|
Post by rational on Mar 23, 2012 15:02:20 GMT -5
The Gospel of John was written about 70 years after the Resurrection - 30 or so years after the other gospels. John and his community had more time to come to a more developed understanding of what Jesus was telling them as he began to teach about who he is. The religion had more time to develop and the resulting gospel fit the new religion.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Mar 23, 2012 15:07:21 GMT -5
I personally believe most workers have got it right. If the 2x2 church fell for the trinity I'd be out of there in a heartbeat. Exactly. It seems to me that the Trinity is a Catholic invention that has no biblical basis. I haven't seen it. If it was so important, I would have thought that the scriptures would have referenced it as least once. But, nope. Not even once is the Trinity mentioned in scripture. (Although the Catholic Church tried and succeeded to dishonestly have it put into the scriptures with the infamous Comma Johanneum episode. Thankfully modern translations, such as the NIV, have since removed it. Unfortunately, it lives on in the KJV.) I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. And that is enough, in my opinion. Seems like you have not been reading the posts. There have been plenty of Scripture quoted on this thread showing where the trinity doctrine is clearly in the Bible. These have not been removed from the NIV. So you are saying that the verse that relate to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit being one God as quoted on this thread do not appear in the NIV? So John 1 the Word was God; the I Am; Hebrews 1 -The Father said to the Son, thou Oh God, and Isaiah 9 as Sharon quoted above, etc etc, God said let us make man in our image - all those have been removed in the NIV? Not my NIV, they haven't. Just one verse relating to these 3 are one, has been removed. All the verses quoted in this thread are in my NIV.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Mar 23, 2012 15:25:50 GMT -5
HappyFeet, I quoted the first three verses of Genesis which recorded God working. You came along and introduced your three-person-god. To me, that seemed like man complicating something simple. Not complicating anything, just pointing out what was written there. That the Son and the Holy Spirit were there at creation so when it says God - how could it just mean the Father when Jesus and the spirit were there as well. It tells us in the New Testament that Jesus was there and without him nothing was made. So when it says in the beginning God created the heaven and earth we know this was referring to Jesus. - couldn't be clearer that Jesus was there in the first 3 verses - not man changing anything, it is clearly in the Bible that Jesus was there creating the heaven and earth - when it says God, it clearly says Jesus was a part of that.
|
|
|
Post by DumSpiroSpero on Mar 23, 2012 15:32:38 GMT -5
OK - for the record, I am not polytheist. I don't think I'm capable of understanding God's form and identity. For me there is sufficient evidence to suggest that Jesus is as eternal as God, and that the Holy Spirit/Ghost is also.
There is conflicting evidence regarding God/Jesus/Holy Spirit as one or separate entities.
I'm not about to join the trinitarian/non-trinitarian debate either.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 15:40:36 GMT -5
“The word Trinity is never found in the Divine Records, but is only of human invention,and therefore sounds altogether cold.” -- Martin Luther, cited by Wilson, Concessions of Trinitarians (Boston: Munroe & Co.,1845), 40 You do your credibility a great disservice to totally take out of context the above quote. At any rate, one out-of-context Martin Luther quote is supposed to disprove the Doctrine of the Trinity? BTW, we here are not so stupid but what we can clearly see that your out of context quote refers only to the word ' Trinity' not being in the Bible. No one has ever said the word 'Trinity' is in the Scriptures - however the Doctrine of the Trinity is clearly found throughout the Scriptures. It is indeed true that the name "Trinity" is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man. (Luther Martin. The Sermons of Martin Luther, Church Postil, 1522; III:406-421, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)
That Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three distinct persons in one divine essence and nature, are one God, who has created heaven and earth...Concerning these articles there is no contention or dispute, since we on both sides confess them. Therefore it is not necessary now to treat further of them. (Luther Martin. The Smallclad Papers. 1537. Translated by F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau Published in: _Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Lutheran Church_. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921), pp. 453-529).
Luther called the Athansen Creed the grandest production of the Christian Church since the times of the apostles (Mueller, John Theodore. The Lutheran Confessions. circa 1953, p.5).
Those who deny the Triune God and His redemptive work are outside the church and without hope of salvation (Mueller, John Theodore. The Lutheran Confessions. circa 1953, p.6).
