WHAT Is the Trinity?

[101G]

What scripture do you have for your understanding of the "names"?
( Not being persons )

Colossians 2:9 "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily".

 

[GodsGrace]

Colossians 2:9 "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily".

Good verse.
It proves Jesus is God. In human form.
The Son. Second person of the Trinity or triune Godhead, just like Colossians 2:9 says.

 

[Helen]

No 101.
I know there are thin red lines like a mine field all over the doctrine of the Trinity.
What you're saying sounds all wrong.

Where did you learn this?
I like to learn from mainline denominational churches that teach what has been taught from the beginning.

Jesus said to baptise in the name of three persons:
.

That just shows how different we all are. I had 20 years of the ' mainline' traditional fundamental teaching.
NOW, these past 30 years much of it I find suspect. People are afraid to sit before God with an
open hand and trust Him. I found that I had been spoon fed in the beginning and had much to unlearn and to unclutter. And I do not think the writers on the NT got it wrong...it's those who came later ...and later yet...who "told us" what the writers were saying....so, just saying...in some things I am far from " mainline".

 

[101G]

Ok, what about this, so that we can clearly eliminate any other persons in the Godhead. understand GG. the name, the personal name of God is Jesus. listen, 1 Timothy 6:13-16 "I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen".

GG, "Who only hath immortality?". so where do that leave the PERSON who you call the Father, your first person?, or the one whom you calls the Holy Ghost, your third person?. the Lord Jesus is the Only one with immortality, so that eliminates any other PERSON. scripture don't LIE.

 

[GodsGrace]

That just shows how different we all are. I had 20 years of the ' mainline' traditional fundamental teaching.
NOW, these past 30 years much of it I find suspect. People are afraid to sit before God with an
open hand and trust Him. I found that I had been spoon fed in the beginning and had much to unlearn and to unclutter. And I do not think the writers on the NT got it wrong...it's those who came later ...and later yet...who "told us" what the writers were saying....so, just saying...in some things I am far from " mainline".

I understand.
How do you understand the Trinity?

 

[101G]

That just shows how different we all are. I had 20 years of the ' mainline' traditional fundamental teaching.
NOW, these past 30 years much of it I find suspect.

correct, I taught the trinity for years, and in the back of my mind things wasn't adding up. but I didn't have anything else to go on or by to change my views. the other doctrine out there had just as many or more holes in them that the trinity had. it wasn't until I made my best mistake of my life in the world that I receive the truth.

 

[Helen]

I understand.
How do you understand the Trinity?

I don't see it as a biblical word. And I can't say how I understand it
The bible tells me " The Lord thy God is ONE".... I believe it.
The Father, The Son , and Holy Spirit are One. The same One.
I " think" that The Lamb has been the part of Godhead which has had contact with the earth long before He came as Jesus. Being Melchizedek King of Salem , Peace. And , probably the angel who wrestled with Jacob. Someone else mentioned how The Spirit "clothed Himself with Gideon" in that battle. And He too was very active here in the OT before He came to dwell within Gods people in the NT.
Someone I read mentioned that Mary was a suragate for Jesus and that she was not Jesus' flesh mother...ie Him being conceived "all of God" as in not flesh.( well that's how I read it.. could be wrong) but I can't agree with that. What would be the point.
The whole point was that He came to redeem mankind...as a man. A sinless man, full of the Holy Spirit . THAT to me is the amazing beauty of Redemption. God's amazing Plan. " To me" having Him 100% Spirit in Mary detracts from that. But that just me...and irevevant to ' the trinity '. He was still The Glorious Lamb who had "emptied Himself , and laid aside His Glory to become man," to reveal The Father to us and destroy the choke hold of the devil over man.
He came to reveal The Father. "If you've seen Me, you have seen The Father." Not just His acts, but His heart of Love.
Some things I know, some things I believe, and some things I think.
Even the things I 'know' I hold lightly. Except where the price paid, the cross and the blood of Jesus' sacrifice is concerned.

