Trinity

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wil

Namaste Dream,

Nice job, do you suppose you could do this again next week with the next 15 pages?

I wonder what percentage of Christians are Trinitarians, which are non trinitarians and which would like to avoid the issue and love G!d and their neighbor?

97

[mee]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

No, you slam Trinitarians and promote your own belief. You do not discuss anything. That is not what CR is for Mee.

some people regard bible truth that is promoted ,as slamming others .

but some people see it as the truth promoted .

promoting bible truth in a christian forum seems ok to mee after all the bible is the aurthority .


or are you saying that because i do not agree with you about the trinity i should not make it known ?


many people do not agree with what i promote even though it is inline with the bible, but i do not complain about it they are free to have their say are they not ?

[mee]

First of all, the words "trinity," "triune," "God-man," "first person," "second person," "third person," "three persons," do not appear anywhere in the inspired text of either Catholic or Protestant Bibles.

Nowhere in the Bible do we find terms such as "God the Son," or "God the Holy Spirit," but rather we read "the Son of God," "the spirit of God," or just "holy spirit."

Nowhere in Scripture is God revealed as three persons, but always as one God.

Now if the very words that are necessary to express the doctrine of the trinity do not appear in the Holy Scriptures, how can we suppose the doctrine to be found or taught therein? Impossible.

[mee]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Indeed — a Gift of the Holy Spirit:
"And unto all nations the gospel must first be preached.

Thomas

and indeed it was ,and is being made known
matthew 28;19-20 matthew 24;14 no mention of the manmade trinity doctrine at all

[mee]

Originally Posted by Dream

I'm curious to JW's why do they think Jesus was crucified? To my understanding of the Bible, Jesus claimed to be God, and was killed for blasphemy.

please show me in the bible where Jesus claimed to be God ?

to my understanding of the bible he never claimed to be God ,even though others wrongly claimed that he was.
just because others (the jews)thought he was claiming to be God ,does not mean that those others were correct in their thinking . many people think many things but not always according to accurate knowledge .



do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, I am God’s Son? JOHN 10;36



Yes, as we can see from the bible, Jesus never ever claimed to be equal to his father .


YOU heard that I said to YOU, I am going away and I am coming [back] to YOU. If YOU loved me, YOU would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.
JOHN 14;28

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by mee

please show me in the bible where Jesus claimed to be God?

Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

Matthew 11:29 "Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: And you shall find rest to your souls."

Matthew 16:15-17 "Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven."

Matthew 26:63-65 "... And the high priest said to him: I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us if thou be the Christ the Son of God. Jesus saith to him: Thou hast said it. Nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his garments, saying: He hath blasphemed: What further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now you have heard the blasphemy."

Matthew 28:18 "And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth."

Matthew 28:20 "And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."

It's all there, Mee ... whether you choose to see it, or 'interpret it away' according to the doctrines of men, is another matter ...

Originally Posted by mee

to my understanding of the bible he never claimed to be God ,even though others wrongly claimed that he was.

Then I suggest your teachers were at fault.

Originally Posted by mee

just because others (the jews)thought he was claiming to be God ,does not mean that those others were correct in their thinking . many people think many things but not always according to accurate knowledge.

Are you suggesting that Jesus was too polite to point out the error, and thought it better to be executed than to embarrass His accusers?

Originally Posted by mee

"do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, I am God’s Son?" JOHN 10;36 — Yes, as we can see from the bible, Jesus never ever claimed to be equal to his father.

No, you've made the common mistake of quoting out of context ... read the verse that follows:
"If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in the Father."
So Jesus is saying, if I do my Father's work, believe in me, and if you cannot bring yourselves to believe in me, at least believe in the One who sent me, but if you believe in the works, then you will come to know that no man can do the Father's work, except the Son, because Father and Son are One.

As it stands, you believe in the works, but not the one who does the work ... you believe in the Father, but reject the Son ... and in so doing, reject the Father, too:

John 6:44 "No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him. And I will raise him up in the last day."

Matthew 11:27 "All things are delivered to me by my Father ..."

'all things', Mee, includes you and I.

"And no one knoweth the Son but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him."

Thomas

[Dream]

John 10:36
Jesus is probably being accused of blasphemy under the directions that are repeated in Deuteronomy.

Deuteronomy 18
18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
19 And whoever will not give heed to my words which he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.
20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.'
21 And if you say in your heart, `How may we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?' --
22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him.

