Is The Trinity Biblical?

[Benedicta00]

Shelb, intellectual bankruptcy/dishonesty is a very sad thing . .


Peace in Him!

And apparently rampant on this forum.

 

[thereselittleflower]

my original comment to you was this
[/font]
I thought I'd make it easier on you to just point you to post #34 but even with that there were several other questions I asked you that you have refused to answer like "where did the Bishops get their understanding"? or "where did the nicene council learn these truths"?
You have refused to answer these as well as the ones in post #34 and at the same time accusing me of being a hypocrate because I wont answer your 2 questions. I have not and will not act like you and call you a hypocrate like you have done to me but I will demand that if you want to resort to name calling the least you can do is answer my questions.


I haven't read any post from you answering my questions. If you have posted recently I will check it out.

The other questions? post #36

Again, I have asked you for the specific posts in which you asked me those questions . .


but lets recap here a little . .


I asked you 2 questions

You refused to answer those 2 questions until I answered your questions from post #34 which you gave your word you would answer when I answered yours from that post . .


I have played your game, I have answered your questions from post #34 . .

So . . are you now delaying in fulfilling your word to me by bringing up more questions to demand an answer from first?


hmmm . . . . . . delaying tactics are always good when one doesn't want to answer questions .

It's up to you neph . .no one is going to force you to keep your word . . .

I am sure you will do your best to find a way out of your commitment. . . any loop hole will do . ..



Peace in Him!

 

[thereselittleflower]

And apparently rampant on this forum.

obviously . .


Peace in Him!

 

[Benedicta00]

I agree totally that it was the Catholic Church that first wrote the doctrine of the trinity on paper but they are not the ones who revealed it. The Bible, the NT, is the document that reveals it and one doesn't have to read the nicene creed to see or understand it in the capacity we have. Sorry but I humblely disagree.

But the creed came before the cannon? Anyway, if it was so clear why was Arian able to convince almost half the Church at that time that Jesus wasn’t God?

 

[thereselittleflower]

But the creed came before the cannon? Anyway, if it was so clear why was Arian able to convince almost half the Church at that time that Jesus wasn’t God?

I seem to remember asking a similar question that didn't get answered . . perhaps it was in a different thread . . but still, its one that they can't answer . . ..

If something was so clear, then why . . . ?


Peace in Him!

 

[Nickolai]

The council of Nicea came before the Canonized bible. How could it be based on something that didn't exist yet?

The CHURCH was the one to explain the Trinity. The Bible mearly gives evidence to whan the Church had already believed.

 

[thereselittleflower]

The other questions? post #36

Are you adding questions in that post to your demands now?


Peace in Him!

 

[KennySe]

Wow! someone who actually answers questions! I should probably print this page out!!!

So your saying the comforter is a messenger like unto Gabriel?

LOL, first let me catch my breath!

Let me be clear on what I am saying.

I am saying that you have shown me through scripture that the God in heaven who sent Jesus from heaven, also sent the Comforter.

What you have not shown through scripture is Jesus is God and the Comforter is God, and you most certainly have not shown that they are the SAME God.

I refer you to the subjectline of this thread.

 

[nephilimiyr]

[/font]

Neph . .you are merely trying to control the conversation, deflecting it from the real issue, trying to make something that is not an issue the issue . .

therese I really don't see you understanding at all what we are talking about nor what we are argueing about. You act as though you just want a arguement.

I have never said the Comforter is anyone other than the Holy Spirit . .

I never accused you of saying that either! I asked you to answer the question that's all! It's not an accusation but a question!

You are either being dishonest in how you are applying my words, or you really are unable to have this type of converstaion logically . .

I'm only giving you a dose of your own medicine. When you told me if I say no to your 2 questions you gave me a whole lists of things that I would be accused of. I'm mearly doing the same to you! Sure doesn't feel good being on the other end of the stick does it therese???

Who has given you any indication that they DON'T believe that the comforter is the Holy Spirit? Your continued hounding on this issue only begs the question as to why you keep asking it . .

Do you really think I am stupid neph?

No not at all! I think your a very smart woman who covers her tracks very well.

Your above comment shows you have no idea what you are argueing with me! I never have made the claim that people here are saying that the comforter is not the Holy Spirit. Well I wasn't at first but now I see that other guy has and I did answer him. They only thing I have differed on in this thread and which my original posts were directed to was Shelb5's asertion that the nature of God as being one nature but three persons is not in scripture.

Why is it you take my real questions and consider them rhetorical and my rhetorical questions as real?

Do you really think I don't know the Comforter is the Holy Spirit?

I sounds like you do yes but that is lightyears from the issue that I am argueing!

Why would you even question such a thing?

You are mistaken that I even questioned that!

Ok . I wll give you what you are demanding . . though for the life of me, your demand that I do so is either extremely childish, or shows that you are out of your depth here in this thread . .

The Comforter is the Holy Spirit neph . . do you not understand I was in agreement with your answer which you gave yourself in your post?

