Oneness of God

Status
Not open for further replies.

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,581
6,065
EST
✟994,427.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
mo.mentum said:
Ok it's about time i inserted myself into this discussion. :)

The idea that God is One in Three persons has been giving problems to theological studies from day 1.

This is a concept that is teetering on the bring of polytheism but is nicely polished to be monotheistic. Why would God try to make things complicated for us with a concept that people have been struggling to explain and that is mysterioulsy alluded to in 1 or 2 verses throughout the entire Bible?

If God is One in Three, why not 4 or 5 or 1000? The more the merrier?

But, If God is One in One, then you've stumbled upon a big secret. This is the fact that everything in the universe is an expression of His unity and ultimate Oneness. Everything around us is gushing forth with unity and perfection.

This is my personal input...doesnt mean this is how it is...To each our own, but our own we share ;)

[size=+1]Thank you for your "personal input" I am more interested in what you can back up with scripture. Did you quote any scripture? I didn't see any.[/size]

"why not 4 or 5 or 1000? The more the merrier?"  [size=+1]Why not? Because of the Bible. You should try reading it sometime. There are three in heaven who bear witness, these three are one. 1 Jn 5:7. The Holy Spirit, the Father and the Son, (3) Lu 3:22. Baptize in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy spirit. (3), Mt 28:19. God, the Son, the Holy Spirit, Rm 1:3-4. God, the Spirit, and Jesus Christ (3) 1 Pt 1:2.[/size]

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Lu 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

1 Pet 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.​
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,581
6,065
EST
✟994,427.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
mo.mentum said:
Der Alter,

Why is it only the NT that has these statements? Since the Bible did indeed fortell the coming of Jesus, it would have at least mentioned _something_ in passing about him being the actual Son of God. But nay...nothing...nada...

The Triniterian creed was never invoked before the Nicene Council in the 4th century...

I lean towards the Unitarian outlook because that is the message that is more underlined in OT and NT when exmained as a whole. The Prime Commandment. "Your Lord God is One".

Plus, this exclusive Oneness, I find, fits better with the design of our Universe and the unitary aspects of our consciousness, which is an infetessimal microcosm of Gods own.

[size=+1]Still no scripture to support your "personal input" It's NOT only the NT. Try reading the Bible. Ps 45:6-7, One called God anointing another one called God. Is 48:18-19, YHWH says YHWH has sent Him and His spirit. The first chapter of the Bible "Let US make man in OUR image." And yes, there are more, those are just real quick ones, off the top of my head.[/size]
Psalm 45:6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Isaiah 48:16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.​
'The Triniterian creed was never invoked before the Nicene Council in the 4th century..." [size=+1] Totally false statement. The Nicene council did NOT create the Trinitarian creed. The word Trinity was written about by early Christians as early as 170 AD, over 150 years before Nicaea. And Constantine, who convened the council was NOT a Trinitarian, he was an Arian, the same as JW. The Eastern church was Arian for 40 years after Constantine's death. Facts easily verifiable in the Encyclopedia Britannica, or any other good historical reference book.[/size]
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,581
6,065
EST
✟994,427.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
mo.mentum said:
Der Alter,

Why is it only the NT that has these statements? Since the Bible did indeed fortell the coming of Jesus, it would have at least mentioned _something_ in passing about him being the actual Son of God. But nay...nothing...nada...

The Triniterian creed was never invoked before the Nicene Council in the 4th century...

[size=+1]Here is more information in response to your post. It addresses several points. The Son of God in the Old Testament. The Trinity in the Early Church, 125 years before Nicaea. And the Encyclopedia Britannica, on the Nicene Council and Constantine. The Trinity in Judaism before the Chrtistian era. I'm sure you can figure out which is which. If you have any questions let me know. There is a link at the bottom where you can verify the early church fathers.[/size]

The Son of God in the Old Testament.

Proverbs 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son‘s name, if thou canst tell?

