• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?

Phantasman

Newbie
May 12, 2012
4,954
226
Tennessee
✟42,126.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Speculation is only what one reads from the history provided.

As the OP title says, through study and observing the evidence provided from the past, one makes their own decision on what is truth. If it's debunk, provide your sources. Otherwise, opinions mean nothing.
 
Upvote 0

Phantasman

Newbie
May 12, 2012
4,954
226
Tennessee
✟42,126.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
You mean that historical accounts lead people to speculate on the parts for which they are yet to find the facts.
You said I speculated on the banishment of church leaders at Nicea by Constantine.

"Constantine is believed to have exiled those who refused to accept the Nicean creed—Arius himself, the deacon Euzoios, and the Libyan bishops Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais—and also the bishops who signed the creed but refused to join in condemnation of Arius, Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea. The Emperor also ordered all copies of the Thalia, the book in which Arius had expressed his teachings, to be burned. However, there is no evidence that his son and ultimate successor, Constantius II, who was an Arian Christian, was exiled."

Arius believed in Jesus as being the separate part of God, with a beginning.

Arianism is the theological teaching attributed to Arius (ca. AD 250–336), a Christian presbyter in Alexandria, Egypt, concerning the relationship of God to the Son of God (Jesus of Nazareth). Arius asserted that the Son of God was a subordinate entity to God the Father. Deemed a heretic by the Ecumenical First Council of Nicaea of 325, Arius was later exonerated in 335 at the regional First Synod of Tyre,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#cite_note-1and then, after his death, pronounced a heretic again at the Ecumenical First Council of Constantinople of 381.

Constantine made sure that the Trinity theory was accepted. Even though it wasn't confirmed till 360AD at Constantinople as accepted by the church.

"Of all the various disagreements within the Christian Church, the Arian controversy has held the greatest force and power of theological and political conflict, with the possible exception of the Protestant Reformation. The conflict between Arianism and Trinitarian beliefs was the first major doctrinal confrontation in the Church after the legalization of Christianity by the Roman Emperors Constantine I and Licinius.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#cite_note-8"

With the strong hand of the Roman Emperors, Trinity became the churches belief. I don't trust them, nor believe them. They killed Christ and I just don't see them succumbing to God the Father, unless it's on their terms.
 
Upvote 0

Mediate

Only Borrowed
Jan 31, 2013
682
26
✟23,492.00
Faith
Pantheist
Marital Status
Single
Against:

the word 'ruach' in hebrew. Used in the bible to denote 'spirit'.

Used in forms such as 'the breath of', 'the mind of', 'the wind of'. Breath being as 'coming from the mouth'.

The greek word 'pneuma' Used in the bible. Meaning 'perspective' as apposed to 'ghost' or 'soul', which is 'psyche'.

Jesus being 'the son of' God. Child of God. What comes from God.

The spirit is able to be present in a person who is not Jesus or God,which means it is not metaphysical, but mental. 'Getting wind of', or being 'inspired by'.

The spirit of God guides our perspective. IT is not a 'ghost' spirit, it's a 'in the spirit of love' spirit.

An attitude. A will in line with God's.

Hence, Jesus had the Holy Spirit.

God is One. His spirit is his 'way' and his 'attitude'.

In his teachings and word, the spirit which he tries to instill in us, is plain to see. Give. Love. Have joy. Be patient and kind.

There is One God. One Mediator, who is the perfect example of what a man should be. A man made obedient to all of God's teachings, and therefore, totally obedient to God.

A man with the spirit in its fullness (as far as it can be full in a man) yet still subject to flesh.

Jesus is not God. 'There is but One who is good'.

The spirit is not a ghost. It is God's attribute. The attribute which God has in fullness and gives to us to learn and apply.

See Eastern religion and you see the original concept of 'spirit'.

Hebrew and greek give gender and personification to inanimate things.

So you can see where 'having a good-will spirit' got messed into 'that spirit over there (personified)'.

But I can assure you that the spirit of God isn't separate from Him, or Jesus. They both love and give and have patience and kindness and compassion in abundance. But One's the God of everything, and the other is the obedient son.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,264
✟584,012.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You said I speculated on the banishment of church leaders at Nicea by Constantine.

No I didn't. I said that this was speculation: "It sure made the others take notice and realize that they should listen to him, and insert God where it met Constantines favor."

Arius believed in Jesus as being the separate part of God, with a beginning.
Arius believed that Jesus was a created being, not God.
 