It is interesting to notice that Martin Luther saw no reason to explain much on the Godhead as both sides (the Protestants and the Catholics, but not the Bible) confessed a trinune divinity. The Athansen creed discusses the belief in the Trinity and the writing about it concludes with:
This is the catholic (general) faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved (p.6).
Thus, the position of the Roman Catholics and the founder of the Protestant Reformation seems to be that salvation is not possible for those who do not accept the trinity.
I chose not to enclose the link - just as JO may have recently done when he may have borrowed a questioning line directly from said quote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 15:48:26 GMT -5
“The word Trinity is never found in the Divine Records, but is only of human invention,and therefore sounds altogether cold.” -- Martin Luther, cited by Wilson, Concessions of Trinitarians (Boston: Munroe & Co.,1845), 40 You do your credibility a great disservice to totally take out of context the above quote. At any rate, one out-of-context Martin Luther quote is supposed to disprove the Doctrine of the Trinity? BTW, we here are not so stupid but what we can clearly see that your out of context quote refers only to the word ' Trinity' not being in the Bible. No one has ever said the word 'Trinity' is in the Scriptures - however the Doctrine of the Trinity is clearly found throughout the Scriptures. It is indeed true that the name "Trinity" is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man. (Luther Martin. The Sermons of Martin Luther, Church Postil, 1522; III:406-421, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)
That Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three distinct persons in one divine essence and nature, are one God, who has created heaven and earth...Concerning these articles there is no contention or dispute, since we on both sides confess them. Therefore it is not necessary now to treat further of them. (Luther Martin. The Smallclad Papers. 1537. Translated by F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau Published in: _Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Lutheran Church_. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921), pp. 453-529).
Luther called the Athansen Creed the grandest production of the Christian Church since the times of the apostles (Mueller, John Theodore. The Lutheran Confessions. circa 1953, p.5).
Those who deny the Triune God and His redemptive work are outside the church and without hope of salvation (Mueller, John Theodore. The Lutheran Confessions. circa 1953, p.6).
It is interesting to notice that Martin Luther saw no reason to explain much on the Godhead as both sides (the Protestants and the Catholics, but not the Bible) confessed a trinune divinity. The Athansen creed discusses the belief in the Trinity and the writing about it concludes with:
This is the catholic (general) faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved (p.6).
Thus, the position of the Roman Catholics and the founder of the Protestant Reformation seems to be that salvation is not possible for those who do not accept the trinity.
I chose not to enclose the link - just as JO may have recently done when he may have borrowed a questioning line directly from said quote. "The word Trinity is not stated anywhere in the bible. It is a term of human invention." Clearday, 2012 Hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 15:50:11 GMT -5
The Gospel of John was written about 70 years after the Resurrection - 30 or so years after the other gospels. John and his community had more time to come to a more developed understanding of what Jesus was telling them as he began to teach about who he is. The religion had more time to develop and the resulting gospel fit the new religion. Actually, you're correct. It was still a very new concept and that is why God's word was being taught in the oral tradition and in the written tradition of the New Covenant gospels and epistles - and preserved to this day that we might also know the fullness of truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 15:54:25 GMT -5
“[The] true religion Jesus founded in the unity of God [fell] into unintelligible polytheism[…] hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus.” --C.B. Sanford, The Religious Life of Thomas Jefferson pages 88, 89.“ Greco-Roman mythological Cerebus
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 15:59:15 GMT -5
Ken, can you quote chapter and verse where Paul referred to "God the Son"? He was more inclined to refer to "God the Father and his son Jesus Christ" than your three-person God. Trinitarianism sure seems like a cult to me. Its like, "if you're not for us you're against us". Anyone who doesn't go along with this man-made doctrine is accused of treating Jesus as "just a man". Writings of St Paul confessing Jesus as God ... Rom. 1:1 - Paul is an apostle of the Gospel of God - Rom. 15:19 - Paul preached the Gospel of Christ.
Rom. 7:22 - Paul says he delights in the law of God - Gal. 6:2 - Paul says fulfill the law of Christ.
Rom. 8:9 - Paul refers to both the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ.
Rom. 9:5 - Jesus Christ is God over all, blessed forever.
Rom. 11:36 - God for from Him through Him and to Him are all things - Heb. 2:10 - Jesus for whom and by whom are all things.
