the Trinity

[JonF]

. Jesus never said He was also God.

Jesus being God is only mentioned a few times in the bible:

Isaiah 9:6
John 1:1-15, 8:58, 10:30, 10:33
Phil 2:6
Rom 9:5
Cols 1:15-20, 2:9
Titus 2:13
Heb 1:8
2 Peter 1:1

 

[GenemZ]

and those ideals and thoughts come from someone 'thinking they have great wisdom in discering real meaning of scriptures'...God wants childlike, not theologians who prove depth of thought and interpretation. I will say this....God did not say...'This is Me in whom I am well pleased'...Jesus did not say, 'I am really God the Father too but as human I'm leaving that to my split personality in heaven'

I am convicted to say something on this thread.
I do believe in the Trinity...God is supreme, Jesus is His Son under Him and in authority of the earth, Holy Spirit is the 'in his likeness' part that is One in us as believers. He is the part of them that leads, comforts and counsels. Does that cause you to put your swords and stones down, or does that cause more contention?

God the Son had his soul in union with Deity before the incarnation took place. He was the Lord God of Israel.

Isaiah 1:13-14a (New International Version)
"Stop bringing meaningless offerings!
Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations— I cannot bear your evil assemblies.


Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts my soul hates."​

God is not soul.. God is Spirit.

Yet? God speaks to Israel saying he has a soul.



The Soul of God was the pre-incarnate Son of God speaking! Union of Deity and soul.




That is why Jesus could say......

​

​

John 8:58 (New International Version)
"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"



​

Jesus was that same soul that the Lord of Israel spoke about possessing when presenting Himself in the past to the Jews as the God of Israel..

Now.... here is is once more! With more context to reveal with certainty who's soul is speaking.

Isaiah 1:14-15 (New International Version)
Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts
my soul hates.
They have become a burden to me;
I am weary of bearing them. When you spread out your hands in prayer,
I will hide my eyes from you;
even if you offer many prayers,
I will not listen.
Your hands are full of blood."


​

Only God can be the one to say he will not listen to prayers. That was the soul of God speaking. The same soul who later entered Jesus at the incarnation!



Jesus said, God's essence is not soul.


​

John 4:24 (New International Version)
"God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."​

God's essence is spirit!

Jesus' soul was living eternally in union with Deity, existing BEFORE Abraham was born!




Some will get what I say...



​

In Christ, GeneZ
​

​

 

[Alchemist]

Hi skywatching ,

Why do people insist that the Trinity is a true doctrine? I just don't see why or where it came from. Jesus never said He was also God.

It is true that he never comes out and says it explicitly (eg. "I am God") but there are many passages in which he equates himself with God; I can get you references if you wish.

He calls God 'Father' and often went into seclusion to pray...why would he pray 'to Himself?"

Because of the Trinity . The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not all the same. They are three persons in the one Godhead of God Himself. Hence, for the Son to pray to the Father makes sense. Also, associated with Trinitarian doctrine (but not the same!) is the doctrine that Jesus was both God and man; he has two natures. In this light, for Jesus as man to pray to God is not unusual at all.

I have heard this my whole life but I just can't equate Jesus with God....The HS is the Spirit that God gifts to his true followers so that I have no prob with. I just can not believe that Jesus and God are one and the same...

Well, we must be careful here... the Trinity does not equate Jesus with God. This is definitely wrong. It just says that Jesus is one of the three persons of God, namely the Son. This does not mean that God is divided up, and there are three Gods, or that God switches between three "modes" of existance, and that Jesus is one of them, but Jesus is not the entire Godhead, only the Son. Likewise with the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is one of the three persons of God; He is not just something that God sends, but part of God himself.

...just part of God that took human form....

And that is true . Only the Son took human form, not the Father nor the Holy Spirit!

I think the early century churches wanted to implement this and there is no true basis for it.

