The Problem With The Trinity

gadar perets · Oct 19, 2018

stunnedbygrace said:
He seems always so very concerned that our Lord not be magnified too much. And the thought comes: WHY is this his concern? Because there is a reason of course...

That is your perception. The reality is that our Father is not being magnified enough. In fact, He is being diminished by modern Christianity who has either made the Son our Father or who has given the glory of the Father to the Son by giving the Son the credit for all that the Father has done (Creation, giving of the Law, OT miracles, NT miracles, resurrection of Messiah, etc.).

stunnedbygrace · Oct 19, 2018

gadar perets said:
That is your perception. The reality is that our Father is not being magnified enough. In fact, He is being diminished by modern Christianity who has either made the Son our Father or who has given the glory of the Father to the Son by giving the Son the credit for all that the Father has done (Creation, giving of the Law, OT miracles, NT miracles, resurrection of Messiah, etc.).

That's precisely what I'm saying. God lifted Him up and you try to push Him back down. God ascribes all honor and glory to Him and you say it is too much. God magnifies the Son and you magnify the law even though that law spoke of Him who was to come. Wherever your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

gadar perets said:
Kurios is falsely used of YHWH in the LXX. It is also a title that the Father and Son share. That does not make Yeshua YHWH any more than Yeshua and Cyrus sharing the title "maschiach" makes Cyrus Yeshua.

What is interesting though is the popular use of the LXX in the first century. So any knowing YHWH is Kurios, would also see Jesus as YHWH.

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

Dave L said:
But always used of YHWH in the Lxx and Jesus in the NT.

well, it is used by Ruth for Boaz too. If you start with a premise and then seek Scripture to verify it, Scripture will always oblige. I mean worship Jesus if you like, til you find Nehushtan anyway, but there are easier ways to make Him into God than that imo. How might you feel "doing greater things" than the High Priest you worship, though?

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
well, it is used by Ruth for Boaz too. If you start with a premise and then seek Scripture to verify it, Scripture will always oblige. I mean worship Jesus if you like, til you find Nehushtan anyway, but there are easier ways to make Him into God than that imo. How might you feel "doing greater things" than the High Priest you worship, though?

If the LXX says YHWH is Kurios, what is a first century Jew to think when Lord (kurios) is used of Jesus too? Have you considered Nestle Aland 27 (in the critical apparatus) and 28 (directly) call Kurios Jesus?
“Now I desire to remind you (even though you have been fully informed of these facts once for all) that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, later destroyed those who did not believe.” (Jude 5)

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

Dave L said:
If the LXX says YHWH is Kurios, what is a first century Jew to think when Lord (kurios) is used of Jesus too? Have you considered Nestle Aland 27 (in the critical apparatus) and 28 (directly) call Kurios Jesus?
“Now I desire to remind you (even though you have been fully informed of these facts once for all) that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, later destroyed those who did not believe.” (Jude 5)

ok, like i said put Jesus in there if you want to, and believe it until you break up Nehushtan if you want to, and don't reflect on my Qs if you don't want to, Dave, ignore them as long as you want, but we are even told that we will do greater things, and i don't see how you will be able to reconcile the two wadr

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
ok, like i said put Jesus in there if you want to, and believe it until you break up Nehushtan if you want to, and don't reflect on my Qs if you don't want to, Dave

I show that I have a valid alternative view that makes sense, endorsed by the newer translations.

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

Dave L said:
I show that I have a valid alternative view that makes sense, endorsed by the newer translations.

maybe after you have addressed some of my points, but see how you are currently unable to do that Dave? Pretty sure they go hand-in-hand, ok

brakelite · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
How might you feel "doing greater things" than the High Priest you worship, though?

"Because I go to the Father". The greater things I believe we not necessarily individual miracles, although certainly Peter and Paul had a good go, but the greater things I think we're in the numbers brought into the kingdom. Souls saved was always the end goal, still is. Jesus managed to convert 11.
KJV John 17
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
maybe after you have addressed some of my points, but see how you are currently unable to do that Dave? Pretty sure they go hand-in-hand, ok

If Nestle Aland agrees with me, little else matters what others think.

