Should you believe in the trinity II

[2ducklow]

Ok, so why don't you show us from scripture this Tripersonal being. You have repeated the words "Tripersonal"but have not provided any scriptural evidence for the term itself which happens to be completely absent.

If you look up tripersonal in the dictionary it just means 3 persons. it is a misnomer in that a personal isn't a person but they call the 3 persons tripersonal.

tri·per·son·al

consisting of or existing in three persons, as the Godhead.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tripersonal

You aren't going to get anyone to show you were it is in the bible. Of course tripersonal refers to the spurious verse matthew 28.19 where The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned. But of course there is nothing in that spurious verse stating any tripersonal thing. The mere mentioning of 3 anything doesn't equate to tripersonal. there are verses where 3 humans are listed in the same verse, but of course they are not a tripersonal being. So there is no justification for jumping to the conclusion that because 2 individuals are mentioned in matthew 28.19 that those 2 beings are tripersonal.

Trinitarians who want to say that unorthodox christians aren't christians have only their trinitarian dogma to prove that we are not christians, They don't have any scriptures, just dogma.

 

[Simonline]

Ok, so why don't you show us from scripture this Tripersonal being. You have repeated the words "Tripersonal"but have not provided any scriptural evidence for the term itself which happens to be completely absent.

Have you not read my earlier posts? The very fact that the terms 'Trinity', 'Tri-Personal' or 'hypostatic union' etc. are not found within the Judeo-Christian Scriptures are not sufficient grounds for rejecting the Truths which those terms convey. Such an assessment of Biblical truth is facile in the extreme.

If the Scriptures declare, both unequivocally and emphatically that there is only One True God and that He alone is our only Saviour (Isa.43:10-13) and they also declare that the Father is the One True God, that the Son is the One True God and that the Holy Spirit is the One True God but that neither the Father, the Son nor the Holy Spirit ALONE is the One True God then the only reasonable conclusion, based upon all of the Scriptural evidence is that there is but One True God who is Tri-Personal [i.e. Father, Son and Holy Spirit] rather than Mono-Personal [i.e. the Father, Son or Holy Spirit alone] in Nature, who has incarnated as a human creature.

Only if it can be demonstrated from the Scriptures (i.e. on the basis of what the Scriptures do say rather than on the basis of what they don't say since basing one's arguments on silence is bad hermeneutics) that God is Mono-Personal, rather than Tri-Personal in Nature would it then be legitimately established that Trinitarianism is false but since that can't be done (otherwise it would have been done long before now), Trinitarianism will remain as orthodox Judeo-Christian doctrine just as Unitarianism remains as Judeo-Christian heresy.

As far as i know she hasn't stated she is agnostic. Why should you judge someone like that?

Didn't you read her post then? Do you know what is meant by the term agnosticism? She has declared that, other than YHWH Himself, no-one else can know, one way or the other, whether He is essentially Tri-Personal [i.e. Trinitarian] or Mono-Personal [i.e. Unitarianism] in Nature. That, by definition, is an agnostic declaration and one which is patently false since God, through the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, has seen to it that we can know (and that we should not allow ourselves to be disuaded from knowing because of controversy and confusion).

No one here has to believe in a silly term to be saved. Our salvation is not dependent of a term, Tripersonal in this case.

Your missing the point completely. It isn't so much about theological jargon or terminology but the truth which those terms communicate. Absolute Reality is not just a matter of personal opinion (whether we want to believe that God is Tri-Personal [i.e. Trinitarian] or Mono-Personal [i.e. Unitarian]) it is ABSOLUTE REALITY as it really exists, absolutely (whether anyone believes it or not).

If (hypothetically speaking) I could convince everyone who doesn't know you personally (which, I guarantee, would be a lot more by comparrison than the few who do know you personally) that you are not in fact a human being (in spite of all appearance to the contrary) but actually a shaven ape (?!) would that then make you a shaven ape in reality or would you really be a human being?

In the same way (and we're not talking hypothetically here), is the essential Nature of God, as either Tri-Personal or Mono-Personal, Absolute Reality or open to negotiation depending on how many people can be persuaded either way?!

Actually, none of the passages you presented prove that God is subdivided. John chapter 1 shows that God's speech is no different then him considering that Logos is the equivalent of the Aramic Memra and the hebrew dabar.

