Is believing in the Trinity necessary for salvation? (POLL!)
- Thread starter Hevosmies
- Start date
-
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.
I'm asking questions to understand the thought... Please do not be offended....
So going with only the people God saved then gave the Son an amount of people to be "delivered" and will go to heaven, does that automatically happen that they are delivered, and go to heaven, no matter what? Or is there some way these people become sanctified/saved?
If Jesus is not a Jew the Messiah DID NOT COME!!! Throw away the Bible because it is ALL FALSE!
The Messiah can ONLY BE A JEW; GREAT NEWS JESUS IS A JEW HE IS MESSIAH AND THE WHOLE BIBLE IS THE INFALLIBLE, INERRANT WORD OF GOD!!!
YOU REALLY SHOULD LEARN IT!!!! With love I pray you do and come to know the One in whom you say you believe!!!!
So going with only the people God saved then gave the Son an amount of people to be "delivered" and will go to heaven, does that automatically happen that they are delivered, and go to heaven, no matter what? Or is there some way these people become sanctified/saved?
If Jesus is not a Jew the Messiah DID NOT COME!!! Throw away the Bible because it is ALL FALSE!
The Messiah can ONLY BE A JEW; GREAT NEWS JESUS IS A JEW HE IS MESSIAH AND THE WHOLE BIBLE IS THE INFALLIBLE, INERRANT WORD OF GOD!!!
YOU REALLY SHOULD LEARN IT!!!! With love I pray you do and come to know the One in whom you say you believe!!!!
L
I think there is a difference between not understanding the trinity, and denying. There are folks who deny that Jesus is one with the father, they say that he is brothers with Satan, or another lesser God. They may as well be worshiping Jesus, the cook down at the Mexican restaurant, because they got the wrong Jesus.
-
2
- Show all
I need to read "THE FORGOTTEN TRINITY" by James White. Many say its a great book on the subject.
HOPEFULLY he has in the book an EASY way to explain the trinity to unbelievers.
I try to break it down in the most BIBLICAL way I can which is:
God the Father (nobody questions this one)
The Son of God, Jesus Christ, son of man, the Word became flesh. (Word is God John 1:1)
The Holy Spirit (another easy one to explain, the Spirit of God, simple)
HOPEFULLY he has in the book an EASY way to explain the trinity to unbelievers.
I try to break it down in the most BIBLICAL way I can which is:
God the Father (nobody questions this one)
The Son of God, Jesus Christ, son of man, the Word became flesh. (Word is God John 1:1)
The Holy Spirit (another easy one to explain, the Spirit of God, simple)
That would be the mormons that teach that lucifier is the spirit brother of Jesus. Mormon Milton Hunter wrote a book called "Gospel Through the Ages, 1945) and said so on page 15 paragraph 3. I know because I have the book.
And you absolutely right when you said, "I think there is a difference between not understanding the trinity, and denying." The Oneness Pentecostals are some of the most ardent deniers of the Trinity and go out of their way to bad mouth it.
Now, you said, "There are folks who deny that Jesus is one with the father." This is true but how is Jesus one with the Father or in what respect is Jesus one with the Father? There are only two ways and one of those ways is that they are one in purpose which means they are on the same page. Jesus prayed for His disciples to be of the same mind just like the Apostle Paul stated at Philippians 2:2.
The second way they are one is by their nature. When Jesus said at John 10:30, "I and My Father are one" He was talking about being one in nature. The Jews completely understood what Jesus was saying because at vs31, "The Jews took up stone AGAIN tyo stone Him." Then at vs33 the Jews say, "The Jews answered Him, For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You being a man, MAKE YOURSELF GOD."
Now, I'm going to explain how easy it is to understand the Trinity and yes I know the word Trinity is not in the Bible. Now, the Bible makes it clear that there are three and only three persons, in the Bible who are IDENTIFIED as God in all the ways that the Bible identifies God.
When you read the Bible make a point of noticing the following five points. God is identifed by His name, by His titles, by His unique attributes (or nature) and by His unique actions. So, who is called or identified as God? We know God the Father is God, we also know when we read the NT Jesus is identified as God numerous times. In fact, I just pointed out that the Jews themselves picked up on Jesus being God. Doubting Thomas conclueded that Jesus is God at John 20:28.
What about the Holy Spirit. He's identified as God at Acts 5:4, "While it remained unsold di it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not liked to men, BUT TO GOD." How about applying the Holy Spirits unique actions. Acts 16:6, "And they passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia."
And who is recognized as God by His titles? Who goes by the title, "Lord, or King, or Savior, or Redeemer? So when you read your Bible look for these various ways in which God is identified. You will not only be amazed how much you will learn but it's fun and you will be asking yourself, "I never thought of that before."
Rember, names, titles, unique actions, His worship. And keep in mind the three persons of the Trinity receive some COMBINATION of these 5 meansof identifying and distinguishing God from the list. Lastly, if you can think of other ways or means by all means let us know. I'm not going to say the five means is it and there are no others. Hope this helps.
