Virgin birth?

theefaith said:

Did d you read my post on the trinity
That’s historic Christian faith

Click to expand...

No thats christian dogma, doesnt make it right. Mens churches are built on such foolishness...

Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
Col 2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
Col 2:22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?
Col 2:23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

men love to be wise

Mat_11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

all one need do is ask Him.

theefaith said:

A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?

Click to expand...

I can handle most of it theefaith but 'virgin perpetual' is unpersuasive.

jaybird said:

i agree but i was talking about the trinity doctrine which would not begin until almost 400 years after Jesus and didnt complete until at least 600 years after Jesus.

Click to expand...

That's nonsense.

It wasn't dogmatically defined until later - but ABSOLUTELY taught in Scripture
(Gen. 1:26, Matt. 28:19, John 15:26, 1 Cor. 12:4-6, 2 Cor. 13:14, 1 John 5:7, Eph. 4:6, Psalm 68:5, Mal. 2:10, Isa. 63:16, 2 Cor. 1:3-4, John 3:16, John 8:41, 1 Thess. 3:13, Isa. 7:14, Isa. 9:6, John 1:1, John 1:3, John 8:58, John 10:30, John 15:9, John 20:28, Acts 5:3-4, 2 Cor. 4:4, Phil. 2:6, Col. 2:9, 1 Tim. 3:16, Heb. 1:8, Tit. 2:13, John 14:16-18, Luke 12:10, 2 Cor. 3:17, 2 Cor. 13:5, John 14:23, Acts 5:3-4)

BreadOfLife said:

That's nonsense.

It wasn't dogmatically defined until later - but ABSOLUTELY taught in Scripture
(Gen. 1:26, Matt. 28:19, John 15:26, 1 Cor. 12:4-6, 2 Cor. 13:14, 1 John 5:7, Eph. 4:6, Psalm 68:5, Mal. 2:10, Isa. 63:16, 2 Cor. 1:3-4, John 3:16, John 8:41, 1 Thess. 3:13, Isa. 7:14, Isa. 9:6, John 1:1, John 1:3, John 8:58, John 10:30, John 15:9, John 20:28, Acts 5:3-4, 2 Cor. 4:4, Phil. 2:6, Col. 2:9, 1 Tim. 3:16, Heb. 1:8, Tit. 2:13, John 14:16-18, Luke 12:10, 2 Cor. 3:17, 2 Cor. 13:5, John 14:23, Acts 5:3-4)

Click to expand...

why did it take 600 plus years to define it? why couldnt the 12 trained by Jesus define it? or st Paul? John the baptist and the Essenes, John the greatest prophet ever and the Essenes said to be the most spiritually enlightened sect, yet there is no mention of this trinity doctrine in all of those scrolls?

theefaith said:

the three hundred plus years the church was under constant persecution of the Roman Empire etc.

You will find it at the baptism of Christ and the transfiguration has plus the other verses mentioned here

Click to expand...

600 years not 300.
the NT comes from those 300 years so there goes that argument.

are you aware that "three" has other meanings than the trinity?
you cant just point to three apples, or three birds and say "Its the trinity!!"

stamp collecting, football, business and theology all have many things in common. They give importance to unimportance and value to that which is valueless....they create systems where there is much to do about nothing. They inflate themselves with their own importance.....creating their own language. There is an exclusivity which is foreign to the man who identified with sinners.

jaybird said:

why did it take 600 plus years to define it? why couldnt the 12 trained by Jesus define it? or st Paul? John the baptist and the Essenes, John the greatest prophet ever and the Essenes said to be the most spiritually enlightened sect, yet there is no mention of this trinity doctrine in all of those scrolls?

Click to expand...

Apparently, you're neither a student of History or the Christian faith.
Allow me to educate you . . .

First of all - it didn't take 600 years to define the Trinity. The Trinity was first formally defined at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. The REASON for this was NOT because it was a "new" idea - but tbecause the teaching had been challenged by the Arian Heresy. This is usually the reason for MOST formal doctrinal and dogmatic definitions.

In short - the teaching on the Trinity was NEVER really an issue for the first 275 years or so - until the Arian Heresy deceived a large number of those in the Churchthe Church, so it had to be formally defined. YOU need to do your homework.