Actually, many of the early century churches did not want to implement it at all; nearly all of the early so-called "heresies" in the Church involved questions about the nature of Christ, and the nature of God. However, do you really think that God will let false things be taught about him so long, uncontested? After-all, following the Arian heresy in the 4th century, Trinitarian theology became well-established, and until around the 17th century non-Trinitarian Christianity was pretty much completely unheard of. That's 1300 years. Yes, humans are fallible. Yes, we are sinners. But when the Jews before Christ erred for less than a moment, God sent prophets and messengers to guide them, and they didn't even have the Holy Spirit like we do!

So yes, it is hard to understand the Trinity, and sometimes it is hard to see where it comes from. But the Bible certainly does not contradict it, as many people will try and convince you. And one has to wonder if, if the Trinity is really false, why God wouldn't do anything about it.

Why do you beleive it?[/quote]
I guess, because I believe in the Holy Spirit, and the 2000 years of Christian people guided by the Him!

Peace,
Nick

 

[JonF]

Genez I see you assert a lot of statements but back few of them up with any sort of evidence…

 

[JonF]

sky I suggest you read up on modalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txn/monarchi.htm

 

[Gwenyfur]

John 14:10-12 KJV

10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. 12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.


John 10:30
I and my Father are one.

 

[Fireinfolding]

sky I suggest you read up on modalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism
[URL]http://mb-soft.com/believe/txn/monarchi.htm[/URL]

Mental gynasticisms

Id say stick to scripture and not dig into every man created ism out there.

Why do people think its either a sin to know in part (which it isnt) or that ALL knowledge in itself is perfect?

Half the stuff men call evil seems very strange to me. Who makes up these ISM names categorizing men under them? It sounds like technicalities and trifles over words. What does any of these sorts of things have to do with loving God and your neighbor as yourself?

Wrangling over half these things makes me think of what has long been corrupted from the simplicity in Christ. It appears as nothing more then manmade confusion and over technical religious jargon having nothing to do with the Spirit of life in Christ. It sure appears (at least to me) like overintellectual diversions away from the truth Himself.

Like a big ol' tangly web of cofusing men slather to slop men with.

What is with these weird ISM hang ups to hang men with? Some of these sorts of things just appear as strifes over stupid words wherby one overexamines (and faultfinds) others for word gliches.

Is there actually an "ISM central" where a bunch of intellectually bored religious men sit around looking for word errors such as these?

Peace

Fireinfolding

 

[NewToLife]

Mental gynasticisms

Id say stick to scripture and not dig into every man created ism out there.

Why do people think its either a sin to know in part (which it isnt) or that ALL knowledge in itself is perfect?

Half the stuff men call evil seems very strange to me. Who makes up these ISM names categorizing men under them? It sounds like technicalities and trifles over words. What does any of these sorts of things have to do with loving God and your neighbor as yourself?

Wrangling over half these things makes me think of what has long been corrupted from the simplicity in Christ. It appears as nothing more then manmade confusion and over technical religious jargon having nothing to do with the Spirit of life in Christ. It sure appears (at least to me) like overintellectual diversions away from the truth Himself.

Like a big ol' tangly web of cofusing men slather to slop men with.

What is with these weird ISM hang ups to hang men with? Some of these sorts of things just appear as strifes over stupid words wherby one overexamines (and faultfinds) others for word gliches.

Is there actually an "ISM central" where a bunch of intellectually bored religious men sit around looking for word errors such as these?

Peace

Fireinfolding

I can see where you are coming from. That said, once you look closer it becomes quite clear that most heresies do in fact have practical effects, they may seem like quibbling but they generally are not.

 

[Oblio]

Id say stick to scripture and not dig into every man created ism out there.

There are many here that 'stick to Scriptures' that are following in the footsteps of heretics, rather than that of Christ.

 

[boodle]

i have access to any encyclopedia or goggle paper just as anyone, I only want Biblical reasons why I should believe Jesus is equal to God in diety because based on the first bit of that post, it came from other sources than the Bible which is what I am getting at...thanks!

