The Trinity definition

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

justbyfaith said:
However, He did say this in another context (Isaiah 55:8-9).

But you are trying to refute my position based on the first context, which was the passage that was used. But, just for the record, even Isaiah 55:8-9 does not consider his ways as foolish by anyone's esteem, just indiscernible - once revealed, they are marvelous in our eyes (Mark 12:11).
Quit the non-sequiturs.

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

marks said:
Isaiah 59:1-17
1) Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2) But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
3) For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.
4) None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
5) They hatch cockatrice' eggs, and weave the spider's web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
6) Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands.
7) Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.
8) The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.
9) Therefore is judgment far from us, neither doth justice overtake us: we wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness.
10) We grope for the wall like the blind, and we grope as if we had no eyes: we stumble at noonday as in the night; we are in desolate places as dead men.
11) We roar all like bears, and mourn sore like doves: we look for judgment, but there is none; for salvation, but it is far off from us.
12) For our transgressions are multiplied before thee, and our sins testify against us: for our transgressions are with us; and as for our iniquities, we know them;
13) In transgressing and lying against the LORD, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood.
14) And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.
15) Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
16) And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him.
17) For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloke.

I hope you don't find this superfluous.

Much love!

But we just did a full circle. You said that you weren't saying that Jesus needed to be God because man's sins were beyond absolving by any other means, but God. And now, I believe that you quote is making that point?

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

marks said:
A man doing what only God can do.

Much love!

Well why are you supporting now, what you said that you weren't?

marks · Nov 12, 2020

DNB said:
But we just did a full circle. You said that you weren't saying that Jesus needed to be God because man's sins were beyond absolving by any other means, but God. And now, I believe that you quote is making that point?

Actually, the point I'm focusing on is not about the absolving of our sins, rather, on Jesus' ability to live without sin.

Jesus came to seek those who are lost, to put them in Himself, and to carry us all back to God, our reconciliation.

I'm saying that the corruption of humanity by sin is so complete that no man could live a life acceptable to God, all will sin.

OK. Let's talk a moment about salvation. One idea of salvation is where we are in a courthouse, guilty of crime, and someone comes to take our sentence for us, and we can walk out of that courthouse free.

My idea of salvation is that I'm part of a dead family tree, and that Jesus provides the bridge to a living family tree. That the first family tree was from Adam, and was subject to death, but the new family tree is from Jesus, Who provides us with life. And this is eternal, because He has life in Himself, only One is eternal, but when we are immersed into Him, we share.

Much love!

jaybird · Nov 12, 2020

Christophany said:
Sure He did in John 8:24- unless you believe I AM you will die in your sins.

Who is the I AM in Exodus 3:14 ?

John 8:58- before Abraham was even born, I AM (ego eimi) the same I AM is Exodus 3:14

They picked up stone to kill Jesus for Blasphemy.

im not the final authority on scripture but im pretty sure thats not what He is saying.
i am means i exist in greek so the scripture could mean "before Abraham I existed" which He did, i think everyone agrees on this. but lets go the other way " before Abraham I am the Most High". to me this is an odd statement, if He is the Most High would He not by the Most High at all times, before and after Abraham? why only before? i dont think this interpretation fits. the pharisee didnt understand either and lucky for us they asked "who are you?" and Jesus answers them that He is the one he has been telling them from the beginning. and what he had said before was He was the son of man, Son of the Most High and the Christ.

And the title Son of God is a Divine title of Jesus. Son of in Judaism means having the nature of: so when Jesus is called the son of man He has the nature of man a human nature. It is used often in Daniel and Ezekiel with that meaning.

So the title Son of God has the meaning of the nature of God, a Divine nature. Hence the 2 natures in Christ both human and Divine. the Son of God and the son of man. Both human and Divine decent.

there are lots of sons of the Most High, angels are sons of the Most High but that does not make angels the Most High and the Most High is not the "son of" anyone.

