I also quoted a fair amount of Scripture to you and you refused to see it or respond top it. Again, if you believe there are no contradictions in Scripture, explain what is happening with 2 Sam. 21:19.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What do you mean by "Trinity"?
- Thread starter BobRyan
- Start date
I think you will find most Christians are going to say your deceiver God is a huge fabrication.
Upvote
0
I didn't dismiss any Scriptures. What I did was present you with one that has a major contradiction and ask you to show how you could explain it away, which you have yet to do.
Upvote
0
Robert Lindstrom
Member
When one looks at the Word of God in the natural, it brings death to him or her.
2Co_3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
There is only one place in the Word of God that the trinity doctrine fits in.
Rev 16:13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
Rev 16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
Three spirits, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost.
We have the Dragon which is the false Father.
We have the Beast which is the false Son of God.
We have the false prophet which is the false Holy Ghost.
The image of the beast is like the false Son of God.
A true One God believer would catch that and believe that the Son of God was in the image of the Father.
But we have the Son of God in the image of the Beast and not the Father of Glory.
It is like saying that the Son of God is in the image of God the Son, not in the image of the Father.
God the Son did not take upon a body of flesh and blood and come down here to die for your sins.
The Father of Glory did that.
JESUS said: If you believe NOT that I am HE (the Father ) you will die in your sins.
Joh 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Joh 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
It can't get no plainer than that. Philip wants to see the Father.
Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
If we see JESUS, we see the Father.
If anyone says that there are three persons in heaven but one Spirit, well we got a psychopathic God with three different personalities coming out of His Spirit. That God needs help big time. We would all be running around then with three different personalities since we are all made in His image.
There is only One Spirit of God but many functions of the Spirit.
The Father is the Administrative office of the Spirit of God. The Father of all spirits.
The Word is the Expression office of the Spirit of God. That is how God expresses Himself, by His Word.
The Holy Ghost is the Power office of God.
Act_1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
Son of Man is the Kingdom office. JESUS was not the Son of any man.
UPC's believe that JESUS was the Son of a man. God on His Father's side and man on his mother's side, therefore the God-man.
Joh_3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
JESUS was saying this in John 3:13 while in shoe leather. Even the Son of Man which IS in heaven.
He would have to be omni=present to be in heaven and on the earth at the same time.
JESUS is not the God-man either. He is God manifest in a body of flesh and blood like one of us.
Nor is He the Son of God manifest in flesh.
Joh_17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
Why didn't JESUS ask to be glorified back the glory of the Son of God?
Php_2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
"No it is to the glory of God the Son." NO He is glorified back to God's own self.
1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
God was manifest in the flesh.
God was justified in the Spirit.
God was seen of angels.
God was believed on in the world.
God was received up into glory.
"No, the Son of God was." No, God was! There is only One God. One Lord, One Spirit. JESUS is the Lord Jehovah God Almighty!
Question-Why didn't JESUS work any miracles before the age of thirty?
Upvote
0
Yes, I agree. God is one mind, one personality, not three. Saying that there are three subjectivities within the Godhead is simply tritheism.
Upvote
0
I covered all that. But you obviously do not regard the scriptures or God's authority over them...so I think we're done here.
Upvote
0
This is what I was replying to:
But, no...I did explain it, quite thoroughly:
All language (including the scriptures) has been confused by God - for our own good, I might add. Of course, you and Colter and hedrick were all quick to add your own conjecture against multiple points of scripture, with your end argument being that the scriptures are flawed and even out of God's control. Which is not greatly different that what I too have been saying - and this is the critical difference - except that I have been the only one defending the scriptures as they are, as a part of God's overall plan.
You also argue that God could not be such a deceiver to employ confusion...when history has already given precedence in His dealings with Israel. So...I maintain...they misunderstood and denied the whole thing...and now you do the same.
Upvote
0
Look, there are many interpretations of Scripture. Two basic ones are found in Catholicism and Protestantism. In Catholicism, the Bible was viewed as a dangerous book. If teh laity read it, they would go crazy and damn themselves. Therefore, God empowered the church as the sole agency to teach and interpret Scripture properly. Therefore, it was illegal for laity to own copies of the Bible. The Protestant Reformation took the opposite approach. God spoke clearly, plainly, directly, and in language the common folk can understand. Therefore teh reprobate and the Devil have clearly heard God and know what he wants. Therefore, they cannot plead ignorance or confusion. Therefore, they are without excuse. Even those who have never heard the Bible are without excuse, as God cleraly and plainly revealed himself in nature. The situation with Pharaoh was that he and God got into a you-know-what competition. Therefore, the minute God let him know whose boss and put him in his place, he began resisting with all his might. The situation with the languages was that God wanted to stop humans from all getting together in some big conspiracy to work their way up to Heaven in rebellion. By having them speak separate languages, they would be unable to gang up together in such conspiracies. The Reformers admitted there were confusing passages in Scripture . However, not to worry. These could be interpreted by referring them back to ones much easier to understand. Bottom line: If you would have been in Calvin's Geneva, he would have had you brunt at the stake. While I don't agree with burnings, I can well understand why Calvin would feel the way he did with you.
Upvote
0
Not in this case, however. Christians never have and never will believe in some sort of deceiver God. A deceiver is evil, the Devil.
Upvote
0
Speak for yourself. I am perfectly happy to continue. But if you are out of puff, you are out of puff. I am still waiting for you to explain away the contradiction in 2 Sam. 21:19. You say you have real spiritual discernment. So how about sharing this discernment and explaining the situation there?
Upvote
0
Colter
Member
That still doesn't explain anything, it merely makes an accusation against God in order to save your own pride. The Hebrew priest made no claim of divine inspiration when they created the pseudo biographical creation story in response to the scattering and loss of their national identity. Upon the return, later generations of church government would make the claim of inspiration to buttress their authority.
Upvote
0
I believe in Father, Son and Holy Spirit but I do not believe in 3 Persons within God that are different from each other but at the same time God. I believe that The Father is God, The Son is the Father's Word/Intellect become Flesh and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit/Power of God.
God bless
God bless
Upvote
0
That might be true if it were I who speaks, but if it is the Holy Spirit whom speaks, as the scriptures say - then it is you who speak against God.
All authority belongs to God, whom also has providence over all people, their words, writings, and acts, according to His will. You seem to accredit Him with very little, I accredit Him with all.
Upvote
0
- Apr 30, 2013
- 33,391
- 20,701
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- United Ch. of Christ
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
The persons of the Trinity are not separated or divided. No orthodox theologian of the early or medieval church claimed that. Distinction is not the same as separation.
The east certainly doesn't think of the Trinity as a monad. I'm less well versed in western Trinitarianism.
The east certainly doesn't think of the Trinity as a monad. I'm less well versed in western Trinitarianism.
Upvote
0
I beg to disagree about the East. Yes, it did view God as a monad, that is, a simple, wholly immutable, self-sufficient, nonrelational being.
Yes, distinction does mean separation. Each member of teh Trinity was assigned a different task. The Father is, for example, the Boss of bosses. The Son and Spirit appear as lesser beings who carry out his bidding. Also, there is no way to affirm differences, save though some form of separation, though false dichotomies can be set up.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