In your original post, you mentioned that you thought the trinity was made up. That was the reason I posted the article on Trinity History. (did not mean to post it twice) Secondly, although I quoted several well know historians the paper is original and not coppied from google.
Thirdly you are asking trinitarians to pove something that is not really mentioned in scripture at all. There are no such words as Triune God, Three in one. Trinity, God the son, God the Holy Spirit, Co-equal persons of God ect. How can they prove something that does not exist. Since it is the trinitarians that pull in extra biblical terms and metaphysical concepts, it is their problem to attempt to prove that their doctrine exists.

 

[StevenL]

It's funny to watch little religious cartoon people hurl "heretic" daggers.

Maybe their bosses will let them start burning and torturing "heretics" again one day. That'll be entertaining.

 

[E.C.]

There are many here that 'stick to Scriptures' that are following in the footsteps of heretics, rather than that of Christ.

So true.

Arius and Nestorius both claimed to "stick to Scriptures". Those are just two of the notorious... heretics (can we still say that here?)

 

[boodle]

Let me see if I can illustrate the dishonesty to which one must stoop to prove a doctrine that is not in scripture.

Logos or “word” in John 1
The Greek word logos has a very clear definition and is used over 350 times in scripture. The definition is a statement, Speech or expressed idea. Even those bible dictionaries that have Trinitarian bent will state that this is the primary definition. One of the most basic fundamentals of honest bible interpretation is that you always use the primary definition of a word unless there is very clear evidence to use another. (proving a doctrine is not reason enough)
In all but 6 to 8 verses Trinitarians interpret the term “logos” or word as a statement, speech or expressed idea. Yet in these few verses they use another definition. By what authority, other then a dishonest attempt to prove a doctrine, do they do this? It is very simple --- There is no clear proof of the doctrine so things must be forced to even give an illusion of backing to the doctrine. By forcing the term logos to literally mean Jesus in these few verses they attempt to prove the trinity. If logos did literally mean Jesus then it would have to do so in the majority of scripture. This is not the case.

Scripture was written so that the common man could understand it. When John wrote his gospel, God used the language and concepts common in the larger Greek world that the gospel was then reaching. Although written in Greek the author still conveyed very Hebrew concepts through the use of the word Logos. A revealing of God as in the burning bush, the shikhania glory ect. The common usage of the term “logos’ was defined as I mentioned above and should be understood in that way.

Curiously enough there are dozens of verses that clearly say that Jesus is a man using the term “antrhropos” which can only mean human. (and I am not talking about some hybrid 100% god 100% man nonsense)

To simply explain John 1. God made a statement in the same way I would make a statement by giving my wife flowers. Something is being said by that action. Yahweh made it very clear that this was perfected humanity. The last Adam. The “man” whom God appointed to judge and rule the Earth.
Acts 17:31
because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man (anthropos - human) whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
God had the idea of perfected humanity from the beginning. This is His overall plan. His idea/plan became flesh. It came to fruition. Jesus is the pivotal point of all of God’s creation. He is that which makes the entire plan work. He is the first fruits and the first to accomplish what God started to do with the first Adam. Because of this, Jesus is our example and the one we are to become like. 1 Peter 2:21
[ Christ Is Our Example ] For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, Any augmentation of Jesus’ full and complete humanity make this comparison impossible. If Jesus is God OR fully God and fully man then He cannot be a true example for us. We can never be sure that the things he did are for us too. This includes His overcoming sin, healing, relationship with God or even His resurrection. How can Jesus’ resurrection be an example or hope for me if what was resurrected lived and existed as something other then completely human. As is stated in the above selected verse, God furnished proof to the rest of humanity (us) by raising this human (Jesus) from the dead.

 

[armyman_83]

There are many here that 'stick to Scriptures' that are following in the footsteps of heretics, rather than that of Christ.

But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
--Acts 24:14

 

[boodle]

It's funny to watch little religious cartoon people hurl "heretic" daggers.

