Should you believe in the trinity II

[scriptures]

Brother 2ducklow, you have 2 lords, but the Bible said only one lord....the same manner that I have 2 Gods one almighty and one inferior.....

So, I don't see any problem with my belief....

 

[scriptures]

You love this don't you? I'm going to say that i do agree with you to the fullest that Witnesses do have two god's in there arguments but always tend ignore it!

Sorry brother but I am an independent christian and not a JW member.....

 

[2ducklow]

Brother 2ducklow, you have 2 lords, but the Bible said only one lord...

if one lord refers to both Jesus and God the Father then either it means that they are one in the same being or that they are two different beings who are one in everything they do. However , I believe that it just refers to the Lord Jesus, not to the Lord God YHWH because of several reasons, like it also says one baptism, but htere are 2 baptisms, so it obviously refers to water baptism given the context of the verse. and in the context of the verse I believe it means one lord Jesus, not 2 lord Jesuses or 3 or 4. The context being that eph. 4.6 says "One God the Father" the context being we have one lord Jesus, one faith, one baptism (in Jesus name, water baptism) and one god the Father.

Eph 4:5One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

We have one Lord Jesus and one God the Father, I beleive that is the meaning.

.the same manner that I have 2 Gods one almighty and one inferior.....

That means then that your 2 gods are one god

So, I don't see any problem with my belief....

The problem is that the bible says God the Father is the one and only true God. It doesn't say God the Father and Jesus are the one and only true God, Just God the Father. so your 2 gods are one God theology falls apart on john 17.3 and 1 cor. 8.6.

John 17.3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


1co 8:6But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

 

[scriptures]

Brother 2ducklow, I don't see your logic their.... you accept 2 lords even though the Bible said there is only one lord...but you cannot accept 2 Gods???

I understand "one true God" to mean one supreme God....Because He is God of gods...Just like I accept one Lord ....

Jesus Christ is called god and lord but not of the same degree as the Father...that's why YHWH is still the one true God....

agape

scriptures

 

[2ducklow]

Brother 2ducklow, I don't see your logic their...

what don't you understand , everything?

. you accept 2 lords even though the Bible said there is only one lord...but you cannot accept 2 Gods???

there is one lord God and one lord Jesus. there are not 2 gods in the bible only one. there is not a god the father and god the son. only the one true god which is God the Father. Do you understand this logic?

Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

1 Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, ( the context is one lord Jesus IMO). when the bible says one lord in the above verses, the context is suppose to be understood. So that when it says one lord in eph .4..5 one is to know from reading the rest of the passage and other verses that say Jesus is one Lord, that it doesn't refer to God the Father who is likewise lord but a lord of a different sort. God is one lord in the sense of lord god. Jesus is one lord in the sense of the savior who died for us and ransomed us with his death. eph. 4.5 doesn't mean both lord god and lord jesus. If you examine q cor. 8.6 you will see that it saying the ssame thing as eph. 4.5-6, that there is one God and one Lord Jesus. do you understand this logic?
do you understand this logic ?

I understand "one true God" to mean one supreme God....Because He is God of gods...Just like I accept one Lord ....
agape

scriptures

you forgot that john 17.3 says that God the father is the ONLY true God. you left only out. How can Jesus be God if God the Father is the only god? or the only true God? he can't and isn't. do you understand this logic?
you have changed the word true to supreme. The word true does not mean supreme. I cannot accept that there are 2 gods, because john 17.3 and 1 cor. 8.6 say that God the Father is the one and only true God. I accept the meaning of the word true, which isn't supreme, and I accept the meaning ot the word only, which doesn't mean many others or one other. . That is why i cannot accept that there are 2 gods one greater and one lesser. I do not change the meaning of the word True. Since there is one and only one true God , any other god would be a false God. And Jesus is not a false anything. Do you understand this logic?



Since you have admited that you have 2 gods, you have likewise defacto admited that you are a polythiest. your religon is polythiesm. do you understand this logic?

so the bible says one Lord but the context is one lord Jesus, not one lord who is several lords. So I do have 2 lords and the bible means one lord jesus in eph. 4.5 not one lord god and one lord jesus in eph. 4.5. do you understand this logic?

