Can the Trinity be Biblically proven?

[bluto]

I have no problem at all in respect t yur claim that I do, pertaining to the identity of the Father and the Son. You have a problem of not reading the Biblical description of God ad origin of the pre-incarnate Jesus, I posted on this thread some time ago. Tou can review it here, as I don't have the time to try finding it on this thread:

The Biblical Description of God - in Theology/Prophecy & Revelation Forum Forum

FYI, the only begotten Son of God, did not exist until in MJt.1:20 and in Lk.1:32 and 35. In the sense you claim, he was the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15, confirming Pr.8:22-36. As such He can be seen as a sn of God, as the sos of God were in Gen.6. In another sense, all of us who belong to Christ, are also sons of God.

The Biblical description of God documented in the above link, can all be thoroughly supported from the Bible, which the Trinity cannot be. You claim God did not create the universe by Jesus, is refuted in Heb.1:1-2. I am contradicting nor forgetting nothing! Read what the Scriptures teach from the link above. You're spinning your wheels from wild claims you cannot support, or from those I have already acknowledged long ago.

As I have said before, I was a Trinitarian for 45 years and then spent 35 more developing God's identity of Himself from the Bible. You have written nothing I do not already know and have studied and researched it.

Yes quasar, you do have a big problem with the identity of the Father and of the Son. For one thing God the Father is not the person of the Holy Spirit. Number two, the Bible clearly teaches the Son was always the Son and pre-existed His incarnation as a man who was "SENT" by His Father. I gave you Micah 5:2 so please explain who the person is that came from Bethlehem and His goings forth are from eternity? What is the name of that person quasar?

You also said, "FYI, the only begotten Son of God, did not exist until in MJt.1:20 and in Lk.1:32 and 35. In the sense you claim, he was the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15," Then you quoted Proverbs 8:22-36 thinking Colossians 1:15 supports the idea that Jesus Christ is a created being just because the Apostle Paul used the word "firstborn." In truth you don't even know what that word means in context.

Look at the context of Colossians 1:15. Paul starts out describing Christ as "the image of the invisible God." In fact, the Bible states in several locations that the essence or substance of God is invisible to human beings, (Romans 1:20, 1 Timothy 1:17; Hebrews 11:27, and Hebrews 1:3. It also states (which I have brought up on numerous occasions) even from Jesus Himself that God the Father cannot be seen and it is Jesus Christ who has made the Father known. (John 1:18; 14:9).

Now, getting back to that word "firstborn." The Greek word is "prototokos" and it does not imply that Jesus is a part of creation or is a creation Himself. It indicates His priority and sovereignty over all creation. This is proved by the next verse which is Colossians 1:16. "For by Him WERE ALL THINGS CREATED." Then you have that "firstborn" showing up again at Colossians 1:18, "He is also head of the body; the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything."

Did you get that quasar? That He Himself might come to have first place in everything." In other words, Jesus Christ is the "firstborn" (prototokos), the first to rise from the realm of the dead IN A PERMANENT MANNER OR FASHION. Revelation 1:5 backs this up when it says, "and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us, and released us from our sins by His blood."

And yes, I have read all your quotes from the sites you want to keep sending me as though that makes your position right. And if you really have studied and researched this issue like you claim why is it you have a problem answering simple questions? I ask you to explain Micah 5:2 and you can't do it. Or how did John the Baptist know that Jesus Christ existed before him? I've ask you to reconsider your position but your not even openminded to the fact that you "might" just be wrong. Then to make matters worse you quote a whole bunch of Scholars and teachers, and even book writers that disagree with you including your so-called mentor. You further use sources that outright deny the deity of Jesus Christ to support your heretical position. Is that the best you have to prove your position, heretics and cults who are anti-christ?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[Quasar92]

Previously posted by bluto:

Yes quasar, you do have a big problem with the identity of the Father and of the Son. For one thing God the Father is not the person of the Holy Spirit. Number two, the Bible clearly teaches the Son was always the Son and pre-existed His incarnation as a man who was "SENT" by His Father. I gave you Micah 5:2 so please explain who the person is that came from Bethlehem and His goings forth are from eternity? What is the name of that person quasar?

You also said, "FYI, the only begotten Son of God, did not exist until in MJt.1:20 and in Lk.1:32 and 35. In the sense you claim, he was the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15," Then you quoted Proverbs 8:22-36 thinking Colossians 1:15 supports the idea that Jesus Christ is a created being just because the Apostle Paul used the word "firstborn." In truth you don't even know what that word means in context.

Look at the context of Colossians 1:15. Paul starts out describing Christ as "the image of the invisible God." In fact, the Bible states in several locations that the essence or substance of God is invisible to human beings, (Romans 1:20, 1 Timothy 1:17; Hebrews 11:27, and Hebrews 1:3. It also states (which I have brought up on numerous occasions) even from Jesus Himself that God the Father cannot be seen and it is Jesus Christ who has made the Father known. (John 1:18; 14:9).