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
And you absolutely right when you said, "I think there is a difference between not understanding the trinity, and denying." The Oneness Pentecostals are some of the most ardent deniers of the Trinity and go out of their way to bad mouth it.
Now, you said, "There are folks who deny that Jesus is one with the father." This is true but how is Jesus one with the Father or in what respect is Jesus one with the Father? There are only two ways and one of those ways is that they are one in purpose which means they are on the same page. Jesus prayed for His disciples to be of the same mind just like the Apostle Paul stated at Philippians 2:2.
The second way they are one is by their nature. When Jesus said at John 10:30, "I and My Father are one" He was talking about being one in nature. The Jews completely understood what Jesus was saying because at vs31, "The Jews took up stone AGAIN tyo stone Him." Then at vs33 the Jews say, "The Jews answered Him, For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You being a man, MAKE YOURSELF GOD."
Now, I'm going to explain how easy it is to understand the Trinity and yes I know the word Trinity is not in the Bible. Now, the Bible makes it clear that there are three and only three persons, in the Bible who are IDENTIFIED as God in all the ways that the Bible identifies God.
When you read the Bible make a point of noticing the following five points. God is identifed by His name, by His titles, by His unique attributes (or nature) and by His unique actions. So, who is called or identified as God? We know God the Father is God, we also know when we read the NT Jesus is identified as God numerous times. In fact, I just pointed out that the Jews themselves picked up on Jesus being God. Doubting Thomas conclueded that Jesus is God at John 20:28.
What about the Holy Spirit. He's identified as God at Acts 5:4, "While it remained unsold di it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not liked to men, BUT TO GOD." How about applying the Holy Spirits unique actions. Acts 16:6, "And they passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia."
And who is recognized as God by His titles? Who goes by the title, "Lord, or King, or Savior, or Redeemer? So when you read your Bible look for these various ways in which God is identified. You will not only be amazed how much you will learn but it's fun and you will be asking yourself, "I never thought of that before."
Rember, names, titles, unique actions, His worship. And keep in mind the three persons of the Trinity receive some COMBINATION of these 5 meansof identifying and distinguishing God from the list. Lastly, if you can think of other ways or means by all means let us know. I'm not going to say the five means is it and there are no others. Hope this helps.
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
-
1
- Show all
This is AN AMAZING article on the topic:
http://christianthinktank.com/jesusnoidol.html
CLEAR and with historical references. READ IT! Great article! (PS: I dont know anything about the website or people who wrote this just saying this PARTICULAR article is great).
http://christianthinktank.com/jesusnoidol.html
CLEAR and with historical references. READ IT! Great article! (PS: I dont know anything about the website or people who wrote this just saying this PARTICULAR article is great).
As of 9/21/2019, there are 21 votes. Of those, nine (including myself) believe that "belief in the Trinity" is necessary for salvation. The other twelve have voted "no." Of course, it is not exactly clear who those "no" voters are, what their religious affiliation is, or why they voted that way.
But with that aside, let me tell you why I voted yes.
To suggest that if all one needs to do is believe that Jesus is, in some round-a-bout sense, the "Son of God" with disregard of the remainder of things the NT has to say about Him then the authors of the NT wasted their time combating false teachers. What would have been the point for Paul, or any other to write entire letters which entail so much detail about the person and being of Jesus Christ, if all that one needs to believe is that He is, in some round-about-way, the "Son of God"? One must believe that Jesus is the Son of God to the very extent that the Apostles also believed and whom they discuss in so much detail throughout the NT, or else your view of Jesus as the "Son of God" is distorted. I would submit to you, that without the Doctrine of the Trinity, there is no way to get that full conceptualization/understanding of what it means for Jesus to be the "Son of God."
There are Unitarian groups that believe Jesus is the "Son of God," but try to discount the texts that speak to His pre-existence. That is not the same Jesus. A different Jesus impacts the Gospel message — a false Jesus, and a false Gospel.
Outside the Doctrine of the Trinity, I don't think one can fully understand the unique relationship between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
But with that aside, let me tell you why I voted yes.
To suggest that if all one needs to do is believe that Jesus is, in some round-a-bout sense, the "Son of God" with disregard of the remainder of things the NT has to say about Him then the authors of the NT wasted their time combating false teachers. What would have been the point for Paul, or any other to write entire letters which entail so much detail about the person and being of Jesus Christ, if all that one needs to believe is that He is, in some round-about-way, the "Son of God"? One must believe that Jesus is the Son of God to the very extent that the Apostles also believed and whom they discuss in so much detail throughout the NT, or else your view of Jesus as the "Son of God" is distorted. I would submit to you, that without the Doctrine of the Trinity, there is no way to get that full conceptualization/understanding of what it means for Jesus to be the "Son of God."
