How to defend the doctrine of the Holy Trinity

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
As for the forgiving.. have a look at the context surrounding each of these quotes. That is the key. They do not stand alone.

So for example.. The Holy Spirit can be initially rejected for salvation.. as can Jesus and the Father.. now this isn't going to be forgiven because the person is rejecting salvation in the first place.

So-- you see Pharisees attributing Christ's work to the devil, rejecting salvation from Christ.. and the Holy Spirit who indwells a person at salvation. They are blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

Now.. a person who gets saved..gets salvation.. they will be forgiven blasphemy because they are already indwelt by the Holy Spirit.. already saved. They effectively really can't commit this sin if it means rejecting salvation to begin with.

Also a saved person who sins against Jesus-- will be forgiven all sin past present and future. Same deal.

Someone already saved.. all sin forgiven, past, present and future..(altho of course not without rebuke and discipline and admonishment from God if they fail in their walk).. they can't really blaspheme Jesus, the Holy Spirit or the Father because they already believed.

Someone rejecting salvation to begin with-- like the Pharisees.. they are blaspheming.
Rejecting salvation is a non-starter. Those that do not RSVP the invitation to the dinner party are barred. No invite, no meal. Those that RSVPed, must wear black and white, as requested by the Host or they will not be allowed into the dinner hall because of dress code violations.

In the land of the living, one should say "Dude, stop wearing the hawaiian shirt with tye dyed shorts and flip flops, you won't make it past the dress code. But don't you worry, you can RSVP anytime except if you are dead. The rich guy tried but to no effect"

In addition to the dress code, there is a rule about conduct. For example, tell the other guests the wrong directions to the dinner hall, slashing the tires of the other guests so you can have a better seat when they arrive late, etc..etc. is a sin against 1) the other guests that have RVSPed 2) the Host who sent the invitation 3) the Father of the Host who printed it. The letterhead is from the Father's company, signed "Always with you in Spirit". You might say that how can the Host know and didn't He say all will be forgiven. Well He's going to check all the CCTVs surrounding the estate along with you cell phone calls as you arrive and His Father's estate is vast and He is well connected. As to "all is forgiven", no. Insult the Host, sure - life has a lot of twist and turns. But, intentionally or unitentionally thwarting someone`s salvation because of your needs will get you a "Deny access" red card. You may ask "even unintentionally"? Is it not written, the Law is knowledge of sin. Those who are ignorant of it will be punish. Those who know and still sin. Doubly so. Also insult the Father of the Host in any way is a no-no, whether intentional or unintentional. So let me say, God is not the author of sin.

Just as part of God's Glory is His Choice to Love us, so is our faith more genuine if we freely choose to love Him. Obedience freely given is unbreakable, obedience because of compulsion is slavery of the lowest kind. Will a person loving God die in His Name, or will someone who likes His Perks.
Blasphemy against God and God's Spirit will not be forgiven, it is written. In my concept of free will, I can blaspheme, but God will chose to Deny - simple, no mysteries In the world of predestination and uncondtional election, the truth is moot or non-existent. The mechanisms/rules/nitty gritties are all mysterious that only the elect seem to know (or don't know). But, just in case, do not test your doctrine of election and go full blasphemous.

The doctrine of grace is also not Scriptural. You may choose to have faith, but it may not render you the Grace in the Eyes of God. A creature cannot compell the Creator. You must demonstrate your obedience to find Grace. Faith without works is dead. It is written.
Holiness is not relative. Will God agree with one's grace self-assessment? I recommend to follow the Bible and not some greek philosophers in pyjamas. The Bible is plainly written and a truly objective compass to find Grace. What does God thinks of the teachings of man. It is written.
 

Jacab

New member
Oct 22, 2021
1
1
3
Is it correct to assert that the concept of the Holy Trinity might have been invented by the Roman Catholic Church after all?
First let's define what this concept means,
The Holy Trinity is a doctrine that states that God has three personas namely:
a)The Father
b) The Son
c) The Holy Spirit
The doctrine goes further to state that each of these is God and they are one hence the Three in One and One in Three doctrine.
My challenge to this doctrine is if the doctrine holds then that makes Jesus and The Father equal which is false because
Jesus himself said this in John 14:28
"The Father is Greater than I".