The point is, do you believe the scriptures give you that understanding? If you would've just gave it an honest try at answering these questions to begin with we would'nt have had to go through all these posts! Now in the context of the John passages that I posted does it or does it not refer to the Holy Spirit or do you believe like that other guy that by reading those verses only tells you that Jesus is sending a messenger along the lines of Gabriel?

Now, what have you achieved by this?

I will show you!

After reconsidering everything, I think the reason you are hounding me on this is because you are simply out of your depth in this thread. .

Quite it! I am not hounding you, you are hounding me and calling me a hypocrate because I wont answer your precious question. You have not dealed with me in good faith. If you were you would have answered my questions and in good turn I would've answered your questions in good faith.

Now, as I see you are out of your depth, and truly do not understand when someone has agreed with you, I have given you a direct answer, even though it was unnecessary . .

WHAT ARROGANCE!!!









[/QUOTE]

 

[thereselittleflower]

The council of Nicea came before the Canonized bible. How could it be based on something that didn't exist yet?

The CHURCH was the one to explain the Trinity. The Bible mearly gives evidence to whan the Church had already believed.

Exactly Nikolas

Neph, you now have the answer to your questions from post 36 . . I whole heartedly agree and concur with this answer, and present it to you as my own as well . . even though you did not clearly demand that I do so . .

Now . .

Again . .

The Ball is in YOUR court . .


By the way, I asked you a question in post #40

just when do you think the New Testament came to be???

​

I see you avoid answering questions that would make you contradict yourself if you answered accurately . .


Hiding behind refusals to answer questions is not a way to build credibility . .



Peace in Him!

 

[nephilimiyr]

The council of Nicea came before the Canonized bible. How could it be based on something that didn't exist yet?

The council used the writings that became the canonized bible. You are totally wrong! Just because the gospels and the Epistles weren't grouped together and called the canonized NT doesn't mean they didn't exist!

 

[Benedicta00]

Hi Neph,

The reason I never responded to you is because Theresa did and she does an thousand times better jog than I could ever at answering questions.

But I will put my 2 cents in. You have shown nothing other than God is God and Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God and that they are all God but what you have not shown using scripture is that they are all ONE God but three separate, distinct persons. Divine persons that is and where Jesus is one divine person who has two natures one human and one divine.

So when you are ready to cite for me that verse, I’ll be hanging around waiting.

 

[Philip]

The council used the writings that became the canonized bible.

As I understand it, those books were canonized because the Council used them.

 

[Benedicta00]

The council used the writings that became the canonized bible. You are totally wrong! Just because the gospels and the Epistles weren't grouped together and called the canonized NT doesn't mean they didn't exist!

Straw-

We know that but who was it, Neph that said these are inspired and from God and these over here are not?

 

[@@Paul@@]

As I understand it, those books were canonized because the Council used them.

Right, which does not mean they were not in use prior to a council "canonized"...

So one can not say we got the bible because of a council... they simply "published" it and stamped their name on it... like the "Trinity".

 

[nephilimiyr]

By the way, I asked you a question in post #40

just when do you think the New Testament came to be???



​

I see you avoid answering questions that would make you contradict yourself if you answered accurately . .

I did answer your question and this is the answer I gave you!

It don't work that way therese. I have a post already with unanswered questions by you. I didn't write them to waste time. Read post #34 and answer those questions THEN I will answer yours if you still want me to.

Quit trying to make me look bad! I gave you the ball and am still trying to determine if you answered those questions or not.

Hiding behind refusals to answer questions is not a way to build credibility . .

Continueing to refuse to answer questions but demanding that those people answer your question threse destroys all credibility you think you have! I was not the one who first refused to answer questions...YOU WERE!


Peace in Him![/QUOTE]

 

[@@Paul@@]

And apparently rampant on this forum.

apparently...

 

[nephilimiyr]

Right, which does not mean they were not in use prior to a council "canonized"...

So one can not say we got the bible because of a council... they simply "published" it and stamped their name on it... like the "Trinity".

Why do these people want to gloss over that fact?

 

[nephilimiyr]

Straw-

We know that but who was it, Neph that said these are inspired and from God and these over here are not?

Well this I would gladly agree that the council did do this...so what? The main point in the question in this whole thread is where do we get the belief of the trinity? Was it the NC or the Bible? it doesn't matter to me that the NC canonized the books but that the books where there for them to read and gain understanding. It's that understanding that is reflected in the creed.

 

[@@Paul@@]

You know absolutely nothing about the gift of infallibility do you?

The word is with out error but he who interprets it is not.

You think you have the authority given by God to interpret what you read and have it be truth but what it is- is nothing more than personal truth.

We think God gave authority to one person not to interpret and create truth from interpreting as you do but to interpret it in light of tradition based on what Jesus personally taught to the apostles who taught that to us and left that teaching with Christ’s Church.

We understand that His gift of infallibility is for our benefit, it is our protecting of never being able to be taught a error.

No i do not... Obviously... as there is no such gift...

Then you place all your faith in a fallible man... I do not. I place all my faith in God, and His word... And that is all i need to get through this period rightly named "the fulness of the Gentiles"... You have a right to your opinion as do I.--------- I respect your descisions,,,, as a fellow Christian you should respect mine.