There are Unitarian groups that believe Jesus is the "Son of God," but try to discount the texts that speak to His pre-existence. That is not the same Jesus. A different Jesus impacts the Gospel message — a false Jesus, and a false Gospel.
Outside the Doctrine of the Trinity, I don't think one can fully understand the unique relationship between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
I voted yes too but as you read in my OP there is a caveat!
Me personally I come from the mean streets, the gutter, the cell, the caravan and for that reason I know a lot of people who are about that life. And witnessing to them and talking to them, they really arent theologians let me tell you! They dont care about "hypostatic union" "divine essence" or any of that theological language created. THEY DONT CARE. They are like many folks in Bible days, regular simple people, and they need to hear the Gospel, when they see the Holy Spirit move on em and TRANSFORM their life, give them peace, heal their illness, heal their friend's disease or whatever the case may be, THEY will be great workers to God!
NOt saying doctrine isnt important, but what I have found is its important to teach the Godhead in a BIBLICAL, SIMPLE way using Bible language, bible verses, instead of all this philosophic theological ivory tower language. These folks hate that stuff, and cant connect with it. Its too "posh" for them, reminds them of politicians!
How I like to explain it is I go through John 1:1-14, Deut 6:4 and 1 Cor 8:6, showing in order that there is only one God, Jesus is God, was with the Father, Jesus is Lord, Father is Lord, Jesus is Alpha and Omega, Father is Alpha and Omega and show 1 cor 8:6 and how its similar to Deut 6:4 (the Shema as Jews call it!)
^Everyone who asked me was satisfied with that kind of an answer and got it. I just hope I said it all correctly, TRINITY makes me nervous. Some have told me what I believe is like ONENESS but i dont believe that. I just believe Jesus is God in the flesh, tabernacle of God among us, God's son. Father is the Father obviously and Holy Spirit is God's Spirit and there is only ONE GOD. I HOPE its good enough! WISH people would stop asking me about the trinity LOL.
Me personally I come from the mean streets, the gutter, the cell, the caravan and for that reason I know a lot of people who are about that life. And witnessing to them and talking to them, they really arent theologians let me tell you! They dont care about "hypostatic union" "divine essence" or any of that theological language created. THEY DONT CARE. They are like many folks in Bible days, regular simple people, and they need to hear the Gospel, when they see the Holy Spirit move on em and TRANSFORM their life, give them peace, heal their illness, heal their friend's disease or whatever the case may be, THEY will be great workers to God!
NOt saying doctrine isnt important, but what I have found is its important to teach the Godhead in a BIBLICAL, SIMPLE way using Bible language, bible verses, instead of all this philosophic theological ivory tower language. These folks hate that stuff, and cant connect with it. Its too "posh" for them, reminds them of politicians!
How I like to explain it is I go through John 1:1-14, Deut 6:4 and 1 Cor 8:6, showing in order that there is only one God, Jesus is God, was with the Father, Jesus is Lord, Father is Lord, Jesus is Alpha and Omega, Father is Alpha and Omega and show 1 cor 8:6 and how its similar to Deut 6:4 (the Shema as Jews call it!)
^Everyone who asked me was satisfied with that kind of an answer and got it. I just hope I said it all correctly, TRINITY makes me nervous. Some have told me what I believe is like ONENESS but i dont believe that. I just believe Jesus is God in the flesh, tabernacle of God among us, God's son. Father is the Father obviously and Holy Spirit is God's Spirit and there is only ONE GOD. I HOPE its good enough! WISH people would stop asking me about the trinity LOL.
-
1
- Show all
Theological lingo can certainly lose people, but it does have its place.
Perhaps you can direct me to other threads where you've written regarding John 1:1-14, and 1 Corinthians 8:6. This sort of stuff is right up my ally.
Often times Trinitarians are accused of Modalism, but the real decisive factor is the pre-existence of the Son. Modalists believe Jesus pre-existed as the Father, where Trinitarians believe Jesus existed eternally alongside the Father. In one hand, one group (Modalists) believe that it was the Father who took on flesh. While in the other hand, the other group (Trinitarians) believe it was the Son who became flesh.
Perhaps you can direct me to other threads where you've written regarding John 1:1-14, and 1 Corinthians 8:6. This sort of stuff is right up my ally.
Often times Trinitarians are accused of Modalism, but the real decisive factor is the pre-existence of the Son. Modalists believe Jesus pre-existed as the Father, where Trinitarians believe Jesus existed eternally alongside the Father. In one hand, one group (Modalists) believe that it was the Father who took on flesh. While in the other hand, the other group (Trinitarians) believe it was the Son who became flesh.
-
1
- Show all
Well you can always say "Three in One" or "Three are One" if *Trinity* makes you nervous [not sure why it should unless you've been listening to the Anti-Trinitarians (who claim to be Unitarians)]. Triune Godhead also means the same thing.
