The Trinity

[zone]

tests have show great results have been found for people online
and those with heads crammed full to bursting

morning mikey

i'm thinkin' canadian bacon and eggs (poached, medium); red potatoes; multigrain toast (no butter); coffee & juice.
blackberry jam (made last summer) after...if i have a piecea toast left.

how to cook though...that is the question....

WILSON!! breakfast!

 

[mark54]

I have no problem with the word Trinity, my problem is with the word EQUAL that goes before it for many

Maybe I should qualify the above. A Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, God/His prescence in three persons, not God IS three persons

 

[mark54]

Wow, Mark. You joined CC after me and I have far less posts. Remember this is a competition. Most posts wins a place in Heaven!

That's because so many people want to talk to me


And that's because so many people are eager to prove me wrong

 

[Jon4TheCross]

I am going to guess from these scriptures that your answer would be "yes". If they were separated for one moment in time, the Trinity doctrine would be false.

Some of these scriptures inseparably connect us spiritually to the Godhead. Do you believe that because we are spiritually connected to the Godhead, that we are physically a part of the Godhead? For instance, I asked the question about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. You gave me scriptures to prove that David can go nowhere without God being there, so do you believe that David is physically part of the Godhead? You mention another scripture that we cannot be separated from the love of God. Does that mean that we are physically part of the Godhead?

My point was that if there is one moment in time that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are separated, then the Trinity doctrine starts to have a problem. It is a fact that if the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spriti are physically separate, then the Trinity doctrine is false, regardless of the fact that David can go nowhere where the Father is not.

It is true that the Godhead may be inseparably connected spiritually, and in this way they are never, even one moment in time separated. But as your scriptures elequently demonstrate, so are we. But are we physically connected? Are the three members of the Godhead truely of the same substance? Meaning that where Jesus is, the Father and the Holy Spirit are there too, always, inseparable, undivided. Where the Holy Spirit is, the Father and Jesus are there too, always, inseparabe, undivided. Where God is, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are there too, always, inseparable, undivided.

So if we go to the Bible for proof, one way or the other, what do we discover? We find addequate support for the Godhead being 3 distinct persons in 1 God (The Trinity), but we also find addequate support for the Godhead being 3 separate and distinct persons. So who is the winner? We hardly can debate the issue because the Bible is our only source for proof, and it gives both sides many wonderful scriptures with which to prove their point.

We are all fairly street smart, so where do we go from here? This whole thread is proof that I am right, in fact throughout the ages wars have been fought and many hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children have been killed over this very issue. So what is the answer? There are 100 extremely intelligent people in this chat room, will one of you answer my question? Where do we go from here?

I'm think I do understand what you are communicating. To be separated in any way (spirit,soul,earthen vessel) we've gotta try to consider all the ways one might become separated. When talking about the physical (earthen vessel) separation, I suppose if the earthen vessel was at any point not under the power of God, then that would mean that it would be separated. What does it mean for an earthen vessel to be under the power (also partly meaning motivated) of God? I would say that a good example is when Jesus gave up the ghost.

Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.


When the earthen vessel of God was in the grave, it was there because God wanted it there. The earthen vessel of God has never been in a condition of not being under the power of God. When considering that we are the body of Christ, we must consider that the body of Christ is not corruptible. This body of flesh and blood is partly there so that we do have a choice to freely allow our flesh and blood body to suffer for the name of Jesus Christ. That by itself is a great reward, and this may or may not be our only opportunity to suffer for the name of Jesus Christ. Our earthen vessels that are not corruptible (the body of Christ) are of the same substance as the Captain of the Host of the Lord, and the priest forever after the order of Melchisidec, and the Son of God, Jesus Christ of Nazareth. When we are born again, even our earthen vessels cannot be separated from being under the power of God. Right now we're in the earthen vessels that must be changed or be dissolved, and yet we are still the body of Christ (His flesh, His bones) by the Spirit that dwells in the living temple of our souls. When the Spirit dwells in our soul, and the soul is in the blood, then even temporary bodies can be under the power of God, and be the body of Christ.

So a question to ask is....... Has my original earthen vessel ever been corrupted or not been under the power of God? Of course not, because this is the best case scenario, and only an unforgivable sin can permanently corrupt the eternal spirit,soul,and earthen vessel that we are.