 

[2ducklow]

let me ask you this. how would you say 'there is only one true God' if 'only one true god ' means according to you , ' only one supreme god'? Or do you think it impossible to convey the idea of 'only onetrue God" or 'only one true wife" or 'only one true son of God" or 'only one true bible'? does only mean only or something else too?

 

[Simonline]

What you are promoting is very similar to Nestorianism which is a heresy.

'Similar to' but not 'the same as' (which is why Nestorianism is heresy and orthodox Christianity is orthodox Christianity).

Unlike Nestorius, who taught that the Messiah was essentially 'two Persons (one Divine and the other human)' simultaneously inhabiting the same corporeal body (?!), which is why he was denounced as a heretic, orthodox Christianity teaches that the Messiah is ONE PERSON simultaneously existing in TWO (distinct but NOT separate) WAYS as TWO (mutually exclusive) NATURES (one Divine, the other human).

Like everyone else in this amateur online debating society, you need to pay very careful attention to detail otherwise you end up slinging mud in all directions so that even the Christians end up getting hit by supposedly 'friendly' fire?!

You are saying that Jesus was not God in his Temporal state only human.

No, that is not what I am saying at all (like I said, you need to pay VERY careful attention to detail). What I said was that Jesus is not God because it is the Son who is both Divine (YHWH) and human (Jesus of Nazareth), not Jesus of Nazareth any more than YHWH (the very idea of YHWH being human is absurd in the extreme, not to mention blasphemous)?!

Jesus of Nazareth is no more Divine than YHWH is human, but the Son, as the Messiah, is both YHWH and Jesus of Nazareth (i.e. Divine and human).

Meaning that as Nesterious argued that Jesus divinity was separated from his humanity which makes it two different beings with separate natures, You are also arguing that Christ was not God nor divine only man.

Nonsense! You are simply not paying sufficient attention to detail?! Nestorius argued that the Messiah was essentially TWO PERSONS, one Divine and the other human. That is blasphemous heresy and the Church was absolutely right to denounce Nestorius as a heretic for his views.

Orthodox Christianity on the other hand teaches that the Messiah is ONE PERSON simultaneously existing in TWO (distinct but NOT separate) WAYS as TWO (mutually exclusive) NATURES (one Divine, the other human). In other words, it is NOT the Person but the Natures that are TWO and as such are mutually exclusive to each other (i.e. Divine Nature CANNOT exist as human nature and human nature CANNOT exist as Divine Nature...but the Son, as the Messiah, CAN exist as both Divine and human...as Divine, the Son is YHWH but as human, the Son is Jesus of Nazareth).

Your argument as Nesterious arguments posses a serious threat on the atonement because if Jesus was only a man while the heavenly Messiah was divine, then we can never tell if the real Messiah truly suffered for the sins of the world.[/quote

]

Except that THERE IS ONLY ONE MESSIAH who is both Divine and human. Only as human did the Messiah die upon the cross (because YHWH is incapable of experiencing death [If 'death' is 'separation from God' then where does God, as both Eternal and Immutable, go to die?!]). The Scriptures teach that the Messiah suffered for the sin of the world but only as human (i.e. by means of His human nature) did the Messiah suffer.

You are separating there natures with your argument as Nesterious did!

Not true! Nestorius separated not only the natures but the Person as well (that's why the Christian Church denounced him as a heretic). Orthodox Christianity separates neither the natures nor the Person. The Person is ONE (the Person of the Son (the Second Person of the Eternal, Immutable and Tri-Personal Creator, YHWH) and the natures are distinguished from each other but not separated (since they are united in the Person)).

Your line of argumentation is not biblical, it's heretical and dangerous! Take a look at the below link and reconsider this

http://i-cias.com/e.o/nestorianism.htm .