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (1 John 5:7 KJV)
This verse (known as the Johannine Comma) has been mercilessly attacked by the Unitarians, and even the Trinitarians have surrendered to them in this regard. But 1 John 5 makes absolutely no sense if this verse is omitted. Furthermore, there is ample evidence that this verse was in Scripture to begin with.
PART I
1 Jn.5:7,8 Establishing the Authenticity of the Johannine Comma
Background
The Comma appears in just ten 10th-18th century Greek manuscripts, in the margins of half of them. [1] It’s said the Erasmus adopted it on the basis of a falsified Greek manuscript, which is just speculation. [2] Latin manuscripts notably support the Comma, the oldest extant being 5th-8th century Old Latin ones & 3rd–4th century [notes.3,4,5] Priscillian quoted it ~385 A.D, Cyprian in 250 A.D. said the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one (reflecting the Comma - Word is Son), and Tertullian in 215 A.D. said of the Father, Son and Comforter, which three are one essence, [6] a likely reference to the Comma. [7]
The earliest known Latin Bible is the mid-2nd century Old-Latin Italic. [8] The 17th-century scholar, Allix, said that the Waldensen Bible was the ancient version called the Italic, [9] and Kenyon said the Italic New Testament had a Traditional-Text basis (Received-Text ancestor). [10] Tepl/Romaunt Waldensen & Vulgate New Testaments all reflect the Italic overall, but they refute the Vulgate at places, [11] likely at Jerome’s 4th-century variance from the Traditional Text. Italic history links the Received Text, and potentially the Comma, to the 2nd century. Actually, as we'll see, the Comma proves to be authentic, tying it to the 1st-century autograph, to the Italic of the 2nd century & the medieval era, to the Received Text, to the KJV.
Censorship marks Comma history, even in the Latin west. A Vulgate prologue notes its removal in 4th-century manuscripts. [12] In a 5th century council of Carthage, 400 North African bishops affirmed its authenticity, despite some anti-Comma Arian threats, [6] so it was a holy standard under attack at that time. Facundus, 6th-century Latin bishop, censored it, claiming that Cyprian quoted the 1 Jn.5:8 three agree in one. [3]
Grammatical authentication
A. Comma absence makes a clause divide between verses 5:7 & 8 to makethe Spirit, the water and the blood a clause fragment in 5:8, and making a fragment serve as verse 5:7. [13] Syntax irregularity is fairly common, but its occurrence by Comma removal indicates the Comma belongs in the passage. In the NIV the irregularity is recognized and is addressed by unique, but incorrect, punctuation. [14] In the NASV the irregularity is recognized in masking of it by clause/verse shuffling that joins the 5:7 fragment to 5:8 and creates a verse 5:7 from the latter half of 5:6 (notice how much shorter verse 5:6 is in the NASV, in contrast with that in the NIV). These are just arbitrary textual devices supporting opinions of these translators about a supposed lack of Comma authenticity. They try to take advantage of the fact that early Greek manuscripts lacked punctuation & verse numbers, but the great differ- ence in the ways that they do so proves they have no recognized authority for doing so. Indeed, resorting to such approaches to discredit the Comma is indicative of a lack of any realistic basis for discrediting it. [CONTINUED BELOW]
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (1 John 5:7 KJV)
This verse (known as the Johannine Comma) has been mercilessly attacked by the Unitarians, and even the Trinitarians have surrendered to them in this regard. But 1 John 5 makes absolutely no sense if this verse is omitted. Furthermore, there is ample evidence that this verse was in Scripture to begin with.
PART I
1 Jn.5:7,8 Establishing the Authenticity of the Johannine Comma
Background
The Comma appears in just ten 10th-18th century Greek manuscripts, in the margins of half of them. [1] It’s said the Erasmus adopted it on the basis of a falsified Greek manuscript, which is just speculation. [2] Latin manuscripts notably support the Comma, the oldest extant being 5th-8th century Old Latin ones & 3rd–4th century [notes.3,4,5] Priscillian quoted it ~385 A.D, Cyprian in 250 A.D. said the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one (reflecting the Comma - Word is Son), and Tertullian in 215 A.D. said of the Father, Son and Comforter, which three are one essence, [6] a likely reference to the Comma. [7]
The earliest known Latin Bible is the mid-2nd century Old-Latin Italic. [8] The 17th-century scholar, Allix, said that the Waldensen Bible was the ancient version called the Italic, [9] and Kenyon said the Italic New Testament had a Traditional-Text basis (Received-Text ancestor). [10] Tepl/Romaunt Waldensen & Vulgate New Testaments all reflect the Italic overall, but they refute the Vulgate at places, [11] likely at Jerome’s 4th-century variance from the Traditional Text. Italic history links the Received Text, and potentially the Comma, to the 2nd century. Actually, as we'll see, the Comma proves to be authentic, tying it to the 1st-century autograph, to the Italic of the 2nd century & the medieval era, to the Received Text, to the KJV.