Now, getting back to that word "firstborn." The Greek word is "prototokos" and it does not imply that Jesus is a part of creation or is a creation Himself. It indicates His priority and sovereignty over all creation. This is proved by the next verse which is Colossians 1:16. "For by Him WERE ALL THINGS CREATED." Then you have that "firstborn" showing up again at Colossians 1:18, "He is also head of the body; the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything."

Did you get that quasar? That He Himself might come to have first place in everything." In other words, Jesus Christ is the "firstborn" (prototokos), the first to rise from the realm of the dead IN A PERMANENT MANNER OR FASHION. Revelation 1:5 backs this up when it says, "and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us, and released us from our sins by His blood."

And yes, I have read all your quotes from the sites you want to keep sending me as though that makes your position right. And if you really have studied and researched this issue like you claim why is it you have a problem answering simple questions? I ask you to explain Micah 5:2 and you can't do it. Or how did John the Baptist know that Jesus Christ existed before him? I've ask you to reconsider your position but your not even openminded to the fact that you "might" just be wrong. Then to make matters worse you quote a whole bunch of Scholars and teachers, and even book writers that disagree with you including your so-called mentor. You further use sources that outright deny the deity of Jesus Christ to support your heretical position. Is that the best you have to prove your position, heretics and cults who are anti-christ?

Micah 5:2: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans[a] of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”

Is throroughly addresswed in the following Biblical Description of God and origin of the pre-incarnate Jesus:

The Biblical Description of God - in Theology/Prophecy & Revelation Forum Forum

The above link proves the Scriptural facts which CAN BE taight from the Bible! You, my friend are the one with the monkey on your back! Either prove one single thing false from Scripture, or the view you hold to are the false ones. Give me Scriptural proof for the Trinity, the Bible, nor Jesus or His apostles ever taught!


Quasar92

 

[bluto]

I have no problem at all in respect t yur claim that I do, pertaining to the identity of the Father and the Son. You have a problem of not reading the Biblical description of God ad origin of the pre-incarnate Jesus, I posted on this thread some time ago. Tou can review it here, as I don't have the time to try finding it on this thread:

The Biblical Description of God - in Theology/Prophecy & Revelation Forum Forum

FYI, the only begotten Son of God, did not exist until in MJt.1:20 and in Lk.1:32 and 35. In the sense you claim, he was the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15, confirming Pr.8:22-36. As such He can be seen as a sn of God, as the sos of God were in Gen.6. In another sense, all of us who belong to Christ, are also sons of God.

The Biblical description of God documented in the above link, can all be thoroughly supported from the Bible, which the Trinity cannot be. You claim God did not create the universe by Jesus, is refuted in Heb.1:1-2. I am contradicting nor forgetting nothing! Read what the Scriptures teach from the link above. You're spinning your wheels from wild claims you cannot support, or from those I have already acknowledged long ago.

As I have said before, I was a Trinitarian for 45 years and then spent 35 more developing God's identity of Himself from the Bible. You have written nothing I do not already know and have studied and researched it.

Yes quasar, you do have a big problem with the identity of the Father and of the Son. For one thing God the Father is not the person of the Holy Spirit. Number two, the Bible clearly teaches the Son was always the Son and pre-existed His incarnation as a man who was "SENT" by His Father. I gave you Micah 5:2 so please explain who the person is that came from Bethlehem and His goings forth are from eternity? What is the name of that person quasar?

You also said, "FYI, the only begotten Son of God, did not exist until in MJt.1:20 and in Lk.1:32 and 35. In the sense you claim, he was the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15," Then you quoted Proverbs 8:22-36 thinking Colossians 1:15 supports the idea that Jesus Christ is a created being just because the Apostle Paul used the word "firstborn." In truth you don't even know what that word means in context.

Look at the context of Colossians 1:15. Paul starts out describing Christ as "the image of the invisible God." In fact, the Bible states in several locations that the essence or substance of God is invisible to human beings, (Romans 1:20, 1 Timothy 1:17; Hebrews 11:27, and Hebrews 1:3. It also states (which I have brought up on numerous occasions) even from Jesus Himself that God the Father cannot be seen and it is Jesus Christ who has made the Father known. (John 1:18; 14:9).

Now, getting back to that word "firstborn." The Greek word is "prototokos" and it does not imply that Jesus is a part of creation or is a creation Himself. It indicates His priority and sovereignty over all creation. This is proved by the next verse which is Colossians 1:16. "For by Him WERE ALL THINGS CREATED." Then you have that "firstborn" showing up again at Colossians 1:18, "He is also head of the body; the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything."

