Are you still saying Adam and Eve were sinners before the fall and not impeccable at that time?Only Jesus is perfect.
That belief in Mary being sinless is a only doctrine taught by RCC or Eastern Orthodox.
Your use of this evidence is flawed.Hi there redleghunter,
The Trinity is always an fun topic to dig into - especially when people are actually willing to engage honestly. I was raised a Trinitarian, but have devoted quite a bit of time to studying this issue (originally to defend it) and can no longer seriously entertain it.
There are a number of ways to approach this, but I think it best to start with the primary argument put forth by your average Christian in favor for the Trinity: the scriptures address him as God. While Jesus never addresses himself as such, there are definitely scriptures that do.
Of course, we must ask what it means for Jesus to be called God? This was a big debate item in the early church, with a myriad of propositions from the Church Fathers. Some posited that he was a second, lesser god. Others that he was God - despite being begotten - by virtue of the fact that he was begotten of the same substance as God (and we, too, shared in this divinity via the HS). Others still maintained that the Son was merely one side or mode of God that he would take on - but that there was no real difference between the Father and Son. Others still who considered it blasphemy to say that the Father died for our sins. etc.
I think we've made a mess of a rather simple issue by not paying attention to the scriptural usage of the term "God," by ignoring the precedents established in scripture. In fact, many have been addressed as God (and even Yahweh) who were not literally God. Angels have been addressed as God, Moses is said to be God to Pharaoh, and the Jewish people (and subsequently Christians) are said to be gods.
For one of several examples of angels being treated as God, consider the story of Jacob wrestling with God - and subsequently being renamed Israel. In Genesis this figure that Jacob wrestles with is treated as if God himself.
Genesis 32:26-30 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.” But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” 27 The man asked him, “What is your name?” “Jacob,” he answered. 28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel,f]">[f] because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.” 29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.” But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there. 30 So Jacob called the place Peniel,g]">[g] saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
However, scripture later clarifies that this was, in fact, an angel:
Hosea 12:2-4 The Lord has a charge to bring against Judah; he will punish Jacobb]">[b] according to his ways and repay him according to his deeds. 3 In the womb he grasped his brother’s heel; as a man he struggled with God. 4 He struggled with the angel and overcame him; he wept and begged for his favor.
As a second example of an angel being addressed as God - and even Yahweh - look at the angel in the burning bush in Exodus 3.
Exodus 3:1-6;13-14 Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the far side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. 3 So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”4 When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!” And Moses said, “Here I am.” 5 “Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.” 6 Then he said, “I am the God of your father,a]">[a] the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God....
13 Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?” 14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.c]">[c] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”
Was it God himself in the bush? No - we are told from the start that this is an Angel of the Lord. Yet he speaks as though God - and it is he, speaking as God, who told Moses God's name: Yahweh.
In a very similar manner, God tells Moses the following:
Exodus 7:1-2 Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. 2 You are to say everything I command you, and your brother Aaron is to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go out of his country.
And Jesus further goes on to interpret the scriptures as asserting that the Jewish people are gods:
John 10:34-35 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’d]">[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—
So then, Jesus is indeed addressed as God in certain scriptures - but there is plenty of precedent for those who are not literally God being addressed as if as though God himself because 1. they are acting as his intermediaries, and 2. they are his children. As the sole mediator between God and men under the New Covenant, and as the only begotten son of God, the application of the term to Jesus makes perfect sense and is in perfect harmony with the usage of term to others who are not literally God himself. The proof of burden then falls on the Trinitarian to explain and justify why when Jesus is called God we are to take the term literally rather than in the sense commonly used throughout scripture.
Additionally, there are plenty of scriptures which very clearly differentiate Jesus from God (not just "the Father" - though they are in fact one in the same). There are really too many examples in the New Testament to list, but I'll start off with a particularly good one:
1 Cor 15:24-28 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.”c]">[c] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Paul here makes it quite explicit that Christ, the Son, is distinct and subordinate to "God himself". I have yet to see an honest and rational response to this passage by a Trinitarian.
This post is getting a bit long so I will cut myself off here
There is only One First and last.
Isaiah 44: NASB
6“Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts:
‘I am the first and I am the last,
And there is no God besides Me.
And Jesus makes the same claim in Revelation chapter 1:
Revelation 1: NASB
17When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.
Unless there are a lot of angels running around claiming to be God, the above is crystal clear.