Censorship marks Comma history, even in the Latin west. A Vulgate prologue notes its removal in 4th-century manuscripts. [12] In a 5th century council of Carthage, 400 North African bishops affirmed its authenticity, despite some anti-Comma Arian threats, [6] so it was a holy standard under attack at that time. Facundus, 6th-century Latin bishop, censored it, claiming that Cyprian quoted the 1 Jn.5:8 three agree in one. [3]
Grammatical authentication
A. Comma absence makes a clause divide between verses 5:7 & 8 to makethe Spirit, the water and the blood a clause fragment in 5:8, and making a fragment serve as verse 5:7. [13] Syntax irregularity is fairly common, but its occurrence by Comma removal indicates the Comma belongs in the passage. In the NIV the irregularity is recognized and is addressed by unique, but incorrect, punctuation. [14] In the NASV the irregularity is recognized in masking of it by clause/verse shuffling that joins the 5:7 fragment to 5:8 and creates a verse 5:7 from the latter half of 5:6 (notice how much shorter verse 5:6 is in the NASV, in contrast with that in the NIV). These are just arbitrary textual devices supporting opinions of these translators about a supposed lack of Comma authenticity. They try to take advantage of the fact that early Greek manuscripts lacked punctuation & verse numbers, but the great differ- ence in the ways that they do so proves they have no recognized authority for doing so. Indeed, resorting to such approaches to discredit the Comma is indicative of a lack of any realistic basis for discrediting it. [CONTINUED BELOW]
-
1
- Show all
PART II
B. Comma absence makes a verse 5:7 grammatical-masculine participle link directly to the 5:8 grammatical-neuter Spirit, water and blood. Now multiple New-Testament nouns can lack gender agreement, so various gender links occur, but scholars are not comfortable with this masculine-neuter link, and seek a specific explanation. [15] It was rejected by Nolan in the early 19th century [6] and by others more recently, [16] but they didn't refute the link with detailed textual proof; they were correct, as indicated by the detailed textual proof offered below.
To begin, the three neuters are not encumbered by immediate links to other nouns, and can act in unison as one neuter, so linking this to one masculine participle contradicts Greek grammar. As we'll see, the 1 John 5:7 masculine participle doesn't link directly to the three neuters, yet a verse 5:8 masculine participle in the Comma does just that since the neuters do act in unison, in a unique way. This becomes clear as we examine aspects of grammar involving the Comma, and relate our conclusions to context.
1. In verse 5:7 the Comma Father, Word and Holy Ghost is the subject of a participle that is an adjectival substantive (noun-like term) functioning as an appositive that denotes & describes its subject, repeating grammatical gender when possible, and the participle repeats the grammatical gender of the Comma masculine Father and Word.
Now some will say the participle is the subject, for it appears first in 5:7, according to a perceived grammar rule, but that over-generalizes the rule. Word order can't always determine the subject/appositive relationship, for it varies among passages according to emphasis. A term is often emphasized in the Greek by bringing it forward in a clause or sentence. In verse 5:7, emphasis on three, a triune witness that follows & expands a singular 5:6 Spirit witness, places three before divine names, making the participle appear first. The participle serves as an adjectival substantive that denotes divine persons and describes their role, as expected of an appositive. Thus the participle fills the adjectival appositive role, and Trinity names, nominatives, are the subject, so rule over-generalization causes a mere apparent subject/appositive reversal. Emphasis on the real subject would rearrange the language of the Comma, as noted below.
For the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost (subject), that bear record (the appositive) in heaven, are three, and these three are one. And the Spirit, the water and the blood (subject), that bear witness (appositive) on earth, are three, and the three agree in one.
Another subject/appositive apparent reversal by emphasis is seen in Jn.14:26 that says in the Greek, But the Comforter, the Holy Ghost…the Comforter is noted first, for Jesus emphasizes a need of comfort to His disciples. Holy Ghost is the subject, and Comforter is the appositive, an adjectival noun that denotes the Holy Ghost and describes His role.
1 Jn.5:6 illustrates an adjectival participle functioning as an appositive, emphasis on the Spirit revealing Him as the subject. It says, And it is the Spirit (subject) that beareth witness (appositive), because the Spirit is truth.
2. We consider a proof of authenticity eliminating all grammatical-gender issues. What we understand about the 3-in-1 nature of the Trinity is that three individual persons comprise one essence, as indicated indirectly in various passages. In Mat.3:16,17, individuality of the three persons of the Godhead is seen as the Father declares Jesus as His beloved Son, and the Spirit like a dove descends upon Jesus. In John 10:30 Jesus says, I and my father are one, indicating unity of essence, and in John 3:34 Jesus says that to Him God giveth not the Spirit by measure, so the Spirit is a measureless, or integral, part of Jesus' person in a unity of essence, and the unity of Jesus with the Father and the Spirit establishes that of the Father with the Spirit. Further, Jude 25 says To the only wise God our Savior, which refers to all three persons of the Trinity who are all involved in our salvation, the Father who authorizes it, the Son who delivers it and the Spirit who authenticates it, and to refer to all of them as one God establishes their unity of essence.