Upvote 0

Luvtosew

Newbie
Feb 27, 2012
450
13
✟679.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Imagican explained it pretty well, in which you disagreed, how Constantine infiltrated the council with parts of his own religious thought. The Nicene Creed is organized under the government of the time. Since only one sixth of the church leaders show up, and since the government is what allows which religious doctrines survive or be considered taboo, the organized Nicene council became the "law of the land" with Constantines help and approval.

Deciding days of worship, holidays, what books to believe, etc. is the sign of a government. When a few people debated the intent in the beginning of the council, Constantine banished them. It sure made the others take notice and realize that they should listen to him, and insert God where it met Constantines favor.

"However, Constantine certainly did not patronize Christianity alone. After gaining victory in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (312), a triumphal arch—the Arch of Constantine—was built (315) to celebrate his triumph. The arch is most notably decorated with images of the goddess Victoria and, at the time of its dedication, sacrifices to gods like Apollo, Diana, and Hercules were made. Most notably absent from the Arch are any depictions whatsoever regarding Christian symbolism." - WIKI

And at the meeting at Nicea:

"Resplendent in purple and gold, Constantine made a ceremonial entrance at the opening of the council, probably in early June, but respectfully seated the bishops ahead of himself."[17] As Eusebius described, Constantine "himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones."[34] He was present as an observer, and did not vote. Constantine organized the Council along the lines of the Roman Senate. Hosius of Cordoba may have presided over its deliberations; he was probably one of the Papal legates"

Hardly what I would call a person who put Christianity at the forefront.

His theology manufactured by his council is todays church.


Your right in those days Roman Emperors were not only Kings they were God in charge of religious beliefs in their domain. He was the ultimate decider after listening to everything, he picked the most docile religion, one that encourage people to be humble, be good slaves, serve others, love one another, discourage adultry, and also one that would be accepted, which is the trinity as Mithra was very popular among the Roman Soldiers.

There was much division going on at the time about the diety of Christ, the holidays, remember we had Jews in Rome also, many, so Constantine wanted decisions made about what religion Rome was to follow. Yet Constantine himself wasn't baptised until his death.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,264
✟584,012.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Yet Constantine himself wasn't baptised until his death.
In those days, it was common for believers to put off their baptisms until they were near death. That fact does not in any way suggest that Constantine was not actually a Christian.
 
Upvote 0

Phantasman

Newbie
May 12, 2012
4,954
226
Tennessee
✟42,126.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Your right in those days Roman Emperors were not only Kings they were God in charge of religious beliefs in their domain. He was the ultimate decider after listening to everything, he picked the most docile religion, one that encourage people to be humble, be good slaves, serve others, love one another, discourage adultry, and also one that would be accepted, which is the trinity as Mithra was very popular among the Roman Soldiers.

There was much division going on at the time about the diety of Christ, the holidays, remember we had Jews in Rome also, many, so Constantine wanted decisions made about what religion Rome was to follow. Yet Constantine himself wasn't baptised until his death.

Constantine was still the elitist. He was the rich man of Jesus parable. He was willing to compromise himself for some of Christianity as long as he didn't have to give up many of the things of mammon. So we wind up with a form of Christianity today that accepts mammon into Christianity when Jesus taught to hate the one and love the other. Constantine could have been killed at any time, so why wait for baptism with the chance you may not receive it? If he were truly Christian at heart, I would think he would have been baptized like those of the Apostles, when they heard the word. But he had to appease the Jews as well, so he stood on the fence until the end.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,264
✟584,012.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Constantine could have been killed at any time, so why wait for baptism with the chance you may not receive it? If he were truly Christian at heart, I would think he would have been baptized like those of the Apostles, when they heard the word. But he had to appease the Jews as well, so he stood on the fence until the end.

Obviously I was wrong not to explain in greater detail my explanation about why Christians at that period of time often put off their baptisms until they were near death. If I had done so, it might have staved off these wild guesses. But maybe not.

The reason is that it was widely thought at that time that sins committed after baptism were unforgiveable. Therefore, the later you waited, the better off you'd be. Constantine did nothing unusual, in other words, but moderns don't know this since the church changed its thinking about that. Therefore, they imagine a variety of dark explanations from appeasing the Jews to really remaining a pagan at heart.

None of that is true. And as for the supposedly pagan emblems his troops continued to display on their armor and the like, those were seen by this time in Roman history as symbols of Rome itself, not as religious, the same way we think of eagles and stars. I know that some inventive mind could theorize that the Romans used eagles, too, so we Americans must be continuing Roman paganism by having eagles on our flagpoles and in other places, but of course that is not true.
 
Upvote 0

Phantasman

Newbie
May 12, 2012
4,954
226
Tennessee
✟42,126.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
The reason is that it was widely thought at that time that sins committed after baptism were unforgiveable.