I suggest that you go away and learn your theology seriously before you start denouncing those who clearly have a much better grasp of theology than you have?! Far from being 'heretical' and 'dangerous', my arguments are soundly Biblical and have been the doctrine of orthodox Christianity for nearly two millennia now (even though many present day Christians are so theologically ignorant that they would no longer be able to correctly distinguish between truth and heresy...as your post testifies).

Do[n't] point fingers at others when your argumentation has also been considered a heresy, it is a remodified form of Nestorianism, but it is still Nestorianism.

As I have said, like many modern-day Christians, you clearly cannot distinguish between Nestorian heresy and orthodox truth (the distinctions being very subtle in deed)?!

I suggest that you do some serious theological and historical study before you attempt to reply to another of my posts?

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

This is very confusing to me. You said the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth, but you are talking about Jesus and the Messiah as if they are two separate persons.

No, the Messiah IS ONE PERSON [the Son] who IS BOTH Jesus of Nazareth AND YHWH BUT Jesus of Nazareth IS NOT YHWH and YHWH IS NOT Jesus of Nazareth (that is to say, Divine Nature IS NOT human nature and human nature IS NOT Divine Nature. In other words, the Messiah is ONE PERSON (the Son) existing in TWO (distinct but not separate) WAYS as TWO (mutually exclusive) NATURES since Divine Nature CANNOT exist as human nature and human nature CANNOT exist as Divine Nature. Thus, the name YHWH reflects the reality that is the Messiah (i.e. the Son) existing as Divine and Jesus of Nazareth is the name that reflects the reality that is the Messiah (i.e. the Son) existing as human - ONE PERSON simultaneously existing in TWO WAYS (the reality that is reflected by the use of TWO NAMES - YHWH and Jesus of Nazareth).

Your other statements have left me with questions:

1. Jesus isn't Divine he's only human, but the Messiah is both Divine and human. (1st quote)
2. Jesus is not God, but the Messiah is both God and man. (2nd quote)

How can Jesus (the Messiah) be Divine, yet not Divine? Not God, yet both God and man?

I am not trying to start an argument, I sincerely want to understand your reasoning.

Because it is the Messiah (i.e. the Son), not 'Jesus', who is both Divine and human. As Divine, the Messiah (i.e. the Son) is YHWH. As human, the Messiah (i.e. the Son) is Jesus of Nazareth.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Hi Virtual Girl. You see, Simonline has a lot of Jealousy for the truth. Yet statements like the above completely throw me off. And when i ask questions concerning those statements, he feels like i'm personally attacking him, and considers me as not wanting to make any honest efforts in understanding, thus all my arguments are discarded with a nice big and bold heretic.

Firstly, I'll thank you not to speak for me, only for yourself. My statements 'throw you off' because you are not used to serious theology or to statements that are different from the usual theological tripe that is often banded about within the present-day Christian sub-culture. My statements require lots of patience, perseverence and serious thought in order to be correctly understood and appreciated (and I do not take kindly to people who blythely dismiss my statements without first taking the time or effort to try and understand what it is that I have actually said).

I dismiss your posts because it is very difficult to take you seriously when you don't take yourself seriously. You just blurt out the first thing that comes into your head without actually taking the time to slowly and carefully read what I have written (even asking for further clarification if necessary) in order to try and seriously understand what I have written.

I wouldn't mind that you disagreed with what I had written if I thought that you had taken the time to actually understand it but I can tell from your many posts that you haven't got a clue what I'm talking about which is why you always reject it out of hand. It is for this reason that I am so dismissive of your posts.

What i think he wants to say with the above is an illusion [that's 'allusion' not 'illusion'] to the fact that Mashiyach is said to literally be in the bosom of the Father present tense, while simultaneously being on earth at the time John 1:18!

But the fact that the text reads as such, only means that Yeshua was actually divine and human, not that he was both not divine and man, while simultaneously being eternally divine and man!