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Ps 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, [Messiah] saying,
3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.
10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Zech 12.10: "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on ME (emphasis mine), the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for HIM (emphasis mine) as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

Constantine I

b. Feb. 27, after AD 280?, Naissus, Moesia [now Nis, Yugos.]
d. May 22, 337, Ancyrona, near Nicomedia, Bithynia [now Izmit, Tur.]


Constantine's personal "theology" emerges with particular clarity from a remarkable series of letters, extending from 313 to the early 320s, concerning the Donatist schism in North Africa. The Donatists maintained that those priests and bishops who had once lapsed from the Christian faith could not be readmitted to the church. Constantine's chief concern was that a divided church would offend the Christian God and so bring divine vengeance upon the Roman Empire and Constantine himself. Schism, in Constantine's view, was inspired by Satan. Its partisans were acting in defiance of the clemency of Christ, for which they might expect eternal damnation at the Last Judgment. Meanwhile, it was for the righteous members of the Christian community to show patience and long-suffering. In so doing they would be imitating Christ, and their patience would be rewarded in lieu of martyrdom--for actual martyrdom was no longer open to Christians in a time of peace for the church. Throughout, Constantine had no doubt that to remove error and to propagate the true religion were both his personal duty and a proper use of the imperial position. His claim to be "bishop of those outside the church" may be construed in this light. Other such pronouncements, expressed in letters to imperial officials and to Christian clergy, demonstrate that Constantine's commitment to Christianity was firmer and less ambiguous than some have suggested. Eusebius confirmed what Constantine himself believed: that he had a special and personal relationship with the Christian God.

Constantine's second involvement in an ecclesiastical issue followed the defeat of Licinius; but the Arian heresy, with its intricate explorations of the precise nature of the Trinity that were couched in difficult Greek, was as remote from Constantine's educational background as it was from his impatient, urgent temperament. The Council of Nicaea, which opened in the early summer of 325 with an address by the Emperor, had already been preceded by a letter to the chief protagonist, Arius of Alexandria, in which Constantine stated his opinion that the dispute was fostered only by excessive leisure and academic contention, that the point at issue was trivial and could be resolved without difficulty. His optimism was not justified: neither this letter nor the Council of Nicaea itself nor the second letter, in which Constantine urged acceptance of its conclusions, was adequate to solve a dispute in which the participants were as intransigent as the theological issues were subtle. Indeed, for more than 40 years after the death of Constantine, Arianism was actually the official orthodoxy of the Eastern Empire. (See Arianism.)

The Council of Nicaea coincided almost exactly with the celebrations of the 20th anniversary of the reign of Constantine, at which, returning the compliment paid by the Emperor's attendance at their council, the bishops were honoured participants. But Constantine's visit to the West in 326, to repeat the celebrations at Rome, brought the greatest political crisis of the reign. During his absence from the East, and for reasons that remain obscure, Constantine had his eldest son, the deputy emperor Crispus, and his own wife Fausta, Crispus' stepmother, slain. Nor was the visit to Rome a success. Constantine's refusal to take part in a pagan procession offended the Romans; and when he left after a short visit, it was never to return.

To cite this page:
"Constantine I" Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
<http://members.eb.com/bol/topic?artcl=109633&seq_nbr=2&page=n&pm=1>

Copyright © 1994-2001 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

Nicaea, Council of

(325), the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, meeting in ancient Nicaea (now Iznik, Tur.). It was called by the emperor Constantine I, an unbaptized catechumen, or neophyte, who presided over the opening session and took part in the discussions. He hoped a general council of the church would solve the problem created in the Eastern church by Arianism, a heresy first proposed by Arius of Alexandria that affirmed that Christ is not divine but a created being. Pope Sylvester I did not attend the council but was represented by legates.

The council condemned Arius and, with reluctance on the part of some, incorporated the nonscriptural word homoousios ("of one substance") into a creed (the Nicene Creed) to signify the absolute equality of the Son with the Father. The emperor then exiled Arius, an act that, while manifesting a solidarity of church and state, underscored the importance of secular patronage in ecclesiastical affairs.