I have not encountered this thought anywhere in my studies. But if this were true, obviously this thought did not come from the Apostles or the scriptures that taught differently. It may have been conceived by people like Tertullian or Irenaeus who tried to redefine Christian theology.
 
Upvote 0

Alter2Ego

Newbie
Feb 8, 2013
102
6
Los Angeles, California
✟24,381.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Against:

the word 'ruach' in hebrew. Used in the bible to denote 'spirit'.

Used in forms such as 'the breath of', 'the mind of', 'the wind of'. Breath being as 'coming from the mouth'.

The greek word 'pneuma' Used in the bible. Meaning 'perspective' as apposed to 'ghost' or 'soul', which is 'psyche'.

Jesus being 'the son of' God. Child of God. What comes from God.

The spirit is able to be present in a person who is not Jesus or God,which means it is not metaphysical, but mental. 'Getting wind of', or being 'inspired by'.

The spirit of God guides our perspective. IT is not a 'ghost' spirit, it's a 'in the spirit of love' spirit.

An attitude. A will in line with God's.

Hence, Jesus had the Holy Spirit.

God is One. His spirit is his 'way' and his 'attitude'.

In his teachings and word, the spirit which he tries to instill in us, is plain to see. Give. Love. Have joy. Be patient and kind.

There is One God. One Mediator, who is the perfect example of what a man should be. A man made obedient to all of God's teachings, and therefore, totally obedient to God.

A man with the spirit in its fullness (as far as it can be full in a man) yet still subject to flesh.

Jesus is not God. 'There is but One who is good'.

The spirit is not a ghost. It is God's attribute. The attribute which God has in fullness and gives to us to learn and apply.

See Eastern religion and you see the original concept of 'spirit'.

Hebrew and greek give gender and personification to inanimate things.

So you can see where 'having a good-will spirit' got messed into 'that spirit over there (personified)'.

But I can assure you that the spirit of God isn't separate from Him, or Jesus. They both love and give and have patience and kindness and compassion in abundance. But One's the God of everything, and the other is the obedient son.
ALTER2EGO -to- MEDIATE:

Excellent points. I would like to add that in reality, the idea that the holy spirit is a "person" was decided upon by the Catholic bishops at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD--under the directions of a politician, Roman Emperor Theodosius--more than 300 years after Jesus Christ left the earthly scene.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,264
✟584,012.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I have not encountered this thought anywhere in my studies.

I can't account for that since it is well-known. I guess all I can say is that I hope it has intrigued you sufficiently to give it further research.

But if this were true, obviously this thought did not come from the Apostles or the scriptures that taught differently.
Alright. What it probably shows is that the first century church was much less in order and settled than we all like to think it was.

It may have been conceived by people like Tertullian or Irenaeus who tried to redefine Christian theology.
I don't think so. That supposes that everyone had a clear and united understanding of Baptism until someone messed it up. It is farfetched to think that Tertullian or Irenaeus could have thrown that kind of monkey wrench into things. It's more a matter of the early church having an uncertain view of some aspects of Baptism that the Scriptures do not answer unequivocally.
 
Upvote 0

Alter2Ego

Newbie
Feb 8, 2013
102
6
Los Angeles, California
✟24,381.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

According to the trinity dogma, Almighty God Jehovah is split up into three persons who are combined into a single "Godhead". Not only does the word "Godhead" not belong in the Judeo-Christian Bible, but the scriptures do not support the false religious doctrine that says the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible is a triune god.

Below is a verse of scripture that demonstrates the idiocy of the trinity dogma.


"The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." (Psalms 110:1 -- King James Version)


"The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord is: 'Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet." (Psalms 110:1 -- New World Translation)


According to that scripture, Jehovah is literally talking to himself. During the conversation with himself, Jehovah puts himself on his own right hand and refers to the enemy of the son (Jesus) as "your" enemy (indicating the enemy is Jesus' enemy and not Jehovah's), rather than using the possessive "our enemy"
 
Upvote 0

Alter2Ego

Newbie
Feb 8, 2013
102
6
Los Angeles, California
✟24,381.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Against:

the word 'ruach' in hebrew. Used in the bible to denote 'spirit'.

Used in forms such as 'the breath of', 'the mind of', 'the wind of'. Breath being as 'coming from the mouth'.

The greek word 'pneuma' Used in the bible. Meaning 'perspective' as apposed to 'ghost' or 'soul', which is 'psyche'.

ALTER2EGO -to- MEDIATE:

Exactly. The holy ghost/holy spirit is not a person but, rather, is a possession. It is something owned by Almighty God Jehovah, rather than it being someone. Thus the use of the word "of" as in "the spirit OF God."