Indeed, the Old Testament teaches the Trinity indirectly at Deut. 6:4 that saysHear O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. The Hebrew for God, Elohim is a plural noun, so in this context the verse speaks of the plurality of God's person in one essence. The Lord Jesus Christ declares this verse in Mk.12: 29 as the main teaching of the law, in a likely subtle reference to His own role in the Trinity. Indeed, in Gen.1:26 Elohim speaks and says, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, which is a reference to the Trinity (the three uses of the personal pronoun even implies the Trinity), for we are in the Trinitarian likeness through our soul, body and spirit, corresponding to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, respectively. Our soul as the controlling power of our personage relates to the Father who is the controlling power of the Trinity, our body relates to the Son's body presently in a supernatural eternal form, and our spirit relates to the Holy Spirit.
Further, we note implications of predicate-nominative grammar three are one in the verse-7 portion of the Comma. Grammatically, this can be interpreted as 3 = 1 so that the meaning would be three different representations or identities of one person, one God appearing as the Father, or the Son, or the Spirit. This interpretation likely caused the Sabellian heresy of the 2nd-3rd centuries (indicating the presence of the Comma in the scripture text during & prior to this period). Thus, the sense of three individuals in one essence requires verification, which is provided by the participle that bear record located outside the Comma in verse 7. Father, Word and Holy Ghost in the Comma are of natural masculinity, so the 5:7 participle describing them is grammatically masculine, the grammatical gender agreeing with the natural, yet participle plurality treats the Trinity persons as individuals. Thus the unique 3-in-1 nature of the Trinity persons in verse 7 is proven, and the authenticity of this portion of the Comma is affirmed. We finalize proof of the authenticity of this Comma portion as we affirm below the authenticity of the verse-8 portion, and affirm the authenticity of the Comma as a whole, to show that it is true scripture inspired by the Spirit, but first we add a little further comment on the Trinity.
For the rest of this study see
http://www.kjvtextualtechnology.com/a--1-john-5--authenticity-of-the-johannine-comma.php
B. Comma absence makes a verse 5:7 grammatical-masculine participle link directly to the 5:8 grammatical-neuter Spirit, water and blood. Now multiple New-Testament nouns can lack gender agreement, so various gender links occur, but scholars are not comfortable with this masculine-neuter link, and seek a specific explanation. [15] It was rejected by Nolan in the early 19th century [6] and by others more recently, [16] but they didn't refute the link with detailed textual proof; they were correct, as indicated by the detailed textual proof offered below.
To begin, the three neuters are not encumbered by immediate links to other nouns, and can act in unison as one neuter, so linking this to one masculine participle contradicts Greek grammar. As we'll see, the 1 John 5:7 masculine participle doesn't link directly to the three neuters, yet a verse 5:8 masculine participle in the Comma does just that since the neuters do act in unison, in a unique way. This becomes clear as we examine aspects of grammar involving the Comma, and relate our conclusions to context.
1. In verse 5:7 the Comma Father, Word and Holy Ghost is the subject of a participle that is an adjectival substantive (noun-like term) functioning as an appositive that denotes & describes its subject, repeating grammatical gender when possible, and the participle repeats the grammatical gender of the Comma masculine Father and Word.
Now some will say the participle is the subject, for it appears first in 5:7, according to a perceived grammar rule, but that over-generalizes the rule. Word order can't always determine the subject/appositive relationship, for it varies among passages according to emphasis. A term is often emphasized in the Greek by bringing it forward in a clause or sentence. In verse 5:7, emphasis on three, a triune witness that follows & expands a singular 5:6 Spirit witness, places three before divine names, making the participle appear first. The participle serves as an adjectival substantive that denotes divine persons and describes their role, as expected of an appositive. Thus the participle fills the adjectival appositive role, and Trinity names, nominatives, are the subject, so rule over-generalization causes a mere apparent subject/appositive reversal. Emphasis on the real subject would rearrange the language of the Comma, as noted below.
For the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost (subject), that bear record (the appositive) in heaven, are three, and these three are one. And the Spirit, the water and the blood (subject), that bear witness (appositive) on earth, are three, and the three agree in one.
Another subject/appositive apparent reversal by emphasis is seen in Jn.14:26 that says in the Greek, But the Comforter, the Holy Ghost…the Comforter is noted first, for Jesus emphasizes a need of comfort to His disciples. Holy Ghost is the subject, and Comforter is the appositive, an adjectival noun that denotes the Holy Ghost and describes His role.
1 Jn.5:6 illustrates an adjectival participle functioning as an appositive, emphasis on the Spirit revealing Him as the subject. It says, And it is the Spirit (subject) that beareth witness (appositive), because the Spirit is truth.
2. We consider a proof of authenticity eliminating all grammatical-gender issues. What we understand about the 3-in-1 nature of the Trinity is that three individual persons comprise one essence, as indicated indirectly in various passages. In Mat.3:16,17, individuality of the three persons of the Godhead is seen as the Father declares Jesus as His beloved Son, and the Spirit like a dove descends upon Jesus. In John 10:30 Jesus says, I and my father are one, indicating unity of essence, and in John 3:34 Jesus says that to Him God giveth not the Spirit by measure, so the Spirit is a measureless, or integral, part of Jesus' person in a unity of essence, and the unity of Jesus with the Father and the Spirit establishes that of the Father with the Spirit. Further, Jude 25 says To the only wise God our Savior, which refers to all three persons of the Trinity who are all involved in our salvation, the Father who authorizes it, the Son who delivers it and the Spirit who authenticates it, and to refer to all of them as one God establishes their unity of essence.
Indeed, the Old Testament teaches the Trinity indirectly at Deut. 6:4 that saysHear O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. The Hebrew for God, Elohim is a plural noun, so in this context the verse speaks of the plurality of God's person in one essence. The Lord Jesus Christ declares this verse in Mk.12: 29 as the main teaching of the law, in a likely subtle reference to His own role in the Trinity. Indeed, in Gen.1:26 Elohim speaks and says, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, which is a reference to the Trinity (the three uses of the personal pronoun even implies the Trinity), for we are in the Trinitarian likeness through our soul, body and spirit, corresponding to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, respectively. Our soul as the controlling power of our personage relates to the Father who is the controlling power of the Trinity, our body relates to the Son's body presently in a supernatural eternal form, and our spirit relates to the Holy Spirit.
Further, we note implications of predicate-nominative grammar three are one in the verse-7 portion of the Comma. Grammatically, this can be interpreted as 3 = 1 so that the meaning would be three different representations or identities of one person, one God appearing as the Father, or the Son, or the Spirit. This interpretation likely caused the Sabellian heresy of the 2nd-3rd centuries (indicating the presence of the Comma in the scripture text during & prior to this period). Thus, the sense of three individuals in one essence requires verification, which is provided by the participle that bear record located outside the Comma in verse 7. Father, Word and Holy Ghost in the Comma are of natural masculinity, so the 5:7 participle describing them is grammatically masculine, the grammatical gender agreeing with the natural, yet participle plurality treats the Trinity persons as individuals. Thus the unique 3-in-1 nature of the Trinity persons in verse 7 is proven, and the authenticity of this portion of the Comma is affirmed. We finalize proof of the authenticity of this Comma portion as we affirm below the authenticity of the verse-8 portion, and affirm the authenticity of the Comma as a whole, to show that it is true scripture inspired by the Spirit, but first we add a little further comment on the Trinity.
For the rest of this study see
http://www.kjvtextualtechnology.com/a--1-john-5--authenticity-of-the-johannine-comma.php
Thanks bro! I agree!
Sorry I cant direct you to that because I was talking about real life face to face showing them from the book! I like to engage in EVANGELISM in the streets, prisons, flea markets and where-ever!
Many people often ask about the trinity, or they ask about Jesus being God. The most popular question I get from atheists is probably "if Jesus was God how could He die?" and thats again where you got to explain that Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit (Son of God) and of Mary (Son of Man) [show Genesis 3:15 prophecy and birth of Jesus from any gospel] so He was both MAN and GOD, GOD in the FLESH(1 tim 3:16). I say it like that because if I throw out a word like "hypostatic union" well I LOST EM!
Anyhow, at the end of the day I believe HOLY SPIRIT does the convicting, Father does the drawing and LUCKILY its not up to us to be eloquent in our speech and delivery to convert people. PRAISE GOD! Otherwise we would be in TROUBLE. Im so dumb one time I was going to church I took the phone out of my pocket and it said "NO SERVICE" so I turned BACK cause i thought the church service was canceled. Brother we are compared to SHEEP, and sheep are REALLY dumb animals!
Sorry I cant direct you to that because I was talking about real life face to face showing them from the book! I like to engage in EVANGELISM in the streets, prisons, flea markets and where-ever!
Many people often ask about the trinity, or they ask about Jesus being God. The most popular question I get from atheists is probably "if Jesus was God how could He die?" and thats again where you got to explain that Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit (Son of God) and of Mary (Son of Man) [show Genesis 3:15 prophecy and birth of Jesus from any gospel] so He was both MAN and GOD, GOD in the FLESH(1 tim 3:16). I say it like that because if I throw out a word like "hypostatic union" well I LOST EM!