Maybe their bosses will let them start burning and torturing "heretics" again one day. That'll be entertaining.

Yes it is, especially since thiose throwing those daggers have their precious doctrine originating from a Pagan sun worshipper named constantine who forced the "same substance" concept onto the church by virtue of the Roman Empire's might.

I can see it now ----
Come on down folks. You too can light a fire for religious piety. Follow in the footsteps of such greats as Caligula and Nero. You can kill your enemies in the name of God. Isn't that what Jesus taught?

 

[skywatching]

In your original post, you mentioned that you thought the trinity was made up. That was the reason I posted the article on Trinity History. (did not mean to post it twice) Secondly, although I quoted several well know historians the paper is original and not coppied from google.
Thirdly you are asking trinitarians to pove something that is not really mentioned in scripture at all. There are no such words as Triune God, Three in one. Trinity, God the son, God the Holy Spirit, Co-equal persons of God ect. How can they prove something that does not exist. Since it is the trinitarians that pull in extra biblical terms and metaphysical concepts, it is their problem to attempt to prove that their doctrine exists.

yea i wasnt being ugly about that...I just have a.d.d. when i see lots of text like that...hehe. I did wrangle through most of it and appreciate the imput. I really didn't mean to sound like it was made up but that men always try to put a deeper meaning or spin on fundamental things.

 

[E.C.]

Yes it is, especially since thiose throwing those daggers have their precious doctrine originating from a Pagan sun worshipper named constantine who forced the "same substance" concept onto the church by virtue of the Roman Empire's might.

And what basis do you have for this? What source claims this?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Yes it is, especially since thiose throwing those daggers have their precious doctrine originating from a Pagan sun worshipper named constantine who forced the "same substance" concept onto the church by virtue of the Roman Empire's might.

Tertullian.

 

[BigNorsk]

Let me see if I can illustrate the dishonesty to which one must stoop to prove a doctrine that is not in scripture.

Logos or “word” in John 1
The Greek word logos has a very clear definition and is used over 350 times in scripture. The definition is a statement, Speech or expressed idea. Even those bible dictionaries that have Trinitarian bent will state that this is the primary definition. One of the most basic fundamentals of honest bible interpretation is that you always use the primary definition of a word unless there is very clear evidence to use another. (proving a doctrine is not reason enough)
In all but 6 to 8 verses Trinitarians interpret the term “logos” or word as a statement, speech or expressed idea. Yet in these few verses they use another definition. By what authority, other then a dishonest attempt to prove a doctrine, do they do this? It is very simple --- There is no clear proof of the doctrine so things must be forced to even give an illusion of backing to the doctrine. By forcing the term logos to literally mean Jesus in these few verses they attempt to prove the trinity. If logos did literally mean Jesus then it would have to do so in the majority of scripture. This is not the case.

Scripture was written so that the common man could understand it. When John wrote his gospel, God used the language and concepts common in the larger Greek world that the gospel was then reaching. Although written in Greek the author still conveyed very Hebrew concepts through the use of the word Logos. A revealing of God as in the burning bush, the shikhania glory ect. The common usage of the term “logos’ was defined as I mentioned above and should be understood in that way.

Curiously enough there are dozens of verses that clearly say that Jesus is a man using the term “antrhropos” which can only mean human. (and I am not talking about some hybrid 100% god 100% man nonsense)

To simply explain John 1. God made a statement in the same way I would make a statement by giving my wife flowers. Something is being said by that action. Yahweh made it very clear that this was perfected humanity. The last Adam. The “man” whom God appointed to judge and rule the Earth.
Acts 17:31
because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man (anthropos - human) whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
God had the idea of perfected humanity from the beginning. This is His overall plan. His idea/plan became flesh. It came to fruition. Jesus is the pivotal point of all of God’s creation. He is that which makes the entire plan work. He is the first fruits and the first to accomplish what God started to do with the first Adam. Because of this, Jesus is our example and the one we are to become like. 1 Peter 2:21
[ Christ Is Our Example ] For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, Any augmentation of Jesus’ full and complete humanity make this comparison impossible. If Jesus is God OR fully God and fully man then He cannot be a true example for us. We can never be sure that the things he did are for us too. This includes His overcoming sin, healing, relationship with God or even His resurrection. How can Jesus’ resurrection be an example or hope for me if what was resurrected lived and existed as something other then completely human. As is stated in the above selected verse, God furnished proof to the rest of humanity (us) by raising this human (Jesus) from the dead.