The council also attempted but failed to establish a uniform date for Easter. But it issued decrees on many other matters, including the proper method of consecrating bishops, a condemnation of lending money at interest by clerics, and a refusal to allow bishops, priests, and deacons to move from one church to another. Socrates Scholasticus, a 5th-century Byzantine historian, said that the council intended to make a canon enforcing celibacy of the clergy, but it failed to do so when some objected. It also confirmed the primacy of Alexandria and Jerusalem over other sees in their respective areas.

To cite this page:
"Nicaea, Council of" Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
<http://members.eb.com/bol/topic?eu=57082&sctn=1&pm=1>
Copyright © 1994-2001 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

The Trinity -In the Zohar.

The Cabala, on the other hand, especially the Zohar, its fundamental work, was far less hostile to the dogma of the Trinity, since by its speculations regarding the father, the son, and the spirit it evolved a new trinity, and thus became dangerous to Judaism. Such terms as &#8220;matronita,&#8221; &#8220;body,&#8221; &#8220;spirit,&#8221; occur frequently (e.q., &#8220;Tazria',&#8221; ed. Polna, iii. 43b); so that Christians and converts like Knorr von Rosenroth, Reuchlin, and Rittangel found in the Zohar a confirmation of Christianity and especially of the dogma of the Trinity (Jellinek, &#8220;Die Kabbala,&#8221; p. 250, Leipsic, 1844 [trans]. of Franck's &#8220;La Kabbale,&#8221; Paris, 1843]). Reuchlin sought on the basis of the Cabala the words &#8220;Father, Son, and Holy Ghost&#8221; in the second word of the Pentateuch, as well as in Ps. cxviii. 22 (ib. p. 10), while Johann Kemper, a convert, left in manuscript a work entitled &#8220;Matteh Mosheh,&#8221; which treats in its third section of the harmony of the Zohar with the doctrine of the Trinity (Zettersteen, &#8220;Verzeichniss der Hebraischen und Aramaischen Handschriften zu Upsala,&#8221; p. 16, Lund, 1900). The study of the Cabala led the Frankists to adopt Christianity; but the Jews have always regarded the doctrine of the Trinity as one irreconcilable with the spirit of the Jewish religion and with monotheism. See Christianity in Its Relation to Judaism; Polemics.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=338&amp;letter=T


The Trinity in the Writings of the Early Church 100+ years before the Nicene Council

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian.

"We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation...[which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian.

"If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority...There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father" (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132). "For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4) "Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification..." (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
 
Upvote 0

Bekah Ferguson

Active Member
Aug 28, 2003
217
0
✟337.00
Faith
Christian
WEBLORD:

ESUS' BAPTISM: The DESCENDING SPIRIT IN THE SHAPE OF A DOVE AND A VOICE FROM HEAVEN
A common use of Scripture by Trinitarians but -
Do these Scriptures really represent a Triune God?

A voice from heaven and a ghostly dove - this beautiful occurance is important enough that it was described in all four gospels of the New Testament. Trinitarians will often use these passages of Scripture to *prove* that there are three distinct personages being represented in the Godhead. Let's take a look at them:

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16-17)

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a Dove descending upon him: And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Mark 1:9-11)

Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. (Luke 3:21-22)

And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him [Jesus]. And I knew him not: but *he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God. (John 1:32-33)

First of all, let's break down these verses and take a look at the manifestations:

THE DOVE

Matthew - the Spirit of God
Mark - the Spirit
Luke - the Holy Ghost
John - the Spirit

A VOICE FROM HEAVEN

First Three Gospels - This is [Thou art] my beloved Son
John - This is the Son of God

And of course, in all four gospels, we have Jesus Christ being baptized by John when the Dove descends on his shoulder and the voice from heaven speaks and says that Jesus is the Son of God.

So, what do we have here?