1 Cor. 15:9 - Paul says he persecuted the Church of God - Matt. 16:18; Rom. 16:16 - it is the Church of Jesus Christ.
1 Cor. 15:28 - God may be all in all - Colossians 3:11 - Christ is all and in all.
Gal. 1:5 - God the Father to whom be the glory forever - 2 Peter 3:18 - to Jesus Christ be the glory both now and forever.
Phil. 2:6-7 - Jesus was in the form of God, but instead of asserting His equality with God, emptied Himself for us.
Col. 1:15 - Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the "firstborn" of all creation. The Greek word for "first-born" is "prototokos" which means eternal preexistence (it never means created).
Col. 1:26 - God's saints - 1 Thess. 3:13 - at the coming of Jesus Christ with all His saints.
Col. 2:9 - in Jesus Christ the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily. He is the whole and entire fullness of the indivisible God in the flesh.
Titus 1:1 - Paul says he is a servant of God - Rom. 1:1 - Paul says he is a servant of Jesus Christ.
Titus 1:3-4 - God our Savior = Christ our Savior = Jesus Christ is God.
Titus 2:11 - the grace of God that has appeared to save all men - Acts 15:11 - through the grace of Jesus we have salvation.
Titus 2:13 - we await our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.
Titus 3:4 - 3:6 - great God and Savior Jesus Christ = God our Savior = Jesus Christ our Savior = Jesus is God.
Heb. 1:6 - when God brings His first-born into the world, let all the angels of God worship Him. Only God is worshiped.
Heb. 1:8 - God calls the Son "God." But of the Son He says, "Thy Throne Oh God is forever and ever."
Heb. 1:9 - God calls the Son "God." "Therefore, God, Thy God has anointed Thee."
Heb. 1:10 - God calls the Son "Lord." "And thou, Lord, didst found the earth in the beginning and the heavens are your work."
Heb. 13:12 - Paul says Jesus sanctifies the people with His blood - 1 Thess. 5:23 - the God of peace sanctifies the people.
1). Yes and many of those hymns were written by Trinitarians. 2). Any who profess Jesus as Lord need to recall that the Lord our God is ONE[/i] or they are guilty of confessing more than one LORD.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Mar 23, 2012 15:59:37 GMT -5
This is the catholic (general) faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved (p.6). Can you not see the parallels between three-person-god doctrine and one-true-way doctrine? Both are exclusive, both make people extremely defensive, both leave a huge hole when people finally see through them.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 16:01:19 GMT -5
This is the catholic (general) faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved (p.6). Can you not see the parallels between three-person-god doctrine and one-true-way doctrine? Both are exclusive, both make people extremely defensive, both leave a huge hole when people finally see through them. I find nothing wrong with one true way exclusivism since it is what Jesus explicitly taught.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Mar 23, 2012 16:03:55 GMT -5
Clearday wrote; The word Trinity is not stated anywhere in the bible. It is a term of human invention The word convention is not stated anywhere in the Bible. No matter how many references to large gatherings in the Bible, the term is of human invention. The word emblems is not stated anywhere in the Bible. No matter how many references to it in the Bible, the term is of human invention.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 16:06:39 GMT -5
Romans 9:5
“Those who contend that in this text Christ is clearly termed God either place little confidence in other passages of Scripture, deny all understanding to the Arians, or pay scarcely any attention to the style of the Apostle. A similar passage occurs in Second Corinthians 11:31: ‘The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is blessed forever’; the latter clause being undeniably restricted to the Father.”
--Trinitarian theologian Erasmus, Works, ed. Jean Leclerc, 10 vols. (Leiden, 1703-1706),6:610, 611.