Except that speech is incapable of incarnating (Jn.1:1,14)?! Only that which is essentially Personal is capable of incarnating as a personal creature or of pre-incarnationally theophanizing (as in the case of 'THE Angel of the LORD' which is the perfect description of the Son in relation to His Father since, contrary to popular opinion, an 'angel' is not just a 'messenger' (a heavenly postman?!) or something with which we adorn our Christmas trees, but rather, 'one doing the bidding of another' which is exactly how the Messiah always described Himself in relation to His Father).

What does logos mean? Speech, expressions of thought, it means the thinking or the faculty of reason. What logos is not? Logos is not a person separate and distinced from God. So no, John chapter 1 does not support your tripersonal view of the eternal considering that no trinity is mentioned

.

Judeo-Christianity does not teach that the Word is 'a person who is separate and distanced from God'. Judeo-Christianity. in accordance with the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, teaches that 'In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God' (Jn.1:1) 'and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory of the One and Only' (Jn.1:14)

It is precisely because the Word is YHWH Himself and not an appendage to YHWH that the apostle John declares a) that the Word is YHWH (and therefore Personal, since YHWH is Personal) and b) that the Word has incarnated as a personal human creature made in the Mono-Personal likeness of His Tri-Personal Creator.

The Messiah is NOT a separate Person or Entity to YHWH! The Messiah IS YHWH Himself, incarnate as a man - Emmanuel - YHWH with us.

I have no idea from where you got your understanding of the Trinity but it certainly wasn't from Judeo-Christian orthodoxy.

Still, if you choose to reject the truth in favour of your own intellectual idol then you are free to do so until such time as the Messiah Himself calls you to account for it.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Post deleted - duplicate post.

 

[Simonline]

If you look up tripersonal in the dictionary it just means 3 persons. it is a misnomer in that a personal isn't a person but they call the 3 persons tripersonal.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tripersonal

You aren't going to get anyone to show you were it is in the bible. Of course tripersonal refers to the spurious verse matthew 28.19 where The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned. But of course there is nothing in that spurious verse stating any tripersonal thing. The mere mentioning of 3 anything doesn't equate to tripersonal. there are verses where 3 humans are listed in the same verse, but of course they are not a tripersonal being. So there is no justification for jumping to the conclusion that because 2 individuals are mentioned in matthew 28.19 that those 2 beings are tripersonal.

Trinitarians who want to say that unorthodox christians aren't christians have only their trinitarian dogma to prove that we are not christians, They don't have any scriptures, just dogma.

No comment.

Simonline.

 

[2ducklow]

No comment.

Simonline.

the message wasn't to you.

 

[2ducklow]

[hypostasis is also a forensic term, it means the blood in a dead body goes to the bottom of the d ead body.

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

If you look up tripersonal in the dictionary it just means 3 persons. it is a misnomer in that a personal isn't a person but they call the 3 persons tripersonal.

I know Tripersonal means three persons indeed. From the way Trinitarians sell it to us, it seems to me that what they mean is that the person of the godhead has double or triple personalities, something like a bipolar per'se. It should be worded tripersonality rather then tripersonal, since tripersonal means three as you correctly pointed out!

tri·per·son·al


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tripersonal

You aren't going to get anyone to show you were it is in the bible. Of course tripersonal refers to the spurious verse matthew 28.19 where The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned. But of course there is nothing in that spurious verse stating any tripersonal thing. The mere mentioning of 3 anything doesn't equate to tripersonal. there are verses where 3 humans are listed in the same verse, but of course they are not a tripersonal being. So there is no justification for jumping to the conclusion that because 2 individuals are mentioned in matthew 28.19 that those 2 beings are tripersonal.

Trinitarians who want to say that unorthodox christians aren't christians have only their trinitarian dogma to prove that we are not christians, They don't have any scriptures, just dogma.

The passage says in the name not in the names.We are not told throughout the brit-hadasha to baptise in the name of the trinity but in the name of Yeshua. However, if we are to baptise in three names then what are the names? Is a name ever assigned to the Ruach Hakodesh? No. So what names? The proof trinity text is also missing from the hebrew of the gosple of Matthew. I'm starting to suspect that it may be another addition just like 1 John 5:7.