"Son of man" is a common term in the Psalms, used to accentuate the difference between God and human beings. As in Ps. viii. 4 (A. V. 5), the phrase implies "mortality," "impotence," "transientness,"as against the omnipotence and eternality of God. Yhwh looks down from His throne in heaven upon the "children," or "sons," of "man" (Ps. xi. 4, xxxiii. 13). The faithful fail among them (Ps. xii. 2 [A. V. 1]); the seed of Yhwh's enemies will not abide among the "children of men" (Ps. xxi. 10). "Children of men" is thus equivalent to "mankind" (Ps. xxxvi. 8 [A. V. 7], lxvi. 5)."Sons of men," or "children of men," designates also the slanderers and evil-doers in contrast to the righteous, that is, Israel (Ps. lvii. 5 [A. V. 4], lviii. 2 [A. V. 1]). It occurs most frequently, however, as a synonym for "mankind," "the human race" (Ps. xc. 3, cvii. 8, cxv. 16, cxlv. 12); Jewish Encyclopedia

hope this helps !!!

this part i agree

edit -
i forgot this but the command in John 8 24 is that we must believe Jesus is "he" not "I Am", the "I Am" passage is 8 58 and there is no command.

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

marks said:
Actually, the point I'm focusing on is not about the absolving of our sins, rather, on Jesus' ability to live without sin.

Jesus came to seek those who are lost, to put them in Himself, and to carry us all back to God, our reconciliation.

I'm saying that the corruption of humanity by sin is so complete that no man could live a life acceptable to God, all will sin.

OK. Let's talk a moment about salvation. One idea of salvation is where we are in a courthouse, guilty of crime, and someone comes to take our sentence for us, and we can walk out of that courthouse free.

My idea of salvation is that I'm part of a dead family tree, and that Jesus provides the bridge to a living family tree. That the first family tree was from Adam, and was subject to death, but the new family tree is from Jesus, Who provides us with life. And this is eternal, because He has life in Himself, only One is eternal, but when we are immersed into Him, we share.

Much love!

Yes marks, but again, you are omitting Jesus' deity in your soteriology. Which, as you know, I'm entirely in accord with that.
We all agree about God's mercy, that he offered us a means towards salvation that did not require us to meet His austere grade. But, you see, somebody had to, or the Law itself would be nothing more than entrapment, something that nobody could even possibly fulfil.
Thus, a human creature was required in order to indict Adam in the first place - if no one but God could complete His Law, then what is man guilty of to begin with? As God promised Abraham that he would entirely spare all of Sodom, if He could find at least 10 righteous men, He equally vowed to exonerate all men, provided that He is able finds one righteous man on earth, and Christ was that man. If he were God, it would void God's pledge and undermine His justice. This is Biblical, and is entirely sound and rational, and exemplifies God's mercy and judgment.

jaybird · Nov 12, 2020

APAK said:
Very powerful words said here......I wonder if folks really get what you said here....it's a miracle that Christ walked on water.....the human being, the Son of the Almighty, his Father created this miracle, not his Son for himself...Give the Father the glory indeed,,,.Amen and Amen

thanks ap. another thing for everyone to consider. we are expected to follow Jesus, Jesus obeyed the law, healed the sick, fed the hungry, etc, we can do those things. the Almighty created the Heavens and Earth, how exactly do we follow that? IMO only a man can be an example to men.

APAK · Nov 12, 2020

jaybird said:
im not the final authority on scripture but im pretty sure thats not what He is saying.
i am means i exist in greek so the scripture could mean "before Abraham I existed" which He did, i think everyone agrees on this. but lets go the other way " before Abraham I am the Most High". to me this is an odd statement, if He is the Most High would He not by the Most High at all times, before and after Abraham? why only before? i dont think this interpretation fits. the pharisee didnt understand either and lucky for us they asked "who are you?" and Jesus answers them that He is the one he has been telling them from the beginning. and what he had said before was He was the son of man, Son of the Most High and the Christ.

there are lots of sons of the Most High, angels are sons of the Most High but that does not make angels the Most High and the Most High is not the "son of" anyone.

this part i agree

edit -
i forgot this but the command in John 8 24 is that we must believe Jesus is "he" not "I Am", the "I Am" passage is 8 58 and there is no command.

Very insightful..

and the other part to this discussion concerning Christ and Abraham is that to match "I AM" that really does not have to be in all caps, to the OT Exodus verse concerning YHWH himself is so ridiculous. It is apples and oranges. It is Hebrew and Greek. The Greek translation to English 'I am (he)' or 'I exist' is a common expression for any man to use...it is me and no one else...etc. It shows emphasis by a person regarding the subject at hand. The Exodus verse (3:14) describing the personal name of YHWH never refers to this same English expression, 'I am' and its meaning. In Exodus, YHWH is calling himself 'I am that I am' or 'I will be who I will be ...etc. It is his personal expressed approximated name. This is never used by his Son at any time..and that would be blasphemous anyway. It would be ridiculous to match 'I existed' before etc or 'I am' he with YHWH's personal expressed name from Hebrew.