Did you get that quasar? That He Himself might come to have first place in everything." In other words, Jesus Christ is the "firstborn" (prototokos), the first to rise from the realm of the dead IN A PERMANENT MANNER OR FASHION. Revelation 1:5 backs this up when it says, "and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us, and released us from our sins by His blood."

And yes, I have read all your quotes from the sites you want to keep sending me as though that makes your position right. And if you really have studied and researched this issue like you claim why is it you have a problem answering simple questions? I ask you to explain Micah 5:2 and you can't do it. Or how did John the Baptist know that Jesus Christ existed before him? I've ask you to reconsider your position but your not even openminded to the fact that you "might" just be wrong. Then to make matters worse you quote a whole bunch of Scholars and teachers, and even book writers that disagree with you including your so-called mentor. You further use sources that outright deny the deity of Jesus Christ to support your heretical position. Is that the best you have to prove your position, heretics and cults who are anti-christ?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

Disregard this post.

 

[bluto]

Micah 5:2: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans[a] of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”

Is throroughly addresswed in the following Biblical Description of God and origin of the pre-incarnate Jesus:

The Biblical Description of God - in Theology/Prophecy & Revelation Forum Forum

The above link proves the Scriptural facts which CAN BE taight from the Bible! You, my friend are the one with the monkey on your back! Either prove one single thing false from Scripture, or the view you hold to are the false ones. Give me Scriptural proof for the Trinity, the Bible, nor Jesus or His apostles ever taught!


Quasar92

There you go again quasar, you can't even exegete Micah 5:2 and you keep referring me to old cut and past sites which I said I read. But listen, maybe I missed where you addressed Micah 5:2 so why don't you enlighten me? Secondly, your initial question was about the identity of God the Father and the Son of God which I addressed by saying God the Father is "NOT" the person of the Holy Spirit and I addressed that Jesus Christ pre-existed His incarantion with solid Biblical proof.

Again, the issue is "identity" and as far as the Trinity is concerned I'm going to do what you keep telling me to do? Read my very first post (#1) in the thread which explains how the Trinity can be and is proved. And btw, Jesus was not sent by God His Father to give proof of the Trinity. He was sent according to Luke 19:10, "For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[VCO]

Quasar92 & jaybird88

Here is an excerpt from the Doctrinal Statement of Faith of the Church where I worship.
PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR STATEMENT OF FAITH from where you Worship
about the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The Trinity
We believe in one God, the eternal, infinite and all-knowing Spirit in whom all things have their source, support and end (Deut. 6:4; John4:24; Gen. 1:1). Within this one God three distinct persons exist—Father, Son and Holy Spirit —united, equal and perfect in all attributes (Matt. 28:19;Acts 7:55; Acts 10:38; 2 Cor. 13:14). The Godhead is one in essence, but within this perfect unity and equality exists order in function—first the Father, then the Son, and then the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 11:3; John 17:3-4; John 15:26; John16:7).

The Person and Work of the Father

We believe God the Father to be the first person of theTrinity. As part of the Trinity, God the Father is distinct both in His relationship to the other members of the Godhead and in His works as part ofthe Trinity. Within the Godhead, the Father is distinct in that He begets the Son and the Holy Spirit proceeds from Him (John 1:14; 15:26). Although allworks of God are the acts of a Triune God, some acts are especially ascribed to the Father, such as creation (Eph. 3:9; Heb. 12:9), election (1 Pet. 1:2;Eph. 1:4), redemption (John 6:37; 17:4-7), and the predetermining of all things (Eph. 1:5; John 5:30). God the Father is also distinct in that He is seen asthe Father of the second member of the Trinity (John 1:18; 14:13) and the spiritual Father of all who believe in Him (Matt. 5:45; 1 John 3:1).

The Person and Work of Christ

We believe the Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God,became man without ceasing to be God; that He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin, that He might redeem sinful man. He accomplished thisredemption by voluntarily giving Himself as a sinless substitutionary sacrifice on the cross, thereby satisfying God’s righteous judgment against sin. He gaveproof that He accomplished that redemption by His bodily resurrection from the grave. He then ascended to the right hand of His Father where He intercedes onbehalf of those who trust Him (John 1:1,2,14,18; Luke 1:34,35; Rom. 3:24-26;8:34).

The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit

We believe the Holy Spirit is the Divine Person who convicts the world of sin; that He alone brings new life to those who are spirituallydead; that He baptizes (or places) all believers into the one true Church,which is the Body of Christ; that He indwells them permanently, seals them untothe day of redemption, bestows spiritual gifts upon them, fills (controls)those who are yielding to Him (John 3:3-8; 16:7-11; 1 Cor. 12:13; John14:16,17; Eph. 4:30; 1 Cor. 12:7-11; Eph. 5:18).