[/color][/size][/size][/color]

Have you not read my earlier posts? The very fact that the terms 'Trinity', 'Tri-Personal' or 'hypostatic union' etc. are not found within the Judeo-Christian Scriptures are not sufficient grounds for rejecting the Truths which those terms convey.

Ok, now my question is, what truths do those terms convey? If the terms do not appear, then you are arguing from silence. Scripture doesn't say God is Tripersonal so why should i believe it? Judaism has never believed nor taught a God that consists of multiple personalities and distinct but inseperable godhead or triad. Actually it is a contradiction to say that they are distinct but inseperable, just the fact that they are distinct means they are seperable. If God consists of three person, then he is limited to space and time and is not omnipresent. Your belief not only promotes a triad, that is three persons in a godhead. It is a deniel of God's omnipresence, and it confines him to time and space as if he were man Jeremiah 23:24; Kings 8:27; Deut 10:14; Matt 10:30; Proverbs 15:3; Psalms 68:33.

If the Scriptures declare, both unequivocally and emphatically that there is only One True God and that He alone is our only Saviour (Isa.43:10-13)

Correct; and he alone stretches out the heavens and all there host has he commanded Isa 45:12. Notice he does it alone, there is no other God beside him. If God was tripersonal as you insist, then he would be divided which contradicts scripture. From what i understand trinitarians believe the father makes up one third of the godhead, the son two thirds. This is confusing and unscriptural. There is but one God period, who was the Word become flesh. Coated himself with humanity and died for the sins of the world.

and they also declare that the Father is the One True God, that the Son is the One True God and that the Holy Spirit is the One True God but that neither the Father, the Son nor the Holy Spirit ALONE is the One True God then the only reasonable conclusion, based upon all of the Scriptural evidence is that there is but One True God who is Tri-Personal [i.e. Father, Son and Holy Spirit] rather than Mono-Personal [i.e. the Father, Son or Holy Spirit alone] in Nature, who has incarnated as a human creature.

God can manifest as he wants. He appeared as a man to Abraham and ate under a tree with the other two angelic man Gen Chapter 18. He wrestled with Jacob as a angelic man Gen chapter 32. He appeared to Manoa as the angel of the Lord judges chapter 13. He retrieved his Ruach Hakodesh from king Saul and sent an evil spirit from him to torment the wicked king Sam 16:14. God can manifest as he choses for he is not limited as we are. Certainly, his dabar is a manifestation of him. The Son and Holy Spirit are manifestations of God not three persons that make up a godhead, or as trinitarians would say, compound unity.

Only if it can be demonstrated from the Scriptures (i.e. on the basis of what the Scriptures do say rather than on the basis of what they don't say since basing one's arguments on silence is bad hermeneutics) that God is Mono-Personal, rather than Tri-Personal in Nature would it then be legitimately established that Trinitarianism is false but since that can't be done (otherwise it would have been done long before now), Trinitarianism will remain as orthodox Judeo-Christian doctrine just as Unitarianism remains as Judeo-Christian heresy.

Your attacks are against unitarians. Launching these attacks against unitarians only derails us from the point that has been established. Trinitarianism derives from paganism. The Roman Catholics bought the babylonian lie that Samiramis, Nimrod and Tammuz consisted of a divine trinity. Samiramis was considered the mother of the god Tammuz. What did the Christians do? They Christianized Samiramis and converted her into Mary the Mother of God. The Trinity is not scriptural but pagan. Ezekiel 8:12-18 describes a meeting of opostate woman worshiping The Babylonian Trinity of Tammuz. From the god Tammuz is where the Trinity derives. You are judging us for not believing a lie.

Your missing the point completely. It isn't so much about theological jargon or terminology but the truth which those terms communicate. Absolute Reality is not just a matter of personal opinion (whether we want to believe that God is Tri-Personal [i.e. Trinitarian] or Mono-Personal [i.e. Unitarian]) it is ABSOLUTE REALITY as it really exists, absolutely (whether anyone believes it or not).

I don't, for it derives from paganism. Scripture tells us not to immitate the pagans.