“Some Trinitarians offer Romans 9:5 as conclusive proof that Jesus is ‘God over all’ and therefore part of the Godhead. It depends which translation one reads, because there are some seven different ways of punctuating the verse in which either Christ or the Father iscalled ‘God blessed forever.’ [For a full examination of the various possibilities, see the essays in the Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis , 1883.] The issue is: Should we read ‘of whom, according to the flesh, is Christ, who is over all. God be blessed forever,’ or ‘of whom, according to the flesh is Christ, who being God over all, is blessed forever’?[…] Using the principle of comparison of text with text, it is most likely that Paul describes the Father as ‘God over all.’ Paul uniformly makes a distinction between God and the Lord Jesus. In the same book Paul blesses the Creator and there isno reason to doubt that the Father is meant (Rom. 1:25). In another passage he speaks of ‘God our Father, to whom be glory forevermore. Amen’ (Gal. 1:4, 5). Romans 9:5 is an obvious parallel. It should not be forgotten that the word theos, God, occurs more than 500 times in Paul’s letters and there is not a single unambiguous instance in which itapplies to Christ. A number of well-known textual critics (Lachmann, Tischendorf) place a period after the word ‘flesh,’ allowing the rest of the sentence to be a doxology of theFather. Ancient Greek manuscripts do not generally contain punctuation, but the Codex Ephraemi of the fifth century has a period after ‘flesh.’ More remarkable is the fact that during the whole Arian controversy, this verse was not used by Trinitarians against the unitarians. It clearly did not attest to Jesus as the second member of the Godhead.[..] It is proper to add that even if Jesus is exceptionally called ‘God,’ the title may be used in its secondary, Messianic sense of one who reflects the divine majesty of the One God, theFather. When the detail of grammatical nuance has been fully explored, balances of probability will be weighed in different ways. It is incredible to imagine that the Christian creed should depend on fine points of language about which many could notreasonably be asked to make a judgment and experts disagree. The plain language of Paul’s and Jesus’ creed is open to every student of the Bible: ‘There is no God except one…There is for us [Christians] one God, the Father’ (1 Cor. 8:4, 6).”
--Sir Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, The Doctrine of the Trinity:Christianity’s Self-Inflicted Wound (Oxford: International Scholars Publications, 1998),281, 282, 283
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Mar 23, 2012 16:07:02 GMT -5
It is only complicated to those who are limited in faith. Exactly. "Don't think, don't read, don't discern.....just believe the party line theories". I'm not talking about "part line theories" here CD...stop right there! I'm talking about our faith in Jesus Christ as our Saviour, as the firstborn of the resurrection, and as the only begotten Son of God the Father. I don't care who you have faith in or don't as far as "party line theories" are concerned....but I do care for those who have faith in Jesus Christ AND all that that name covers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 16:07:26 GMT -5
Clearday wrote; The word Trinity is not stated anywhere in the bible. It is a term of human invention The word convention is not stated anywhere in the Bible. No matter how many references to large gatherings in the Bible, the term is of human invention. The word communion or the emblems is not stated anywhere in the Bible. No matter how many references to it in the Bible, the term is of human invention. Yep, and yep.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Mar 23, 2012 16:07:57 GMT -5
1). Yes and many of those hymns were written by Trinitarians. 2). Any who profess Jesus as Lord need to recall that the Lord our God is ONE [/i] or they are guilty of confessing more than one LORD. [/quote] Trinitarians can write sensible hymns if they don't emphasise their three-person-god theology. I believe it pleases God the Father when people confess his son Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. Confessing more than one Lord is man's hang-up, not God's hang-up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 16:09:31 GMT -5
Exactly. "Don't think, don't read, don't discern.....just believe the party line theories". I'm not talking about "part line theories" here CD...stop right there! I'm talking about our faith in Jesus Christ as our Saviour, as the firstborn of the resurrection, and as the only begotten Son of God the Father. I don't care who you have faith in or don't as far as "party line theories" are concerned....but I do care for those who have faith in Jesus Christ AND all that that name covers. Yes, your contentions are a matter of faith, not a matter of fact. The problem is, faith is not a virtue.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Mar 23, 2012 16:11:20 GMT -5
Clearday wrote:
Exactly. "Don't think, don't read, don't discern.....just believe the party line theories".
The party line theory of what - that God is the Father - or that the father, Son and Holy Spirit are God?
Also I made a correction in my previous post Clearday, I wrote that communion and the emblems are not in the Bible. Sorry, communion is, emblems is not.