The main thing is that Trinity relies upon church tradition and is not found by itself in the letters and gospels. The accusation of blasphemy in John 10 was actually an accusation of false teaching -- or teaching contrary to Moses. The way that Jesus said he was God, was merely a claim to be the next prophet like Moses. This relates to the fact that saying anything against what Moses said is the scriptural definition of 'Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit'. Jesus baptized in the Holy Spirit, just like Moses did. If Jesus' point was really to claim to be a God this would not justify the accusation of blasphemy as long as his teachings were in keeping with Moses and were accompanied by miracles. As a precedent, Moses was legitimately called 'God' as he spoke for the God that cannot be seen. Three scripture references follow. I'm keeping it short:

Exodus 7:1 And the LORD said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh; and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet.

I Corinthians 10
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
18 Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar?

1 Corinthians 10
1 I want you to know, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea,
2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
3 and all ate the same supernatural food
4 and all drank the same supernatural drink. For they drank from the supernatural Rock which followed them, and the Rock was Christ.

These verses should suggest to us that Israel being baptized into Moses was baptized into the Holy Spirit. I do not know if this is in harmony with church tradition, however I suggest it is worth looking into. The up-shot of it is that Jesus teachings and his claim as the Anointed of God were being brought into question both at the same time. That is what is indicated by the word 'Blasphemy'.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Dream

John 10:36
Jesus is probably being accused of blasphemy under the directions that are repeated in Deuteronomy.

Quite possibly. His conflation of Daniel and the Psalms in His response would also have aroused their anger. But then to base an assumption on these verses, and ignore the rest of Scripture, is to miss the point.

Originally Posted by Dream

The main thing is that Trinity relies upon church tradition and is not found by itself in the letters and gospels.

Once again, it was being taught before the Gospels and letters were written, and it was part of the disciplina arcana by which the catechumen was sworn to secrecy.

The Christians were first and foremost a liturgical community, and yet nothing of the Liturgy is written in the Gospels and Letters either, rather the letters and later the Gospels were read aloud as part of the Liturgy.

In this sense, the Liturgy is the (secret) transmission of the spirit of the doctrine, of which the Scriptures are, without that illuminating spirit, little but the letter.

So without the tradition one is left with a collection of works, with no real access to anything but a surface reading of the text.

Originally Posted by Dream

The way that Jesus said he was God, was merely a claim to be the next prophet like Moses.

No it wasn't. Where did you ever get that from? The most mention of Moses is in the Gospel of John, and John never saw Jesus as a prophet.

Originally Posted by Dream

This relates to the fact that saying anything against what Moses said is the scriptural definition of 'Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit'. Jesus baptized in the Holy Spirit, just like Moses did.

And then you quote Scripture, St Paul, who is introducing a Trinitarian formula, and you have identified Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but insist the doctrine is an invention?

Originally Posted by Dream

As a precedent, Moses was legitimately called 'God' as he spoke for the God that cannot be seen.

I am not sure the Jews would agree with you, and I can find no reference to the Jews calling Moses 'God'.

Originally Posted by Dream

Three scripture references follow. I'm keeping it short:These verses should suggest to us that Israel being baptized into Moses was baptized into the Holy Spirit.

But the Jews do not accept the Holy Spirit, else they would be obliged to accept two Gods.

Originally Posted by Dream

I do not know if this is in harmony with church tradition, however I suggest it is worth looking into.

I think I would say you're conflating Old and New Testament texts. You also seem to be using a New Testament text of the Trinity to infer there isn't a Trinity?

Thomas

[Dream]

That was the best way that I could explain the way I've been seeing this verse. Protestant Christianity has become more of a search for lost roots than of an actual protest against Catholicism, and it is that search that describes almost the entirety of my Christian education. I value liturgy as a way of preserving information, however I know that to be truly valid it must have a failsafe within it to counter corruption by generations of men. I suspect any liturgy given by God will have this property. There is a similar idea within our body's DNA and cell structures, where each cell is programmed to self destruct in certain instances where corruption is detected. What is the failsafe in the Church's liturgy? I know that this liturgy was not passed on to me. Is that the proof of its failsafe?

The only liturgy with fail-safes that I know of is Moses' words, the principles therein, and the strong testimony of its continuity. To this I respite when a passage in a gospel seems unclear. I view the gospels and letters with regard to it, comparing them to it in every case. Without it, the gospels have no liturgy any longer. Are they corrupt? They will contradict it. That liturgy which was passed down through the church I consider irrecoverable. I started over.

[Thomas]

Hi Dream

Originally Posted by Dream

Protestant Christianity has become more of a search for lost roots than of an actual protest against Catholicism...

Interestingly, John Henry Newman began his "Development of Christian Doctrine" as an Anglican, and finished it a Catholic, declaring that only the Catholic Church was a Church the Fathers might recognise as being a continuation of the faith that they believed.

Originally Posted by Dream

I value liturgy as a way of preserving information, however I know that to be truly valid it must have a failsafe within it to counter corruption by men ... The only liturgy with fail-safes that I know of is Moses' words, the principles therein, and the strong testimony of its continuity.