 

[Quasar92]

There you go again quasar, you can't even exegete Micah 5:2 and you keep referring me to old cut and past sites which I said I read. But listen, maybe I missed where you addressed Micah 5:2 so why don't you enlighten me? Secondly, your initial question was about the identity of God the Father and the Son of God which I addressed by saying God the Father is "NOT" the person of the Holy Spirit and I addressed that Jesus Christ pre-existed His incarantion with solid Biblical proof.

Again, the issue is "identity" and as far as the Trinity is concerned I'm going to do what you keep telling me to do? Read my very first post (#1) in the thread which explains how the Trinity can be and is proved. And btw, Jesus was not sent by God His Father to give proof of the Trinity. He was sent according to Luke 19:10, "For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

What's your problem? You've had your answer several times! If you can't find it from what I have posted, Micah 5:2 is reference to Jesus origin from "ancient times." No doubt about it, the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15, confirming Pr.8;22-36. The time factor represents about 13.6 billion years ago, before the universe was created, as recorded in Heb.1:1-2! Is there anything else I can help you with bluto?


Quasar92

 

[Quasar92]

Disregard this post.

No reason whatever to disregard it bluto, it is the Biblical description of God and origin of the pre-incarnate Jesus. Al of which can readily be taught from the Bible, which the Trinity cannot be.


Quasar92

 

[Quasar92]

Quasar92 & jaybird88

Here is an excerpt from the Doctrinal Statement of Faith of the Church where I worship.
PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR STATEMENT OF FAITH from where you Worship
about the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

This is mine, since August of 1937, while I was inn High School:

In the most simple way it can be described is the following:
1. First of all: "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God..." Rom.3:23a. In other words, we are all separated from God, until...

2. "...and are justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus." Rom.3:23b.
"God presented Him as a sacrifice of atonement through faith in His blood..." Rom.3:26a. In other words, God gave up His Son to shed His blood and die, a sacrificial death, in our place, paying our sin debts in full, past, present and future, for everyone who believes in Him.

3. "For God so loved the world He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." Jn.3:16.

4. "That if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved." Rom.10:9-10.

5. "And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in Him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession - to the glory of His name." Eph.1:13-14.

6. "For those God foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified." Rom.8:29-30.

7. The Scriptures also tell us the following: "Whoever believes in Him [Jesus] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe in Him, is condemned already." Jn.3:18. Until they confess and believe anytime during their lifetime, as addressed above.

8. Upon believing/receiving Jesus as our Lord and Savior, He gives/baptizes us with the Holy Spirit, immediately. Mt.3:11. Providing us with His promise of our salvation and eternal life. Jn.3:16. Then, as Peter said, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of your sins." Acts 2:38.

Please feel free to inquire as to any questions you may have regarding the above.



Quasar92

 

[jaybird88]

Quasar92 & jaybird88

Here is an excerpt from the Doctrinal Statement of Faith of the Church where I worship.
PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR STATEMENT OF FAITH from where you Worship
about the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

i have no idea what the statements of faith are at my church. i go there for Sunday school and praise and worship. i dont go there to follow the group, the bible teaches not to do that. follow Jesus instead.

 

[RBA238]

To knowingly deny any of the essentials of the Christian Faith is proof.

Jesus only has one Church not any others. A Christian is defined by What The Church he founded teaches from his word. In fact We are to obey the original teachings of his original Apostles to be saved..(I Timothy 4 verse 16/ Acts 2 verse 42). Again, Jesus nor his Apostles ever taught there are "3 Persons in One God". To beleive they did, is false doctrine..

 

[Placid]

Hi, I am a new member and have been reading from page 1 of your good discussion on this topic started by Bluto. --- I read with interest Post 25 by Quasar92. I also have read the quote in AW Tozer's book, "The knowledge of the Holy." where it says, --- That the Trinity is an "incomprehensible mystery."

This made God a 'mystery' to mankind, when the Scriptures say, 'that we are to know God.'
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." John 17:3. --- We are to know "The only true God."
　
I'm sure you have covered most of the aspects of the faulty trinity doctrine, and I my not read all of the comments but I want to come and learn more, as we each have our own understanding, but our shades of perception might be influenced by our opinions, or others, so we need to examine everything in the the light of the Scriptures.
--- I have been involved in a long discussion on the subject with some trinititarians and I discovered some interesting things. The Church had followed the Apostles' teaching up to about 300 AD, in spite of persecution from Rome, but there was a dispute that had grown among the Churches about understanding God, and the relationship to Christ.
Arius said that "There had to be a time when God existed alone." --- This would mean that the Word, (through whom all things were created, John 1:3), and Christ, came later. --- We find references in the annals of history, that the Word was called a 'Son of God,' --- It follows logically when there is a Father-Son relationship, that the Father had to come first. --- Then both Christ and Jesus are called 'the Son of God.' --- Notice the interesting wording in Luke 1:
34 Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?"
35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be 'called' the Son of God."
--- It doesn't really say that Jesus 'was' the Son of God, but that He would be CALLED the Son of God. --- Which He was called through the Gospels, and still is. --- And it comes down to us where it says in Romans 8:
14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." --- So we identify with Jesus.
I will continue later, --- and feel free to question and challenge what I say, as you have been doing in the discussion.
Placid
　