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

brakelite said:
Souls saved was always the end goal, still is.

ha well let's just agree that "saved" is a disputed definition, apparently Christ would deem most of them twice the sons of hell and possessed of seven worse spirits

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

Dave L said:
If Nestle Aland agrees with me, little else matters what others think.

what others think is not even the subject Dave; why you had to give up the field like you have just done is the subject ok

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
what others think is not even the subject Dave; why you had to give up the field like you have just done is the subject ok

Do you know more than the professional bible translators? What are your credentials?

brakelite · Oct 19, 2018

There is overwhelming evidence in Scripture showing that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. It would be far too much to comment upon in detail here. Suffice it to say that certain of the Jews regarded His claim as blasphemous (Mark 14:60-65 John 10:36). They said He was claiming to be God (John 5:18, 10:3033). It was this claim of Sonship that He was challenged with at His trial (Matthew 26:63, Luke 22:70). The Jews said His claims made Him worthy of death (Mark 14:64, John 19:7, see also John 8:56-59). Jesus was mocked for claiming to be the Son of God (Matthew 27:40-43). It was on this point of Sonship with God that Satan challenged Christ in the wilderness (Matthew 4:3-6, Luke 4:3-9). Peter, when confessing Christ to be ―the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16), was told by Jesus that it had not been ―flesh and blood that had revealed this to him but His Father in Heaven (Matthew 16:17). Jesus said very clearly that He was the Son of God (Matthew 16:16-17, John 3:16, 5:25-26, 9:35, 10:36, 11:4, 19:7). At His trial he claimed to be the Son of God (Matthew 26:64, Mark 14:62, Luke 22:70-71). It was this claim that brought about the sentence of death against Him (Mark 14:64, John 19:7).
The demons also addressed Jesus as the Son of God (Matthew 8:29, Mark 3:11, 5:7, Luke 4:41). The man in the tombs possessed of a devil also called Christ the Son of God (Luke 8:27-29). The Roman centurion said he believed that Christ was the Son of God (Mark 15:39). The disciples confessed Christ to be the Son of God (Matthew 14:33, 16:16, John 1:49, 11:27). Philip (the evangelist) explained to the Ethiopian eunuch that Christ was the Son of God (Acts 8:37). The first thing Paul taught after his 'blindness' was that Christ is the Son of God (Acts 9:20). Paul‘s continuing theme was that God had sent His Son into the world to die (Romans 1:4, 8:3, 32, 2 Corinthians 1:19, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 4:13 etc.). Not surprisingly, John's little letters, as does the book of Hebrews, constantly refer to Christ as the Son of God (1 John 3:8, 4:15, 5:5, 5:10, 5:12-13, 5:20, Hebrews 4:14, 6:6, 7:3, 10:29). That Christ is the Son of God was also the testimony of John the Baptist (John 1:32-34) – and so the list goes on. Some say that Christ is a son only because of the virgin birth at Bethlehem, but if this were true, then John, when writing his Gospel (to show that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God), made a serious mistake. This is because he did not even mention the birth of Jesus or the events of Bethlehem. The only thing in this respect he did say was that the Word was made flesh (John 1:14). This must be the briefest of references to Christ‘s incarnation that it is possible to make. If John had wanted to show that the only reason why Christ was called the Son of God was because of the virgin birth then surely he would have at least mentioned where the angel Gabriel visited Mary saying that the child she was going to bear would be called the Son of God (Luke 1:35). As it was he did not even mention it. The prime reason therefore for Christ being called the Son of God cannot be His birth at Bethlehem. There must be another reason. The ―signs‖ that John gave were signs of Christ‘s divinity. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he was led of God to show that Christ was the divine Son of God. This can clearly be seen in his opening words: ―In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.‖ John 1:1 In order to fulfil the purpose in writing his Gospel (that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God), the very first thing that the Holy Spirit led John to write was that Christ, in His pre-existence, ―was God‖. From the outset therefore, John was saying to his readers that there are two divine personages who are both rightly termed God (Gr. Theos). This was the opening thrust of his Gospel. John then proceeded to reinforce his opening words. He did this by saying that all things were made by the Word and without him was not any thing made that was made (John 1:3). Christ therefore, says John, is our Creator. This is the highest possible claim to divinity. Only divinity is not created.

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

Dave L said:
Do you know more than the professional bible translators? What are your credentials?

Dave, those are Scriptural questions i have posed, my credentials are not really relevant imo