The other challenge is that Jesus never emphasized the doctrine when he introduced the Lord's Prayer in Mathew 6:9-13.
The Holy Spirit is not digged into a lot, the picture of the Holy Spirit in the works of salvation comes in after Jesus ascends into the Father. The only verse that supports this doctrine is Mathew 28:19
"...baptise them in the name of the Father, The son and of The Holy Spirit".

I think this could be a big misinterpretation of why Jesus said this, there is no indication that from this Jesus is God or The Holy Spirit is also God, what are your thoughts and interpretation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity?
Actually, I completely agree with your assessment in regards to the Holy Trinity. There's definitely a hierarchical order in the Godhead. As a matter of fact, 1 John 5:6-8 has a totally different statement in the NKJV as compared to NLT version. See below.

1 John 5:6-8 NKJV

This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.

Compare with New Living Translation;

And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by his baptism in water and by shedding his blood on the cross—not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with his testimony. 7 So we have these three witnesses—8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood—and all three agree.

Note:
A few very late manuscripts add in heaven—the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And we have three witnesses on earth.

So the original texts did not even include the - "Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one".

I believe there's another way of looking at the Godhead rather than the co-equality.
 

wattie

Senior Member
Feb 24, 2009
3,037
1,026
113
New Zealand
Rejecting salvation is a non-starter. Those that do not RSVP the invitation to the dinner party are barred. No invite, no meal. Those that RSVPed, must wear black and white, as requested by the Host or they will not be allowed into the dinner hall because of dress code violations.

In the land of the living, one should say "Dude, stop wearing the hawaiian shirt with tye dyed shorts and flip flops, you won't make it past the dress code. But don't you worry, you can RSVP anytime except if you are dead. The rich guy tried but to no effect"

In addition to the dress code, there is a rule about conduct. For example, tell the other guests the wrong directions to the dinner hall, slashing the tires of the other guests so you can have a better seat when they arrive late, etc..etc. is a sin against 1) the other guests that have RVSPed 2) the Host who sent the invitation 3) the Father of the Host who printed it. The letterhead is from the Father's company, signed "Always with you in Spirit". You might say that how can the Host know and didn't He say all will be forgiven. Well He's going to check all the CCTVs surrounding the estate along with you cell phone calls as you arrive and His Father's estate is vast and He is well connected. As to "all is forgiven", no. Insult the Host, sure - life has a lot of twist and turns. But, intentionally or unitentionally thwarting someone`s salvation because of your needs will get you a "Deny access" red card. You may ask "even unintentionally"? Is it not written, the Law is knowledge of sin. Those who are ignorant of it will be punish. Those who know and still sin. Doubly so. Also insult the Father of the Host in any way is a no-no, whether intentional or unintentional. So let me say, God is not the author of sin.

Just as part of God's Glory is His Choice to Love us, so is our faith more genuine if we freely choose to love Him. Obedience freely given is unbreakable, obedience because of compulsion is slavery of the lowest kind. Will a person loving God die in His Name, or will someone who likes His Perks.
Blasphemy against God and God's Spirit will not be forgiven, it is written. In my concept of free will, I can blaspheme, but God will chose to Deny - simple, no mysteries In the world of predestination and uncondtional election, the truth is moot or non-existent. The mechanisms/rules/nitty gritties are all mysterious that only the elect seem to know (or don't know). But, just in case, do not test your doctrine of election and go full blasphemous.

The doctrine of grace is also not Scriptural. You may choose to have faith, but it may not render you the Grace in the Eyes of God. A creature cannot compell the Creator. You must demonstrate your obedience to find Grace. Faith without works is dead. It is written.
Holiness is not relative. Will God agree with one's grace self-assessment? I recommend to follow the Bible and not some greek philosophers in pyjamas. The Bible is plainly written and a truly objective compass to find Grace. What does God thinks of the teachings of man. It is written.
Well I'm not talking of calvinism predestination. I am talking of receiving Jesus as Saviour by free will and then having a place in heaven guaranteed, predestined.

So its predestined only on believing first.

We would need to look at an example in scripture of someone who committed blasphemy after being eternally saved to get a conclusive answer.