- Jesus Christ
- the Dove (the Holy Spirit)
- Voice from Heaven (God the Father)

Here's where the Trinitarians say, "This is clear proof that there are three separate persons in the Godhead: Jesus was in the water, the Holy Spirit descended as a Dove, and God the Father spoke from Heaven! Three seperate persons that make up One God!"

Let's take a closer look:

The Dove is described not only as "the Spirit", but also as "the Spirit of God", and "the Holy Ghost". Therefore, the Spirit of God is the Holy Ghost! Okay, now keep this in mind as you read the following two Scripture verses:

God is a Spirit. (John 4:24)

In whom (Jesus) we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins . . . Who is the image of the invisible God. (Colossians 1:14-15)

Without the body of Jesus Christ, God is an invisible Spirit - the Holy Spirit!

THEREFORE - God IS the Holy Spirit - period! There is no separation of persons here. (A separation would mean there are two Spirits and this doctrine is nowhere to be found in the Bible!)

So, let's recap what we actually have in these Scripture passages:

- God (the Holy Spirit)
- Jesus Christ

Okay, we're down from three *persons* to two *persons*. Or are we?

God was manifest in the flesh . . . (1 Timothy 3:16b)

And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. . . (John 1:14:b)

God IS Jesus Christ. The invisible God [the Holy Spirit], became flesh [Jesus Christ] and dwelt among us. The invisible God of the Old Testament did not have a physical body until He came to earth as a man.

One Being - One Divine Man. Three separate persons? Not at all! One body, one Spirit - God's Name is Jesus Christ!

"But, if there aren't three separate persons in the Godhead, then why were there three *separate* forms appearing together at Jesus' baptism?" (Jesus Christ, the descending Dove, and the Voice from Heaven)

Refer back to John 1:33 which says, 'he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost'

Who sent John the Baptist? God! And what did God say to John about Christ before John had ever met Jesus Christ? God said, "Upon [whom] thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"

The descending Dove and the Voice from Heaven was a sign specifically for John the Baptist! God sent this sign so that John would know for sure, without a doubt, that Jesus Christ was truly the Son of God [God in the flesh]!

God is omnipresent: Jeremiah 23:23-24 and Psalm 139:7-10. This was a specific and miraculous sign, manifested by an omnipresent God, to show His prophet John that He had indeed come to earth as a man! John needed to see this sign and hear the definite voice of God. If the man Jesus Christ had spoken to John and said, "I am the Son of God", would this have been irrefutable proof for John? No, because he was waiting for this specific sign and word from God, which God had previously promised him. Any man could claim to be the Son of God. So, what did John say after witnessing this miracle? "And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God." (John 1:33) Mission accomplished.

Study Scripture in context! I can't stress this enough! Scripture does not contradict Scripture! We wouldn't have understood the meaning of this miracle if we had only read about it in one of the Gospels. Instead, we read about it in all four gospels and as a result, the meaning is clear!

THIS IS . . . MYSELF?

I don't want to ignore a common question pertaining to these Scriputres because I'm sure you're probably thinking of it! Some people say, "If Jesus is the same Being as God, or if Jesus is not a separate Person from God, then why didn't the voice from heaven say, 'This is Myself in whom I am well pleased'?"

Again, this has to do with the vital importance of the Sonship of God! As we discussed earlier, there is a meaningful distinction between God the Father and Jesus the Son - not a distinction between personages but rather, a distinction between the man Jesus Christ and the Divine Spirit of God dwelling within him.

The example Jesus set for us was, and still is, for the specific purpose of teaching us what it means to be "godly in Christ Jesus" (2 Timothy 3:12) Jesus taught us to follow His example: to be Christ-like. What does it mean to be Christ-like? Denying our flesh and human reasonings in order to obey God's Will.
 