ALL of the following Early Church writings came WELL BEFORE Nicaea and the formal declarations about the Trinity . . .

Athenagoras
For, as we acknowledge a God, and a Son his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence, - the Father, the Son, the Spirit because the Son is intelligence, reason, wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire; so also do we apprehend the existence of other powers, which exercise dominion about matter, and by means of it (A Plea for the Christians, 2:18 [A.D. 177]).

Irenaeus
For the Son, who is the Word of God, arranged these things beforehand from the beginning, the Father being in no want of angels, in order that He might call the creation into being, and form man, for whom also the creation was made; nor, again, standing in need of any instrumentality for the framing of created things, or for the ordering of those things which had reference to man; while, [at the same time,] He has a vast and unspeakable number of servants. For His offspring and His similitude do minister to Him in every respect; that is, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Word and Wisdom; whom all the angels serve, and to whom they are subject (Against Heresies 4:7:4 [A.D. 180-190]).

Theophilus of Antioch
The three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His Wisdom (To Autolycus 2:18 [A.D. 181]).

Clement of Alexandria
And the address in the Timœus calls the creator, Father, speaking thus: ‘Ye gods of gods, of whom I am Father; and the Creator of your works.’ So that when he says, ‘Around the king of all, all things are, and because of Him are all things; and he [or that] is the cause of all good things; and around the second are the things second in order; and around the third, the third,’ I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father (The Stromata 5:14 [A.D. 202]).

Hippolytus
A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three. But if he desires to learn how it is shown still that there is one God, let him know that His power is one. As far as regards the power,
THEREFORE, GOD IS ONE. BUT AS FAR AS REGARDS THE ECONOMY THERE IS A THREEFOLD MANIFESTATION, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine (Against the Heresy of One Noetus 8 [A.D. 200-210]).

Tertullian
…All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Against Praxeus 2 [A.D. 213]).
…all the Scriptures attest the clear existence of, and distinction in (the Persons of) the Trinity, and indeed furnish us with our Rule of faith…. (ibid. 11[A.D. 213]).

Origen
…the divine benefits [are] bestowed upon us by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which Trinity is the fountain of all holiness…. (On First Principles 1:4:2 [A.D. 220-230]).
And under this rule must be brought also the understanding of the sacred Scripture, in order that its statements may be judged not according to the worthlessness of the letter, but according to the divinity of the Holy Spirit, by whose inspiration they were caused to be written (ibid. 4:27 [A.D. 220-230]).

Gregory Thaumaturgus
There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abides forever (Declaration of Faith [circa A.D. 250]).

BreadOfLife said:

Apparently, you're neither a student of History or the Christian faith.
Allow me to educate you . . .

Click to expand...

Not education, more like indoctrination, because all of this is misleading and bias, you know this.

First of all - it didn't take 600 years to define the Trinity. The Trinity was first formally defined at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. The REASON for this was NOT because it was a "new" idea - but tbecause the teaching had been challenged by the Arian Heresy. This is usually the reason for MOST formal doctrinal and dogmatic definitions.

Click to expand...

The first Nicea had nothing to do with the trinity, it had to do with the nature of Jesus.

2nd and 3rd Council of Constantinople 553 and 680 not sure which, maybe both, they are still making changes to the trinity doctrine.

Burning people alive for the trinity did not begin until until the 600s. Therefore they did not start teaching it in churches until the 600s

In short - the teaching on the Trinity was NEVER really an issue for the first 275 years or so - until the Arian Heresy deceived a large number of those in the Churchthe Church, so it had to be formally defined. YOU need to do your homework.

Click to expand...

"the Arian Heresy deceived"

thats an interesting choice of words, it sounds like you have a preset decision against these teachings no matter what they are they are wrong.

Its also funny you think Arius was out to deceive everyone. Arius was a product of Alexandria where any and all ideas were welcome, and then you have rome where only the roman idea is allowed and all others are persecuted.

And what did Arius teach? We will never know because rome destroyed all of his writings and all the scriptures that lead him to these conclusions. They also destroyed the great library. Rome sure didnt like people learning, why is that?


ALL of the following Early Church writings came WELL BEFORE Nicaea and the formal declarations about the Trinity . . .