I will address more of your comments at another time.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,125
6,150
EST
✟1,149,197.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Excellent points. I would like to add that in reality, the idea that the holy spirit is a "person" was decided upon by the Catholic bishops at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD--under the directions of a politician, Roman Emperor Theodosius--more than 300 years after Jesus Christ left the earthly scene.

Interesting theory but it is not supported by evidence.

In his, (Link to: Dialogue with Trypho), Justin wrote;
  1. The Word is Not as an Inanimate Power
  2. The Word is a Person.
  3. The Word is Begotten of the Father's Substance.
  4. He (Jesus) was God,
  5. He (Jesus) was Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God.
  6. He (Jesus) was God, indivisible from the Father.
  7. He (Jesus) was God, inseparable from the Father.
  8. (Jesus) was Begotten from the Father but not by abscission [cutting off][/size]
The First Apology of Justin, (150 AD) (175 years before Nicea) "But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the only begotten Son. We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For "the Word was made flesh." Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a 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. 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"
Chapter XXXVI Who is this King of glory? 'And the Holy Spirit, either from the person of His Father, or from His own person, answers them, `The Lord of hosts, He is this King of glory.'

The Epistle Of Ignatius To The Philippians Chap. II. — Unity Of The Three Divine Persons. [100 AD, 225 years before Nicaea]

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."(9) And again, "Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father?(10) 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."(11) And again, "One Lord Jesus Christ."(12) And in another place, "What is His name, or what His Son's name, that we may know?"(13) And there is also one Paraclete.(14) For "there is also," saith [the Scripture], "one Spirit,"(15) since "we have been called in one hope of our calling."(16) And again, "We have drunk of one Spirit,"(15) with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts [possessed by believers] "worketh one and the self-same Spirit."(17) There are not then either three Fathers,(18) 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,"(19) not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour.

Athenagoras the Athenian — A Plea For the Christians Philosopher and Christian [177 AD] (148 years before Nicea)

while men who reckon the present life of very small worth indeed, and who are conducted to the future life by this one thing alone, that they know God and His Logos, what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, the Father, and their distinction in unity; and who know that the life for which we look is far better than can be described in words, provided we arrive at it pure from all wrong-doing; who, moreover, carry our benevolence to such an extent, that we not only love our friends ("for if ye love them," He says, "that love you, and lend to them that lend to you, what reward will ye have? ",-shall we, I say, when such is our character, and when we live such a life as this, that we may escape condemnation at last, not be accounted pious?

FatAthenPleaChr

180 AD (145 years before Nicea) Theophilus of Antioch

Chapter XV. - Of the Fourth Day.
" 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." 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.

Chapter XV. - Of the Fourth Day, To Autolycus 2:15)

Clement Of Alexandria Stromata, Book V, ch. 14 — 190 AD (135 years before Nicea) "

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)

"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)

'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)

"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).

Gregory the Wonderworker (Declaration of Faith [A.D. 265]). (60 years before Nicea)

"There is one God . . . There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abides ever"

200 AD Tertullian (125 years before Nicea)"

[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)

"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)

"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

Irenaeus Against Heresies [a.d. 120-202.] [125 years before Nicaea] disciple of Polycarp a disciple of John

BOOK IV
.Thus also did Rahab the harlot, while condemning herself, inasmuch as she was a Gentile, guilty of all sins, nevertheless receive the three spies,(8) who were spying out all the land, and hid them at her home; [which three were] doubtless [a type of] the Father and the Son, together with the Holy Spirit.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,125
6,150
EST
✟1,149,197.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
According to the trinity dogma, Almighty God Jehovah is split up into three persons who are combined into a single "Godhead". Not only does the word "Godhead" not belong in the Judeo-Christian Bible, but the scriptures do not support the false religious doctrine that says the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible is a triune god.

JW doctrine. You saying "the word "Godhead" does not belong in the Judeo-Christian Bible," does not make it so. Can you prove with any kind of evidence this is true? You saying "the scriptures do not support the false religious doctrine" does not make it so. Can you prove with any kind of evidence this is true?

Below is a verse of scripture that demonstrates the idiocy of the trinity dogma.

"The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." (Psalms 110:1 -- King James Version)

"The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord is: 'Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet." (Psalms 110:1 -- New World Translation)

According to that scripture, Jehovah is literally talking to himself. During the conversation with himself, Jehovah puts himself on his own right hand and refers to the enemy of the son (Jesus) as "your" enemy (indicating the enemy is Jesus' enemy and not Jehovah's), rather than using the possessive "our enemy"

You claim this proves something but your argument is just opinion. One being-God, three persons-Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is one God. In the Bible the Father is God but He is not the Son or the Holy Spirit. The Son is God but He is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is God but He is not the Son or the Father.