Upvote 0

Bekah Ferguson

Active Member
Aug 28, 2003
217
0
✟337.00
Faith
Christian
Hi there Der Alter! :)

The post in which I said that you never responded to my "Right Hand of God" post - I wrote that before you responded but for whatever reason, it showed up in the forum after your response. :p

You said:

--
I quoted a specific passage of scripture, Stephen immediately before he was stoned to death, said “Behold I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.” And I asked, “Did Stephen see what he said he saw?” I also quoted scripture from the OT, David saying “The LORD said unto my Lord.” and “God your God has anointed you.” And again I asked about these specific passages. What did David hear and see? Did David see/understand God to be anointing Himself? Did David understand God to be speaking to Himself? I also quoted from Revelation, Jesus saying, “as I have overcome and am set down with the Father in His throne.” What did Jesus say and what did John understand?
--

The reason I say that this is a circular argument is because you say "Jesus IS God" and then you say "Jesus will be standing at the Right Hand of God" and then you say, "Jesus and God are One Entity", and then you say, "There will be One in Heaven", and then you say once again, "But, Jesus will be standing on the Right Side of God who is sitting on the Throne" and then you say again, "Jesus and God are One Entity".

Aside from the whole "Right Hand = Power" discussion, the MAIN REASON it is obvious that "Jesus stood at the Right Hand of God" is SYMBOLIC is because of Revelation 1:7-8,12-18 which says,

Behold, he (Jesus) cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. "I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending," saith the Lord, "which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" . . . And I (John) turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his RIGHT HAND seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp towedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his RIGHT HAND upon me, saying unto me, "Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen."

In this first chapter of Revelation, the majestic God described is Jesus Christ - he said, "I am he that liveth, and was dead; behold, I am alive for evermore". As you believe: Jesus and God are One Being! This One Being, is clearly our Lord Jesus (Revelation chp. 1) and yet John actually makes a couple of references to the Right Hand of JESUS! (And he had in his Right Hand seven stars, etc.) This chapter of the Bible not only proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Jesus IS God (as you already believe) but it also shows clearly that the "Right Hand of God" is indeed SYMBOLIC. If it were literal, this chapter of the Bible would not make any sense at all. And if it IS literal, then why does John make reference to the Right Hand of JESUS?!

Originally Posted By: Bekah Ferguson

DER ALTER= In response to 1 John 5:7 (You say it proves the Trinity)

1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father,
the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

We might ask "there are three WHAT that bear record?" But, that verse explained itself already. There are three that bear record, period.

Der Alter, here was your response:

--
First the verse begins, “there are three,” it does not begin , “there is one in heaven.” There are three in heaven, and then it identifies the three, “the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost.” In the gospel, that bears his name, John identifies the Word as God who became flesh. And these three, NOT one, “bear record.” “Bear record” translates the word “martureo” and is translated as, bear witness, testify, bear record, witness, be a witness, and give testimony. Only sentient, cognizant, rational beings can “bear record, be a witness, give testimony” So John recognized that in heaven there were somehow three sentient, cognizant, rational beings, and also somehow the three are one.
--

Did it ever come to your mind that perhaps John was trying to clear up the misunderstanding that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost were three separate individuals? (These three are one) No matter what you say, the verse just doesn't say *three persons*. It just says *three*. You've merely interpreted it to mean *three persons*. (Three that bare witness in Heaven.) Yes, the Holy Spirit bears witness, as does Jesus. Is this because 'they' are two separate persons or because they are both God? This verse could just as easily be interpeted in a Oneness standpoint, just as it is also readily interpreted to indicate Trinity. If we compare this verse to the rest of the New Testament however, we can determine the true meaning of the verse, which I believe is the clear and easy to understand, straight forward meaning: "these three are one" - just One.
 
Upvote 0

Bekah Ferguson

Active Member
Aug 28, 2003
217
0
✟337.00
Faith
Christian
Der Alter = I know that I still have not addressed that verses in which King David said, 'The Lord said unto my Lord" and "God your God has annointed you". You asked: "What did David hear and see? Did David see/understand God to be anointing Himself? Did David understand God to be speaking to Himself?"