If (hypothetically speaking) I could convince everyone who doesn't know you personally (which, I guarantee, would be a lot more by comparrison than the few who do know you personally) that you are not in fact a human being (in spite of all appearance to the contrary) but actually a shaven ape (?!) would that then make you a shaven ape in reality or would you really be a human being?

Scripture plainly doesn't teach the trinity; there are some though that take God's manifestations to be different persons of his nature. If that's so, then God is much more then just tripersonal. If i take Revelation 4:5 and say that the Seven lamps of fire which are the seven Spirits of God should also be added to a divine Godhead that consists of many but remains one, i can say that. Does that make my argument valid? Ofcourse not!

Except that speech is incapable of incarnating (Jn.1:1,14)?! Only that which is essentially Personal is capable of incarnating as a personal creature or of pre-incarnationally theophanizing (as in the case of 'THE Angel of the LORD' which is the perfect description of the Son in relation to His Father since, contrary to popular opinion, an 'angel' is not just a 'messenger' (a heavenly postman?!) or something with which we adorn our Christmas trees, but rather, 'one doing the bidding of another' which is exactly how the Messiah always described Himself in relation to His Father).

Judeo-Christianity does not teach that the Word is 'a person who is separate and distanced from God'. Judeo-Christianity. in accordance with the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, teaches that 'In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God' (Jn.1:1) 'and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory of the One and Only' (Jn.1:14)

It is precisely because the Word is YHWH Himself and not an appendage to YHWH that the apostle John declares a) that the Word is YHWH (and therefore Personal, since YHWH is Personal) and b) that the Word has incarnated as a personal human creature made in the Mono-Personal likeness of His Tri-Personal Creator.

I agree with almost everything your saying, but am opposed to your last statement where you say that the word was made which he wasn't. The greek says ginomai which means became not that he was made. You also say he was made in the mono-personal likeness of his tripersonal creator. I think it is statements as these that has us going in different directions. The Word has no creator for he is the creator of all things.

The Messiah is NOT a separate Person or Entity to YHWH! The Messiah IS YHWH Himself, incarnate as a man - Emmanuel - YHWH with us.

I agree, you have just denied the Trinity by stating the above.

I have no idea from where you got your understanding of the Trinity but it certainly wasn't from Judeo-Christian orthodoxy.

I don't know what Trinity you are refering, in your previous statement you denied it unknowingly. You've become like one of us, a heretical. We are only considered Heretical's because we refuse to believe in the mother of the incarnate God Tammuz who is three in one with Nimrod and the child.

Still, if you choose to reject the truth in favour of your own intellectual idol then you are free to do so until such time as the Messiah Himself calls you to account for it.

Simonline.

Actually, i am not the one using intellect. It is you who is looking for hundreds of ways to defend your escatalogy. I am doing as the Jews in berea did, by putting your escatalogy to the biblical test. It is not passing it by the way, since you have utterly failed to show us from scripture where does it say God is Tripersonal or the Holy Trinity. Scripture doesn't even imply what you are proposing to us!

 

[Kris10leigh]

Simon and Yeshuamy, I color coded my message to easily quote you both in one message.

Simon,

I did not say that you personally were imbecilically arrogant.

I see what you're saying. I re-read it. Initially I took the "we" to be the arrogant "we" like "Well, aren't we snippy tonight?" Anyway, thanks for clarifying.

By declaring that no-one but God knows whether or not He is essentially Tri-Personal or Mono-Personal in Nature you are effectively declaring that the essential Nature of God is purely a matter of agnosticism (i.e. that no human can know either way with any degree of certainty)?!

Hmm...much as I hate to admit it, I see what you're saying here. By pure definition "agnostic" means believing the existance of a deity is unknown or unknowable. I guess for me, I KNOW God and Yeshua exist but the rest is up to faith. So I am definitely not agnostic in my belief in God, but perhaps my beliefs within mans' religious structure are agnostic in nature. I'm going to have to think on this...

If (hypothetically speaking) I could convince everyone who doesn't know you personally (which, I guarantee, would be a lot more by comparrison than the few who do know you personally) that you are not in fact a human being (in spite of all appearance to the contrary) but actually a shaven ape (?!) would that then make you a shaven ape in reality or would you really be a human being?

I believe you just made my point here. It doesn't really matter what we think about God because it does not change Him at all. He is what He is regardless of what we think.





