Help on understanding the Trinity..

[St_Worm2]

31 Insomuch that the multitude wondered, to see the dumb speak, the maimed whole, the halt to go, and the blind to see: and they glorified the God of Israel.

Who is "THEY" if it meant the Jews wouldn't t say and they glorified God?

Hi BAC, sorry, I forgot about this part. To be honest, I don't know. I do know that it was not unusual for the Jews to say things like that in the OT however. For instance, when speaking to the sons of Levi, Moses said:

"Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the rest of the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to Himself, to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation to minister to them" ~Numbers 16:9​

I'll take a look at v15:31 and get back to you, but it seems to me that building your exegesis around the phrase, "the God of Israel", instead of the Lord's explicit teaching just a few verses earlier (v24) which tells us that your exegesis isn't true, has trouble written all over it

Yours and His,
David

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Then apparently you faith is weak not to let the world know of your stand. I have no problem letting people know I'm a Christian and have absolutely no shame in it. BTW what would you do if your and your family were being attacked and faced possible death?

No. The first scenario you describe is a breaking of the Command in tempting the Lord and it would not be an example of a weakness of faith for a believer. Also, God is the giver and taker of life. If God takes one of us believers home early, that is His call. If we are to are to be persecuted for Christ, we are to rejoice because great is our reward in heaven for such a thing. In fact, all who live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. For to live is Christ and to die is gain.

...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

1 Corinthians 15:55


...

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

No. The first scenario you describe is a breaking of the Command in tempting the Lord and it would not be an example of a weakness of faith for a believer. Also, God is the giver and taker of life. If God takes one of us believers home early, that is His call. If we are to are to be persecuted for Christ, we are to rejoice because great is our reward in heaven for such a thing. In fact, all who live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. For to live is Christ and to die is gain.

...

Sorry to hear you won't defend your family.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

QUOTE "Jason0047....God is the giver and taker of life. If God takes one of us believers home early, that is His call. If we are to are to be persecuted for Christ, we are to rejoice because great is our reward in heaven for such a thing. In fact, all who live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. For to live is Christ and to die is gain...QUOTE


just noticed: not just a reward....... so much more - "great is our reward in heaven...." yes. (IF, the premise is met/satisfied, Yes, Yes)

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

Hi BAC, sorry, I forgot about this part. To be honest, I don't know. I do know that it was not unusual for the Jews to say things like that in the OT however. For instance, when speaking to the sons of Levi, Moses said:

"Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the rest of the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to Himself, to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation to minister to them" ~Numbers 16:9​

I'll take a look at v15:31 and get back to you, but it seems to me that building your exegesis around the phrase, "the God of Israel", instead of the Lord's explicit teaching just a few verses earlier (v24) which tells us that your exegesis isn't true, has trouble written all over it

Yours and His,
David

Not really because the bible states a remnant of Israel will be saved and few of the other nations will be saved. So yes I'm glad I'm among the remnant that is saved. And I stand on what I questioned who "they" are.

 

[Cis.jd]

So of course I believe in the Son, Father and Holy Ghost, but I believe that they are all in one. Some Christian's like the one's who are into the Trinity believe that they are all separate spirits. Trinity is found no where in the Bible though. So how does that even make sense at all? I also have another question concerning the matter. So how about Baptism? Are there really several ways to Baptiste or is there really only one real way?

In reality, no one can fully understand the Holy Trinity because no one can comprehend God. If scientists themselves can't fully get the universe then what more with the creator?

What we can do is try to explain how we understand it, and some of it may be different both in view and opinion but the main important thing is to keep in my mind that all explanations still mean that there is only ONE God. Not 3 separate spirits, no segments, no different versions.. One universal God.

My best way of understanding it is through the Human *being* as an example. When we read Genesis, we read "God created us in his image and in his likeness", in short he made us like him. God is Trinity. We humans are trinity as well, as i explained in the example. Body, Soul, and Spirit are the three essences that make 1 human being.. likewise with God.. there is the Father, The Word, and The Spirit that is the 1 God Being.

In terms of roles
God the Father: God above us/God who created us
God the Son: God with us/God who saved us
God the Spirit: God with in us/God who sanctifies us

 

[St_Worm2]

Yes, John also said in verse 14 that the word became flesh and that means that the word was incarnated in Jesus.

Hi Stan, I'm still trying to figure out who you believe the "Word" is (or perhaps "what" you believe it is)? Who or What was with God and was God in the beginning?

Thanks!

--David

 

[StanJ]

Hi Stan, I'm still trying to figure out who you believe the "Word" is (or perhaps "what" you believe it is)? Who or What was with God and was God in the beginning?
Thanks!
--David

I believe exactly what is written in John 1:1-2

 

[St_Worm2]

Hi Stan, obviously that's not an answer to my question, so I'll ask it again. Who OR What is the "Word" spoken of in John 1:1-2? Is the "Word" a Divine Being who has always existed like God the Father, or do you believe it is something different altogether?

I also believe exactly what is written in John 1:1-2, and that includes the fact that the "Word" spoken of there is the pre-incarnate, eternal, Son of God, a Being known to us today as Jesus Christ. But you've already told us that you don't believe that's true, which is why I've asked you to tell us who (or what) you believe the "Word" is.

Thanks!

--David

 

[StanJ]

Hi Stan, obviously that's not an answer to my question, so I'll ask it again. Who OR What is the "Word" spoken of in John 1:1-2? Is the "Word" a Divine Being who has always existed like God the Father, or do you believe it is something different altogether?
I also believe exactly what is written in John 1:1-2, and that includes the fact that the "Word" spoken of there is the pre-incarnate, eternal, Son of God, a Being known to us today as Jesus Christ. But you've already told us that you don't believe that's true, which is why I've asked you to tell us who (or what) you believe the "Word" is.

Where exactly is that stated in John 1:1-2? I said I believe exactly what John 1:1-2 actually states and then you come up with something that it doesn't state so where exactly did you get that?

 

[St_Worm2]

Stan, I've told you Who I believe the "Word" is. Who (or what) do 'you' believe the Word is? I'm not sure what it is about my question that's difficult for you to understand

If you believe the "Word" is a little green man sitting by a campfire fixing grilled cheese sandwiches on the dark side of the Moon, fine, tell me that. If however, you believe He (or It) is someone or something else, tell me that. That's all.

Thank you!

--David

 

[Meowzltov]

As the Son He was begotten of the Father from all eternity.
He was then made flesh--incarnate--in the womb of the Virgin Mary and born.

His generation from the Father is from all eternity; His birth from Mary was in time. He is called the Son of God because He is God, the only-begotten of the Father from all eternity. He is a man because He united Himself with our human nature in the womb of Mary.

Thus He is both God and man, the God-Man.

-CryptoLutheran

I can always count on you to give clear, orthodox answers.

 

[St_Worm2]

Not really because the bible states a remnant of Israel will be saved and few of the other nations will be saved. So yes I'm glad I'm among the remnant that is saved. And I stand on what I questioned who "they" are.

Hi BAC, perhaps you are correct, but while I go looking for more evidence of who "they" are from Matthew 15:31, how about helping me with the conundrum that the 4,000 being a group of Gentiles seems to create when held up to the light of Matthew 15:24.

Also, if what you say is true, why do you believe that the Lord's decision to extend salvation to the Gentiles stunned the Apostles, and was a surprise to the Gentiles as well (i.e. Acts of the Apostles 13:46-48). I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just trying to figure out how this all fits together.

Thanks!

--David
p.s. - as a point of interest, St. Augustine makes this point in one of his homilies:

He said, “I am not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” [II] 2. Here arises a question out of these words; “If He was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, how came we from among the Gentiles into Christ’s fold? What is the meaning of the so deep economy of this mystery, that whereas the Lord knew the purpose of His coming—that He might have a Church in all nations, He said that ‘He was not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel’?” Augustine of Hippo. (1888). Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament. Homilies on the Gospels (Vol. 6, pp. 342–343).​

 

[Meowzltov]

It's already been well-established that I don't consider your views Orthodox nor correct.