I am going to respond to this! Hopefully, this afternoon! But, don't worry! I'm not going to ignore these important passages from the Old Testament! :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,581
6,065
EST
✟994,427.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
GJG said:
"I and my Father are one"
"He who has seen me has seen the Father"
"The Father is in me"...etc

These are but a few which highlight the fact that the Divinity within Jesus, is God. It is Jesus who says that He is the Father, not UPC or KFC or ABC, Jesus said it, therefore it is fact.

[size=+1]Oh yes, this joke is hilarious. But the statement is false. You have quoted out-of-context. Jesus said also in the statement that He is in the Father. Jesus prayed that believers be one with Him as He is one with the Father. Are believers also the Father? There is NOT one single verse of scripture that states,, "Jesus is the Father." If Jesus IS the Father was the Father crucified and did He die? Did the Father commend His soul unto the Father on the cross? Did the Father pray in the garden that the Father take the cup from Himself? There are twelve verses in which Jesus, while standing on this earth, speaks of the Father in heaven.[/size]

Lu 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Mt 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. (Mt 6:9, Lu 11:2, Mt 11:25, Mt 12:50, Mt 16:17, Mt 18:10, Mt 11:25, Mt 12:50, Mt 16:17, Mt 18:10, Mt 18:19)​
 
Upvote 0

GJG

Active Member
Jul 16, 2003
272
1
✟412.00
Der Alter said:
[size=+1]I don't know. I have done that before, answer a post addressed to someone else as if it were addressed to me. If fact you did almost the same thing in this post responding to a post addressed to Bekah Ferguson.[/size]

http://www.christianforum.com/showthread.php?p=1002855&postcount=55
Are you for real dude??

O my goodness! How could anyone make the mistake of speaking as if they said the very words of someone else?? I don't know of anyone who is so simple minded, that they would quote the words of another poster, as their very own words, and then go on to explain why they themselves said what they obviously didn't even say in the first place!

How dare you make the presumption that I myself am capable of being so stupid!

Old Shepherd was saying that HE HIMSELF said the very exact words that you posted! Why would he then explain these very words as if HE HIMSELF posted them??:(

Now I am absolutely certain that you are simply attempting to ruin the good natured spirit within this topic. I suggest you take your childish behaviour somewhere else!

If you continue with this unacceptable behaviour you will leave me no option but to lodge a formal complaint!
 
Upvote 0

GJG

Active Member
Jul 16, 2003
272
1
✟412.00
Der Alter said:
[size=+1]Oh yes, this joke is hilarious. But the statement is false. You have quoted out-of-context. Jesus said also in the statement that He is in the Father. Jesus prayed that believers be one with Him as He is one with the Father. Are believers also the Father? There is NOT one single verse of scripture that states,, "Jesus is the Father." If Jesus IS the Father was the Father crucified and did He die? Did the Father commend His soul unto the Father on the cross? Did the Father pray in the garden that the Father take the cup from Himself? There are twelve verses in which Jesus, while standing on this earth, speaks of the Father in heaven.[/size]

Lu 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Mt 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. (Mt 6:9, Lu 11:2, Mt 11:25, Mt 12:50, Mt 16:17, Mt 18:10, Mt 11:25, Mt 12:50, Mt 16:17, Mt 18:10, Mt 18:19)​

If you think this is a joke then I again suggest you leave!:(
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,581
6,065
EST
✟994,427.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Bekah Ferguson said:
I have written on online Bible Study concerning the Oneness of God and Trinity Theology. If anyone would like to check it out, my website address is:

[size=+1]I went to that website, I read the first sentence and stopped. There was no need to read further, because the first sentence is a total and base falsehood. Scroll back and read where I proved from several sources that the Nicene council did NOT even discuss the Trinity. The Nicene council did NOT force anything on the church. The word Trinity to describe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was written by the early church over 160 years before Nicaea, Tertullian, Origen, and others.