Yeshuamy,

If God consists of three person, then he is limited to space and time and is not omnipresent. Your belief not only promotes a triad, that is three persons in a godhead. It is a deniel of God's omnipresence, and it confines him to time and space as if he were man Jeremiah 23:24; Kings 8:27; Deut 10:14; Matt 10:30; Proverbs 15:3; Psalms 68:33

I'm not disagreeing, but I don't understand how God as a triune God would be a denial of His omnipresence. Could you please elaborate?

From what i understand trinitarians believe the father makes up one third of the godhead, the son two thirds. This is confusing and unscriptural.

I THINK the belief is that God makes up 1/3, the son 1/3 and the Holy Spirt 1/3. And yes, I too think it is confusing and unscriptural.

Trinitarianism derives from paganism. The Roman Catholics bought the babylonian lie that Samiramis, Nimrod and Tammuz consisted of a divine trinity. Samiramis was considered the mother of the god Tammuz. What did the Christians do? They Christianized Samiramis and converted her into Mary the Mother of God. The Trinity is not scriptural but pagan. Ezekiel 8:12-18 describes a meeting of opostate woman worshiping The Babylonian Trinity of Tammuz. From the god Tammuz is where the Trinity derives. You are judging us for not believing a lie.

What a sad lie to have followed us through history.

I agree, you have just denied the Trinity by stating the above.

Yeshuamy, you said this to Simone but I don't understand what you mean. Do you remember what you meant?

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

Simon and Yeshuamy, I color coded my message to easily quote you both in one message.


I'm not disagreeing, but I don't understand how God as a triune God would be a denial of His omnipresence. Could you please elaborate?

Easy, think about it. If you say God needs to subdivid himself into different and separate deities, each of them being a person and or personal, then God is indeed a person, limited to time and space. Truth is that scripture never refers to God as a person or the first and second person of a Trinity. If God is a person then he is confined to space and time, he couldn't fill heaven and earth as Jeremiah 23:24 declares. The trinity is a deniel of God's Omnipresence, for a person can never fill heaven and earth for he is confined. Scripture says God is Spirit John 4:23; not man Num 23:19. When we see God as Spirit and not a person we can understand why scripture says the highest heaven cannot contain him 1Kings 8:27; Deut 10:14. Trinitarians want to make a person out of the logos, another person out of the holy spirit and another person out of God. This cannot be, for logos can never be understood as the second person of the Trinity but of what proceeds from the mouth of the almighty. The definiton is clear as i've provided before, which is exactly what logos is not what Trinitarians want us to believe.

I THINK the belief is that God makes up 1/3, the son 1/3 and the Holy Spirt 1/3. And yes, I too think it is confusing and unscriptural.

I which i underdstood them i little better but the fact is that i can't. Two days ago a Trinitarian said that what i believe is heretical, and it's called Nestorianism. Nestorianism is a doctrine that came about in the fifth century and it was probably out there much before. The belief is that the diety of Yeshua did not suffere but only his humanity. Nestorious believed that Mary could not be the mother of God for God is immortal. Further more, Nestorious also said that Jesus humanity died on the cross not his divinity. This of course was considered a heresy to christias for they feel it is heretical for God to have two natures. hence, they are under the assumption that when Jesus died the divinity also died. If the divinity died then we really have a problem 1 Timothy 6:16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever.

How is the divinity immortal and dwells in unapproachable light if he died in calvary? Unlike Nestorious, i believe the divinity suffered, but i don't believe it died for that would mean that the immortal died. Can i say that Nestorious was 100% wrong in his analysis? Absolutly not. I believe God can do as he wants when he wants. He cann manifest in 10,000 places at once; he knows the very hairs in our heads Matt 10:30. He knows all of our thoughts at once. He indeed acts plurally though a singular, so why should it be difficult for him to manifest as a mortal human born of a virgin whilest countinuing to be immortal none human Spirit simultaneously. God is to great to nailed in a box as trinitarians love to do. Ducklow is completely right when he says Trinitarians like to debate there Trinity with logic. When logic doesn't work for them, they want to take God out of a logical box by saying no one can comprehend God to the fullest. If this argument were true, then Trinitarians shouldn't be so judgemental towards others like unitarians ect. Since God cannot be understood to the fullest, then why do they call everyone that happens to disagree with there doctrine a heretical? I don't believe God is illogical, but neither do i believe that our logic is enough to comprehend him to the fullest. I believe he transcendes our logic because he is outside time and space while we are confined to time and space. But at least my argument remains the same always, that is God transcendes human logic period; im consistent, most trinitarians are not! Notice i said most, for there are many Trinitarians that are consistent and are not as judgemental as others!

What a sad lie to have followed us through history.

It's pityful, yet we are considered unsaved because we don't believe in this dogma.

Yeshuamy, you said this to Simone but I don't understand what you mean. Do you remember what you meant?

I don't have it with me right now, let me take a look.

The Messiah is NOT a separate Person or Entity to YHWH! The Messiah IS YHWH Himself, incarnate as a man - Emmanuel - YHWH with us.

Notice the above; he says the Messiah is not a separate person or entity to YHVH. What does that mean? No Trinity! For the Trinity is to profess that the Father is not the Son, and that the Son is not the Father, and that the Holy Spirit is not the Son nor Father, but they are an inseperable compound unity.

 

[Kris10leigh]

Easy, think about it. If you say God needs to subdivid himself into different and separate deities, each of them being a person and or personal, then God is indeed a person, limited to time and space.

Thank you! That makes perfect sense now.

a Trinitarian said that what i believe is heretical

Aren't you tired of hearing that?

Nestorious also said that Jesus humanity died on the cross not his divinity.

I have never given this a thought before. I have always believed that Yeshua is both divine and immortal. Or at least that His divinity is immortal. How can His divinity die? Otherwise, what is He now? He would not be a presence as God is, but merely a Ghost.

so why should it be difficult for him to manifest as a mortal human born of a virgin whilest countinuing to be immortal none human Spirit simultaneously.

Here is where you and I differ. We are told that Yeshua is the son of God. I agree that God COULD manifest as a mortal human born of a virgin. He manifested as man when He appeared to Jacob, and to others as you pointed out. I just believe that He didn't. His appearances to previous men were blips on the screen compared to His supposed appearance is Yeshua. No, I believe Yeshua was much more special than even that. And I agree that it is beyond human comprehension.

However, I am still considering what I believe on this issue. This very issue is what has led me strongly to study Yeshua as a Messianic. To be honest, I am the only one I have heard that believes as I do. (I can hear Simon's pulse raising as he reads Go ahead Simon! Let me have it!) But my point is that I have felt very God led throughout this journey and I am very persuedable if felt led to be. I have not felt led away from this belief I hold, nor have I found anything to contradict it.











It's pityful, yet we are considered unsaved because we don't believe in this dogma.

Notice the above; he says the Messiah is not a separate person or entity to YHVH. What does that mean? No Trinity! For the Trinity is to profess that the Father is not the Son, and that the Son is not the Father, and that the Holy Spirit is not the Son nor Father, but they are an inseperable compound unity.

I must be missing something. This is the opposite of what I believe. He says the Messiah is not a separate person or entity to God. That IS the trinitarian belief. They believe they are not separate, but one. I, however, believe that they ARE separate and NOT one. How do you personally view the relationship? Maybe that will help me understand where you are coming from? I believe Yeshua is the literal son of God, separate. I believe there are two beings, God and Yeshua and that the Holy Spirit IS God.

 

[Kris10leigh]

I've been thinking about this term. The term itself means not knowing whether or not God exists. I believe God exists! Where I differ is that I don't feel that any one man or any collection of men (ie. the writers of the Bible) could ever possibly fully understand the nature of God. How could we? That certainly simplifies Him, doesn't it? If we fully knew who God was, then God wouldn't be God. And there wouldn't be a million denominations and sub-denominations.

I believe the Bible is not inerrant and that the people who wrote it make mistakes. Yes, I believe it was inspired, but in the end it was man who wrote it.

I hope I never say the words "I'm right and you're wrong." If that makes me agnostic in someone's eyes, so be it I suppose. It's just semantics. God knows what I am.

 

[2ducklow]

Can't we all just get along?

 

[Simonline]

the message wasn't to you.

no comment

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

[hypostasis is also a forensic term, it means the blood in a dead body goes to the bottom of the d ead body.

No comment

Simonline.