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't see it as a biblical word. And I can't say how I understand it
The bible tells me " The Lord thy God is ONE".... I believe it.
The Father, The Son , and Holy Spirit are One. The same One.
I " think" that The Lamb has been the part of Godhead which has had contact with the earth long before He came as Jesus. Being Melchizedek King of Salem , Peace. And , probably the angel who wrestled with Jacob. Someone else mentioned how The Spirit "clothed Himself with Gideon" in that battle. And He too was very active here in the OT before He came to dwell within Gods people in the NT.
Someone I read mentioned that Mary was a suragate for Jesus and that she was not Jesus' flesh mother...ie Him being conceived "all of God" as in not flesh.( well that's how I read it.. could be wrong) but I can't agree with that. What would be the point.
The whole point was that He came to redeem mankind...as a man. A sinless man, full of the Holy Spirit . THAT to me is the amazing beauty of Redemption. God's amazing Plan. " To me" having Him 100% Spirit in Mary detracts from that. But that just me...and irevevant to ' the trinity '. He was still The Glorious Lamb who had "emptied Himself , and laid aside His Glory to become man," to reveal The Father to us and destroy the choke hold of the devil over man.
He came to reveal The Father. "If you've seen Me, you have seen The Father." Not just His acts, but His heart of Love.
Some things I know, some things I believe, and some things I think.
Even the things I 'know' I hold lightly. Except where the price paid, the cross and the blood of Jesus' sacrifice is concerned.

I agree to all.
The Trinity is not easily found in scripture...

The theory of the Trinity was put together after Jesus ascended and slowly over time by those who came after Him. It is only found in the bible when one looks for it, so it wouldn't be easy to see as we read through.

This is a good link which could be read by those interested...

Is the Trinity taught in the Bible?

 

[tabletalk]

I have a question for anyone here:

Who is greatest in the body(the church) of the Christ?

Are apostles greater?
Pastor, Teachers?
Or Administration?

The one who serves.

 

[bbyrd009]

Strong's?!!
Try Daniel 7:13-14

looks like it Lex's out to the same thing,
Strong's Hebrew: 1247. בַּר (bar) -- son
Strong's Hebrew: 606. אֱנָשׁ (enash) -- man, mankind

you would have to show me the difference i guess

 

[bbyrd009]

The Son of Man was understood to mean the Messiah or anointed one sent by God.

the search of that sentence possibly clarifies things?
The Son of Man was understood to mean the Messiah or anointed one sent by God. - Google Search

although granted search might obscure the hits most relevant to us, maybe

 

[GodsGrace]

the search of that sentence possibly clarifies things?
The Son of Man was understood to mean the Messiah or anointed one sent by God. - Google Search

although granted search might obscure the hits most relevant to us, maybe

bb
The Son of Man refers to the Messiah.
Jesus is the Messiah.
It doesn't matter what Strong's says or doesn't say.
The study of this has to be based on Daniel 7:13-14
and all the other times in the OT that The Son of Man is mentioned meaning the coming Christ.
AND all the times it's said in the N.T.

The Jews knew that when Jesus was calling Himself the Son of Man He was declaring Himself to be God - the awaited Messiah.

 

[bbyrd009]

The Jews knew that when Jesus was calling Himself the Son of Man He was declaring Himself to be God - the awaited Messiah.

so you say, but the Jews i know say something different. I would be open to a link explaining this as a euphemism though, if you can locate one. Seems like i cannot

 

[GodsGrace]

so you say, but the Jews i know say something different. I would be open to a link explaining this as a euphemism though, if you can locate one. Seems like i cannot

I know you have a friend that's a Rabbi'.
Please ask him about this
What does Son of Man mean in the O.T.
It's a long study, if you start a thread we could get into it.
It would be easier if you just asked him.

There are some verses in the O.T. that refer to the sons of men
and then there are some verses that refer to the Son of Man.
Daniel 7 is the most prominent one.

Here are some verses for you.
I don't understand why you don't accept them.
Do you believe Jesus was the Messiah but not God?

P.S. the verses need to be weeded out as of above.

37 Bible verses about Son Of Man

Also found this:

Why Is Jesus Called “Son of Man”? | Desiring God

And this: I'm sure there's a lot more and I'm sure you know how to find it.

What does Son of Man and Son of God mean? - NeverThirsty

 

[Dcopymope]

Someone I read mentioned that Mary was a suragate for Jesus and that she was not Jesus' flesh mother...ie Him being conceived "all of God" as in not flesh.( well that's how I read it.. could be wrong) but I can't agree with that. What would be the point.
The whole point was that He came to redeem mankind...as a man. A sinless man, full of the Holy Spirit . THAT to me is the amazing beauty of Redemption. God's amazing Plan. " To me" having Him 100% Spirit in Mary detracts from that. But that just me...and irevevant to ' the trinity '.

This sounds like nothing more than the gnostic version of Jesus. Them believing that flesh, this material existence was a manifestation of evil in the beginning, that the flesh is a prison to contain the spirit designed by a cruel and vindictive being called the "Demiurgos" who imagined himself to be the one true God, which for us is the God of the Bible. This is of course contrary to the Bible which states God created the heavens, earth, and all things in it, and that it was "good". If Jesus was 100% spirit, then none of us are saved since that makes his claim to being the 'son of man' null and void. We cannot claim him to be our savior if he wasn't also fully human, if he wasn't born from the seed of the woman.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

There is no gentile or Jew, no male or female.
In the Body of Christ no one is better than the other.
The body cannot live without any member, or part.
(Wish I had my Bible)
I believe you'll find this in 1corinthians.

I have tried to keep up with post in this thread; what time permits. Forgive me if I repost something similar to what someone else has already said. I am typing on my cell.

The only way I can understand Father, Son, and Spirit; The LORD, the One true God, is by considering the body.

Unlike man in his envying, strife, and argument for a higher position. There is only perfect harmony within God. Respect. Love. Unity. Intimacy. God is Relationship. HE has given us the model to live by: ONE body; many members working in harmony and love as a whole for a common good; each of us having a vital role...but still equal and of ONE body.

The question is: do we really believe in ONE body that is His? Many members but ONE. Or are we each separate, operating solely on our own?

Man is the one that makes it a competition. God is One: Father, Son, and Spirit.

The body of Christ is One: some apostles, some teachers, some administrative...relationship(or we should be).

 

[Helen]

@Dcopymope Agree, it totally makes everything pointless all the whole of the NT null and void.
I read in some thread earlier on this morning ( Canada's morning that is )but I have forgotten which thread or by whom. There was a lot to read when I first came on her this morning. Which is always nice to find. :)

 

[Dcopymope]

@Dcopymope Agree, it totally makes everything pointless all the whole of the NT null and void.
I read in some thread earlier on this morning ( Canada's morning that is )but I have forgotten which thread or by whom. There was a lot to read when I first came on her this morning. Which is always nice to find. :)

Yep, gnosticism doesn't teach salvation from sin through Jesus Christ at all. They don't even believe him to be the only begotten son, but merely a "messenger of light" who basically came to teach us how to attain the knowledge, the "gnosis" by which we can save ourselves. This will be a basic tenet of that "other gospel" that will be preached by the beast of revelation for sure, who I'm sure will claim to be a sort of "messenger of light". It will be works based to the core.

 

[bbyrd009]

What does Son of Man mean in the O.T.
It's a long study, if you start a thread we could get into it.
It would be easier if you just asked him.

i think you will find your perspective to be on the Catholic side of a pretty wide bell curve, as this search kind of indicates, but we can ask Christ Himself,

36While you have the light, believe in the light so that you may become sons of light."
Jesus said this, then went away and hid from them.

(the second sentence being the more operative one here, but nonetheless) the first is arguably just a restatement of His first reply (v35) to Who is this Son of Man?
v35 being 'Jesus answered, "The light will be with you only a little longer. Walk while you have the light so that darkness doesn't overtake you. The one who walks in darkness doesn't know where he's going.' so, either an aside or a conflation of Son of Man, the question, with The light..., correct?

And the argument that in v 35 Christ is now speaking in an "aside" is a compelling one; the question is not being directly answered, see, and then Christ "went and hid from them." For the same reason that you cannot quote Jesus saying that He is God, and the same reason that this discussion goes on endlessly. Christ does not want to be worshipped as Nehushtan...is one way to put it. Jesus Cult is i guess another, although those first few hits look useless

another way to say it is that there is a popular notion that one might perform some altar works once and then just "really, really" believe that Jesus did everything else needed for them to go to heaven--when they die, of course--and Jesus even said "it is finished" to back them up lol

crap i'm just making it worse lol look you are a Son of Man, ok, at least if you fit this, While you have the light, believe in the light so that you may become sons of light, and this elevating of "Son of Man" to something it is not strikes me as not understanding why Jesus would call Himself "Son of Man" in the first place, that being because He was a man.

This is another central problem with the Trinity doctrine, the tangle that is created with going beyond "God is the head of Christ" imo, because now you gotta make Mary holy, too, see, and it just perpetuates out from there, you end up with something...perpetual

 

[amadeus]

Hi Amadeus,
I pretty much had your experience.
BUT, why would those nice nuns lie to us??
I don't believe they did.

No intentional lies of which I am aware were told. This doesn't mean they were right.

I'd love to understand the ONENESS doctrine better.

It's hard for me to explain fairly since I know long subscribe to it. One explanation I heard from another person was that the Oneness belief was simply the flip side of the Trinity belief. That is, the trinitarians believe in 3 in 1 [Father, Son and Holy Ghost], while the oneness people believe in 1 in 3.

Actually where I was in oneness however they believe in only one God with the three manifestations. In other words, the Father is Jesus. The Son is Jesus. The Holy Ghost is Jesus.

Regarding your statement which I highlighted, it is easy enough to understand.

To baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is a FORM of baptism. Jesus commanded this in Mathew 28:19 so it must be correct. He did not make mistakes.

Acts 2:38 is instead telling us about a TYPE of baptism.

The trinitarians usually use the Matt 28:19 as the primary, while the oneness use Acts 2:38 as the primary. In both cases they speak of a literal pronunciation of words spoken by the baptizing minister while performing the baptism. Among Trinitarians some baptize by sprinkling while others use immersion in water. The Oneness people always baptize by immersion. I disagree with both of them on the words to be pronounced during the ritual. The Oneness people say that Matt 28:19 only uses titles while Acts 2:38 actually uses the name [Jesus].

For me the baptism needs to be IN the Name rather while speaking the name. Consider the meaning of this verse:

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Matt 18:20

What does it means to be in his name? For me it means to be in the Spirit as expressed in the following verse:.

"If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit." Gal 5:25
If we are baptized in the Spirit, what difference would it make what words the minister actually speak with his mouth while doing it?

John baptized for the repentence of sins and was preparing the way for Jesus who preached repentence and the turning to God and living in His Kingdom.

So Peter says to repent and be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS.
This means with fire and the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1:8
For the power to witness to even the remotest part of the earth.

The baptism of fire I do not connect directly with water or Spirit baptisms. What is fire in scripture?

"For our God is a consuming fire." Heb 12:29 [Deut 4:24]
And what does God the consuming fire do?

"Understand therefore this day, that the LORD thy God is he which goeth over before thee; as a consuming fire he shall destroy them, and he shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt thou drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the LORD hath said unto thee." Deut 9:3

But, must the fire of God always consume and destroy?

"And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.
And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I." Exodus 3:2-4

But then see here an example of fire that consumes on the one hand and on the other does not consume:

"Therefore because the king's commandment was urgent, and the furnace exceeding hot, the flame of the fire slew those men that took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego" Dan 3:22

Dan 3:24 Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonied, and rose up in haste, and spake, and said unto his counsellors, Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king.
Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
Dan 3:26 Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire.
Dan 3:27 And the princes, governors, and captains, and the king's counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, upon whose bodies the fire had no power, nor was an hair of their head singed, neither were their coats changed, nor the smell of fire had passed on them.

So is this not then the consuming firing of God that consumes that which binds us and that which is opposed to God while stand beside those who stand with God. So the baptism of fire may then be the trials we must go through to clean us up and move us closer to God. The trials of Job, which led him closer to God could certainly be understood as a baptism of fire.