there was a time when He did not exist." (De Principis, Book V, Summary, section 28)
    225 AD Origen "We worship one God, the Father and the Son." (Against Celsus, Book VIII, section 12)
    225 AD Origen "The specific points which are clearly handed down through the apostolic preaching are these: First, that there is one God who created and arranged all things, and who, when nothing existed, called all things into existence, and that in the final period this God, just as he had promised beforehand through the prophets, sent the Lord Jesus Christ. Secondly, that Jesus Christ himself, who came, was born of the father before all creatures; and after he had ministered to the father in the creation of all things, for through him all things were made" … "Although he was God, he took flesh; and having been made man, he remained what he was. God" (The Fundamental Doctrines 1:0:4).
    225 AD Origen "For we do not hold that which the heretics imagine: that some part of the Being of God was converted into the Son, or that the Son was procreated by the Father from non-existent substances, that is, from a Being outside himself, so that there were a time when he [the Son] did not exist" … "No, rejecting every suggestion of corporeality, we hold that
    the Word and the Wisdom was begotten out of the invisible and incorporeal God, without anything

Viewing 20 posts - 241 through 260 (of 9,998 total)

The topic ‘Trinity (Part 1)’ is closed to new replies.

© 1999 - 2019 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account