Here is how Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars translated Psalm 110:1 in the Septuagint 250 BC.

Psa 110:1 (109:1) A Psalm of David. The Lord [κύριος] said to my Lord [κύριος], Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.​

.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,125
6,150
EST
✟1,149,197.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DerAlter,

Is it just me or do all anti-Trinitarian cults attempt to prove some "great apostasy" starting with the Council of Nicea? What makes Nicea their big target?

I think it is because of Constantine who was a pagan sun worshipper until his conversion experience in 312. They claim that he remained a sun worshipper and forced the Trinity on the church at Nicaea. Evidently they are not aware that Constantine was an Arian.
 
Upvote 0

Mediate

Only Borrowed
Jan 31, 2013
682
26
✟23,492.00
Faith
Pantheist
Marital Status
Single
JW doctrine. You saying "the word "Godhead" does not belong in the Judeo-Christian Bible," does not make it so. Can you prove with any kind of evidence this is true? You saying "the scriptures do not support the false religious doctrine" does not make it so. Can you prove with any kind of evidence this is true?



You claim this proves something but your argument is just opinion. One being-God, three persons-Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is one God. In the Bible the Father is God but He is not the Son or the Holy Spirit. The Son is God but He is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is God but He is not the Son or the Father.

Here is how Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars translated Psalm 110:1 in the Septuagint 250 BC.

Psa 110:1 (109:1) A Psalm of David. The Lord [κύριος] said to my Lord [κύριος], Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.​
.

In case you haven't noticed, superfluous repetitions of some inane doctrinal teachings only perpetuate this cycle of argument and protestation. To cut to the heart of your ceaseless vacillations on this topic - your arguments are consistently flat, piddling differently worded versions of 'just because you say it, doesn't make it so'. However, 'Godhead' isn't a word in the bible, nor is 'trinity', and it is up to you to explain and verify your theology; a theology whose doctrines, though concurred by multitudes, still fly in the face of rationale.

The issue is that in proving them to yourself you seem to have beleaguered your ability to form counterarguments, evidenced in what you say displaying that you've either simply not examined the cogency of the stance you are opposed to or don't pay any heed to its durability. Each of the frothy retorts you've given to Alter2Ego carry an insignificant measure of substance, and just about every one of them could be comfortably neutralized by simply swivelling their focus back to you.

I got tired of this like eight months ago.
 
Upvote 0

Alter2Ego

Newbie
Feb 8, 2013
102
6
Los Angeles, California
✟24,381.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Interesting theory but it is not supported by evidence.

The First Apology of Justin, (150 AD) (175 years before Nicea) "But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the only begotten Son. We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For "the Word was made flesh." Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a 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. 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"
Chapter XXXVI Who is this King of glory? 'And the Holy Spirit, either from the person of His Father, or from His own person, answers them, `The Lord of hosts, He is this King of glory.'


The Epistle Of Ignatius To The Philippians Chap. II. — Unity Of The Three Divine Persons. [100 AD, 225 years before Nicaea]


Athenagoras the Athenian — A Plea For the Christians Philosopher and Christian [177 AD] (148 years before Nicea)


180 AD (145 years before Nicea) Theophilus of Antioch


Clement Of Alexandria Stromata, Book V, ch. 14 — 190 AD (135 years before Nicea) "


Gregory the Wonderworker (Declaration of Faith [A.D. 265]). (60 years before Nicea)


200 AD Tertullian (125 years before Nicea)"


Irenaeus Against Heresies [a.d. 120-202.] [125 years before Nicaea] disciple of Polycarp a disciple of John


ALTER2EGO -to- DER ALTER:

Look at all of the individuals you listed above and the dates next to each of them. None of their versions of trinity was accepted as OFFICIAL Trinity teaching. In fact, Justin came right out and admitted he was regarded as a madman by his contemporaries:


"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."


Furthermore, none of those people considered the holy spirit to be a "person" in the same manner as it came to be considered a "person" in the official trinity dogma of the 4th century CE.


BTW: While you tried hard to make it appear that Justin aka the "madman" was referring to the holy spirit as a person, the reality is that Justin referred only to the Father (Jehovah) and the Son (Jesus Christ) as persons. He referred to the holy spirit as "the spirit of prophecy".


"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. . . .
Chapter XXXVI Who is this King of glory? 'And the Holy Spirit, either from the person of His Father, or from His own person, answers them, `The Lord of hosts, He is this King of glory.'."


I will deal with the next person on your list in a separate post.
 
Upvote 0