Help on understanding the Trinity..

[BornAgainChristian1]

While this may be true of the New Testament, this is not true of the Old Testament. While there were a few exceptions to the rule like Abel, the general theme of the Old Testament is that if you obeyed God, your life would generally be protected. For was Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, and Job murdered for their faith? Surely not. How about Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego? Did God not protect them because of their faith? Or did they burn up in the furnace of fire? Did not God protect the Israelites from Pharoah with the miracle that took place at the Red Sea? Why did these same Israelites perish in the wilderness? Was it because of their obedience or disobedience?

As for the New Testament:
Again, I am fully aware that New Testament believers thru out history have been primarily martyred for their faith.
But again, I believe there are exceptions to the rule on this one, too. For rumor has it that the apostle John could not be killed.

Here is a quote from an article:

"We know little about John’s later life and death from the Bible. The most insightful bit of information comes from John 21 when the risen Christ was talking to Peter about Peter’s death. After Jesus told Peter that he would not live long Peter asked about John’s death. Jesus replied that if John lived until Christ’s return, that was not Peter’s concern. This was not a promise that John would live until the Lord returned, but it does seem to indicate that the Lord knew John would live a long time (John 21:19-23).

Tradition holds that John was sentenced to death in a boiling vat of oil. Yet he emerged unharmed from the experience. Again tradition tells us that John lived into old age dying sometime after AD 98. He is thought to have died in Ephesus."​

Also, while rumor has it that Paul was martyred for his faith, was not Paul protected from the bite of a snake? Do you think it was Paul's natural immune system or God that protected Paul? The point I am getting at is that God can protect His people when it suits His plan or purposes. In other words, I would consider it an honor to be persecuted and to die for my faith. Yet, I also would consider it even more of an honor to be protected from harm like other great men of God thru out history, too. Whatever God decides to do, let all praise, glory, honor and power be unto Him. Yes, I realize all who live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. Yes, I realize most true believers die today for their faith. But if God wants to protect one of His people instead of having them die, then that is also a reality that you have to accept, too. You believe God is not capable of protecting His people today. I disagree. The 144,000 is a great example. Those who are Raptured or taken up into the air alive will also be protected by God. So no. I don't believe you. God is all powerful and can protect His people today according to their faith (and if it serves God's will and plan).


Article for Source Quote:
http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/john-the-apostle-bible-biography-facts-and-death/

Again you making unfounded statements about the OT isn't helping your argument. You mention a few but the fact is thousands if not millions in total of Jews killed by God including Moses and Aaron. Another fact there were only two taken to heaven and escaped natural death.

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

I didn't say liberal scholars. I said scholars.

Yes I believe you consider liberal scholars as scholars which is why I said what I said. The point I was making I don't hold catholic doctrines and/or traditions in the same league with the bible. When I see people hold men's opinions over what the bible states their conversation is then voided. Perhaps you could use the Bereans example of confirming things though scripture instead of your churches opinions?

 

[StanJ]

The Son and Logos are identical. The Logos is the only-begotten of the Father, the One we call the Son because He is begotten of the Father.

Scripture please.

The Logos never became the Son, the Logos is from all eternity the only-begotten Son of the Father because His Origin is from and of the Father.
To say otherwise is heretic.

John 1:14

False. Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God because He is begotten of the Father from all eternity, the Son never came into existence, the Son always has been. He was Son in the beginning, He was Son two thousand years ago, He is Son today, and will be Son forever and ever.

Scripture please.

Hebrews 1. The Son is the One by which God made all things; the Son is the One who is the exact imprint of the Father's being; the Son is the One to whom the Father says, "Your throne O God is forever and ever".

Heb 1:1-2 states;
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.
Heb 8:6 states;
And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.” Matt 2:1, Luke 2:13-14

Most importantly, the Father is called Father because He has a Son. If the Son is not eternal and did not exist prior to the Incarnation then it follows that the Father did not become Father until the Incarnation. God never became Father, He has always been Father: "For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family (πατριά) in heaven and on earth takes its name." (Ephesians 3:15)

The Father was only called Father when he had a son.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/fatherhood-of-god.html

the very concept of fatherhood within the created order exists as a reflection of the Divine Paternity of God who is Father from all eternity, and He can only be Father from all eternity if He has a Son from all eternity. Which He does, as His Son is His Logos, and it is this One who united to our human nature in the womb of the Virgin Mary is Jesus the Christ, Lord and Savior.

As the above link will show that is not factual. The Son was never called the Logos, or vice versa. The Logos became the Son when he became flesh. John 1:14

 

[StanJ]

Both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches teach orthodoxy.

Yes, but not Christian Orthodoxy.

No, your "orthodoxy" seems to exist according to your personal opinions about what the Bible says. Of course Christian orthodoxy is not determined by StanJ, StanJ isn't the arbiter of Christian orthodoxy; what is and is not orthodox was defined long before you or I were so much an idea in the minds of our ancestors; but has been set forth and received down through twenty centuries of faithful servants of Jesus Christ right up until the present day.

Not just mine, but I actually do use the Bible unlike you who use mainly your own understanding of the Orthodoxy of your own denomination. I use the Bible exactly the way Paul admonished us to in 2nd Timothy 3:16.

Rejecting that and going your own way is, by every metric, the definition of heresy.

Being called a heretic by heresy doesn't really mean much to me.

Earlier in this thread I pointed out that merely speaking a heretical statement doesn't make one a heretic; however it would seem that your insistence on rejecting the very basic teachings of the Christian religion on something like this and to accuse the entire Church of God of not being orthodox and then claiming your own private orthodoxy makes you--I'm sorry--a heretic.

If this were true you might have a point but as you have not only lied and called me a heretic but put false words in my mouth I guess we know exactly who your father is.

You can be offended if you want; you can shoot the messenger if you like. But the fact is that if you reject the basic, fundamental teachings of Christianity--and the eternal generation of the Son is one of those--then that places you outside of Christian orthodoxy and into heresy. And if you insist on your own way, against the teachings of Christ's Church, that by definition makes you a heretic--that's not an insult, or an ad hominem attack, but a description of reality.

I'm sure most self-righteous pharisaical people like you feel the same way, but I am only accountable to God and to those people who run this forum, and definitely not to an inculcated person such as yourself.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Yes, but not Christian Orthodoxy.

Why don't you explain to us what Christian Orthodoxy is?.....that should be easy since you proclaim to know what it is not.

 

[faroukfarouk]

The end of Matthew 28 has the baptismal formula; in the name (singular) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Baptism is a symbol; it is not a life-giving rite. Saving faith involves the activity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit; John's Gospel is full of references to Father, Son and Holy Spirit working together in God's wondrous plan of redemption (see especially John 13 thru 17).

 

[JCFantasy23]

MOD HAT

THREAD CLOSED FOR STAFF REVIEW

MOD HAT OFF​