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

justbyfaith said:
I can say unequivocally that I understand the Trinity.

Have you read my explanation of it in the thread that I provided for you?

(posts #1-#6):

True Trinity.

@Christophany
ok, I read your nonsense post. ...I actually didn't know that you were a modalist (I know that 101G is), I must have forgotten?
JBF, do you not yet see where I am coming from - if one's conclusion is absurd and into the realm of the incomprehensible, it means that his exegesis is incorrect. This has been my stance from day 1, which has entirely eluded all you god-man theorists. Point being, you all do nothing more than show how you Biblically came to your conclusion, which any monkey/heretic/charlatan can do, but you are all unable to justify the implausibility of your Christology with reason and wisdom. The defense is always, 'hey, it's a mystery', or 'how are we creatures expected to fathom the ontology of God?'.

We are created in His image, we therefore understand all His attributes, but we just cannot fathom the magnitude of these qualities. A student understands skill and development, but as of yet, he cannot appreciate how knowledgeable, adept and in control his master is. But again, he is able to comprehend these principles, and therefore work towards them to a greater degree until he becomes like his master.

You do not understand the trinity JBF, all you did was show how you eisegeted it, that doesn't qualify as comprehension. The Father being in heaven, while simultaneously praying to Himself while on earth, explains absolutely nothing, but rather, leaves those that entertain such a ludicrous notion, delirious and bewildered. Again, just because you think that you found sufficient verses to support your theory, does not mean that your theory is correct, obviously. When it's as absurd as a god-man theory, than we conclude that the theory is just that, absurd and not to be entertained or taken seriously.

jaybird · Nov 12, 2020

APAK said:
Very insightful..

and the other part to this discussion concerning Christ and Abraham is that to match "I AM" that really does not have to be in all caps, to the OT Exodus verse concerning YHWH himself is so ridiculous. It is apples and oranges. It is Hebrew and Greek. The Greek translation to English 'I am (he)' or 'I exist' is a common expression for any man to use...it is me and no one else...etc. It shows emphasis by a person regarding the subject at hand. The Exodus verse (3:14) describing the personal name of YHWH never refers to this same English expression, 'I am' and its meaning. In Exodus, YHWH is calling himself 'I am that I am' or 'I will be who I will be ...etc. It is his personal expressed approximated name. This is never used by his Son at any time..and that would be blasphemous anyway. It would be ridiculous to match 'I existed' before etc or 'I am' he with YHWH's personal expressed name from Hebrew.

i agree about the caps but the guy i was talking to believes that phrase to be the Most High so i try to respect his belief.

the way i understand is Jesus said "I am" and the Hebrew bible says " Am who I Am" or I Am Who will be" which is what you said i think. the word analysis is so complex, old Hebrew>Hebrew>old Greek>modern Greek, it leaves open so many windows i try not to get into it. i prefer the logical / plain reasoning approach.

His true nature IMO is something only the inner circle (the 12, John B) would have known, not something He would have revealed to pharisee non believers, they didnt believe Him, He would have known that so why bother to enlighten those that have no interest in the first place.

jaybird · Nov 12, 2020

i have a question to anyone that can answer, some claim that if you dont believe Jesus is the Most High (deny the deity), or do not accept the trinity, then it undoes everything. how does Jesus being a man undo anything?

another thing that confuses me, "deity" means a divine being, not the Most High, any being in the heavens could be a divine being. the arch angel Michael is a divine being, no one confuses him with the Most High.

DancesWithGnostics · Nov 12, 2020

Jhn 5:18

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

jaybird · Nov 12, 2020

DancesWithGnostics said:
Jhn 5:18

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

what does equal with the Father mean?

Truther · Nov 12, 2020

Christophany said:
@marks

This is from Christianity.com

All Christians believe the doctrine of the Trinity. If you do not believe this—that is, if you have come to a settled conclusion that the doctrine of the Trinity is not true—you are not a Christian at all. You are in fact a heretic. Those words may sound harsh, but they represent the judgment of the Christian church across the centuries. What is the Trinity? Christians in every land unite in proclaiming that our God eternally exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Those who deny that truth place themselves outside the pale of Christian orthodoxy.