It isn't a forced interpretation. It's simply accepting the passage as it is written. The passage does not end with verse 1.

Joh 1:14-18 NET.
(14) Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory — the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.
(15) John testified about him and shouted out, "This one was the one about whom I said, 'He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.' "
(16) For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another.
(17) For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ.
(18) No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.

As you can see, the Word is Jesus. Just as it was in verse 1. It's not a forced interpretation to back up a man made doctrine. The doctrine came from the study of scripture, if you don't see it, maybe the problem isn't that it is made up, maybe you just need some more study time.

Frankly I have trouble believing you've spent much time at it if you didn't even read the first chapter of John to see the clear reference that the Word is Jesus.

Marv

 

[]RiSeN[]

Let me see if I can illustrate the dishonesty to which one must stoop to prove a doctrine that is not in scripture.

Logos or “word” in John 1
The Greek word logos has a very clear definition and is used over 350 times in scripture. The definition is a statement, Speech or expressed idea. Even those bible dictionaries that have Trinitarian bent will state that this is the primary definition. One of the most basic fundamentals of honest bible interpretation is that you always use the primary definition of a word unless there is very clear evidence to use another. (proving a doctrine is not reason enough)
In all but 6 to 8 verses Trinitarians interpret the term “logos” or word as a statement, speech or expressed idea. Yet in these few verses they use another definition. By what authority, other then a dishonest attempt to prove a doctrine, do they do this? It is very simple --- There is no clear proof of the doctrine so things must be forced to even give an illusion of backing to the doctrine. By forcing the term logos to literally mean Jesus in these few verses they attempt to prove the trinity. If logos did literally mean Jesus then it would have to do so in the majority of scripture. This is not the case.

Scripture was written so that the common man could understand it. When John wrote his gospel, God used the language and concepts common in the larger Greek world that the gospel was then reaching. Although written in Greek the author still conveyed very Hebrew concepts through the use of the word Logos. A revealing of God as in the burning bush, the shikhania glory ect. The common usage of the term “logos’ was defined as I mentioned above and should be understood in that way.

Curiously enough there are dozens of verses that clearly say that Jesus is a man using the term “antrhropos” which can only mean human. (and I am not talking about some hybrid 100% god 100% man nonsense)

To simply explain John 1. God made a statement in the same way I would make a statement by giving my wife flowers. Something is being said by that action. Yahweh made it very clear that this was perfected humanity. The last Adam. The “man” whom God appointed to judge and rule the Earth.
Acts 17:31
because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man (anthropos - human) whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
God had the idea of perfected humanity from the beginning. This is His overall plan. His idea/plan became flesh. It came to fruition. Jesus is the pivotal point of all of God’s creation. He is that which makes the entire plan work. He is the first fruits and the first to accomplish what God started to do with the first Adam. Because of this, Jesus is our example and the one we are to become like. 1 Peter 2:21
[ Christ Is Our Example ] For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, Any augmentation of Jesus’ full and complete humanity make this comparison impossible. If Jesus is God OR fully God and fully man then He cannot be a true example for us. We can never be sure that the things he did are for us too. This includes His overcoming sin, healing, relationship with God or even His resurrection. How can Jesus’ resurrection be an example or hope for me if what was resurrected lived and existed as something other then completely human. As is stated in the above selected verse, God furnished proof to the rest of humanity (us) by raising this human (Jesus) from the dead.

Truth is so sexy.