The contention of the trinity - is a matter of fact, not faith. Fact, as written in the Bible. or are you saying the Bible is faith not fact?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 16:14:02 GMT -5
Colossians 2:9
“Mark 12:28ff. presents Jesus as affirming his own belief in the unitary monotheism of the Jews. It is to that passage of Scripture that all discussion of the Godhead should refer.John’s ‘Jewish’ monotheism is never in doubt. The Father is still the ‘only true God’ (John 17:3), ‘the one who alone is God’ (John 5:44), and since Jesus is evidently a different person from the Father, Jesus is not God. He is the fully authorized agent of God, the ideal King of Israel for whom the Old Testament yearned. Jesus perfectly expresses the character of his Father and relays His message of the Kingdom (Luke 4:43).Thus it may be said that ‘the fullness of the Deity dwells in Jesus’ (Col. 2:9) [Very similar language about the fullness of God dwelling in Christians is found in Eph. 3:19]. But this does not mean that he is himself God.” ----Sir Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, The Doctrine of the Trinity:Christianity’s Self-Inflicted Wound (Oxford: International Scholars Publications, 1998)
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Mar 23, 2012 16:14:42 GMT -5
You do your credibility a great disservice to totally take out of context the above quote. At any rate, one out-of-context Martin Luther quote is supposed to disprove the Doctrine of the Trinity? BTW, we here are not so stupid but what we can clearly see that your out of context quote refers only to the word ' Trinity' not being in the Bible. No one has ever said the word 'Trinity' is in the Scriptures - however the Doctrine of the Trinity is clearly found throughout the Scriptures. It is indeed true that the name "Trinity" is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man. (Luther Martin. The Sermons of Martin Luther, Church Postil, 1522; III:406-421, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)
That Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three distinct persons in one divine essence and nature, are one God, who has created heaven and earth...Concerning these articles there is no contention or dispute, since we on both sides confess them. Therefore it is not necessary now to treat further of them. (Luther Martin. The Smallclad Papers. 1537. Translated by F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau Published in: _Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Lutheran Church_. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921), pp. 453-529).
Luther called the Athansen Creed the grandest production of the Christian Church since the times of the apostles (Mueller, John Theodore. The Lutheran Confessions. circa 1953, p.5).
Those who deny the Triune God and His redemptive work are outside the church and without hope of salvation (Mueller, John Theodore. The Lutheran Confessions. circa 1953, p.6).
It is interesting to notice that Martin Luther saw no reason to explain much on the Godhead as both sides (the Protestants and the Catholics, but not the Bible) confessed a trinune divinity. The Athansen creed discusses the belief in the Trinity and the writing about it concludes with:
This is the catholic (general) faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved (p.6).
Thus, the position of the Roman Catholics and the founder of the Protestant Reformation seems to be that salvation is not possible for those who do not accept the trinity.
I chose not to enclose the link - just as JO may have recently done when he may have borrowed a questioning line directly from said quote. "The word Trinity is not stated anywhere in the bible. It is a term of human invention." Clearday, 2012 Hope that helps. Ahhh, CD, IF we're going to be sticklers about using words that are not found in the bible to talk about things contained between the outer covers of those bibles....then first we MUST get rid of the word "bible", simply because it isn't hidden within the covers of the KJV, NKJV, the NIV or any other translation of that particular book in which there are said to be "scriptures"....Now if I may progress even more "picky" is the word "scriptures" in that book? Now we're going to lose a common word that describes those things we seek to discuss...we can't call that book the "bible" because "bible" is not a word within that so-called bible and NOW we have doubts that "scriptures" are in that so-called bible. Now let's get a bit more stringent on this discourse...you don't want to consider a "catholic or general" consensus that the unnamed book contains "Trinity or trinity or Triune or triune". Why? Are we to forget that there are general terms mankind used esp. IF they are of the same language that describes something more completely then saying, "The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost"? A term that states that as we've tried to point out that those 3 persons were present before the "beginning" and always will be present throughout eternity? That those 3 persons are said to be "God" before the world ever became? That though the "Word" is not called Jesus at that very moment, that later in the NT we understand that the "Word" took on flesh and dwelt amonst us? Okay NOW we understand that the "Word" is the Father's only begotten Son. How do we know that? By the Father's Word after Jesus' was baptized by John the Baptist and John is the witness of that who had told his own disciples all about this man called Jesus, just who Jesus was, is and always will be....yesterday, today and forever. The Father declared "Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. " So Jesus had every right in the world to call God HIS Father, BUT that's why the religious righteous had Him put to death because He said He was God's Son, making Himself equal with God. The scriptures also says that "Hbr 1:3 Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; " Do you not understand what "the express image of his person" means?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 16:17:40 GMT -5