 

[tourist]

Hi, I am a new member and have been reading from page 1 of your good discussion on this topic started by Bluto. --- I read with interest Post 25 by Quasar92. I also have read the quote in AW Tozer's book, "The knowledge of the Holy." where it says, --- That the Trinity is an "incomprehensible mystery."

This made God a 'mystery' to mankind, when the Scriptures say, 'that we are to know God.'
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." John 17:3. --- We are to know "The only true God."
　
I'm sure you have covered most of the aspects of the faulty trinity doctrine, and I my not read all of the comments but I want to come and learn more, as we each have our own understanding, but our shades of perception might be influenced by our opinions, or others, so we need to examine everything in the the light of the Scriptures.
--- I have been involved in a long discussion on the subject with some trinititarians and I discovered some interesting things. The Church had followed the Apostles' teaching up to about 300 AD, in spite of persecution from Rome, but there was a dispute that had grown among the Churches about understanding God, and the relationship to Christ.
Arius said that "There had to be a time when God existed alone." --- This would mean that the Word, (through whom all things were created, John 1:3), and Christ, came later. --- We find references in the annals of history, that the Word was called a 'Son of God,' --- It follows logically when there is a Father-Son relationship, that the Father had to come first. --- Then both Christ and Jesus are called 'the Son of God.' --- Notice the interesting wording in Luke 1:
34 Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?"
35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be 'called' the Son of God."
--- It doesn't really say that Jesus 'was' the Son of God, but that He would be CALLED the Son of God. --- Which He was called through the Gospels, and still is. --- And it comes down to us where it says in Romans 8:
14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." --- So we identify with Jesus.
I will continue later, --- and feel free to question and challenge what I say, as you have been doing in the discussion.
Placid
　

Glad to have you aboard. Welcome to CC.

 

[Quasar92]

Hi, I am a new member and have been reading from page 1 of your good discussion on this topic started by Bluto. --- I read with interest Post 25 by Quasar92. I also have read the quote in AW Tozer's book, "The knowledge of the Holy." where it says, --- That the Trinity is an "incomprehensible mystery."

This made God a 'mystery' to mankind, when the Scriptures say, 'that we are to know God.'
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." John 17:3. --- We are to know "The only true God."
　
I'm sure you have covered most of the aspects of the faulty trinity doctrine, and I my not read all of the comments but I want to come and learn more, as we each have our own understanding, but our shades of perception might be influenced by our opinions, or others, so we need to examine everything in the the light of the Scriptures.
--- I have been involved in a long discussion on the subject with some trinititarians and I discovered some interesting things. The Church had followed the Apostles' teaching up to about 300 AD, in spite of persecution from Rome, but there was a dispute that had grown among the Churches about understanding God, and the relationship to Christ.
Arius said that "There had to be a time when God existed alone." --- This would mean that the Word, (through whom all things were created, John 1:3), and Christ, came later. --- We find references in the annals of history, that the Word was called a 'Son of God,' --- It follows logically when there is a Father-Son relationship, that the Father had to come first. --- Then both Christ and Jesus are called 'the Son of God.' --- Notice the interesting wording in Luke 1:
34 Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?"
35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be 'called' the Son of God."
--- It doesn't really say that Jesus 'was' the Son of God, but that He would be CALLED the Son of God. --- Which He was called through the Gospels, and still is. --- And it comes down to us where it says in Romans 8:
14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." --- So we identify with Jesus.
I will continue later, --- and feel free to question and challenge what I say, as you have been doing in the discussion.
Placid
　

Thanks for sharing. Very well said.


Quasar92

 

[bluto]

Hi, I am a new member and have been reading from page 1 of your good discussion on this topic started by Bluto. --- I read with interest Post 25 by Quasar92. I also have read the quote in AW Tozer's book, "The knowledge of the Holy." where it says, --- That the Trinity is an "incomprehensible mystery."