The Nicene council was convened to settle the controversy of Arianism, a heresy that taught Jesus was a created being and NOT God. There were over 300 presiding Bishops attending all but two signed the accords of that council. One of those was Arius, the originator of the heresy.

Read the real history what is known as the Catholic church today, did NOT exist in 325 AD.

The term Trinitas was dubbed by Tertullian almost 100 years before the Nicene council in his debate against Praxeas. However, he was not the first to use the term. A man Theophilus Bishop of Antioch in 160 was the first to use it, many years before in his epistle to Autolycus The 2nd,xv..We can assume it was used prior to Theophilus and was held as a common church belief with the many quotes that are left to us in history. Athenagoras representing the whole Churches belief wrote, that, "they hold the Father to be God, and the Son God, and the Holy Spirit, and declare their union and their distinction in order."(A plea for the Christians.10.3)

The truth is that there was no Roman Catholic Church ruling Christianity before Constantine, because Christianity was an illegal religion and an underground practice. It was not until hundred's of year's later, 5th cent. to the 7th cent., that the first vestiges of this church government rose where there was a Roman bishop as the head of the Church, making it an official Roman Church functioning similar to today's.

http://www.letusreason.org/Trin13.htm

Theophilus of Antioch to Autolycus 160 AD

In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf02-42.htm#P1469_430289
And of course the third sentence is also a base falshood, "Three Gods." Trinitarians do NOT believe in three Gods!
[/size]

Many churches teach that God is three separate Persons who as a whole are just One Being. This is what they call the Trinity - A doctrine introduced and forced by the Catholic Church in 325 a.d.- a segment of Catholic doctrine that the Protestants actually took with them when they separated from the Catholic church.
* * *
There was God the Father and Jesus the Son and then . . . the Holy Spirit as well? Three Gods. (Three that are One?!)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,581
6,065
EST
✟994,427.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
GJG said:
If you think this is a joke then I again suggest you leave!

[size=+1]Please read further, the next three quotes for example.[/size]

GJG said:
These are but a few which highlight the fact that the Divinity within Jesus, is God. It is Jesus who says that He is the Father, not UPC or KFC or ABC, Jesus said it, therefore it is fact.

Click Here. to link to this post.

Bekah Ferguson said:
GJG - your last post was EXCELLENT! :)

(And I loved the UPC/KFC joke!) :p

Click Here. to link to this post

Der Alter said:
Oh yes, this joke is hilarious. But the statement is false.

Click Here. to link to this post.

GJG said:
Der Alter,

Your continual insults show the character of a pathetic, childish, person that is totaly ignorant of any common sense whatsoever!

Please take your unwanted behaviour elswhere!

[size=+1]What insults? Take my behavior elsewhere? Don&#8217;t you wish.[/size]

GJG said:
BTW Der Alter,

Could you suggest a way in which I can make a formal complaint?

Who do I contact, regarding unacceptable behaviour of a particular poster?

Your help in this matter would be much appreciated!

[size=+1]I sure can but before you do that I suggest you read the rules and be prepared to tell the moderators exactly which rule you think I am violating. There is a "Report" button at the bottom right of each post window. Be my guest.

Click here to see rules.
[/size]
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

GJG

Active Member
Jul 16, 2003
272
1
✟412.00
Bekah Ferguson said:
GJG - I think you're being a little bit harsh. Der Alter is for sure insulting from time to time, but that is merely because he completely disagrees with our standpoint. I would like to continue discussing things with him for a little while longer. If things don't change, then I'll move on. :p

AAAAARRRRRGGGHHHHH....aaaarrgghhhh.......puff......pant....puff
picture me pulling my hair out.......puff.......aahhhh......count to 100 slowly......1..2..3..4.......96 numbers later.........thax for that Becks:)
I suppose I am kinda feeling quite frustrated at the moment.
However, your suggestion is a sound one:)

I shall continue to grit my teeth and bear it all!

BTW: Well done on an excellent post and essay!

SHEMA!

I may have to repost the description of God as there seems to be no feed back just yet. What you think?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.