Trinity Facts

[stan1953]

In Greek all GODS are GOD. To translate into English a person must determine if the article "a" needs to be used, and also is the word being used should be upper or lower case. And the Word was a god.

In Greek the base is THEOS but I trust that the credentialed scholars render it into English as it is contextually conveyed in the Greek.
We don't need to translate, we just need to know how to read English and NOT equivocate, without credentials, as to what the Greek actually says.

John 1:1 does not have the Greek word éna, for 'a', in the verse so you are in error. This is a typical fallacious claim by those who refuse to accept what it does convey. It also shows an extreme lack of knowledge when it comes to being able to read and study the NT.

 

[CherubRam]

If we don't agree on a common text I think this conversation will soon become stymied. But maybe not. For clarity's sake would you agree that:

The Word of God existed from the beginning (John 1:2)?
The Word of God became flesh in the form of Jesus (John 1:14)?

If yes, then that's cool. If not, why not?


Because Christianity had already been around for more than 200 years prior to Lactantius, any unorthodox opinion he expressed doesn't carry much weight with me.

I agree that Christ is an ancient being. I agree that he was born in the flesh.

 

[CherubRam]

In Greek the base is THEOS but I trust that the credentialed scholars render it into English as it is contextually conveyed in the Greek.
We don't need to translate, we just need to know how to read English and NOT equivocate, without credentials, as to what the Greek actually says.

John 1:1 does not have the Greek word éna, for 'a', in the verse so you are in error. This is a typical fallacious claim by those who refuse to accept what it does convey. It also shows an extreme lack of knowledge when it comes to being able to read and study the NT.

Since Christ said himself that he was "a god" from heaven, then it is a forgone conclusion that the article "a" needs to be added in places.

John 10
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?

 

[Senecharnix]

The Holy Spirit is the Father our God whose name is (Yahuah / Yahwah.) "Holy Spirit" is a title and not a name.

Nonsense!

 

[CherubRam]

Nonsense!

What bible verse do you have to support your claim?

 

[Albion]

What bible verse do you have to support your claim?

Honestly, they're all over the New Testament. However, there's little good in going that route since you would say that the meaning--held by almost every Christian theologian of almost every denomination--has mistranslated each every one of them.

It's wonderfully reassuring to be able to stand against almost all the wisdom of the ages and say "I myself know better," but that doesn't make for a very productive debate. IOW, "nonsense" may say all that's needed.

 

[CherubRam]

Honestly, they're all over the New Testament. However, there's little good in going that route since you would say that the meaning--held by almost every Christian theologian of almost every denomination--has mistranslated each every one of them.

It's wonderfully reassuring to be able to stand against almost all the wisdom of the ages and say "I myself know better," but that doesn't make for a very productive debate. IOW, "nonsense" may say all that's needed.

There are leaders and there are followers. Try taking the lead and venture out of your comfort zone.

 

[Albion]

There are leaders and there are followers. Try taking the lead and venture out of your comfort zone.

And get back a snarky one-liner in reply? That's not my idea of "a discussion," and this subject is worthy of a genuine discussion.

 

[CherubRam]

And get back a snarky one-liner in reply? That's not my idea of "a discussion," and this subject is worthy of a genuine discussion.[/QUOTE]

Then proceed to discuss.

Since Christ said himself that he was "a god" from heaven, then it is a forgone conclusion that the article "a" needs to be added in places.

John 10
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?

 

[Albion]

It's very apparent, in that passage, that Jesus was using the word in two different senses in order to make a point.

He did not in the least declare ordinary mortals, including those he was addressing, "gods" in the sense that Jehovah is God (and Christ is God). That is impossible to find in the passage.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Holy Spirit Baptism

As you can see the disciples practiced a separate baptism for the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit baptism was a baptism of fire. So unless you are baptized with fire you are not baptized by the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 3:11
“I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Luke 3:16
John answered them all, “I baptize you with water. But one who is more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

By the 'baptism of fire' John was referring to the destruction of the wicked in the lake of fire, not a baptism into the fellowship of God and the church. This is made clear by reading the entire context of these verses.

 

[RevelationTestament]

It's very apparent, in that passage, that Jesus was using the word in two different senses in order to make a point.

He did not in the least declare ordinary mortals, including those he was addressing, "gods" in the sense that Jehovah is God (and Christ is God).

Yes, He did.

That is impossible to find in the passage.

No, it's not. He was telling the Jews they are elohim, like YHWH.

 

[2ducklow]

(Rotherham) Matthew 3:11 I, indeed, am immersing you, in water, unto repentance,--but, he who, after me, cometh is, mightier than I, whose, sandals, I am not worthy to bear, he, will immerse you, in Holy Spirit and fire:

acts 2.When there came suddenly out of heaven a sound, just as of a mighty rushing wind,---and it filled all the house where they were sitting; 3 And there appeared unto them--parting asunder--tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them; 4 And they were all filled with Holy Spirit, and began to be speaking with other kinds of tongues just as the Spirit was giving unto them to be sounding forth.


acts 2.33 By the right hand of God, therefore, having been exalted, also, the promise of the Holy Spirit, having received from the Father, He hath poured out this which, yourselves, do see and hear.

Note my bold above. Thus I take immersion or baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire spoken of in matthew 3.11 to mean immersion in the holy spirit and the fire portion refers to speaking in tongues. According to acts 2.33 God poured out this (spirit baptism and speaking in tongues) that happened on the day of Pentecost.

 

[CherubRam]

It's very apparent, in that passage, that Jesus was using the word in two different senses in order to make a point.

He did not in the least declare ordinary mortals, including those he was addressing, "gods" in the sense that Jehovah is God (and Christ is God). That is impossible to find in the passage.

Psalm 82:6
“I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’

John 10:34
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’?

 

[Albion]

Psalm 82:6
“I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’

John 10:34
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’?

Yes, but surely you do not think that these mortals created the universe...which is to say, it's not the same USE of the word as when referring to the Almighty.

 

[CherubRam]

By the 'baptism of fire' John was referring to the destruction of the wicked in the lake of fire, not a baptism into the fellowship of God and the church. This is made clear by reading the entire context of these verses.

When the word "fire" is used as a parable it means "judgment."

 

[stan1953]

Since Christ said himself that he was "a god" from heaven, then it is a forgone conclusion that the article "a" needs to be added in places.

John 10
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?

Since that is clearly NOT what Jesus said even in the example you provided, I can only conclude you are not capable of actually understanding the Bible in it's proper context.

 

[stan1953]

Then proceed to discuss.

Since Christ said himself that he was "a god" from heaven, then it is a forgone conclusion that the article "a" needs to be added in places.

John 10
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?

Jesus NEVER said He was 'a' god, so there is really nothing to discuss. You inability to properly read and convey what IS in the Bible is the only thing in evidence here.

 

[Albion]

Yes, He did.
No, it's not. He was telling the Jews they are elohim, like YHWH.

I don't really think that the Book of Mormon --or Doctrines and Covenants or the Pearl of Great Price--adds clarity to this particular discussion.

 

[ChetSinger]

I agree that Christ is an ancient being. I agree that he was born in the flesh.

OK. If you also agree that one of his titles is "the Word of God" then I'm ready to move on.