Anyhow, at the end of the day I believe HOLY SPIRIT does the convicting, Father does the drawing and LUCKILY its not up to us to be eloquent in our speech and delivery to convert people. PRAISE GOD! Otherwise we would be in TROUBLE. Im so dumb one time I was going to church I took the phone out of my pocket and it said "NO SERVICE" so I turned BACK cause i thought the church service was canceled. Brother we are compared to SHEEP, and sheep are REALLY dumb animals!
Hi revelationman, welcome to the Christian Chat forums. What you posted is on the right track but please take what I'm about to say in the spirit of kindness/correction. First of all the Alpha & Omega and the First & the Last and the Beginning & the End are "NOT" three beings of the Trinity. When you say three beings it means to most people three gods.
I know what you mean but others may not so there is no sense in raising contraversial issues. The Trinity consist of three coequal "persons" who make up the One God. Another thing to remember is they are not three "separate" persons but three "distinct" persons. The definition of the word "separate" and "distinct" are not the same even though the words are synonymous.
Again, I am not being "knitpicky" but explaing to you that in explaining the Trinity you need to be accurate and precise in you language. So when we read at Isaiah 44:6, "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel And his Redeemer the Lord of host; I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me." This verse is referring to God because God is our Redeemer.
The following is why. Revelation 1:8, "I am the Alpha and Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come the Almighty." Now look at Revelation 1:17,18, "Do not be afraid, I am the first and the last, vs18, and the living One, and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore etc." So here we have Jesus Christ being identified as the First and Last and He to is our Redeemer and He is the Lord God Almighty. Does this make sense to you? Btw, who told you the angel of the Lord is Jesus Christ?
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
I know what you mean but others may not so there is no sense in raising contraversial issues. The Trinity consist of three coequal "persons" who make up the One God. Another thing to remember is they are not three "separate" persons but three "distinct" persons. The definition of the word "separate" and "distinct" are not the same even though the words are synonymous.
Again, I am not being "knitpicky" but explaing to you that in explaining the Trinity you need to be accurate and precise in you language. So when we read at Isaiah 44:6, "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel And his Redeemer the Lord of host; I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me." This verse is referring to God because God is our Redeemer.
The following is why. Revelation 1:8, "I am the Alpha and Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come the Almighty." Now look at Revelation 1:17,18, "Do not be afraid, I am the first and the last, vs18, and the living One, and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore etc." So here we have Jesus Christ being identified as the First and Last and He to is our Redeemer and He is the Lord God Almighty. Does this make sense to you? Btw, who told you the angel of the Lord is Jesus Christ?
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
Responses like this are fairly "typical", from "stuck in the mud" believers. No offense to the Lamb of God.
They become "stuck" to the "Oneness" of the Father which is in Christ. Yet, somehow, don't feel a/the need/duty/responsibility/obligation, of going onwards, as they are confessed to the Father by Christ, to the "Oneness" of "He who sent Christ!"
Which, rather puts the whole "plan of salvation", into a much more "clearer" perspective!
Even Jesus Himself stated that His Father is GREATER than Himself.
(I didn't vote, btw...dunno why. jez didn't feel the need
)
I indicated "yes" but I'd like to specify that I am positive there are a lot of people with confused ideas about the Trinity who are still believers.
Specifically, I don't think individuals who vehemently deny the Trinity and spread suspicion among the Church about Trinitarians are saved. I believe they are spawn of Satan who are seeking to disrupt the Church and cause confusion. I would include cultists at the top of this list, along with other bizarre lone ranger Christians who have similar mentalities.
Here's a good set of sermons that explain the Trinity well:
https://www.sermonaudio.com/search....setcat=series&subsetitem=God+in+Three+Persons
By the way, I believe anti-Trinitarians can be saved, and ultimately they will submit their understanding to the Bible, rather than the vain men that developed their false doctrines.
Specifically, I don't think individuals who vehemently deny the Trinity and spread suspicion among the Church about Trinitarians are saved. I believe they are spawn of Satan who are seeking to disrupt the Church and cause confusion. I would include cultists at the top of this list, along with other bizarre lone ranger Christians who have similar mentalities.
Here's a good set of sermons that explain the Trinity well:
https://www.sermonaudio.com/search....setcat=series&subsetitem=God+in+Three+Persons
By the way, I believe anti-Trinitarians can be saved, and ultimately they will submit their understanding to the Bible, rather than the vain men that developed their false doctrines.
You were doing great up until you got here!
This is were you differ from my belief. Is the Holy Spirit a separate person? Can you separate that Spirit from the Father or from Christ? The Holy Spirit is what makes the Godhead united and omnipresent-omnipotent-omniscience. The Holy Spirit will make us united with the Godhead upon our resurrection. I don't call that a person.
This is were you differ from my belief. Is the Holy Spirit a separate person? Can you separate that Spirit from the Father or from Christ? The Holy Spirit is what makes the Godhead united and omnipresent-omnipotent-omniscience. The Holy Spirit will make us united with the Godhead upon our resurrection. I don't call that a person.