The children of God are not corruptible, as God is not corruptible. We have a beginning, but no ending. God has no beginning or ending. The earthen vessel of God has not been out of his control, and it's always been under the power of God.


I added this part to clarify what I am referring to as the children of God........
1Jn 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

 

[hopesprings]

Anyways...I am very curious as to how you can admit that there is only One God, then say that Jesus is God also but not the one True God. I'm confused. Please explain...I can start a new thread if you'd rather...


Well by all means start a thread on it. I could write it all out here, but as you will ignore what I write and give me your ologies and isms not much point, so I will just give you two verses of scripture for now:


But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O GOD , will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
[SUP]9 [/SUP]You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore GOD, YOUR GOD, has set you above your companions
by anointing
Heb1:8&9

I wasn't trying to be a smarty pants...I was honestly asking how you reconcile the two. So, I actually won't ignore what you say...thanks for assuming tho...

As for the scripture you quoted...what exactly are you trying to prove by quoting it? That the Son is God but not the One True God? Does that mean that you believe that there is more then one God?

The Father speaks of the son with the Title God, BUT still says he is the Son's God. The point being there is ONLY ONE TRUE GOD. However you won't accept the plain words of Christ on that subject will you. You prefer what has to be extrapolated by the little grey cells, no buzz otherwise I guess

I don't understand exactly what you are saying. It sounds incredibly confusing. There is only One True God (being God the Father), but Jesus is called God but that doesn't mean he actual is God, it's just a title when applied to him. Do I have that right?

 

[mark54]

I wasn't trying to be a smarty pants...I was honestly asking how you reconcile the two. So, I actually won't ignore what you say...thanks for assuming tho...

As for the scripture you quoted...what exactly are you trying to prove by quoting it? That the Son is God but not the One True God? Does that mean that you believe that there is more then one God?



I don't understand exactly what you are saying. It sounds incredibly confusing. There is only One True God (being God the Father), but Jesus is called God but that doesn't mean he actual is God, it's just a title when applied to him. Do I have that right?

The Father when speaking of the Son spoke of him with thetitle God, but in the very next verse confirms he is the Son’s God. That iswritten very plainly. Christ himself pointed out to the Pharisees. ‘He calledthem gods to whom the word of God came’(John 10:35)
Do you believe those people were the one true God as wellbecause they were referred to as gods?

Now you have said that you have produced scripture that statese must believe Christ is God., Yet many times in this thread Elin has pointed out there is not one plain scripture that even states Christ is God in the bible. So do we have a cryptic bible? A bible where the requirement of belief unto salvation is not plainly stated?
Now I don’t know much about other religions sacred books,but I doubt any of them would say the fundamental requirement of belief in their sacred books is not mentioned plainly.
You see. Neither Peter, James, John, Paul, or Christ commanded anyone to believe Christ was God Himself unto salvation. Neither don early all the ministers of the Trinitarian churches(I have never known one who does) Neither do well over 90% of churchgoers believe a person must believe Christ is God unto salvation.
It is nearly always an internet thing. Because it is based
on the extrapolations of the little grey cells. If you are right that the Bible plainly states a person must believe Christ is God unto salvation, you in effect condemn nearly all of the Trinitarian ministers in the pulpits. For you and I both know any minister is obligated to fearlessly and plainly preach what is and what is unacceptable belief unto salvation and the consequences of getting it wrong
So what will you do now, deflect, or argue against what is unarguable?

 

[hopesprings]

The Father when speaking of the Son spoke of him with thetitle God, but in the very next verse confirms he is the Son’s God. That iswritten very plainly. Christ himself pointed out to the Pharisees. ‘He calledthem gods to whom the word of God came’(John 10:35)
Do you believe those people were the one true God as wellbecause they were referred to as gods?

My answer is no, the context of Ps. 82 is quite clear.

Please read John 10 starting at the beginning of the chapter. Please take notice of the fact that Jesus calls himself the Good Shepherd that guides the sheep, and all that that implies. Please also take notice that after Jesus answers the Jews in verses 34-38, they seek again to stone him. Why would they do that if he was suddenly making himself to be less then God? Mark, please realize I am not arguing with you for the sake of arguing. I am honestly interested in your response.