I have found that among posters here on CF, Via Crucis' views are consistently those of orthodox Christianity -- by that I mean what is taught by the early ecumenical councils which are accepted by all the Christian churches. You may disagree with him, as is your right, but I do not see where you have the right to say his views are not orthodox.

 

[St_Worm2]

I have found that among posters here on CF, Via Crucis' views are consistently those of orthodox Christianity -- by that I mean what is taught by the early ecumenical councils which are accepted by all the Christian churches. You may disagree with him, as is your right, but I do not see where you have the right to say his views are not orthodox.

Hi Stan, I also noticed your claim (that you held some of ViaCrucis' views to be UN-orthodox), and I meant to ask you why you said that. What, specifically, have you seen ViaCrucis post that you feel should be tagged as unorthodox?

It's a mystery to me because I agree with Open Heart, everything I can remember reading of his (and it has been a lot over the years I'm happy to say) always seems to line up with what the church teaches. In fact, he's helped me better understand what the church teaches in many cases How much more "orthodox" can you get than that

Thanks!

--David

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

Hi BAC, perhaps you are correct, but while I go looking for more evidence of who "they" are from Matthew 15:31, how about helping me with the conundrum that the 4,000 being a group of Gentiles seems to create when held up to the light of Matthew 15:24.

Also, if what you say is true, why do you believe that the Lord's decision to extend salvation to the Gentiles stunned the Apostles, and was a surprise to the Gentiles as well (i.e. Acts of the Apostles 13:46-48). I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just trying to figure out how this all fits together.

Thanks!

--David
p.s. - as a point of interest, St. Augustine makes this point in one of his homilies:

He said, “I am not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” [II] 2. Here arises a question out of these words; “If He was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, how came we from among the Gentiles into Christ’s fold? What is the meaning of the so deep economy of this mystery, that whereas the Lord knew the purpose of His coming—that He might have a Church in all nations, He said that ‘He was not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel’?” Augustine of Hippo. (1888). Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament. Homilies on the Gospels (Vol. 6, pp. 342–343).​

Christ did say .......
John 10:271599 Geneva Bible (GNV)
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me,

And no the Jews did not follow Him but in fact crucified Him and as of today are lost as a nation.

 

[JLB777]

Presbyterians baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit; the same as every other Christian church.

What is the name that incorporates the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the name in which all the fullness of the Godhead dwells?


Did you also know there are three baptism's, which is what Jesus was referring to?



JLB

 

[JLB777]

Where exactly is that stated in John 1:1-2? I said I believe exactly what John 1:1-2 actually states and then you come up with something that it doesn't state so where exactly did you get that?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:1-3

The Son of God, the Word, took park in the creation of all things.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14


The Word, the Son of God became flesh.

God the Father didn't become flesh, but the Son became flesh.


JLB

 

[ViaCrucis]

What is the name that incorporates the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the name in which all the fullness of the Godhead dwells?

"Jesus" is not the name of the Father or the Holy Spirit, so what you're trying to say is false. Jesus is the name of the Son only.

We baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The fullness of the Godhead, that means the fullness of Deity, dwells in Jesus because Jesus, as the Son, is God. The word "Godhead" just means Deity, or specifically the state or condition of being God, it's the Greek theotes, meaning the state or condition of being theos, God. Hence the archaic translation Godhead, God-hood, being God.

Jesus is not the Father.
Jesus is not the Holy Spirit.
Jesus is the Son.

Did you also know there are three baptism's, which is what Jesus was referring to?

Except He wasn't. He was referring to one baptism. Baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is normal, ordinary Christian Baptism. It's what the Christian Church has always done.

-CryptoLutheran