Really? Even in the face of the fact there is more uncertainty about the authorship of the Mosaic texts than of the Gospels? That's a statement of faith in my book, not 'fact' ... I'm not disputing the Pentateuch, or the Mosaic authorship — but I am surprised that someone — other than a Jew — might assert its infallibility over the New Testament.

Why not convert, if you feel so strongly?

Originally Posted by Dream

To this I respite when a passage in a gospel seems unclear.

And yet Christ is the light of the Law? The fulfillment of that which was promised? Surely then you are obliged to accept that Jesus is not the Messiah?

Originally Posted by Dream

I view the gospels and letters with regard to it, comparing them to it in every case. Without it, the gospels have no liturgy any longer. Are they corrupt? They will contradict it. That liturgy which was passed down through the church I consider irrecoverable. I started over.

New wine in old bottles comes to mind ...

It's a shame there are no Greek Orthodox here, they would certainly refute that last statement. I of course would argue that the Protestant liturgy is void, but to say the orthodox liturgy was lost, and reinvented, is going too far.

Thomas

[Dream]

Thank you for your input, Thomas; and I appreciate your honest opinion about it. Perhaps we should get back to the topic of the thread, then.

[mee]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

Matthew 11:29 "Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: And you shall find rest to your souls."

Matthew 16:15-17 "Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven."

Matthew 26:63-65 "... And the high priest said to him: I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us if thou be the Christ the Son of God. Jesus saith to him: Thou hast said it. Nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his garments, saying: He hath blasphemed: What further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now you have heard the blasphemy."

Matthew 28:18 "And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth."

Matthew 28:20 "And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."

It's all there, Mee ... whether you choose to see it, or 'interpret it away' according to the doctrines of men, is another matter ...


Then I suggest your teachers were at fault.


Are you suggesting that Jesus was too polite to point out the error, and thought it better to be executed than to embarrass His accusers?



No, you've made the common mistake of quoting out of context ... read the verse that follows:
"If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in the Father."
So Jesus is saying, if I do my Father's work, believe in me, and if you cannot bring yourselves to believe in me, at least believe in the One who sent me, but if you believe in the works, then you will come to know that no man can do the Father's work, except the Son, because Father and Son are One.

As it stands, you believe in the works, but not the one who does the work ... you believe in the Father, but reject the Son ... and in so doing, reject the Father, too:

John 6:44 "No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him. And I will raise him up in the last day."

Matthew 11:27 "All things are delivered to me by my Father ..."

'all things', Mee, includes you and I.

"And no one knoweth the Son but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him."

Thomas

yes simon peter was right he said that Jesus was the SON OF GOD .

And yes Jesus was humble and lowly in heart , and just as his father said LISTEN TO HIM ....LUKE 9;35 .


and yes as Jesus himself said ,all power and aurthority was GIVEN him


and yes as you say its all there even though many choose to dissmiss what the bible really teaches ,and move away to manmade doctrines .


and yes the father and the son are in unity and purpose and Jesus learned many things from his father.

being in heaven with his father before being born on the earth, he had the best teacher and gained much wisdom indeed .


but no where in the bible does it teach us that Jesus is GOD.


And he certainly did do the works of the father when he was on the earth , and it was his father who sent him to the earth for that purpose.

IT WAS THE FATHER THAT SENT HIM . have another read of the bible with no preconcieved ideas about a TRINITY DOCTRINE


AND YOU WILL SEE THINGS VERY CLEARLY INDEED



so as we can see the bible nowhere teaches that Jesus is God it just does not teach that .



yes all things are delivered to him BY THE FATHER


not sure why you think that JW reject the son , we certainly know and believe that Jesus IS THE SON OF GOD




For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent forth his Son into the world, not for him to judge the world, but for the world to be saved through him.
john 3;16-17



He who did not even spare HIS OWN SON but delivered him up for us all, why will he not also with him kindly give us all other things? ROMANS 8;32



By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten Son into the world that we might gain life through him
1 JOHN 4;9


But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, YOU may have life by means of his name.
JOHN 20;31



YES AS WE CAN SEE THE BIBLE TEACHES US THAT JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD ,I AM SEARCHING LIKE MAD AND THE BIBLE DOES NOT TEACH THAT JESUS IS GOD . ITS NOT THERE


thats because i have not taken on the preconcieved manmade doctrine THE TRINITY ..............



i only take in pure bible teachings with no manmade doctrines to cloud my thought .


if people do that they are more inline with Gods thoughts .

[Pico]

Originally Posted by mee

YES AS WE CAN SEE THE BIBLE TEACHES US THAT JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD ,I AM SEARCHING LIKE MAD AND THE BIBLE DOES NOT TEACH THAT JESUS IS GOD . ITS NOT THERE


thats because i have not taken on the preconcieved manmade doctrine THE TRINITY ..............