This made God a 'mystery' to mankind, when the Scriptures say, 'that we are to know God.'
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." John 17:3. --- We are to know "The only true God."
　
I'm sure you have covered most of the aspects of the faulty trinity doctrine, and I my not read all of the comments but I want to come and learn more, as we each have our own understanding, but our shades of perception might be influenced by our opinions, or others, so we need to examine everything in the the light of the Scriptures.
--- I have been involved in a long discussion on the subject with some trinititarians and I discovered some interesting things. The Church had followed the Apostles' teaching up to about 300 AD, in spite of persecution from Rome, but there was a dispute that had grown among the Churches about understanding God, and the relationship to Christ.
Arius said that "There had to be a time when God existed alone." --- This would mean that the Word, (through whom all things were created, John 1:3), and Christ, came later. --- We find references in the annals of history, that the Word was called a 'Son of God,' --- It follows logically when there is a Father-Son relationship, that the Father had to come first. --- Then both Christ and Jesus are called 'the Son of God.' --- Notice the interesting wording in Luke 1:
34 Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?"
35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be 'called' the Son of God."
--- It doesn't really say that Jesus 'was' the Son of God, but that He would be CALLED the Son of God. --- Which He was called through the Gospels, and still is. --- And it comes down to us where it says in Romans 8:
14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." --- So we identify with Jesus.
I will continue later, --- and feel free to question and challenge what I say, as you have been doing in the discussion.
Placid
　
[/QUOTE

Welcome to the boards placid. You said in your post the trinity doctrine is faulty. Can you please explain on what basis it is faulty? Secondly, did you read my post #1 on this thread I started? What did I say that is not Biblical? Lastly, just because something is a mystery or hard to understand does "NOT" mean it's not true.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[popeye]

Cue rod sterling.
" imagine a Christian forum where there is no trinity,no gifts,and no bride in heaven"

News flash. No imagination needed

Go Hillary!!!

 

[bluto]

Cue rod sterling.
" imagine a Christian forum where there is no trinity,no gifts,and no bride in heaven"

News flash. No imagination needed

Go Hillary!!!

What do you mean go Hillary? Maybe you two can hold hands as you both ascend north during the "fictitious" pre-trib rapture? And btw on a serious note, she needs to be prayed for that she does become a Christian.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RBA238]

What do you mean go Hillary? Maybe you two can hold hands as you both ascend north during the "fictitious" pre-trib rapture? And btw on a serious note, she needs to be prayed for that she does become a Christian.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

1 John 2 verse 1 (KJV) "My little children, these things i write unto you, that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate WITH THE FATHER, JESUS CHRIST THE RIGHTEOUS".

JOHN 5 VERSE 43: Jesus said; "I HAVE COME IN MY FATHER'S NAME, And you receive me not. If another comes in his name, him you'll receive".

The End Result: The Father is ONE LORD/ ONE GOD..Flesh and Spirit as One....Class dismissed.

 

[bluto]

1 John 2 verse 1 (KJV) "My little children, these things i write unto you, that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate WITH THE FATHER, JESUS CHRIST THE RIGHTEOUS".

JOHN 5 VERSE 43: Jesus said; "I HAVE COME IN MY FATHER'S NAME, And you receive me not. If another comes in his name, him you'll receive".

The End Result: The Father is ONE LORD/ ONE GOD..Flesh and Spirit as One....Class dismissed.

So rba, your one of those huh? You know like John 17:3 says, "And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent." In other words, God the Father is the only true God and Jesus Christ is just along for the ride as "chopped" liver huh?

It's obvious you never thought this issue through especially when you made this Sunday School statement? "The End Result: The Father is ONE LORD/ ONE GOD..Flesh and Spirit as One....Class dismissed." Look, Jesus Christ is God the Father's Son and as far as I know it's a universal law that sons share the same nature as their father.

Number 2! Jesus gives eternal life to all that God the Father gives Him, which is a claim to being absolute Deity "SINCE" only god can give eternal life. Number3! Jesus forgives sin and only God can forgive sins. Number 4! Jesus existed in glory with the Father even "BEFORE" the world was created. Read John 17:5. Number 4! Jesus states that everything that the Father has b elongs to Him, which makes Him the heir of everything that exists. Not to mention that Jesus Christ created everything that does exist. John 1:3, Colossians 1:16,17 as well as Revelation 3:14.

Number 5! Jesus and the Father both indwell all believers, read John 14:23. This also means that Jesus Christ would be omnipresent and therefore God since God alone is omnipresent. Number 6! The context of John 17:3 about the Father being the only true God in no way was meant to deny that Christ is God as well. And the Bible makes it clear that the Holy Spirit is God as well. Read Acts 5:3-4.

Now, I have a question and it's in regard to Romans 8:8-11. I'm not going to quote the verses but rather you read them and then please address the following question? 1-Does the Spirit of Christ (also called here in this passage, "the Spirit of God" dwell in you?

If your answer is "YES" than how is it that the Lord Jesus Christ is NOT God? I mean, how can a spirit who is called "the Sprit of God" in the Bible dwell in you AND in others and yet NOT actually BE God?

If your answer is "NO" (either by simply saying 'no" or by trying to redfine what it means to have the spirit of God AKA, the "Spirit of Christ" dwelling in you) do you understand that you are, according to Romans 8:9, "NONE OF HIS?" The point is laid out at 1 John 2:23, "Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also." You cannot have fellowship with the Father alone and deny the fellowship of the Son. There are one and the same God, period. "This is what Jesus meant when He said at John 10:30, "I and My Father "WE" are one," that is one in nature. Now class is dismissed for you to go and do some homework.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[Placid]

Hi, thanks for the welcome, Tourist, Quasar92, and Bluto.

Quote from Post 754:
Welcome to the boards placid. You said in your post the trinity doctrine is faulty. Can you please explain on what basis it is faulty? Secondly, did you read my post #1 on this thread I started? What did I say that is not Biblical?

Response: --- I will explain what is faulty with the trinity doctrine as I continue

Quote from Post 1:
"But first I want to say the doctrine of the trinity is not an "assumption" as quasar seems to think. It is the normative systematic theology of God in Christianity and is BASED on the fact that the Bible is explicit in telling us that there is, was and forever will be only ONE God and the fact that the Bible IDENTIFIES three (and only three) persons as God."

--- While this is a general understanding of Christians, there is a different thought in Modern or Liberal Theology, so we will see how accurate your views are to the Scriptures.
While many people who become Christians, learn the trinity doctrine in their Churches, --- but they receive their salvation through Faith in God, and by accepting Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord, --- then it can't be tied to a particular doctrine that causes division. --- So, as we study the doctrine of trinity, we can agree to disagree, agreeably, can we not?
　

 

[Quasar92]

So rba, your one of those huh? You know like John 17:3 says, "And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent." In other words, God the Father is the only true God and Jesus Christ is just along for the ride as "chopped" liver huh?

It's obvious you never thought this issue through especially when you made this Sunday School statement? "The End Result: The Father is ONE LORD/ ONE GOD..Flesh and Spirit as One....Class dismissed." Look, Jesus Christ is God the Father's Son and as far as I know it's a universal law that sons share the same nature as their father.

Number 2! Jesus gives eternal life to all that God the Father gives Him, which is a claim to being absolute Deity "SINCE" only god can give eternal life. Number3! Jesus forgives sin and only God can forgive sins. Number 4! Jesus existed in glory with the Father even "BEFORE" the world was created. Read John 17:5. Number 4! Jesus states that everything that the Father has b elongs to Him, which makes Him the heir of everything that exists. Not to mention that Jesus Christ created everything that does exist. John 1:3, Colossians 1:16,17 as well as Revelation 3:14.

Number 5! Jesus and the Father both indwell all believers, read John 14:23. This also means that Jesus Christ would be omnipresent and therefore God since God alone is omnipresent. Number 6! The context of John 17:3 about the Father being the only true God in no way was meant to deny that Christ is God as well. And the Bible makes it clear that the Holy Spirit is God as well. Read Acts 5:3-4.

Now, I have a question and it's in regard to Romans 8:8-11. I'm not going to quote the verses but rather you read them and then please address the following question? 1-Does the Spirit of Christ (also called here in this passage, "the Spirit of God" dwell in you?

If your answer is "YES" than how is it that the Lord Jesus Christ is NOT God? I mean, how can a spirit who is called "the Sprit of God" in the Bible dwell in you AND in others and yet NOT actually BE God?

If your answer is "NO" (either by simply saying 'no" or by trying to redfine what it means to have the spirit of God AKA, the "Spirit of Christ" dwelling in you) do you understand that you are, according to Romans 8:9, "NONE OF HIS?" The point is laid out at 1 John 2:23, "Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also." You cannot have fellowship with the Father alone and deny the fellowship of the Son. There are one and the same God, period. "This is what Jesus meant when He said at John 10:30, "I and My Father "WE" are one," that is one in nature. Now class is dismissed for you to go and do some homework.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

I compliment you in how well you address and defend your views, bluto. Unfortunately you are on the wrong team. Reference in the following is to the thread subject in which the facts are revealed that the Trinity cannt be taught from the Bible:

[SUP]Jn.8:28 "[/SUP]So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me."

[SUP]Jn.14:10 "[/SUP]Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work."

NOTICE HOW JESUS IDENTIFIES GOD: "THE FATHER [BY HIS TITLE] IS IN ME,'' WHO IS THE HOLY SPIRIT DWELLING WITHIN HIM, ONE PERSON, NOT TWO!

[SUP]Jn.14:28 [/SUP]“You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."

[SUP]Jn.17:3 "[/SUP]Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

Jn.17:5 "And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began."

[SUP]Jm.17:20 [/SUP]“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, [SUP]21 [/SUP]that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.[SUP]22 [/SUP]I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— [SUP]23 [/SUP]I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."

NOTICE HOW JESUS DESCRIBES BEING ONE WITH THE FATHER SPIRITUALLY, BUT TWO SEPARATE PERSONS, AS ALL FATHERS AND SONS ARE.


THE BIBLICAL DESCRIPTION OF GOD AND ORIGIN OF JESUS DOCUMENTED IN THE LINK BELOW:


The Biblical description of God and origin of Jesus Christ in Theology/Prophecy & Revelation Forum Forum

Surprising admissions that the Trinity isn't in the Bible! Never taught by Jesus or His disciples:

Notice these admissions from a number of reputable sources and authors who, while themselves affirming the Trinity, acknowledge that the word "Trinity" and the doctrine is not found in the Bible.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia acknowledges that "'trinity' is a second-century term found nowhere in the Bible, and the Scriptures present no finished trinitarian statement" (1988, Vol. 4, "Trinity," p. 914). It further states that "church fathers crystallized the doctrine in succeeding centuries"—long after the apostles had passed from the scene.

Yhe HarperCollins Bible Dictionary tells us, "The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the NT [New Testament]" (Paul Achtemeier, editor, 1996, "Trinity").

The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism states: "Today, however, scholars generally agree that there is no doctrine of the Trinity as such in either the OT [Old Testament] or the NT [New Testament] . . . It would go far beyond the intention and thought-forms of the OT to suppose that a late-fourth-century or thirteenth-century Christian doctrine can be found there . . . Likewise, the NT does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity" (Richard McBrien, general editor, 1995, "God," pp. 564-565).

The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, in its article on the Trinity, explains: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies . . . It was not until the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons" (1985 edition, Micropaedia, Vol. 11, p. 928).

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology points out that "primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds of the early church" (Colin Brown, editor, Vol. 2, 1976, "God," p. 84).


Historian and science fiction writer H.G. Wells, in his noted work The Outline of History, points out, "There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the trinity—at any rate from him" (1920, Vol. 2, p. 499).

Martin Luther, the German priest who initiated the Protestant Reformation, conceded, "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" (reproduced in The Sermons of Martin Luther, John Lenker, editor, Vol. 3, 1988, p. 406).

The Oxford Companion to the Bible states: "Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon [i.e., actual Scripture]" (Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan, editors, 1993, "Trinity," p. 782).


Professor Charles Ryrie, in his respected work Basic Theology, writes: "Many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the Scripture for which there are no proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this. It is fair to say that the Bible does not clearly teach the doctrine of the Trinity . . . In fact, there is not even one proof text, if by proof text we mean a verse or passage that 'clearly' states that there is one God who exists in three persons" (1999, p. 89).


Ryrie goes on to state: "The above illustrations prove the fallacy of concluding that if something is not proof texted in the Bible we cannot clearly teach the results . . . If that were so, I could never teach the doctrine of the Trinity" (p. 90).


Millard Erickson, research professor of theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes that the Trinity "is not clearly or explicitly taught anywhere in Scripture, yet it is widely regarded as a central doctrine, indispensable to the Christian faith. In this regard, it goes contrary to what is virtually an axiom of biblical doctrine, namely, that there is a direct correlation between the scriptural clarity of a doctrine and its cruciality to the faith and life of the church.


"In view of the difficulty of the subject and the great amount of effort expended to maintain this doctrine, we may well ask ourselves what might justify all this trouble" (God in Three Persons: A Contemporary Interpretation of the Trinity, 1995,p. 12).

Professor Erickson further states that the Trinity teaching "is not present in biblical thought, but arose when biblical thought was pressed into this foreign mold [of Greek concepts]. Thus, the doctrine of the Trinity goes beyond and even distorts what the Bible says about God" (p. 20).

Professor Erickson later points out: "It is claimed that the doctrine of the Trinity is a very important, crucial, and even basic doctrine. If that is indeed the case, should it not be somewhere more clearly, directly, and explicitly stated in the Bible? If this is the doctrine that especially constitutes Christianity's uniqueness . . . how can it be only implied in the biblical revelation? . . . For here is a seemingly crucial matter where the Scriptures do not speak loudly and clearly.

"Little direct response can be made to this charge. It is unlikely that any text of Scripture can be shown to teach the doctrine of the Trinity in a clear, direct, and unmistakable fashion" (pp. 108-109). Later in this booklet we will consider various scriptures often used to support the Trinity doctrine.

Shirley Guthrie, Jr., professor of theology at Columbia Theological Seminary, writes: "The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. Neither the word 'trinity' itself nor such language as 'one-in-three,' 'three-in-one,' one 'essence' (or 'substance'), and three 'persons,' is biblical language. The language of the doctrine is the language of the ancient church taken from classical Greek philosophy" (Christian Doctrine, 1994, pp. 76-77)."


See the following for much more: Is the Trinity Biblical



Quasar92