Yahweh claims to be the first and last in Isaiah 44. Jesus Christ makes the same claim in Revelation 1.
The only way your view could be argued is if one subscribes to tritheism.
"for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" Colossians 2:9I think if we ask the question of how Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and mankind helps understand Colossians 2:9.
This is the difference between the relationship of Father and Son. Which does not mean God the Son is any less than God from God.
It’s always in posts like this that you see so many heretical beliefs come up. Jesus is fully human and God, anyone who says otherwise would contradict the historical Christian faith and the apostolic faith of the Fathers and Church. Most people who hold otherwise in this thread seem to hold ideas that resemble historical heresies.
Your use of this evidence is flawed.
Most would say the Angel of YHWH was actually pre-incarnate Christ, and the fact that the Angel is addressed as God Himself while still somehow considered distinct, actually provides evidence for the Trinity.
Here's a video examining the evidence for the Trinity in the Old Testament.
Hebrews 1:1-14 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 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. 3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.
5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”a]">[a]?
Or again,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”b]">[b]?
6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”c]">[c]
7 In speaking of the angels he says,
“He makes his angels spirits,
and his servants flames of fire.”d]">[d]
8 But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”e]">[e]
10 He also says,
“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.”f]">[f]
13 To which of the angels did God ever say,
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet”g]">[g]?
14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
What we do know is that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man.One can be saved without vast knowledge but not without accepting what little we do know.
It's not so much that you need to positively assent to each and every creed, but that you may not dissent from them knowingly and willingly. We do not need to comprehend everything (we can't) but we should not deny anything in the creeds either. One can be saved without vast knowledge but not without accepting what little we do know.
You believe what you think you are called to believe. Every man for himself, I guess. I will accept these three creeds, the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed because the Catholic Church asks me to. Complain all you want. Funny thing though is that you are saying we are judged by works. You can argue with your co-religionists about that.That maybe the Catholic position, but it is in complete disagreement with the scriptures
These issues were all solved well over a thousand years ago. No need to reinvent them.What we do know is that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man.
What we know for sure is that God became flesh and dwelt among us - emptying Himself of the divine which was fully part of His incarnate nature, and functioning and overcoming sin totally as a human being.
What we know is that - in that totally human capacity - He spoke of the God He worshiped and depended on as His Father - just as we His other children do.
What we know is that God said of Jesus when was incarnate - "“You are my Son, today I have begotten you”. Whereas one of the major creeds calls Him eternally begotten of the Father.
We know that the "Word" of God existed in the form of God before that Word was incarnate.
What we do not know is that that same person existed as the Son of God before the incarnation and that that alleged Son of God person was incarnate separate from a God the Father person and a God the Holy Spirit person which constitute together the one true God.
It is completely possible to affirm the deity of Jesus Christ and indeed the deity of God as the Son, as the Father of the Son, and as the Spirit of both - without resorting to redefining the very meaning of monotheism as many would say that Trinitarians have done - quite unnecessarily.
Is an eternal Trinity construct compatible with the scriptures? With a special redefining of monotheism - certainly. It is not therefore heretical to believe in an eternal Trinity.
Is a One God construct compatible with the scriptures? Absolutely - and interestingly - it avoids the necessity of redefining the meaning of "One" which so offends both Jews and Muslims.
While there are explanations concerning the nature of God that are heretical - such as Arienism and some forms of modalism - there is no need to throw out the baby with the bath water and blindly adopt a Trinitarian construct to find an adequate answer to the problems presented in the scriptures.
You believe what you think you are called to believe. Every man for himself, I guess. I will accept these three creeds, the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed because the Catholic Church asks me to. Complain all you want. Funny thing though is that you are saying we are judged by works. You can argue with your co-religionists about that.
Also I must say accepting the Creeds is not just a Catholic position, you will find the acceptance of the Creeds in Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran and other Churches which are Traditional like mine. It's the new religion that won't accept the Creeds and think the Bible is everything
They were handed down by the Church which is the pillar and foundation of faith
Sure - and its a great place to start from. That doesn't mean it's infallible. We must test all things and refine our understanding. That is what it means to love God with all your mind, to put in your own effort to understand things as best you can - not to blindly assent to doctrines handed down by others who were willing to put in the effort.
We will have to disagree, I do not believe in the religion of the individual. I do believe God put the Church in charge not the individual person.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?