Fine. To each his own.

[mee]

Originally Posted by Pico

Fine. To each his own.

very true

This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ. John 17;3


its all in the bible and listening to Jesus is the way to go

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by mee

yes simon peter was right he said that Jesus was the SON OF GOD ... And yes Jesus was humble and lowly in heart , and just as his father said LISTEN TO HIM ....LUKE 9;35 ... and yes as Jesus himself said, all power and authority was GIVEN him ... "

I think the JW problem is the confuse the humanity of Jesus — which is no different from the humanity of you and I — with the Sonship of Jesus, which is Divine.

Jesus is man, and the Son of God, begotten through Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit ... a man yet one with the Power of God, and the Authority of God, He is one with God, and God is one with Him (John 10:30) ... when one sees Jesus, one sees God (John 6:46), furthermore, no-one sees God, unless Jesus decrees it (John 1:8), and no-one gets to God unless Jesus allows it (John 14:6) ... and Jesus was before the world was created, and will be after its end ... it was through Him that all things came to be, in heaven and on earth (Colossians 1:16) so whilst "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28), nevertheless "in him, it hath well pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell" (1:19) "And through him (the Son) to reconcile all things unto himself (the Father)" (1:20).

... which means without Jesus, man would not know God ... which means God makes Himself known through Jesus, and through Jesus we are known to Him ...

... so if Jesus is not God, it would appear that God is heavily dependent upon a man to realise His plan, His plenitude and His providence ... which makes God dependent upon man, which is logically a nonsense ...

"Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell"
Colossians 1:19

The Catholic Church believes that the Word of God, transmitted in the Sacred Scriptures, is inviolate ... if it pleases the Father that 'all fullness' dwells in the Son, and the Son was not produced through any sense of organic reproduction, but by procession, then the question is, what limits God? Why is that which proceeds from God lesser than God?

That which proceeds from man is not the man, because man is finite, contingent and limited, and as much as he puts himself into his works, his works are always other than Himself ... whereas God is Infinite, Absolute and Unlimited, and what proceeds from Him is under no limitation, so what proceeds from God is God, without let or hindrance ... so the Son, who proceeds from God, who is God's Word and God's Wisdom ... is God ...

Why then, cannot 'all fullness' of the Father dwell in the Son?

Indeed, why cannot Jesus words, "All things are delivered to me by my Father" Matthew 11:27 be true, without condition?

Unless it is you who

Originally Posted by mee

choose to dissmiss what the bible really teaches, and move away to manmade doctrines.

Originally Posted by mee

and yes the father and the son are in unity and purpose and Jesus learned many things from his father ... being in heaven with his father before being born on the earth, he had the best teacher and gained much wisdom indeed.

This is somewhat naive, Mee ... God is a spirit, the Father is a spirit, and before He became flesh, He was a spirit ... it's not a case of teaching, it's a case of being.

Originally Posted by mee

but no where in the bible does it teach us that Jesus is GOD.

I think if one looks, it is everywhere ... "Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you." Matthew 7:7

Originally Posted by mee

so as we can see the bible nowhere teaches that Jesus is God it just does not teach that.

In your opinion.

Originally Posted by mee

not sure why you think that JW reject the son , we certainly know and believe that Jesus IS THE SON OF GOD

Yet you choose to limit what God can do.

We do not limit God, nor the Word of His Scripture.

"For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life. For God sent forth his Son into the world, not for him to judge the world, but for the world to be saved through him".
John 3:16-17

"By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten Son into the world that we might gain life through him"
1 JOHN 4:9

"But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, YOU may have life by means of his name."
John 20:31

Originally Posted by mee

YES AS WE CAN SEE THE BIBLE TEACHES US THAT JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD ,I AM SEARCHING LIKE MAD AND THE BIBLE DOES NOT TEACH THAT JESUS IS GOD . ITS NOT THERE

Are you so blind that you cannot see?

If Jesus is not God, then if we believe "in him", if we have faith "in him", if we have life "in him", if we are saved "in him" ... and He is not God, then we are not in God either, are we, we are in Him, not in God, aren't we? We don't believe in God, we believe in a man.

Furthermore, if we 'believe in him', 'have faith in him' and 'profess his name'
and He is not God, then the Jews are right, He is a false teacher, a heretic and a blasphemer, and we have transgressed a number of the Commandments.

Jesus says, "in my name" — not in my Father's name, or in God's name, but he speaks and acts, he rewrites the Decalogue in His own name (Matthew 5-7).

Think about it.

If Jesus is not God, then The New Testament is a blasphemy.

Thomas