Clearday wrote: Exactly. "Don't think, don't read, don't discern.....just believe the party line theories". The party line theory of what - that God is the Father - or that the father, Son and Holy Spirit are God? Also I made a correction in my previous post Clearday, I wrote that communion and the emblems are not in the Bible. Sorry, communion is, emblems is not. The contention of the trinity - is a matter of fact, not faith. Fact, as written in the Bible. or are you saying the Bible is faith not fact? Trinity is far from fact, and far from the truth. It is, and always has been not only an invented term, but an invented concept of man to to bring the Greeks and Romans into the growing church system....without alienating the Jewish heritage too much with polytheism. The Trinity is not just a matter of faith, but more importantly, it is a matter of politics.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 16:17:45 GMT -5
1). Yes and many of those hymns were written by Trinitarians. 2). Any who profess Jesus as Lord need to recall that the Lord our God is ONE [/i] or they are guilty of confessing more than one LORD. [/quote] Trinitarians can write sensible hymns if they don't emphasise their three-person-god theology. I believe it pleases God the Father when people confess his son Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. Confessing more than one Lord is man's hang-up, not God's hang-up. [/quote] Prayers for you JO. That the holy 2x4 will hit you over the head and that you may clearly see that the words Lord and Savior in the hymns are indeed GOD, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, GOD as written by the Trinitarians. Oh come on!!!!! It is God's COMMANDMENT that man shall not worship more than ONE God - when Scripture clearly tells us that the Lord our God is ONE.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 16:23:41 GMT -5
Colossians 2:9“Mark 12:28ff. presents Jesus as affirming his own belief in the unitary monotheism of the Jews. It is to that passage of Scripture that all discussion of the Godhead should refer.John’s ‘Jewish’ monotheism is never in doubt. The Father is still the ‘only true God’ (John 17:3), ‘the one who alone is God’ (John 5:44), and since Jesus is evidently a different person from the Father, Jesus is not God. He is the fully authorized agent of God, the ideal King of Israel for whom the Old Testament yearned. Jesus perfectly expresses the character of his Father and relays His message of the Kingdom (Luke 4:43).Thus it may be said that ‘the fullness of the Deity dwells in Jesus’ (Col. 2:9) [Very similar language about the fullness of God dwelling in Christians is found in Eph. 3:19]. But this does not mean that he is himself God.” ----Sir Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, The Doctrine of the Trinity:Christianity’s Self-Inflicted Wound (Oxford: International Scholars Publications, 1998) They were. (Many Jews still are.) There is no dispute to that. That is why Jesus began to teach and preach that he, Jesus, was also God. For which he was crucified. And Resurrected, raising himself of his own power. God. Thru which you may have eternal life everlasting. Thanks be to God. Why? Why was he able to do this? Because he is man AND God.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Mar 23, 2012 16:37:55 GMT -5
Colossians 2:9“Mark 12:28ff. presents Jesus as affirming his own belief in the unitary monotheism of the Jews. It is to that passage of Scripture that all discussion of the Godhead should refer.John’s ‘Jewish’ monotheism is never in doubt. The Father is still the ‘only true God’ (John 17:3), ‘the one who alone is God’ (John 5:44), and since Jesus is evidently a different person from the Father, Jesus is not God. He is the fully authorized agent of God, the ideal King of Israel for whom the Old Testament yearned. Jesus perfectly expresses the character of his Father and relays His message of the Kingdom (Luke 4:43).Thus it may be said that ‘the fullness of the Deity dwells in Jesus’ (Col. 2:9) [Very similar language about the fullness of God dwelling in Christians is found in Eph. 3:19]. But this does not mean that he is himself God.” ----Sir Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, The Doctrine of the Trinity:Christianity’s Self-Inflicted Wound (Oxford: International Scholars Publications, 1998) They were. (Many Jews still are.) There is no dispute to that. That is why Jesus began to teach and preach that he, Jesus, was also God. For which he was crucified. And Resurrected, raising himself of his own power. God. Thru which you may have eternal life everlasting. Thanks be to God. Why? Why was he able to do this? Because he is man AND God. Yes, Jesus even explained that.... Jhn 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. Also this power: Mat 9:3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This [man] blasphemeth. Oh, oh. Now the Pharisees are finding that Jesus is taking God's power to do himself. That is blasphemy. Mat 9:4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? Mat 9:5 For whether is easier, to say, [Thy] sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? Mat 9:6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. Another place describes that the people thought only God could forgive sins. Mar 2:7 Why doth this [man] thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? Folks, are we not missing some important messages out of the gospels here? Why have we not noted that Jesus did what ONLY God could do?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Mar 23, 2012 16:42:06 GMT -5