 

[2ducklow]

Nothing could be further from the Truth. The idea that no-one but God Himself knows whether or not He is Tri-Personal or Mono-Personal in Nature is a lie. God, through the Word, has revealed Himself as Tri-Personal and He expects us to both uphold and proclaim that Truth to the world as something that is both Eternally and Immutably Absolute Reality. It is not up for discussion or debate (as if the majority opinion of sinful finite human creatures could change the very Nature of Absolute Reality (how imbecilically arrogant we are)?!)

And neither should you think that you can hide behind your culpable agnosticism either. Since YHWH has revealed Himself to Mankind He will hold to account any and all who refuse to believe the Truth of His own revelation about Himself.



If you wait until your Day of Judgment to get closure on the matter then you will be in catastrophic trouble form which there will be no escape. You can believe what you like about your rights but the truth is that the only thing to which you have a 'God-given' right is Divine Justice. Since YHWH has revealed Himself to us as essentially Tri-Personal in Nature and commands us to both believe and live by the Truth (i.e. that which is true) rather than our own personal preferences (i.e. that which is false) then, on our Day of Judgment, Divine Justice will be all that we can ever hope to expect for our willful disobedience in refusing to believe the Truth that Truth Himself has revealed (Jn.1:1,14; Jn.14:6; Jn.17:3, 17).

Simonline.

Do you ever tire of proving the trinity by saying those who don't believe it go to hell? Lets see how many times you can say "no comment'.

 

[2ducklow]

[/color][/size][/size][/color]

Trinitarianism will remain as orthodox Judeo-Christian doctrine just as Unitarianism remains as Judeo-Christian heresy.




Still, if you choose to reject the truth in favour of your own intellectual idol then you are free to do so until such time as the Messiah Himself calls you to account for it.

Simonline.

more proof of trinity by saying heretic and people who don't believe the trinity go to hell.

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

Thank you! That makes perfect sense now.

Your welcome.

Aren't you tired of hearing that?

To be honest with you, i haven't heard it much in CF, accept for a selected some who you would least expect it.

I have never given this a thought before. I have always believed that Yeshua is both divine and immortal.

Yeshua willingly gave his life, no one took it from him John 10:18. He is the way the truth and the life John 14:6.

Or at least that His divinity is immortal. How can His divinity die? Otherwise, what is He now? He would not be a presence as God is, but merely a Ghost.

He is a manifestation of the invisible God. God in all his power and glory is not comprehensible to our very limited minds. But in the visibleness of Mashiyach he is.

Here is where you and I differ. We are told that Yeshua is the son of God. I agree that God COULD manifest as a mortal human born of a virgin. He manifested as man when He appeared to Jacob, and to others as you pointed out. I just believe that He didn't. His appearances to previous men were blips on the screen compared to His supposed appearance is Yeshua. No, I believe Yeshua was much more special than even that. And I agree that it is beyond human comprehension.

Mashiyach was comletely human, so he was literally the Son of Miriam, hence the Son of God being that he is God's speech (Logos) become flesh. Remember that Mashiyach did not do everything as God but as man. He had to learn how to walk and speak, he wasn't born knowing this. It is why he can rightfully say as Hiliel once said, no one knows the day nor the hour, not the angels of heaven but my Father only Matt 24:36. Moreover, Mashiyach prayed, this he did as man for there is no need for God to pray nor submite his will to anyone. Everything Mashiyach did he did as man, for he was man.

However, I am still considering what I believe on this issue. This very issue is what has led me strongly to study Yeshua as a Messianic. To be honest, I am the only one I have heard that believes as I do.

I don't understand; what would you consider so strange about your beliefs?

(I can hear Simon's pulse raising as he reads Go ahead Simon! Let me have it!) But my point is that I have felt very God led throughout this journey and I am very persuedable if felt led to be. I have not felt led away from this belief I hold, nor have I found anything to contradict it.

Ok, post the most crucial points that you remember from the top of your mind so we can dicuss them. If you'd like, post all of them. I will happily discuss them with you!

I must be missing something. This is the opposite of what I believe. He says the Messiah is not a separate person or entity to God. That IS the trinitarian belief. They believe they are not separate, but one. I, however, believe that they ARE separate and NOT one. How do you personally view the relationship? Maybe that will help me understand where you are coming from? I believe Yeshua is the literal son of God, separate. I believe there are two beings, God and Yeshua and that the Holy Spirit IS God.