Now you have said that you have produced scripture that statese must believe Christ is God., Yet many times in this thread Elin has pointed out there is not one plain scripture that even states Christ is God in the bible. So do we have a cryptic bible? A bible where the requirement of belief unto salvation is not plainly stated?

Now I don’t know much about other religions sacred books,but I doubt any of them would say the fundamental requirement of belief in their sacred books is not mentioned plainly.
You see. Neither Peter, James, John, Paul, or Christ commanded anyone to believe Christ was God Himself unto salvation. Neither don early all the ministers of the Trinitarian churches(I have never known one who does) Neither do well over 90% of churchgoers believe a person must believe Christ is God unto salvation.
It is nearly always an internet thing. Because it is based
on the extrapolations of the little grey cells. If you are right that the Bible plainly states a person must believe Christ is God unto salvation, you in effect condemn nearly all of the Trinitarian ministers in the pulpits. For you and I both know any minister is obligated to fearlessly and plainly preach what is and what is unacceptable belief unto salvation and the consequences of getting it wrong
So what will you do now, deflect, or argue against what is unarguable?

Again, I am not trying to argue with you. I am trying to discuss this with you. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm arguing (I am having massive deja vu right now)....

Anyways...I think that John 8:24 is very clear that you must believe Jesus is 'I am' otherwise you will die in your sins. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it does seem to be saying that....quite clearly too...and, again, I am not condemning anyone. I am sure if there was an honest poll taken, we would find that most churches don't even preach the Gospel the way that it is presented in the bible. Sadly.

 

[Jon4TheCross]

For a person to believe/trust/act upon the fact that Jesus Christ of Nazareth died for our sins and rose from the grave and is alive today, that person must be drawn by the Father (soul stuff) to Jesus Christ of Nazareth (because we can approach the Father through the earthen vessel of the Father, which example shows us what a real Son of God is, cause He's real). If someone asks me if Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the Son of God, the answer is yes. If someone asks me if Jesus Christ is God, the answer is yes. Both are true is a very common conclusion in matters pertaining to God. All with no beginning are God Himself, that's how powerful He is.

If we tell someone that they really need to trust in Jesus Christ of Nazareth (I have found that many people understand the word trust better than believe), then we have taken on the task of showing them how we trust in God if that person chooses to trust in Jesus Christ of Nazareth. There will be questions, but the person does not need to have active knowledge that Jesus is God in order for them to be found trusting in God. Knowing Jesus more and more each day is something that happens automatically when we truly do want to.

If this is truly just a question of Jesus Christ of Nazareth being God or not, then I have these reminders (with scriptural support if needed, but I think we all know that these reminders are from scripture).

Exo_20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

I could give scripture again to remind us of The Captain of the Host of the Lord, and the priest forever after the order of Melchisidec (that's two witnesses), but I'll give another witness from Jesus Christ of Nazareth (which is the third in this reminder).

Don't ignore the verily, verily part

Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

So if we're really just trying to figure out if scripture supports that Jesus Christ of Nazareth is God, then I've given three witnesses. If someone disagrees concerning those witnesses, then I would ask what they think the name is of the person worshiped in the other two appearances mentioned?

We know that soul and spirit are not the same, but are connected. We know we have earthen vessels. Is it so hard to understand that there's parts to a walnut, but it's still one walnut? (there's better examples I know, but that one is hard to not understand). Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the Holy Spirit of the Right Hand of the Father, or I could say that Jesus Christ of Nazareth is what we are going to be (which we don't know exactly, but it includes an earthen vessel), only He has no beginning, and there is no measure with God, but we have a measure.


1Jn_3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.


We want to nourish people up when they decide to trust in Jesus, and if we cannot explain with scripture what the Son of God is, then we cannot give that person one of the greatest confidence boosters ever, which is knowing that Jesus Christ of Nazareth is God.

Luk 20:41 And he said unto them, How say they that Christ is David's son?
Luk 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Luk 20:43 Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Luk 20:44 David therefore calleth him Lord, how is he then his son?

So maybe we should take a baby step and agree yes or no concerning who the two men were?

Heb 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
Heb 7:2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;
Heb 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.



Jos 5:13 And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?
Jos 5:14 And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?
Jos 5:15 And the captain of the LORD'S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.

 

[mark54]

My answer is no, the context of Ps. 82 is quite clear.

Please read John 10 starting at the beginning of the chapter. Please take notice of the fact that Jesus calls himself the Good Shepherd that guides the sheep, and all that that implies. Please also take notice that after Jesus answers the Jews in verses 34-38, they seek again to stone him. Why would they do that if he was suddenly making himself to be less then God? Mark, please realize I am not arguing with you for the sake of arguing. I am honestly interested in your response.



Again, I am not trying to argue with you. I am trying to discuss this with you. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm arguing (I am having massive deja vu right now)....

Anyways...I think that John 8:24 is very clear that you must believe Jesus is 'I am' otherwise you will die in your sins. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it does seem to be saying that....quite clearly too...and, again, I am not condemning anyone. I am sure if there was an honest poll taken, we would find that most churches don't even preach the Gospel the way that it is presented in the bible. Sadly.

You do give me a wry smile, its the same old thing isn't it. Ignore the plainest of scripture on this subject, and by Christ himself and try to fit your verse in that certainly does not say Christ is God Himself. I have had all this before hopespring. I know how it works. You refuse to accept the plain words of Christ in John 17:3 which are crystal clear but then believe Christ contradicted himself in John8:24, amazing.

John 8:24
I told you that you would die in your sins unless you believe I am the one I claim to be

So who did Christ claim to be?

The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ,[SUP][e][/SUP] the Son of God.”
[SUP]64 [/SUP]“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied
There you go



As for the Jews wanting to stone Jesus becase they believed he was God Himself. That makes no sense at all. In John 19:7 they accused Christ beforte Pilate of claiming to be the Son of God because they wanted him crucified. Why did they not tell Pilate Christ claimed to be God Himself if that is what they believed?
I'm sorry Hopespring, there is no point to this, for you won't accept plain text, but your not the only one.
Thanks for the chat

 

[hopesprings]

You do give me a wry smile, its the same old thing isn't it. Ignore the plainest of scripture on this subject, and by Christ himself and try to fit your verse in that certainly does not say Christ is God Himself. I have had all this before hopespring. I know how it works. You refuse to accept the plain words of Christ in John 17:3 which are crystal clear but then believe Christ contradicted himself in John8:24, amazing.

John 8:24
I told you that you would die in your sins unless you believe I am the one I claim to be

So who did Christ claim to be?

The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ,[SUP][e][/SUP] the Son of God.”
[SUP]64 [/SUP]“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied
There you go



As for the Jews wanting to stone Jesus becase they believed he was God Himself. That makes no sense at all. In John 19:7 they accused Christ beforte Pilate of claiming to be the Son of God because they wanted him crucified. Why did they not tell Pilate Christ claimed to be God Himself if that is what they believed?
I'm sorry Hopespring, there is no point to this, for you won't accept plain text, but your not the only one.
Thanks for the chat

Okay, well, I can accept that you are not really interested in having a discussion with me anymore. It's too bad that you can't back up your own claims tho...using one verse theology doesn't fly....because that is what you are doing. Last I checked the bible contains more then one verse. The only person who is making a contradiction appear is you. But, I understand that you don't see it that way.

The Jews wanted to stone Jesus because he was making himself God - Jesus even points out to them that if he isn't doing the works of his Father then don't believe him. The works he was doing proved his deity. He doesn't refute their saying, this is evident in his reply to them and in the fact that they still wanted to stone him afterwards. If he wasn't God and the Jews had misunderstood his claims, then why didn't he just say 'no...you got it all wrong! I'm not God!"? At which point the Jew's would have been like, oh...okay, so your not committing blasphemy then. I'm sorry, but your conclusion is the one that doesn't make any sense: Jesus is only called God (capital G) even though there is only One True God (which would, incidentally, make him a false God - but we'll ignore that)...and even though this One True God will not give any of his glory to anyone else, he for some reason, breaks his own word and gives some of his glory to this Jesus character who is called God but really isn't God. I don't get it.

Jesus being the Son of God totally implies that He is also God. The coming Messiah, was to be the Lord. Jesus was the coming Messiah. His deity is all over the place in scripture. But, again, I understand that you don't see it that way. And, like you said, I'm sure that you have had this discussion millions of times before, with other people who believe similar to me. I guess if that's reason to stop then so be it. Take care...

 

[mark54]

Okay, well, I can accept that you are not really interested in having a discussion with me anymore. It's too bad that you can't back up your own claims tho...using one verse theology doesn't fly....because that is what you are doing. Last I checked the bible contains more then one verse. The only person who is making a contradiction appear is you. But, I understand that you don't see it that way.

The Jews wanted to stone Jesus because he was making himself God - Jesus even points out to them that if he isn't doing the works of his Father then don't believe him. The works he was doing proved his deity. He doesn't refute their saying, this is evident in his reply to them and in the fact that they still wanted to stone him afterwards. If he wasn't God and the Jews had misunderstood his claims, then why didn't he just say 'no...you got it all wrong! I'm not God!"? At which point the Jew's would have been like, oh...okay, so your not committing blasphemy then. I'm sorry, but your conclusion is the one that doesn't make any sense: Jesus is only called God (capital G) even though there is only One True God (which would, incidentally, make him a false God - but we'll ignore that)...and even though this One True God will not give any of his glory to anyone else, he for some reason, breaks his own word and gives some of his glory to this Jesus character who is called God but really isn't God. I don't get it.

Jesus being the Son of God totally implies that He is also God. The coming Messiah, was to be the Lord. Jesus was the coming Messiah. His deity is all over the place in scripture. But, again, I understand that you don't see it that way. And, like you said, I'm sure that you have had this discussion millions of times before, with other people who believe similar to me. I guess if that's reason to stop then so be it. Take care...

Well I will make a general point. You have had to reason, and theologise as to Christ being God. Why have you had to do that? Because as Elin said, there is not one verse of plain scriptruree in the entire bible that states Christ is God Himself. Ministers on the whole admit that when they discuss it. You know, they're just being honest.
You said you don't blike one verse theology, there's plenty more than that. The point is though you do not even have one verse from the entire bible that states what you believe eternal llife hinges on believing, hence you have to theologise reason what you believe(which if you are honest you revel in doing) And as you won't accept one plainly written verse, I know you won't accept anymore either, for I know how these conversations go with people like you
So you actually berlieve the core of the Christian faith, and that on which eternal life hinges is not even plainly written in the bible, wow
But, for the scholar and theologian that's handy I guess, for it gives them reason to use those little grey cells to rationalise and theologically pour through the scriptures striving to prove they are correct. And so eternal life is said to hinge on what neither, Christ, Paul, Peter, John, or James plainly told anyone they must believe unto salvation. Not only that, but the ministers don't demand it in the churches, nor nearly all of their congregations would demand it either.
It is glaringly obvious, it really is. Scholars and theologians poured over scripture all those years ago and then came Nicea. And would be scholars and theologians on the internet today are the ones insisting on extra biblical demands for salvation, and they are extra biblical demands Hopespring, of that we both know
I admit to a slight chuckle, but it is not funny really, but rather sad
God Bless, enjoy your theology

 

[mark54]

Okay, well, I can accept that you are not really interested in having a discussion with me anymore. It's too bad that you can't back up your own claims tho...using one verse theology doesn't fly....because that is what you are doing. Last I checked the bible contains more then one verse. The only person who is making a contradiction appear is you. But, I understand that you don't see it that way.

The Jews wanted to stone Jesus because he was making himself God - Jesus even points out to them that if he isn't doing the works of his Father then don't believe him. The works he was doing proved his deity. He doesn't refute their saying, this is evident in his reply to them and in the fact that they still wanted to stone him afterwards. If he wasn't God and the Jews had misunderstood his claims, then why didn't he just say 'no...you got it all wrong! I'm not God!"? At which point the Jew's would have been like, oh...okay, so your not committing blasphemy then. I'm sorry, but your conclusion is the one that doesn't make any sense: Jesus is only called God (capital G) even though there is only One True God (which would, incidentally, make him a false God - but we'll ignore that)...and even though this One True God will not give any of his glory to anyone else, he for some reason, breaks his own word and gives some of his glory to this Jesus character who is called God but really isn't God. I don't get it.

Jesus being the Son of God totally implies that He is also God. The coming Messiah, was to be the Lord. Jesus was the coming Messiah. His deity is all over the place in scripture. But, again, I understand that you don't see it that way. And, like you said, I'm sure that you have had this discussion millions of times before, with other people who believe similar to me. I guess if that's reason to stop then so be it. Take care...

BTW
I would continue this with you, but am getting tired of man made rationalisations that contradict the plain scripture, Therefore, I would continue ONLY under the agreement that PLAIN scripture is produced concerning our disagreement.
In other words, I have produced to you one plain and clear scripture where Christ states only the Father is the one true God. If you can give me EQUALLY PLAIN scripture that states Christ is the one true God(not I AM) I will continue, but otherwise not. If you do, fine i will give you another PLAIN scripture then we can discuss that and continue. Of course if Elin is right, you can't do it, but maybe you may know of a scripture she has overlooked. But please, I don't want a theological discussion of what you think scripture means, just the plain scripture that unequivocally states Christ is God Himself, lets have a level playing field so to speak
If you can't produce any scripture that meets this requirement, thanks for the chat.

 

[hopesprings]

Well I will make a general point. You have had to reason, and theologise as to Christ being God. Why have you had to do that? Because as Elin said, there is not one verse of plain scriptruree in the entire bible that states Christ is God Himself. Ministers on the whole admit that when they discuss it. You know, they're just being honest.

I have honestly not met one christian minister who agrees with the above statement.

You said you don't blike one verse theology, there's plenty more than that.

You are taking one verse (John 17:3) and rationalizing away all the other verses that do not agree with your interpretation of John 17:3. That is one verse theology.

The point is though you do not even have one verse from the entire bible that states what you believe eternal llife hinges on believing, hence you have to theologise reason what you believe(which if you are honest you revel in doing) And as you won't accept one plainly written verse, I know you won't accept anymore either, for I know how these conversations go with people like you

People like me? Please enlighten me as to what kind of people I am...

So you actually berlieve the core of the Christian faith, and that on which eternal life hinges is not even plainly written in the bible, wow

That just isn't true. I don't believe the bible contradicts itself. I have never discredited John 17:3 - though I did offer another interpretation of the passage for you to consider. John 8:24 is very plain, as well as many other scriptures that attest to Christ' divinity.

But, for the scholar and theologian that's handy I guess, for it gives them reason to use those little grey cells to rationalise and theologically pour through the scriptures striving to prove they are correct. And so eternal life is said to hinge on what neither, Christ, Paul, Peter, John, or James plainly told anyone they must believe unto salvation. Not only that, but the ministers don't demand it in the churches, nor nearly all of their congregations would demand it either.
It is glaringly obvious, it really is. Scholars and theologians poured over scripture all those years ago and then came Nicea. And would be scholars and theologians on the internet today are the ones insisting on extra biblical demands for salvation, and they are extra biblical demands Hopespring, of that we both know
I admit to a slight chuckle, but it is not funny really, but rather sad
God Bless, enjoy your theology

If I am a theologian or a scholar (in the negative sense) then what exactly do you consider yourself?

 

[hopesprings]

BTW
I would continue this with you, but am getting tired of man made rationalisations that contradict the plain scripture, Therefore, I would continue ONLY under the agreement that PLAIN scripture is produced concerning our disagreement.
In other words, I have produced to you one plain and clear scripture where Christ states only the Father is the one true God.

In order for this to be a conversation, you must acknowledge that I have given you an 'alternate' interpretation of John 17:3. You may not agree with my interpretation, but that doesn't mean it isn't plausible.

If you can give me EQUALLY PLAIN scripture that states Christ is the one true God(not I AM) I will continue, but otherwise not.

Again, in order for this to be an actual conversation you must acknowledge that I have provided you with this verse from John. Who is the 'I am'?

If you do, fine i will give you another PLAIN scripture then we can discuss that and continue. Of course if Elin is right, you can't do it, but maybe you may know of a scripture she has overlooked. But please, I don't want a theological discussion of what you think scripture means, just the plain scripture that unequivocally states Christ is God Himself, lets have a level playing field so to speak
If you can't produce any scripture that meets this requirement, thanks for the chat.

That's the problem tho, Mark. The WHOLE bible gives plain scripture that says Jesus is God. The bible is a complete revelation. The Whole Bible. Not one verse out of the bible. If you continue to say that Christ isn't God then you have a lot of scripture gymnastics to do with the rest of the bible.

 

[mark54]

I have honestly not met one christian minister who agrees with the above statement.


Have you met a Christian mnister who stands in the pulpit and states that unless a person believes Christ is God Himself, it is insuffiecient simply to believe he is the Son of God, they cannot be saved and will therefore go to hell? I haven't

You are taking one verse (John 17:3) and rationalizing away all the other verses that do not agree with your interpretation of John 17:3. That is one verse theology.

lOL. What verses? You haven't given me one verse yet that contradicts it and states Christ is God Himself

People like me? Please enlighten me as to what kind of people I am...


You are someone who will not accept what is plainly written in favour of wanting to extrapolate scripture/theologise it to the point of briniging it into contradiction with what is plainly stated
That just isn't true. I don't believe the bible contradicts itself. I have never discredited John 17:3 - though I did offer another interpretation of the passage for you to consider. John 8:24 is very plain, as well as many other scriptures that attest to Christ' divinity.

Tell me Hopespring, do you think Arius was saved with his beliefs? Only he believed in the divinity of Christ
I have often stated the divinity of the Father's prescence is in the son. If the word 'divinity' is what to you decides if a person is saved, then I guess you accept Arius as a Christian

But I luv your reference tov John 8:24. If you are right we do have a strange bible indeed

Christ tells us the Father is the one true God
Paul states
'Yet for us there is but one God(true God) the Father

John tells us

No one has seen God at anytime

And John also states

If anyone believes Jesus is the son of God, God lives in him and he in God

But you say, John 8:24 contradicts, Paul John and Christ and tells us that a person must believe Christ is God Himself unto salvation



If I am a theologian or a scholar (in the negative sense) then what exactly do you consider yourself?

I am someone who believes the plain and simple words of scripture on this subject

 

[mark54]

In order for this to be a conversation, you must acknowledge that I have given you an 'alternate' interpretation of John 17:3. You may not agree with my interpretation, but that doesn't mean it isn't plausible.

What you mean is, you have contradicted the plain words of Christ with your 'alternative explanation' and will not accept the Father is the one true God


Again, in order for this to be an actual conversation you must acknowledge that I have provided you with this verse from John. Who is the 'I am'?

You have not given me any verse of scripture that states Christ is the one true God

That's the problem tho, Mark. The WHOLE bible gives plain scripture that says Jesus is God. The bible is a complete revelation. The Whole Bible. Not one verse out of the bible. If you continue to say that Christ isn't God then you have a lot of scripture gymnastics to do with the rest of the bible.

So give me one verse of plain scripture that states Christ is the one true God Hopespring just one will do.

Either Christ, Paul and John are wrong, or you do not undertsand the truth, should I believe them, or you?

 

[Bowman]

Let's try this again...

Neither do well over 90% of churchgoers believe a person must believe Christ is God unto salvation.

Let's try this again...

'Salvation' from what?!

 

[crosspreacher]

I have a couple general bible questions about the Trinity.

Does God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost appear to any ONE profit within the bible simultaneously?
If so, how many times OR can I get an example of just one time, please?

Someone whom sees Jesus, sees the Father. Where Jesus is, the Father is.

 

[mark54]

Re: Let's try this again...

Let's try this again...

'Salvation' from what?!

hmmmmmm what to do where Bowman is concerned?

What if I answer his question?
What next?
Will I get meaningful discussion?
Unlikely
What if I place scripture before him that he has difficulty answering?
Probably bog the conversation down by saying we must refer to the Greek or ancient manuscripts
What if he doesn't answer my questions?
He'll probably tell me he has
Would he understand if I told him Christ died to save us from our sins?
Not sure
Why doesn't he know the answer to his question?
Who knows
Wuold he constantly deflect from answering questions?
Almost definately(going by past encounters)

What should I do?
Only one thing for it
Put him back on ignore

 

[cfultz3]

Re: Let's try this again...

Let's try this again...

'Salvation' from what?!

Since it seems that you are back to being on his bad person ingore list, I will answer it.

From condemnation (the adverse sentencing attached to the Law)?