Rejecting the means by which salvation is given to begin with seems to be the case when I see blaspheme mentioned.

Anyway.. back to the trinity, the point I was making is the 3 expressions of God .. each is fully God.

The book of John shows this with Jesus referring to Himself being equal with the Father.

The Holy Spirit is referred to in the OT as Gods Spirit.

You cant get away from the fact all are fully God.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
12,332
4,055
113
Athuorial intent would be according to the Author. without the Originals, we have the Bible + Spirit + All who have ever been inspired by the Spirit and wrote down their thoughts thoughout the years -- the Body of Christ.(?)

and there is seeking. there is much confusion (Tower of Bable Syndrome and / or just not knowing what it all might mean when one reads the Scriptures). if we seek truth from God (not just our own Interpretation) -- we must be willing to grow in Truth -- and leave all our previous interpretations and/ or ideas as much as we are shown (by God /Spirit) where we must... and/ or put them into proper perspective... i.e. "this was a level... now I understand different and / or more in depth". this changes the interpretation -- for the // - true - // seeker. level upon level, here a little there a little.
no, authorial intent is what one can possibly receive when you understand the literary context. Seeking the "meaning".
to do so we must look at all areas of scripture to seek what the authorial intended to say.

  • who did he say it to?
  • What was the time frame it was said?
  • why did he say it?
  • how did they apply it then?
  • how do we apply it today?
 

williamjordan

Senior Member
Feb 18, 2015
495
122
43
Is it correct to assert that the concept of the Holy Trinity might have been invented by the Roman Catholic Church after all?
First let's define what this concept means,
The Holy Trinity is a doctrine that states that God has three personas namely:
a)The Father
b) The Son
c) The Holy Spirit
The doctrine goes further to state that each of these is God and they are one hence the Three in One and One in Three doctrine.
My challenge to this doctrine is if the doctrine holds then that makes Jesus and The Father equal which is false because
Jesus himself said this in John 14:28
"The Father is Greater than I".

The other challenge is that Jesus never emphasized the doctrine when he introduced the Lord's Prayer in Mathew 6:9-13.
The Holy Spirit is not digged into a lot, the picture of the Holy Spirit in the works of salvation comes in after Jesus ascends into the Father. The only verse that supports this doctrine is Mathew 28:19
"...baptise them in the name of the Father, The son and of The Holy Spirit".

I think this could be a big misinterpretation of why Jesus said this, there is no indication that from this Jesus is God or The Holy Spirit is also God, what are your thoughts and interpretation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity?
Using John 14:28 is a rather amateur move. This is not a text you should be using if you're trying to disprove the Trinity. By citing such a text, you are only demonstrating that you have misunderstood—even distorted—the very point Jesus is trying to make.

The term μείζων (“greater”) is speaking about a position of authority. For example, in Luke 22:27 it states,

“For who is greater (μείζων), the one who reclines at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at the table? But I am among you as the one who serves.” (Luke 22:27)
This should immediately cause one to recall Philippians 2, where in the incarnation, Jesus—who being equal with God—divested Himself and took on the form of a servant (cf. 2 Cor. 8:9). Ironically, this servant motif (as found in Philippians 2) is picked up in John 13,

Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God and was going back to God, got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself. Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded. So He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him, “Lord, do You wash my feet?” Jesus answered and said to him, “What I do you do not realize now, but you will understand hereafter.” Peter said to Him, “Never shall You wash my feet!” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.” Simon Peter said to Him, “Lord, then wash not only my feet, but also my hands and my head.” Jesus said to him, “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.” For He knew the one who was betraying Him; for this reason He said, “Not all of you are clean.”

So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again (cf. Luke 22:27), He said to them, “Do you know what I have done to you? You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. (John 13:1-15)
The point of Jesus’ words in 14:28 is this: As long as He remains on earth as a servant, He will experience true limitations. But there will come a time—in fulfillment of Ps. 110:1—by virtue of His ascension, when He will once more taken back up those glorious garments and recline once again at the right hand of God the Father on high. He will no longer function as the Father’s subordinate, but will be given all authority in heaven and on earth. Jesus had humbled Himself in the incarnation and was going back to the Father, where He will be anointed with oil, and crowned King. This is the reason the disciples would have “rejoiced.” If you want the full impact, all one needs to do is read Hebrews 1, which is an interpretation of the coronation of the King. Notice the setting in Hebrews 1:3 ("After He had provided purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high").
 

williamjordan

Senior Member
Feb 18, 2015
495
122
43
All am saying is that Jesus is not omniscient, he rejected this attribute by stating that "Only God knows of that day, not even the angels or anyone"
Wrong again. I would first point out what Jesus says just thirteen chapters earlier in the Book of Matthew:

“All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.” (Matthew 11:27)
Jesus says, no one knows the Son except the Father. And no one knows the Father except the Son. Jesus’ knowledge of the Father is reciprocal. The same way the Father knows the Son, the Son knows the Father. And no one is qualified, or can know Jesus except the Father. Who does Jesus think He is? No one is able to know the Son; only the Father has that ability and capacity. Only someone who is incomprehensible by nature, is beyond the ability of another to know, which is why only God can know, because the Father has a divine mind and can comprehend the incomprehensible. The Father knows the Son inside and out — knowing every thought and tittle He’s had, have, and will have — and Jesus says He knows the Father in that exact same way, which is why He alone is qualified to make the Father known. Not only does Jesus claim to have an omniscient mind (which is required to know the Father truly as He is), but that He is also incomprehensible (for only the Father can know the Son). Even long before Jesus speaks the words in Matthew 24:36, Jesus claims to be the incomprehensible, omniscient Son, who knows the Father to the same degree and extent that the Father knows the Son, and therefore, is equal to the Father in understanding, wisdom, and knowledge.

Further, notice this OT parallel to the Second Coming of Jesus — Zechariah 14:1–7,

“Behold, a day is coming for the Lord when the spoil taken from you will be divided among you. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city will be captured, the houses plundered, the women ravished and half of the city exiled, but the rest of the people will not be cut off from the city. Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the East; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from East to West by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the North and the other half toward the South. You will flee by the valley of My mountains, for the valley of the mountains will reach to Azel; yes, you will flee just as you fled before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord, my God, will come, and all the holy ones with Him! In that day there will be no light; the luminaries will dwindle. For it will be a unique day which is known to the Lord, neither day nor night, but it will come about that at evening time there will be light.” (Zechariah 14:1-7)
Did you catch it? In this text the day of the Lord is referenced (the second coming of Christ). We are told YHWH will stand on the Mount of Olives and split it upon His advent (v. 4), and that this Lord’s day is known to Him (v. 7). However, Acts 1:11-12 proves that it is Jesus who will come on the Lord’s Day and stand on the Mount of Olives:

“They also said, ‘Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven.’ Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day’s journey away” (Acts 1:11-12).
Since Jesus is the LORD mentioned in Zechariah 14:4 who stands on the Mount of Olives on the Lord’s Day as Acts 1:11-12 establishes, He is by implication likewise the LORD who knows the unique day in v. 7. Thus, Christ does know the day of His return in His full divine consciousness, contra the false understanding of those who misuse Matthew 24:36.

Further, notice Revelation 5:6,

“And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slaughtered, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth.”
This text is best understood in light of it’s OT backdrop to Zechariah 4:1–14 — particularly Zechariah 4:6 — where the Spirit establishes God’s rule on earth. With a clear allusion to Zechariah 4:10, John equates the “eyes of the LORD” in the Zechariah passage with the “seven eyes” of the Lord Jesus (Revelation 5:6), to explain that the “seven spirits of God” are His eyes on earth; that He has an all-encompassing gaze: “For the eyes of the LORD move to and fro throughout the earth that He may strongly support those whose heart is completely His… ” (2 Chronicles 16:10). This language is directly connected to the idea that Jesus knows all things.

Without typing a book, I simply refer you to two videos, both of which are excellent discussions on the topic:



 
Aug 2, 2021
7,317
2,046
113
Is it correct to assert that the concept of the Holy Trinity might have been invented by the Roman Catholic Church after all?
First let's define what this concept means,
The Holy Trinity is a doctrine that states that God has three personas namely:
a)The Father
b) The Son
c) The Holy Spirit
The doctrine goes further to state that each of these is God and they are one hence the Three in One and One in Three doctrine.
My challenge to this doctrine is if the doctrine holds then that makes Jesus and The Father equal which is false because
Jesus himself said this in John 14:28
"The Father is Greater than I".

The other challenge is that Jesus never emphasized the doctrine when he introduced the Lord's Prayer in Mathew 6:9-13.
The Holy Spirit is not digged into a lot, the picture of the Holy Spirit in the works of salvation comes in after Jesus ascends into the Father. The only verse that supports this doctrine is Mathew 28:19
"...baptise them in the name of the Father, The son and of The Holy Spirit".

I think this could be a big misinterpretation of why Jesus said this, there is no indication that from this Jesus is God or The Holy Spirit is also God, what are your thoughts and interpretation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity?
You do err, not knowing the Scripture.
 

wattie

Senior Member
Feb 24, 2009
3,037
1,026
113
New Zealand
Using John 14:28 is a rather amateur move. This is not a text you should be using if you're trying to disprove the Trinity. By citing such a text, you are only demonstrating that you have misunderstood—even distorted—the very point Jesus is trying to make.

The term μείζων (“greater”) is speaking about a position of authority. For example, in Luke 22:27 it states,



This should immediately cause one to recall Philippians 2, where in the incarnation, Jesus—who being equal with God—divested Himself and took on the form of a servant (cf. 2 Cor. 8:9). Ironically, this servant motif (as found in Philippians 2) is picked up in John 13,



The point of Jesus’ words in 14:28 is this: As long as He remains on earth as a servant, He will experience true limitations. But there will come a time—in fulfillment of Ps. 110:1—by virtue of His ascension, when He will once more taken back up those glorious garments and recline once again at the right hand of God the Father on high. He will no longer function as the Father’s subordinate, but will be given all authority in heaven and on earth. Jesus had humbled Himself in the incarnation and was going back to the Father, where He will be anointed with oil, and crowned King. This is the reason the disciples would have “rejoiced.” If you want the full impact, all one needs to do is read Hebrews 1, which is an interpretation of the coronation of the King. Notice the setting in Hebrews 1:3 ("After He had provided purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high").
Yes beautifully put. I've been posting the same thing, but seems to be falling on deaf ears. Altho I am unsure who in this thread is actually non trinitarian aside from one person
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
Well I'm not talking of calvinism predestination. I am talking of receiving Jesus as Saviour by free will and then having a place in heaven guaranteed, predestined.

So its predestined only on believing first.

We would need to look at an example in scripture of someone who committed blasphemy after being eternally saved to get a conclusive answer.

Rejecting the means by which salvation is given to begin with seems to be the case when I see blaspheme mentioned.

Anyway.. back to the trinity, the point I was making is the 3 expressions of God .. each is fully God.

The book of John shows this with Jesus referring to Himself being equal with the Father.

The Holy Spirit is referred to in the OT as Gods Spirit.

You cant get away from the fact all are fully God.
I apologized for the calvinist ascription.

It is true that faith under the Yoke of Jesus is light, but "once saved always saved" will misguide. Once saved, faith will change you, not that faith becomes an intrinsic part of your existence. It is not a commodity that lingers. It must be constantly sustained.

Blasphemy as a faithful.
Consider Peter Matthew 16:23. Jesus rebuked Peter for inhibiting/causing doubt in Jesus' fulfillment of his mission. He rebuked Peter for expressing his true heart felt denial of His Death. Did he blaspheme God? No there was no talk about rearranging heaven. How about the Holy Ghost? No, there was no prophesying, no denial of truth to his fellows. Did he sin against Jesus? Yes. Jesus is master, we his slaves. Peter questioned Jesus mission because of his own sensibilities not concern for his Lord's Mission. Was he forgiven? Yes. He's the Rock.
Consider Judas Iscariot. Was he not chosen by Jesus? Yes, therefore a faithful disciple. Did he sin? Yes - big time against Jesus (he betrayed his master), God (he took money over salvation), and the Holy Spirit (he followed his wisdom over the Wisdom of God and caused doubt in his fellow apostles). What was his punishment? Matt 26:24

Trinity as 3 persons all God. Shema - My Master is GOD, my Master is One... Paraphrase - all Glory to God. Three co-equal persons are God. Paraphrase, take the Glory from God and give it away.

Mob wisdom
When I learn mathematics, I go to university not a night club. When I need legal advice, I go to a lawyer not some guy on the street who busks. What was the actual charge Matt 26:63 "But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God."
So the learned pious skeletons that sought to kill Jesus, called it blasphemous to be the Son of God, while the raging mob that sought to stone Jesus to death says the blasphemy is being equal to God. What did Jesus say in Matt26:64 ...Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power... So you decide to listen to the mob, not Jesus saying He is on the right hand side of God (as Chief Vizier, Scion,...)

Kind of ridiculous, no?
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
7,897
1,458
113
67
Brighton, MI
Gooday mate.

Wassup?
Another round with cancer and degenerative bone surgery. So, far a doctor and two nurses are asking questions about Jesus. Also, witnessing to JWs and LDS on quota. They create a post about their false religions, not expecting an intelligent response.
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
7,897
1,458
113
67
Brighton, MI
Matthew 26:62-65
New King James Version
62 And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!”

64 Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

65 Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!

Mark 14
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

Acts 7:55
Easy-to-Read Version
55 But Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit. He looked up into heaven and saw the glory of God. And he saw Jesus standing at God’s right side.

Hebrews 1:3, 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22; Acts 7:55-56

When I attended Jewish Temple School, these texts were used against Jesus because the Teachers understood Jesus as saying he is equal to God.
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
Another round with cancer and degenerative bone surgery. So, far a doctor and two nurses are asking questions about Jesus. Also, witnessing to JWs and LDS on quota. They create a post about their false religions, not expecting an intelligent response.
Another round with cancer and degenerative bone surgery. So, far a doctor and two nurses are asking questions about Jesus. Also, witnessing to JWs and LDS on quota. They create a post about their false religions, not expecting an intelligent response.
I break that off my brother.

Get off of him cancer.
We evict you now in Jesus name.
Go...and never return.

You will not infect him or be in him or around him.
Get out now!.....and never come back.

The blood of Jesus is against you cancer. The empty tomb is against you. The cross is against you. And THE RISEN SAVIOR IS AGAINST YOU.

BE GONE FROM HIM!!!!!!!

I PROPHESY TOTAL DELIVERANCE FOR MY BROTHER.
COMPLETE AND TOTAL DELIVERANCE.
NO CANCER WILL GET HIM.
NO SIR.
 

Ogom

Active member
Aug 22, 2020
385
100
43
ogom.co
... authorial intent is what one can possibly receive when you understand the literary context. Seeking the "meaning".
to do so we must look at all areas of scripture to seek what the authorial intended to say.

  • who did he say it to?
  • What was the time frame it was said?
  • why did he say it?
  • how did they apply it then?
  • how do we apply it today?

yes many things can help. it's like if you look around at this website -- you will see many points of view -- of which various could help us at any given time.

and if we use one or however many methods to read and understand the Bible, but then in passing -- a colleague or friend might say something to us that helps us look at things in a different light. both might be helpful (to us -- where we are at), or in a way or ways, depending... but instead and/or also -- we might be stuck on a viewpoint unfruitful or not as helpful to us... but then someone in passing says or writes something to us that leads us to start thinking in another way, and this really helps us somehow more to understand and/or move ahead in life -- then the intention of the Scriptures has been fulfilled (in part) for you/us... for if the Scriptures were given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and if we have in turn gained help spiritually from them (line upon line, level upon level... here a little, there a little... or however fast or slow for each person) then the intention of the Scriptures has been fulfilled (in us) however in small part or piece or in larger view.

Athuorial intent would be according to the Author. without the Originals, we have the Bible + Spirit + All who have ever been inspired by the Spirit and wrote down their thoughts thoughout the years -- the Body of Christ.(?)

and there is seeking. there is much confusion (Tower of Bable Syndrome and / or just not knowing what it all might mean when one reads the Scriptures). if we seek truth from God (not just our own Interpretation) -- we must be willing to grow in Truth -- and leave all our previous interpretations and/ or ideas as much as we are shown (by God /Spirit) where we must... and/ or put them into proper perspective... i.e. "this was a level... now I understand different and / or more in depth". this changes the interpretation -- for the // - true - // seeker. level upon level, here a little there a little.