stunnedbygrace · Oct 19, 2018

brakelite said:
There is overwhelming evidence in Scripture showing that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. It would be far too much to comment upon in detail here. Suffice it to say that certain of the Jews regarded His claim as blasphemous (Mark 14:60-65 John 10:36). They said He was claiming to be God (John 5:18, 10:3033). It was this claim of Sonship that He was challenged with at His trial (Matthew 26:63, Luke 22:70). The Jews said His claims made Him worthy of death (Mark 14:64, John 19:7, see also John 8:56-59). Jesus was mocked for claiming to be the Son of God (Matthew 27:40-43). It was on this point of Sonship with God that Satan challenged Christ in the wilderness (Matthew 4:3-6, Luke 4:3-9). Peter, when confessing Christ to be ―the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16), was told by Jesus that it had not been ―flesh and blood that had revealed this to him but His Father in Heaven (Matthew 16:17). Jesus said very clearly that He was the Son of God (Matthew 16:16-17, John 3:16, 5:25-26, 9:35, 10:36, 11:4, 19:7). At His trial he claimed to be the Son of God (Matthew 26:64, Mark 14:62, Luke 22:70-71). It was this claim that brought about the sentence of death against Him (Mark 14:64, John 19:7).
The demons also addressed Jesus as the Son of God (Matthew 8:29, Mark 3:11, 5:7, Luke 4:41). The man in the tombs possessed of a devil also called Christ the Son of God (Luke 8:27-29). The Roman centurion said he believed that Christ was the Son of God (Mark 15:39). The disciples confessed Christ to be the Son of God (Matthew 14:33, 16:16, John 1:49, 11:27). Philip (the evangelist) explained to the Ethiopian eunuch that Christ was the Son of God (Acts 8:37). The first thing Paul taught after his 'blindness' was that Christ is the Son of God (Acts 9:20). Paul‘s continuing theme was that God had sent His Son into the world to die (Romans 1:4, 8:3, 32, 2 Corinthians 1:19, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 4:13 etc.). Not surprisingly, John's little letters, as does the book of Hebrews, constantly refer to Christ as the Son of God (1 John 3:8, 4:15, 5:5, 5:10, 5:12-13, 5:20, Hebrews 4:14, 6:6, 7:3, 10:29). That Christ is the Son of God was also the testimony of John the Baptist (John 1:32-34) – and so the list goes on. Some say that Christ is a son only because of the virgin birth at Bethlehem, but if this were true, then John, when writing his Gospel (to show that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God), made a serious mistake. This is because he did not even mention the birth of Jesus or the events of Bethlehem. The only thing in this respect he did say was that the Word was made flesh (John 1:14). This must be the briefest of references to Christ‘s incarnation that it is possible to make. If John had wanted to show that the only reason why Christ was called the Son of God was because of the virgin birth then surely he would have at least mentioned where the angel Gabriel visited Mary saying that the child she was going to bear would be called the Son of God (Luke 1:35). As it was he did not even mention it. The prime reason therefore for Christ being called the Son of God cannot be His birth at Bethlehem. There must be another reason. The ―signs‖ that John gave were signs of Christ‘s divinity. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he was led of God to show that Christ was the divine Son of God. This can clearly be seen in his opening words: ―In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.‖ John 1:1 In order to fulfil the purpose in writing his Gospel (that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God), the very first thing that the Holy Spirit led John to write was that Christ, in His pre-existence, ―was God‖. From the outset therefore, John was saying to his readers that there are two divine personages who are both rightly termed God (Gr. Theos). This was the opening thrust of his Gospel. John then proceeded to reinforce his opening words. He did this by saying that all things were made by the Word and without him was not any thing made that was made (John 1:3). Christ therefore, says John, is our Creator. This is the highest possible claim to divinity. Only divinity is not created.

Yes! And also, John says everything was created through Him. God does not use men of flesh to create. They ARE a creation.

He also told people their sins were forgiven.

They absolutely knew what our Lord was saying.

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
Dave, those are Scriptural questions i have posed, my credentials are not really relevant imo

No credentials = no authority in original languages.

bbyrd009 · Oct 19, 2018

Dave L said:
No credentials = no authority in original languages.

so see how we are not really even having a convo, Dave?
i have language authorities on tap wadr, and most of them are hip to the reason kurios was invoked, "In Greek mythology the word 'kurios' was only very sporadically applied to the deity," "The ubiquitous noun κυριος (kurios), meaning sir, mister, master, lord or Lord. It occurs 745 times in the New Testament..."
Have a nice day, ok

Dave L · Oct 19, 2018

bbyrd009 said:
so see how we are not really even having a convo, Dave?
Have a nice day, ok

Taken · Oct 19, 2018

farouk said:
Great answer there!

The point is: What saith the Scriptures?

Scriptures notify us of the knowledge of both good and evil spirits.

And that either (good or evil spirits) can enter a man and direct the man, according to the intent of the spirit (good or evil)
1 John 4:6

The man who elects to have Gods good, Spirit of truth within him; such man has access to spiritual truth, communication, direction, via Gods Spirit / word, truth, power.

Glory to God,
Taken

The Problem With The Trinity

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Dave L

Guest

Groper

Dave L

Guest

Groper

Dave L

Guest

Groper

brakelite

Guest

Dave L

Guest

Groper

Groper

Dave L

Guest

brakelite

Guest

Groper

Well-Known Member

Dave L

Guest

Groper

Dave L

Guest

Well-Known Member

Similar threads