Athenagoras
For, as we acknowledge a God, and a Son his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence, - the Father, the Son, the Spirit because the Son is intelligence, reason, wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire; so also do we apprehend the existence of other powers, which exercise dominion about matter, and by means of it (A Plea for the Christians, 2:18 [A.D. 177]).

Irenaeus
For the Son, who is the Word of God, arranged these things beforehand from the beginning, the Father being in no want of angels, in order that He might call the creation into being, and form man, for whom also the creation was made; nor, again, standing in need of any instrumentality for the framing of created things, or for the ordering of those things which had reference to man; while, [at the same time,] He has a vast and unspeakable number of servants. For His offspring and His similitude do minister to Him in every respect; that is, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Word and Wisdom; whom all the angels serve, and to whom they are subject (Against Heresies 4:7:4 [A.D. 180-190]).

Theophilus of Antioch
The three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His Wisdom (To Autolycus 2:18 [A.D. 181]).

Clement of Alexandria
And the address in the Timœus calls the creator, Father, speaking thus: ‘Ye gods of gods, of whom I am Father; and the Creator of your works.’ So that when he says, ‘Around the king of all, all things are, and because of Him are all things; and he [or that] is the cause of all good things; and around the second are the things second in order; and around the third, the third,’ I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father (The Stromata 5:14 [A.D. 202]).

Hippolytus
A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three. But if he desires to learn how it is shown still that there is one God, let him know that His power is one. As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine (Against the Heresy of One Noetus 8 [A.D. 200-210]).

Tertullian
…All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Against Praxeus 2 [A.D. 213]).
…all the Scriptures attest the clear existence of, and distinction in (the Persons of) the Trinity, and indeed furnish us with our Rule of faith…. (ibid. 11[A.D. 213]).

Origen
…the divine benefits [are] bestowed upon us by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which Trinity is the fountain of all holiness…. (On First Principles 1:4:2 [A.D. 220-230]).
And under this rule must be brought also the understanding of the sacred Scripture, in order that its statements may be judged not according to the worthlessness of the letter, but according to the divinity of the Holy Spirit, by whose inspiration they were caused to be written (ibid. 4:27 [A.D. 220-230]).

Gregory Thaumaturgus
There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abides forever (Declaration of Faith [circa A.D. 250]).

Click to expand...

this is all very misleading, most if not all of these guys were not trinitarians. Origen, Tertullian, and Clement were definitely not as they did not believe Jesus was co equal and believed the Father was the Most High and the Father was greater. they may have used phrases as "same substance" but that does not make anyone co equal. they believed a man and a horse were of the "same substance" that does not make man and horse one and the same. "same substance" is greek thought going back to plato and the greek mystery schools.

happy new year buddy

jaybird said:

Not education, more like indoctrination, because all of this is misleading and bias, you know this.

The first Nicea had nothing to do with the trinity, it had to do with the nature of Jesus.
2nd and 3rd Council of Constantinople 553 and 680 not sure which, maybe both, they are still making changes to the trinity doctrine.
Burning people alive for the trinity did not begin until until the 600s. Therefore they did not start teaching it in churches until the 600s

"the Arian Heresy deceived"
thats an interesting choice of words, it sounds like you have a preset decision against these teachings no matter what they are they are wrong.

Its also funny you think Arius was out to deceive everyone. Arius was a product of Alexandria where any and all ideas were welcome, and then you have rome where only the roman idea is allowed and all others are persecuted.

And what did Arius teach? We will never know because rome destroyed all of his writings and all the scriptures that lead him to these conclusions. They also destroyed the great library. Rome sure didnt like people learning, why is that?

ALL of the following Early Church writings came WELL BEFORE Nicaea and the formal declarations about the Trinity . . .

this is all very misleading, most if not all of these guys were not trinitarians. Origen, Tertullian, and Clement were definitely not as they did not believe Jesus was co equal and believed the Father was the Most High and the Father was greater. they may have used phrases as "same substance" but that does not make anyone co equal. they believed a man and a horse were of the "same substance" that does not make man and horse one and the same. "same substance" is greek thought going back to plato and the greek mystery schools.

Click to expand...

As usual - you're DEAD WRONG - and it's my pleasure to educate you publicly . .

FIRST of all, son - the Counci of Nicaea DID address the Trinity. In order to address the Arian Heresy, which denied the divinhity of Jesus Christ. From this council came the Nicene Creed, which chronicles the belief in a TRIUNE Godhead. It proclaims - among other things - that the Son is "God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, CONSUBSTANTIAL with the Father".
It also declares that the Holy Spirit, "proceeds from the Father AND the Son - and WITH the Father AND the Son, He is adored and glorified."

YOUR claim that this teaching was NOT addressed for "600 years" is just more of your blatent dishonesty . . .

Also - YOUR claims about the Early Church Fathers NOT being Trinitarians - in the face of the PROOF that I gave you in my last post is idiotic.
In fact - it was Tertullian himself who coined the term, "Trinity".

So much for your foolish claims . . .

BreadOfLife said:

As usual - you're DEAD WRONG - and it's my pleasure to educate you publicly . .

FIRST of all, son - the Counci of Nicaea DID address the Trinity. In order to address the Arian Heresy, which denied the divinhity of Jesus Christ. From this council came the Nicene Creed, which chronicles the belief in a TRIUNE Godhead. It proclaims - among other things - that the Son is "God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, CONSUBSTANTIAL with the Father".
It also declares that the Holy Spirit, "proceeds from the Father AND the Son - and WITH the Father AND the Son, He is adored and glorified."

YOUR claim that this teaching was NOT addressed for "600 years" is just more of your blatent dishonesty . . .

Also - YOUR claims about the Early Church Fathers NOT being Trinitarians - in the face of the PROOF that I gave you in my last post is idiotic.
In fact - it was Tertullian himself who coined the term, "Trinity".

So much for your foolish claims . . .

Click to expand...

nope, there was no trinity debate at the first CON. it was all about the Arian contro. which consisted of Jesus and the Father. no spirit therefore no trinity.

2nd and 3rd Council of Constantinople they are still making changes. why do you ignore this?

tertullian believed the Father is greater and the Father Son were not co equal. thats not the trinity.

so sad that you have to ignore all these facts and make believe they do not exist. im sorry but your points have been thoroughly debunked.

theefaith said:

Also it’s not rome crushing all opposition but a firm duty to defend the truth and the faithful from all error, and heresy

Click to expand...

but this is in fact exactly what rome does, they destroy anyone and everyone that disagrees.

sounds like you think a freethinker is a good idea! We must only live and defend truth, goodness, and beauty

Click to expand...

are you being serious? you really think truth should be established by who has the greatest army, who is better at killing and destroying.

i see nothing good nor beautiful about burning people alive, torturing people, and burning down villages full of women and children.

theefaith said:

Also it’s not rome crushing all opposition but a firm duty to defend the truth and the faithful from all error, and heresy

sounds like you think a freethinker is a good idea! We must only live and defend truth, goodness, and beauty

Click to expand...

sorry but i have to go back to this one again as i am completely dumbfounded anyone would make such a statement. basically this means free speech is bad, defending the norm with armies is good.
according to this idea Jesus and the 12 should have been immediately put to death and silenced when they spoke against mainstream Judaism.
unbelievable . . .

jaybird said:

nope, there was no trinity debate at the first CON. it was all about the Arian contro. which consisted of Jesus and the Father. no spirit therefore no trinity.
2nd and 3rd Council of Constantinople they are still making changes. why do you ignore this?

Click to expand...

And yet, I destroyed this idiocy back in post #55, when I quoted from the Nicene Creed, which states that the Son is "God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, CONSUBSTANTIAL with the Father".

It also declares that the Holy Spirit, "proceeds from the Father AND the Son - and WITH the Father AND the Son, He is adored and glorified."

YOU lose . . .

jaybird said:

tertullian believed the Father is greater and the Father Son were not co equal. thats not the trinity.

Click to expand...

jaybird said:

so sad that you have to ignore all these facts and make believe they do not exist.

Click to expand...

Apparently - ou enjoy being humiliated, so here you go.
From Tertullian:
All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Against Praxeus 2 [A.D. 213]).

jaybird said:

im sorry but your points have been thoroughly debunked.

Click to expand...

Apparently, NOBODY ever taught you that in order to "debunk" something - you need to provide PROOF.
So far, I'm the only one who has provided any documented evidence for my claims - so it is I who have debunkes YOU . . .