No, that's not what I mean at all! The Messiah (being Divine) is as much 'Omni' as the Father and the Holy Spirit (not to mention also equally Eternal and Immutable). That means that the Messiah, as Divine (i.e. as YHWH), is as Eternally Omnipresent as the Father and the Spirit (Jn.3:13) but this is absolutely impossible for the Messiah as human (i.e. as Jesus of Nazareth) who, as human, can only be in one place at any one time.

The Scriptures do not teach that Jesus of Nazareth is both Divine and human. They teach that it is the Messiah who, as YHWH, is Divine and as Jesus of Nazareth is human. The Scriptures do NOT teach that Jesus of Nazareth is Divine any more than they teach that YHWH is human?!

Simonline.

 

[virtualgirl]

Because it is the Messiah (i.e. the Son), not 'Jesus', who is both Divine and human. As Divine, the Messiah (i.e. the Son) is YHWH. As human, the Messiah (i.e. the Son) is Jesus of Nazareth.

Simonline.

Light bulb moment!!! I'm beginning to understand this, Simonline. Thanks.

~Veeg

 

[scriptures]

Brother 2ducklow, one lord is two lord in different sense... just as one god is actually two gods also in different sense....

since you admitted that one lord can mean two lords...it is but logical to admit that one god can mean many.....

agape

scriptures....

 

[2ducklow]

Brother 2ducklow, one lord is two lord in different sense... just as one god is actually two gods also in different sense....

since you admitted that one lord can mean two lords...it is but logical to admit that one god can mean many.....

agape

scriptures....

seems to me you don't want to deal with the points i have brought up for discussion. as you have repeatedly ignored my statements.

 

[2ducklow]

Light bulb moment!!! I'm beginning to understand this, Simonline. Thanks.

~Veeg

its all confusing gibberish to me.

 

[scriptures]

Brother 2ducklow, It's clear one can mean many.... as you explained.....

anyway, thanks

 

[beloved57]

No Trinity No God..

A person is yet unconverted if they disbelieve the Trinity..Father, Son, and Holy Ghost..

 

[2ducklow]

No Trinity No God..

A person is yet unconverted if they disbelieve the Trinity..Father, Son, and Holy Ghost..

says you but not the bible


John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.


John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

I'm putting my trust in the word of God that says faith in Jesus and the one who sent him (God the Father) results in eternal life. show me a verse that says believe the trinity and thou shalt be saved, and I'll beleive it. but it ain't there, everybody knows that.

 

[beloved57]

says you but not the bible


John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

But you dont heareth Gods word if you dont hear trinity..

 

[scriptures]

But you dont heareth Gods word if you dont hear trinity..

Just where in the scriptures?????

 

[2ducklow]

But you dont heareth Gods word if you dont hear trinity..

says you not the bible.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

I believe the bible not you. you spread a false gospel which is " believe the trinity and you will be saved". I spread the gospel of the word of God that says believe on Jesus Christ and the one that sent him and you will be saved.

you made up that bit about "you don't hear gods word if you don't hear trinity." It's not the word of God, it's your word. I rely on God's word not your word for salvation. I rely on the gospel of the bible not your gospel. I asked you to show me in the b ible where it says to believe the trinity to be saved and all you did was show me your words. your words don't save, the word of God saves.

 

[Simonline]

If Mashiyach and Yeshua are the same person, does each name convey a different meaning?

The PERSON is the SON. As Divine, the name of the Son (just like the name of both the Father and the Holy Spirit) is YHWH. As human, the name of the Son is Jesus of Nazareth.

As the Divine Creator, YHWH, the PERSON of the SON exists in a completely different way to the way that He exists as the human creature, Jesus of Nazareth, since the Divine Creator CANNOT exist as a human creature just as a human creature CANNOT exist as the Divine Creator.

The term 'Messiah' (meaning 'annointed one') refers to the PERSON of the SON existing both as the Divine Creator, YHWH and the human creature, Jesus of Nazareth. It does not refer to the Son existing only as the Divine Creator YHWH or to the Son existing only as the human creture, Jesus of Nazareth. The term 'Messiah' applies only to the Eternal and Immutable Son, incarnate as a human creature.

Hope this explanation helps?

Simonline.