My View derives from the meanings of Dabar, Memera and Logos which is translated Word. It is virtually impossible for God's word to be someone other then himself or he would be speechless througout scripture. Remember Genesis chapter 1 and how God proclaims things into existence through his word (Dabar). It is not possible for that word to be a distinct entity as Trinitarians assert.

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

I've been thinking about this term. The term itself means not knowing whether or not God exists. I believe God exists! Where I differ is that I don't feel that any one man or any collection of men (ie. the writers of the Bible) could ever possibly fully understand the nature of God.

I agree. I don't believe the authors of scripture focused on discussing the nature of God as much as Trinitarians do today. Why? Because they were Jewish not greek philosophers. It is the christians that rejoice in condemning others because they don't adhere to there philosophies and dogmas.

How could we? That certainly simplifies Him, doesn't it? If we fully knew who God was, then God wouldn't be God. And there wouldn't be a million denominations and sub-denominations.

You are correct, God would be a figure we created not the creator. If God could be explained by human philosophies, human logic and human reasoning, then human logic, human reasoning and human philosophies created him.

I believe the Bible is not inerrant and that the people who wrote it make mistakes. Yes, I believe it was inspired, but in the end it was man who wrote it.

Actually Scripture is inerrant. The reason is because these men were lead by God's Spirit and God's Spirit convicts of errors it does not lead men unto errors. Historically we can prove that the Torah has remained virgin. The New Testament has been tempered with a bit; we only have the copies of the copies of the copies in greek, we don't have the originals. Though i believe that all this information will appear, it still remains unfound. I believe men can actually add to scripture and diminish if he feels like it, that is why we have prohibitions against doing so > Deut 4:2; Deut 12:32; Rev 22:18-19. But the Torah remains being the same, whether men add or take away from it.

I hope I never say the words "I'm right and you're wrong." If that makes me agnostic in someone's eyes, so be it I suppose. It's just semantics. God knows what I am.

Let them speak. Those words cannot faze you for the Lord almighty blesses whom are his, and no ones vain words and curses of men can touch them.

 

[Kris10leigh]

The part about my belief that no one else seems to hold to is that Yeshua is the son of God, literally. Everyone else says that Yeshua is a manifestation of God. That's what I do not understand or believe. And words made flesh? That does not make logical sense to me.

 

[2ducklow]

The part about my belief that no one else seems to hold to is that Yeshua is the son of God, literally. Everyone else says that Yeshua is a manifestation of God. That's what I do not understand or believe. And words made flesh? That does not make logical sense to me.

Jesus is the literal son of god because God created human male seed to fertilize Mary's egg with. God does not have male spirit genitalia that he procreates with. God didn't begat a half spirit and half man Jesus. Jesus is 100 percent human, and has DNA just like any man, half from his mother and half from God who created the HUMan male DNA that resulted in 100 percent human Jesus. not half man.

Jesus is the literal son of God as a result of God creating human male seed just as much as any man whose body creates human male seed. Both place their seed in the appropriate place to fertilize a female egg. thus both are equally Fathers. You say Jesus is divine because his Father is God, and human cause Mary is human, but God is spirit, so if Jesus is a descendant and offspring of spirit then he is not 100 percent human but 50 percent spirit and 50 percent human.

Jeremiah 31:22 How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the LORD hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man.

this is the literal translation of Jer. 31.22, if you look at a number of other translations you will find they all have mistranslated it various ways, some unbelieveable such as,

(BBE) Jeremiah 31:22 How long will you go on turning this way and that, O wandering daughter? for the Lord has made a new thing on the earth, a woman changed into a man.

the KJV translates it literally, look up the def of the Greek words that it translates and you will find it is the only one that is faithful in translating Jer. 31.22

Jeremiah 31:22 How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the LORD hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man.

God created something new, human male seed, he used it to enable a woman (Mary) to go around (the Greek word here literally means go around, not encompass or change, or whatever, but go around.) a man, Go around a man for what? to conceive with the new creation of course, jer. 31.22 is a messianic prophecy, it is the only interpretation that holds water with the literal reading of the verse.