Clearday wrote: Exactly. "Don't think, don't read, don't discern.....just believe the party line theories". The party line theory of what - that God is the Father - or that the father, Son and Holy Spirit are God? Also I made a correction in my previous post Clearday, I wrote that communion and the emblems are not in the Bible. Sorry, communion is, emblems is not. The contention of the trinity - is a matter of fact, not faith. Fact, as written in the Bible. or are you saying the Bible is faith not fact? Trinity is far from fact, and far from the truth. It is, and always has been not only an invented term, but an invented concept of man to to bring the Greeks and Romans into the growing church system....without alienating the Jewish heritage too much with polytheism. The Trinity is not just a matter of faith, but more importantly, it is a matter of politics. CD. Are not all of those words that you've answered Happy Feet "invented words"? Why are you not using words that you've not invented? OH/? You find that you want to use your own wording because you understand better what you want to say! Okay, I'll buy that. Why is it so hard to turn loose of the 2x2 rhetoric against the word "Trinity"...why are you hollering it is political, when it is only a "descriptive" word to describe the relationship between the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost....I understand that the 2x2's use those names to baptize one another with....
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 17:09:13 GMT -5
Amen. 258 & 259!
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Mar 23, 2012 17:24:31 GMT -5
Colossians 2:9“Mark 12:28ff. presents Jesus as affirming his own belief in the unitary monotheism of the Jews. It is to that passage of Scripture that all discussion of the Godhead should refer.John’s ‘Jewish’ monotheism is never in doubt. The Father is still the ‘only true God’ (John 17:3), ‘the one who alone is God’ (John 5:44), and since Jesus is evidently a different person from the Father, Jesus is not God. He is the fully authorized agent of God, the ideal King of Israel for whom the Old Testament yearned. Jesus perfectly expresses the character of his Father and relays His message of the Kingdom (Luke 4:43).Thus it may be said that ‘the fullness of the Deity dwells in Jesus’ (Col. 2:9) [Very similar language about the fullness of God dwelling in Christians is found in Eph. 3:19]. But this does not mean that he is himself God.” ----Sir Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, The Doctrine of the Trinity:Christianity’s Self-Inflicted Wound (Oxford: International Scholars Publications, 1998) They were. (Many Jews still are.) There is no dispute to that. That is why Jesus began to teach and preach that he, Jesus, was also God. For which he was crucified. And Resurrected, raising himself of his own power. God. Thru which you may have eternal life everlasting. Thanks be to God. Why? Why was he able to do this? Because he is man AND God. Let's go the next step with this - as Jesus continued to teach in John 5 (these were gospel readings at Daily Mass this week ... ). 16So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jews persecuted him. 17Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.” 18For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.19Jesus gave them this answer: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, to your amazement he will show him even greater things than these. 21For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son,
We left off with vs 19 where the Jews wanted to kill Jesus even the more because he was claiming to be God, equal with God ... working on the Sabbath ... What happens next? Gives life? Only God can give life. We all know that. 21For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 17:31:29 GMT -5
They were. (Many Jews still are.) There is no dispute to that. That is why Jesus began to teach and preach that he, Jesus, was also God. For which he was crucified. And Resurrected, raising himself of his own power. God. Thru which you may have eternal life everlasting. Thanks be to God. Why? Why was he able to do this? Because he is man AND God. Yes, Jesus even explained that.... Jhn 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. Also this power: Mat 9:3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This [man] blasphemeth. Oh, oh. Now the Pharisees are finding that Jesus is taking God's power to do himself. That is blasphemy. Mat 9:4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? Mat 9:5 For whether is easier, to say, [Thy] sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? Mat 9:6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. Another place describes that the people thought only God could forgive sins. Mar 2:7 Why doth this [man] thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? Folks, are we not missing some important messages out of the gospels here? Why have we not noted that Jesus did what ONLY God could do? That's interesting that you take the religion of the Jews about forgiving sins and use that to validate a theory of Trinity that is in direct contradiction to Jewish belief. Why can't you just believe Jesus that "the Son of Man" had that power. We both know that all power of the Son of Man was given by God.
|
|