We believe in one living and true God who is the Creator of heaven and earth; who is eternal, almighty, unchangeable, infinitely powerful, wise, just and holy.

We believe that the one God eternally exists in three Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and that these three are one God, co-equal and co-eternal, having precisely the same nature and attributes, and worthy of precisely the same worship, confidence, and obedience. Matthew 3:16, 17; Matthew 28:19, 20; Mark 12:29; John 1:14; Acts 5:3, 4; II Corinthians 13:14.

This doctrine unites all true Christians and separates us from those who are not Christian. You may believe and still not be a Christian, but if you deny this doctrine in your heart, you are not a Christian at all.

Do you agree with the above ?

Why or why not ?

hope this helps !!!

No, if you believe in the trinity you are a Roman Catholic daughter.

DancesWithGnostics · Nov 12, 2020

To those Jews in the context, it meant something worth killing Jesus for.

We now can talk about Elohim and Yahweh, we can say that Jesus used the "ye are gods" quote, we could say many things; but "making himself equal with God" meant something pretty drastic to the Jews in His time - and remember, the Sanhedrin had Sadducees who didn't believe in spirits or resurrection and the Pharisees who did. Amazing they jointly ran Israel being so theologically diverse.

DancesWithGnostics · Nov 12, 2020

"No, if you believe in the trinity you are a Roman Catholic daughter."

Hardly works for the Orthodox. Go tell some Metropolitan he is a Roman Catholic daughter. Orthodox go back just as far as Catholic.

DancesWithGnostics · Nov 12, 2020

There are Oneness Pentecostals and others I would hesitate to call Hairy-Ticks because of a non-belief in Trinity.

DancesWithGnostics · Nov 12, 2020

"i am means i exist in greek so the scripture could mean "before Abraham I existed" which He did, i think everyone agrees on this"

but I imagine Jesus was speaking either Aramaic of Hebrew - just because we have the gospels WRITTEN in Greek does not mean Jesus originally said everything in Greek

Jesus was speaking something that definitely torqued the Jewish leaders - like I AM as in Yahweh as in equating Himself with God. He knew what He was saying and the Jewish leaders did also.

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

DancesWithGnostics said:
To those Jews in the context, it meant something worth killing Jesus for.

We now can talk about Elohim and Yahweh, we can say that Jesus used the "ye are gods" quote, we could say many things; but "making himself equal with God" meant something pretty drastic to the Jews in His time - and remember, the Sanhedrin had Sadducees who didn't believe in spirits or resurrection and the Pharisees who did. Amazing they jointly ran Israel being so theologically diverse.

You're jumping to conclusions. Jesus calling God his Father may mean a myriad of different things. How the Pharisees and Sadducees interpreted it, is something entirely different - did not Jesus' profundity continuously elude them?
Do you not yourself call God your Father, I do, Jesus told us all that we all have but one Father in heaven.
You eisegeted the text by concluding that Jesus said that he was God, simply by calling God his Father.

DNB · Nov 12, 2020

DancesWithGnostics said:
"i am means i exist in greek so the scripture could mean "before Abraham I existed" which He did, i think everyone agrees on this"

but I imagine Jesus was speaking either Aramaic of Hebrew - just because we have the gospels WRITTEN in Greek does not mean Jesus originally said everything in Greek

Jesus was speaking something that definitely torqued the Jewish leaders - like I AM as in Yahweh as in equating Himself with God. He knew what He was saying and the Jewish leaders did also.

No, you're eisegeting the text again, 'before Abraham was, I am' may mean a plethora of different things. The Jews, whos Patriarch was Abraham, in that no one comes before Abraham in precedence to their religion, simply interpreted Jesus' words as that he was claiming to be of more importance than Abraham, which in and of itself, was enough to raise the ire of the Jews.
And, that is all that Jesus was saying, that God intended him to be his precedential creation, despite his chronology implying otherwise.
If you took more care to exegete the text correctly, you'd realize that on any grammatical level 'before Abraham was, YHWH' makes absolutely no coherent sense whatsoever. But, a slight inflection in verb tense, at least in understanding, reveals the sound meaning behind Jesus' very profound expression - his mystery is in his chronology, not his ontology.

The Trinity definition

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads