Data On The Trinity

[Peterlag]

I like what you wrote here, except that whether or not Jesus and Adam were to be direct correlation in the way you mean, why does that have to be the "rule"?

Adam is a type of Christ, but after that we have to go to Scripture to identify in what exact way. Crossing the red sea was seen as being baptized into Moses, which was given to us as a type, though our baptism into Christ involves much more than that.

As the Bible tells us about the first Adam and the Last Adam, God gives us this information.

1 Corinthians 15:45-49 KJV
45) And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46) Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47) The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48) As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49) And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

Much love!

Here's a bit more for your enjoyment...

The Bible says the Son will be subject to the Father even in the future “When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him [God] who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). The teaching that the two of them are “co-equal” must be wrong if Jesus is subject to the Father even in the eternal future. John 10:36 says “do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, You are blaspheming, because I said, I am the Son of God?” The fact that Jesus was consecrated, or as it's translated in other versions as “sanctified” by God shows he's not God because God does not need to be sanctified. Philippians 2:6 says that Christ “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.” The point of the verse is that Jesus Christ was highly exalted by God because he was humble and did not seek equality with God. Jesus would never have needed to seek equality with God in the first place because it would have been inherent in him if he was God.

We read in John 5:19 “the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing.” Jesus repeated that in several different ways. “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge… because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me” (John 5:30). “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me” (John 7:16). “I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me” (John 8:28). “For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak” (John 12:49). Jesus would not have needed to be directed by his Father if he was God, and co-equal and co-eternal with the Father.

The Old Testament referred to the Messiah as the servant of God, and we see this in Isaiah 52-53, which speaks of the suffering and death of the Messiah when referring to the Messiah as God’s “servant.” They called King David God’s “servant” when the disciples prayed to God in Acts 4:25 and later in that same prayer they called Jesus “your holy servant” (Acts 4:30) CSB; ESV; NAB; NASB; NET; NIV; NJB). They equated the Messiah as a servant of God just like David was rather than referring to Jesus as if he was God himself. There are many verses indicating that the power and authority Jesus had was given to him by the Father. Jesus Christ would have always had those things that the Scripture says he was “given” if he was the eternal God. Christ was:

• Given “all authority” Matthew 28:18).
• Given “a name above every name” (Philippians 2:9).
• Given work to finish by the Father (John 5:36).
• Given those who believed in him by the Father (John 6:39, 10:29).
• Given glory (John 17:22, 24).
• Given his “cup” [his torture and death] by the Father (John 18:11).
• “Seated” at God’s own right hand (Ephesians 1:20-21).
• “Appointed” over the Church (Ephesians 1:22).

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

The fact of the matter is that human beings cannot fully comprehend God. If you think you can, you are simply deluded. So there is no "club" to beat down doubters and dissenters. It is perfectly true that the Holy Trinity is indeed a Mystery -- "The Mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ" (Col 2:2; Rev 10:7; 1 Tim 2:16) -- so trying to dismiss this as invalid proves that the anti-trinitarians wish to create their own god.

The fact that Christians have held to this doctrine since the time of the apostles also counts for something. That fact that Jesus of Nazareth is God manifest in the flesh means that there are at least two persons in the Godhead. The fact that Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit as God means that there are indeed three persons in the Godhead. So this is the true "data" on the Trinity.

That may be true in the Catholic and Protestant version of history, but biblical history attributes no such doctrine to the 1st century Church. There isn't a single passage that vividly teaches in clear, simple language that God is a trinity. If it was taught by the apostles, then why did Paul conveniently leave out any mention of the Holy Spirit as a Person in all of the letters where he thanked the Godhead?

The fact that you have to use those passages as "proof" that the trinity isn't supposed to be understood only proves that trinitarians have to misquote passages to shoehorn their beliefs into the text. The "mystery" that those passages speak of is not the trinity at all, no matter how much you twist their context.

And c'mon, anti-trinitarians create their own god? Talk about projecting. How can you seriously expect anti-trinitarians to take you seriously when your god is too complex for you to understand, explain, or prove as being biblical? Can anyone realistically or logically have a relationship with such a god?

 

[Matthias]

That God is referred to 5,000 times in the Bible using singular pronouns shoe He is singular.

“GOD: GOD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

The New Testament enunciates no new God and no new doctrine of God. It proclaims that the God and Father of Jesus Christ is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of earlier covenants. What the New Testament announces is that this God has acted anew in inaugurating God’s final reign and covenant through the career and fate of Jesus of Nazareth.”

God: God in the New Testament | Encyclopedia.com

The God and Father of Jesus Christ is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That’s not a new doctrine of God. That’s simple truth, but that’s not what I was taught in Sunday School.

Sunday School: Jesus is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That’s a new doctrine of God.

Sunday School: The Trinity is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That’s a new doctrine of God.

Sunday School: Jesus doesn’t have a God. Jesus is God. That’s the logic of a new doctrine of God.

I was reading this afternoon what Paul says of Jesus in Romans 6:10, “the life that he lives, he lives to God.”

“The life that [Jesus] lives, he lives to God” - his God and Father, who is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

The life that Jesus lives, he doesn’t live to himself.

The life that Jesus lives, he doesn’t live to the Trinity.

The life that Jesus lives, he lives to the Father.

The life that Jesus lives, he lives to “my Father and your Father, my God and your God” (John 20:17).

The one God is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, the God of Jesus, the Father.

The one God is the God of you and the God of me. Just as Jesus himself does, we live to God.

For us, there is no other God to live to.

 

[RedFan]

How can you seriously expect anti-trinitarians to take you seriously when your god is too complex for you to understand, explain, or prove as being biblical? Can anyone realistically or logically have a relationship with such a god?

In fairness, the difficulty of wrapping our heads around the nature of God plagues all of us, Trinitarian and anti-Trinitarian alike. The incorporeal Divine substance is largely incapable of expression in human language.

If we juxtapose God and the created universe -- i.e., there's "God," and there's "everything else" -- on which side of the divide would the Son fall? John 1:3 and John 1:10 (and perhaps 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Colossians 1:15-16) would suggest to me that the Son falls on the "God" side. How to square this with Jewish notions of God being One (numerically as well as by ontologically) is the challenge -- but again, expressing divine concepts at all is itself the bigger challenge. Nevertheless, let's try this as an approximation:

Consider the visible spectrum of light waves at frequencies between the limits of infrared and ultraviolet. The colors are distinct.

White is not on the spectrum, because white is not a “color” at all. Rather, white light is produced by combining the colors of the spectrum. More generally, white light is produced in combining three primary colors – red, green and blue. Thus combined, the distinct colors are not separate.

Distinct but not separate. Three colors. One light.





Similarly in the one God, Father Son and Holy Spirit are distinct but not separate. Three "persons." One God.

I don't really think "persons" is the best word here, although that is the traditional formulation in Trinitarian circles. I prefer persona -- in the sense of a portrayal or a posture, an outward-looking manifestation. The Greek word prosōpon expresses this rather well—an actor’s mask, a character, a face. I encounter Father, or Son, or Holy Spirit, depending on which face is facing me. The three “persons” are relational; they are distinct realities of the one God in relation to me, in relation to humanity, in relation to the created universe.

The one God’s triune nature persists in each of these three faces, as inseparable from each other as are the sides of a tetrahedron. In that very unity lies their shared essence. It is not a material essence, not shared as the faces of a tetrahedron share the same core of stone, eliminating any real distinction of substance comprising the sides. (That is where Sabellius went wrong, analogizing to the material world and supposing the common “stuff” of the divine to be the defining substance of a single entity.) In my view, the shared essence of these three persons lies in what they form in their unity, as the joining together of triangles edge to edge with a common apex forms the shape we know as a tetrahedron:




It is "tetrahedronness" itself, not what the tetrahedron as a solid might be made of, that constitutes this essence. And so it is with the Godhead. We can never fully comprehend the divine “stuff” of the Godhead; that is beyond our power to describe through analogies to the physical world. But the concept of God, like the abstract concept of a tetrahedron, is revealed by the particular relation, the particular union, of its distinct faces. Without the three, there is not the One.

Or so I muse.

 

[Enoch111]

If it was taught by the apostles, then why did Paul conveniently leave out any mention of the Holy Spirit as a Person in all of the letters where he thanked the Godhead?

Paul did NOT leave out the mention of the Holy Spirit while thanking the Godhead. Note carefully: [1] The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and [2] the love of God [the Father], and [3] the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. (2 Cor. 13:14)

The three persons of the triune Godhead are all mentioned together here. As to the apostles never teaching on the Trinity that is completely false. Thomas and Paul called Jesus "GOD" and Peter called the Holy Spirit "GOD". You simply ignored all that because of your anti-trinitarianism.

So first of all you need to get rid of your bias, and secondly you need to be a diligent student of the Word. Not talk about Catholics and Protestants, but what is actually in Scripture from Genesis to Revelation.

 

[Peterlag]

That may be true in the Catholic and Protestant version of history, but biblical history attributes no such doctrine to the 1st century Church. There isn't a single passage that vividly teaches in clear, simple language that God is a trinity. If it was taught by the apostles, then why did Paul conveniently leave out any mention of the Holy Spirit as a Person in all of the letters where he thanked the Godhead?

The fact that you have to use those passages as "proof" that the trinity isn't supposed to be understood only proves that trinitarians have to misquote passages to shoehorn their beliefs into the text. The "mystery" that those passages speak of is not the trinity at all, no matter how much you twist their context.

And c'mon, anti-trinitarians create their own god? Talk about projecting. How can you seriously expect anti-trinitarians to take you seriously when your god is too complex for you to understand, explain, or prove as being biblical? Can anyone realistically or logically have a relationship with such a god?

God made it simple... very simple that even a child can understand it.

 

[Taken]

@Peterlag

Hi - Welcome to the Forum.

Regarding the Topic, “trinity”, I have no issue with the word trinity, nor believe any one “group” has a monopoly on what “trinity” means...
Simply tri- 3 - unity - united...3 united.
Three what united?

Gen 1:
[26] And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

From the get go, A SINGLE God, gives manKind a mysterious preview.

Paralleling Scripture with a man himself, Pronouns and specifics come into view...One single man, saying, My will, My soul, My body, My spirit, My word, My flesh, My blood, My heart, My mind...
...Possessive “different” things expressly Applicable to One Single man.

Sort of a “pick-a-part”, and reveal the “intent, purpose, highlight” of that part, “in agreement or contention with the other parts” ?

Moving forward, through ancient history of manKind’s beginning, to manKind’s ... Creator AND Maker...and the ”parallels” and “differences”.

The Big Picture, imo, reveals and lands on some DISTINCTIONS...
God...unseen, unheard.
* Man...seen, heard.

God...self sufficient
* Man...needs earth (dry land), water, sun to exist.

God...will, word, power Always in Agreement.
* Man...will, word, power Routinely in Conflict. (Mind thinks to do this, says he will do this, Heart thinks bad idea, power “strength” begins to do, fails, too weak, too tired, emergency arises. Conflict in thoughts, (between mind and heart), Failure in ability to Do as his word said.)

^ It’s a mans “constant” conundrum. Mans “parts” in conflict, NOT in unity. Thoughts conflict. Word conflicts with thoughts. Strength conflicts with word and thoughts.
( The “medical” field/branch of “science”, has a plethora of philosophies, terms, diagnostics, unnatural concocted chemical (even poisonous) compounds to sooth, but not cure, a mans CONFLICTS.)
* And THAT ^ may “only” cost you an arm, a leg, your bank account, to test, experiment, hope to sooth your ongoing CONFLICT, and then you die.

Delving into Gods, “us” / “our” reference... and Revealings of “express”, identifiers, names, titles, attributes, purposes, intents, The Big Picture unfolds.
Lord- word, desire, intent, purpose, Son, Jesus, holy, good, name, etc.
God- will, desire, intent, purpose, Father, Yahweh, holy, good, name, etc
Almighty- power, desire, intent, purpose, Spirit, Christ, holy, good, etc

Lord God Almighty, IS ALWAYS in Agreement within Himself.
He Creates, Makes and Offers, and Can, and Will, “RE-MAKE” any willing, ManKind of thing:
To BE in the Lord God Almighty’s “LIKENESS”.
And What exactly does THAT “likeness” MEAN?
A triune unity of One single mans:
Word, Will, Power ... TRI-UNITED.

In closing;
IS a Triune God, “three Gods united” ? No.
IS a Triune God, “expressly the Whole of God united” ? Yes.

Wholly, Whole, Holy.

Eph 1: (Paul appointed to preach to the Gentiles)
[1] Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
[2] Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
[3] Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
[4] According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
[5] Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

1 Tim 4:
[15] Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.

1 Thes 5:
[23] And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and (whole) soul and (whole) body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

John 5:
[15] The man departed, and told the Jews that it was Jesus, which had made him whole.

Gentiles...did y’all get the first memo? 6,000 yrs ago?
Yep, God called the Hebrews, Israel, Tribes, Jews FIRST, to teach y’all, but seems even ancient Gentiles had something equivalent to “ear buds” la, la, la, la, la...can’t hear ya, busy building beauty, comfort and fun.
Gentiles....did y’all get the second memo? 2,000 yrs ago?

Ya ain’t whole, until the Wholly, Whole, Holy Lord God Almighty
Re-MAKES the Whole of you, body, soul, spirit, Wholly, Whole and Holy.

No paper documents to sift through, sign, file.
No man’s authority, office, certification required.
Simple...Call on the Lords Name (Jesus).
* Declare...With YOUR Whole, body, soul, spirits’ WORD, YES you Believe: In the Whole...Body, Soul, Spirit of the Lord God Almighty.
* God Himself WILL Re-MAKE the WHOLE of you, Certify you with His SEAL that you are His Alone and He will handle ALL the paperwork, in His Records and Books;
* Be patient, He is preparing a New Home for you, (and your New siblings) and will Pick you UP shortly.

 

[True Faith]

The Trinity can be disposed of simply by one question... "Whose will did God Himself come down from heaven to do, if not his own?...

Trinitarians have a hard time maintaining the trinity as a Triune God in the first place...

They always separate God into 3 separate and distinct persons.... "God the Son was doing the will of God the Father."....

John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven not to do mine own will but the will of him that sent me....

Then you have to ask them "Was it the will of Jesus to do the will of his Father, who is God?", you have to ask them this because they don't even understand what it means to be "Triune", quite simply they do not even understand their own doctrine...

Then you will have those who will try to use Revelation to prove their false doctrine without actually reading the very first verse....

So they will always say that you do not understand God when it is them who cannot seem to wrap their own heads around their false doctrine...

Besides, every trinitarian directly defies God because they teach a person to "Know God" when God Himself specifically says not to... Jeremiah 31:34 "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

Their very creeds are meant to "Know God" meant to teach who God is and describes exactly how it is you should know Him and who he is...

 

[Peterlag]

The Trinity can be disposed of simply by one question... "Whose will did God Himself come down from heaven to do, if not his own?...

Trinitarians have a hard time maintaining the trinity as a Triune God in the first place...

They always separate God into 3 separate and distinct persons.... "God the Son was doing the will of God the Father."....

John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven not to do mine own will but the will of him that sent me....

Then you have to ask them "Was it the will of Jesus to do the will of his Father, who is God?", you have to ask them this because they don't even understand what it means to be "Triune", quite simply they do not even understand their own doctrine...

Then you will have those who will try to use Revelation to prove their false doctrine without actually reading the very first verse....

So they will always say that you do not understand God when it is them who cannot seem to wrap their own heads around their false doctrine...

Besides, every trinitarian directly defies God because they teach a person to "Know God" when God Himself specifically says not to... Jeremiah 31:34 "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

Their very creeds are meant to "Know God" meant to teach who God is and describes exactly how it is you should know Him and who he is...

Great Post. Here's some data on the holy spirit...

We have no evidence in the Bible that “the Holy Spirit” was ever used as a name because no one ever used it in a direct address. Many people spoke or prayed directly to God, starting out by saying “O Yahweh” (translated as “O LORD” in almost all English versions). Furthermore, the name “Jesus” is a Greek form of the name “Joshua” (in fact, the King James Version confuses “Joshua” and “Jesus” in Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8) and many people spoke “to Jesus” in the Bible. But no one in the Bible ever used “the Holy Spirit” in a direct address because there's simply no actual name for any “Person” known as “the Holy Spirit” anywhere in the Bible.

 

[Marymog]

Something that is openly admitted by theologians that is not known by many Christians is that the doctrine of the Trinity is not stated in the Bible, but is actually “built” by piecing together statements that are said to support it. Since most Christians believe the Trinity is a mystery and not to be understood is a huge reason why doctrinal discussions about it are often avoided or brushed aside and ignored. Worse, the teaching that the Trinity is a “mystery” has been used as a club to beat down doubters and dissenters, and those people are often branded as “heretics” and their role in Christianity minimized.

The word “Trinity” is not in the Bible, and that is supporting evidence that the doctrine is unbiblical, which may be why Trinitarians differ, sometimes greatly in their definitions of the Trinity. The Eastern Orthodox Church differs from the Western Church on the relation of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son. Trinitarians who hold to the “classic” definition of the Trinity say Jesus was 100% God and 100% man while on the earth believe differently from Kenotic Trinitarians who believe Jesus set aside his godhood while he was a man on the earth. Oneness Pentecostals say the classic formula of the Trinity is completely wrong, and yet all these claim that Christ is God and that the Bible supports their position.

A study of the history of the Christian Church shows a definite development in the doctrine of the Trinity over the centuries. For example, the early form of the Apostles Creed (believed to date back to shortly after the time of the apostles themselves) does not mention the Trinity or the dual nature of Christ. The Nicene Creed that was written in 325 AD and modified later added the material about Jesus Christ being “eternally begotten” and the "true God” and about the Holy Spirit being “Lord.” But it was the Athanasian Creed that was most likely composed in the latter part of the 4th century or possibly even as early as the 5th century that was the first creed to explicitly state the doctrine of the Trinity.

It seems it would have been clearly stated in the Bible and in the earliest Christian creeds if the doctrine of the Trinity was genuine and central to Christian belief and especially if belief in it was necessary for salvation as many Trinitarians teach. God gave the Scriptures to the Jewish people, and the Jewish religion and worship that comes from that revelation does not contain any reference to or teachings about a triune God. Surely the Jewish people were qualified to read and understand it, but they never saw the doctrine of the Trinity.

Scripture mentions God, the Holy Spirit and Jesus as 3 separate entities all agreeing with each other. One can not be without the other 2.

What name do you give that 3 in 1 entity?

 

[Marymog]

The Trinity can be disposed of simply by one question... "Whose will did God Himself come down from heaven to do, if not his own?...

Trinitarians have a hard time maintaining the trinity as a Triune God in the first place...

They always separate God into 3 separate and distinct persons.... "God the Son was doing the will of God the Father."....

John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven not to do mine own will but the will of him that sent me....

Then you have to ask them "Was it the will of Jesus to do the will of his Father, who is God?", you have to ask them this because they don't even understand what it means to be "Triune", quite simply they do not even understand their own doctrine...

Then you will have those who will try to use Revelation to prove their false doctrine without actually reading the very first verse....

So they will always say that you do not understand God when it is them who cannot seem to wrap their own heads around their false doctrine...

Besides, every trinitarian directly defies God because they teach a person to "Know God" when God Himself specifically says not to... Jeremiah 31:34 "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

Their very creeds are meant to "Know God" meant to teach who God is and describes exactly how it is you should know Him and who he is...

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.

"I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come."

So we have Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit mentioned in the first passage and the Spirit of truth referred to as a "he" in the 2nd passage. If you don't like the word "Trinity" to describe all 3, what word would you like to use?

Mary

 

[GRACE ambassador]

In fairness, the difficulty of wrapping our heads around the nature of God plagues all of us, Trinitarian and anti-Trinitarian alike.

Thus, what we don't understand is taken "by faith, Pleasing God," Correct?

Similarly in the one God, Father Son and Holy Spirit are distinct but not separate. Three "persons." One God.

Awesome, similar to:

And, for our Precious anti-Triune GodHead friends, we kindly ask:

IF JESUS Is NOT God Almighty [as in 500 Scriptures], then:

HOW are our sins forgiven, so that we Are
Redeemed By God's Own BLOOD?

God's Simple Will!

 

[Peterlag]

Scripture mentions God, the Holy Spirit and Jesus as 3 separate entities all agreeing with each other. One can not be without the other 2.

What name do you give that 3 in 1 entity?

Do you have a verse that says one cannot be without the other 2?

 

[Pierac]

Something that is openly admitted by theologians that is not known by many Christians is that the doctrine of the Trinity is not stated in the Bible, but is actually “built” by piecing together statements that are said to support it. Since most Christians believe the Trinity is a mystery and not to be understood is a huge reason why doctrinal discussions about it are often avoided or brushed aside and ignored. Worse, the teaching that the Trinity is a “mystery” has been used as a club to beat down doubters and dissenters, and those people are often branded as “heretics” and their role in Christianity minimized.

The word “Trinity” is not in the Bible, and that is supporting evidence that the doctrine is unbiblical, which may be why Trinitarians differ, sometimes greatly in their definitions of the Trinity. The Eastern Orthodox Church differs from the Western Church on the relation of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son. Trinitarians who hold to the “classic” definition of the Trinity say Jesus was 100% God and 100% man while on the earth believe differently from Kenotic Trinitarians who believe Jesus set aside his godhood while he was a man on the earth. Oneness Pentecostals say the classic formula of the Trinity is completely wrong, and yet all these claim that Christ is God and that the Bible supports their position.

A study of the history of the Christian Church shows a definite development in the doctrine of the Trinity over the centuries.

When Christianity started spreading, the leaders of the churches were now Gentiles who had converted to Christianity. These people, for the most part, had been educated in Greek philosophies in their schools and universities. As educated persons, they of course wanted to find a place for their new religious beliefs within the philosophical framework they had already acquired. So when they read Hebrew Scriptures, they could not help injecting Greek philosophical meanings into them. The Encyclopedia Britannica says concerning Christian Platonist:

"They did not believe that truth could conflict with truth and were confident that all that was rationally certain in Platonic speculation would prove to be in perfect accordance with the Christian revelation. Their unhistorical approach and unscholarly methods of exegesis of texts, both pagan and Christian, facilitated this confidence."

There was also the felt need of some Christians with Greek philosophical training to express Christianity in those terms, both for their own intellectual satisfaction and in order to convert educated pagans.

What is needed today is to remove all the Greek influence from what is called modern day Christianity, and return to the Christianity that was preached by Jesus and his Apostles.

The Council of Nicaea, in 325 AD., made "Jesus of the same substance as God." This is not the Trinitarian doctrine we know of today, but it was a start. Fifty-six years later, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD., the Holy Spirit was added to the formula, bringing to life the modern day Trinity. One can easily see that even at Nicaea the Trinity was not an established doctrine by the absence of the Holy Spirit. Trinitarians will argue that the belief in a triune God was there from the Apostles, and that it was formalized as dogma at Nicaea and Constantinople. But the fact is that the New Testament does not anywhere teach the doctrine of the Trinity. The Doctrine of the Trinity, was not an established doctrine from Apostolic times, but a slowly developing idea that took over three hundred years to formalize.

325 AD - Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea in order to develop a statement of faith that can unify the church. The Nicene Creed is written, declaring that "the Father and the Son are of the same substance" (homoousios). Emperor Constantine who was also the high priest of the pagan religion of the Unconquered Sun presided over this council. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions and personally proposed the crucial formula expressing the relationship of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council. "of one substance with the Father."

The American Academic Encyclopedia states:

"Although this was not Constantine’s first attempt to reconcile factions in Christianity, it was the first time he had used the imperial office to IMPOSE a settlement."

At the end of this council, Constantine sided with Athanasius over Arius and exiled Arius to Illyria.

328 AD - Athanasius becomes bishop of Alexandria.

328 AD - Constantine recalls Arius from Illyria.

335 AD - Constantine now sides with Arius and exiles Athanasius to Trier.

337 AD - A new emperor, Contantius, orders the return of Athanasius to Alexandria.

339 AD - Athanasius flees Alexandria in anticipation of being expelled.

341 AD - Two councils are held in Antioch this year. During this council, the First, Second, and Third Arian Confessions are written, thereby beginning the attempt to produce a formal doctrine of faith to oppose the Nicene Creed.

343 AD - At the Council of Sardica, Eastern Bishops demand the removal of Athanasius.

346 AD - Athanasius is restored to Alexandria.

351 AD - A second anti - Nicene council is held in Sirmium.

353 AD - A council is held at Aries during Autumn that is directed against Athanasius.

355 AD - A council is held in Milan. Athanasius is again condemned.

356 AD - Athanasius is deposed on February 8th, beginning his third exile.

357 AD - Third Council of Sirmium is convened. Both homoousios and homoiousios are avoided as unbiblical, and it is agreed that the Father is greater than His subordinate Son.

359 AD - The Synod of Seleucia is held which affirms that Christ is "like the Father," It does not however, specify how the Son is like the Father.

361 AD - A council is held in Antioch to affirm Arius’ positions.

380 AD - Emperor Theodosius the Great declares Christianity the official state religion of the empire.

381 AD - The First Council of Constantinople is held to review the controversy since Nicaea. Emperor Theodosius the Great establishes the creed of Nicaea as the standard for his realm. The Nicene Creed is re-evaluated and accepted with the addition of clauses on the Holy Spirit and other matters. (History of Arian Controversy)

If you believe that Nicaea just formalized the prevalent teaching of the church, then there really should not have been any conflicts. Why should there be? If it were the established teaching of the church, then you would expect people to either accept it, or not be Christians. It would be like me being a member of the Communist Party. I would join it knowing that they do not believe in the ownership of private property, no conflict. But now, say after I have been a member of the party for a few years, someone decides to introduce a proposal that we allow the ownership of private property, not everyone in the party is going to agree, the result is conflict. This is similar to what happened in the church. It was not the established teaching, and when some faction of the church tried to make it official, the result was major conflict.

It was mainly a theological power grab by certain factions of the church. The major complication throughout all this was that the emperors were involved. At Nicaea it was Constantine that decided the outcome. Then as you can see, we have the flip-flopping of opinion with the result that Athanasius is exiled and recalled depending on who is in power. We even have in 357 AD the declaration that homoousios and homoiousios are unbiblical, and that the Father is greater than His subordinate Son. This is 180 degrees from Nicaea. It is definitely not the Trinitarian formula.

In 380 AD Emperor Thedosius declares Christianity the state religion. One can come to the conclusion that whichever way Theodosius favors, is the way in which it is going to end. This is exactly what happened next. In 381 AD the struggle was finally ended by the current emperor, Theodosius the Great, who favored the Nicene position. Just like at Nicaea, the EMPEROR again decided it. The emperors were dictating the theology of the church. The big difference now was that there was not going to be any more changing sides. It was now the state religion. You cannot make Christianity the state religion and then change its beliefs every few years, it would undermine its credibility as the true faith. The Trinity was now the orthodox position, and the state was willing to back it up by killing non believers. (Does this sound like the teaching of Jesus? ) Debates however, would continue for years to come.

 

[Peterlag]

When Christianity started spreading, the leaders of the churches were now Gentiles who had converted to Christianity. These people, for the most part, had been educated in Greek philosophies in their schools and universities. As educated persons, they of course wanted to find a place for their new religious beliefs within the philosophical framework they had already acquired. So when they read Hebrew Scriptures, they could not help injecting Greek philosophical meanings into them. The Encyclopedia Britannica says concerning Christian Platonist:

"They did not believe that truth could conflict with truth and were confident that all that was rationally certain in Platonic speculation would prove to be in perfect accordance with the Christian revelation. Their unhistorical approach and unscholarly methods of exegesis of texts, both pagan and Christian, facilitated this confidence."

There was also the felt need of some Christians with Greek philosophical training to express Christianity in those terms, both for their own intellectual satisfaction and in order to convert educated pagans.

What is needed today is to remove all the Greek influence from what is called modern day Christianity, and return to the Christianity that was preached by Jesus and his Apostles.

The Council of Nicaea, in 325 AD., made "Jesus of the same substance as God." This is not the Trinitarian doctrine we know of today, but it was a start. Fifty-six years later, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD., the Holy Spirit was added to the formula, bringing to life the modern day Trinity. One can easily see that even at Nicaea the Trinity was not an established doctrine by the absence of the Holy Spirit. Trinitarians will argue that the belief in a triune God was there from the Apostles, and that it was formalized as dogma at Nicaea and Constantinople. But the fact is that the New Testament does not anywhere teach the doctrine of the Trinity. The Doctrine of the Trinity, was not an established doctrine from Apostolic times, but a slowly developing idea that took over three hundred years to formalize.

325 AD - Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea in order to develop a statement of faith that can unify the church. The Nicene Creed is written, declaring that "the Father and the Son are of the same substance" (homoousios). Emperor Constantine who was also the high priest of the pagan religion of the Unconquered Sun presided over this council. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions and personally proposed the crucial formula expressing the relationship of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council. "of one substance with the Father."

The American Academic Encyclopedia states:

"Although this was not Constantine’s first attempt to reconcile factions in Christianity, it was the first time he had used the imperial office to IMPOSE a settlement."

At the end of this council, Constantine sided with Athanasius over Arius and exiled Arius to Illyria.

328 AD - Athanasius becomes bishop of Alexandria.

328 AD - Constantine recalls Arius from Illyria.

335 AD - Constantine now sides with Arius and exiles Athanasius to Trier.

337 AD - A new emperor, Contantius, orders the return of Athanasius to Alexandria.

339 AD - Athanasius flees Alexandria in anticipation of being expelled.

341 AD - Two councils are held in Antioch this year. During this council, the First, Second, and Third Arian Confessions are written, thereby beginning the attempt to produce a formal doctrine of faith to oppose the Nicene Creed.

343 AD - At the Council of Sardica, Eastern Bishops demand the removal of Athanasius.

346 AD - Athanasius is restored to Alexandria.

351 AD - A second anti - Nicene council is held in Sirmium.

353 AD - A council is held at Aries during Autumn that is directed against Athanasius.

355 AD - A council is held in Milan. Athanasius is again condemned.

356 AD - Athanasius is deposed on February 8th, beginning his third exile.

357 AD - Third Council of Sirmium is convened. Both homoousios and homoiousios are avoided as unbiblical, and it is agreed that the Father is greater than His subordinate Son.

359 AD - The Synod of Seleucia is held which affirms that Christ is "like the Father," It does not however, specify how the Son is like the Father.

361 AD - A council is held in Antioch to affirm Arius’ positions.

380 AD - Emperor Theodosius the Great declares Christianity the official state religion of the empire.

381 AD - The First Council of Constantinople is held to review the controversy since Nicaea. Emperor Theodosius the Great establishes the creed of Nicaea as the standard for his realm. The Nicene Creed is re-evaluated and accepted with the addition of clauses on the Holy Spirit and other matters. (History of Arian Controversy)

If you believe that Nicaea just formalized the prevalent teaching of the church, then there really should not have been any conflicts. Why should there be? If it were the established teaching of the church, then you would expect people to either accept it, or not be Christians. It would be like me being a member of the Communist Party. I would join it knowing that they do not believe in the ownership of private property, no conflict. But now, say after I have been a member of the party for a few years, someone decides to introduce a proposal that we allow the ownership of private property, not everyone in the party is going to agree, the result is conflict. This is similar to what happened in the church. It was not the established teaching, and when some faction of the church tried to make it official, the result was major conflict.

It was mainly a theological power grab by certain factions of the church. The major complication throughout all this was that the emperors were involved. At Nicaea it was Constantine that decided the outcome. Then as you can see, we have the flip-flopping of opinion with the result that Athanasius is exiled and recalled depending on who is in power. We even have in 357 AD the declaration that homoousios and homoiousios are unbiblical, and that the Father is greater than His subordinate Son. This is 180 degrees from Nicaea. It is definitely not the Trinitarian formula.

In 380 AD Emperor Thedosius declares Christianity the state religion. One can come to the conclusion that whichever way Theodosius favors, is the way in which it is going to end. This is exactly what happened next. In 381 AD the struggle was finally ended by the current emperor, Theodosius the Great, who favored the Nicene position. Just like at Nicaea, the EMPEROR again decided it. The emperors were dictating the theology of the church. The big difference now was that there was not going to be any more changing sides. It was now the state religion. You cannot make Christianity the state religion and then change its beliefs every few years, it would undermine its credibility as the true faith. The Trinity was now the orthodox position, and the state was willing to back it up by killing non believers. (Does this sound like the teaching of Jesus? ) Debates however, would continue for years to come.

Now this is well written.

 

[Pierac]

Thus, what we don't understand is taken "by faith, Pleasing God," Correct?


Awesome, similar to:

And, for our Precious anti-Triune GodHead friends, we kindly ask:

IF JESUS Is NOT God Almighty [as in 500 Scriptures], then:

HOW are our sins forgiven, so that we Are
Redeemed By God's Own BLOOD?

God's Simple Will!

Indeed... you think it requires God's own blood to forgive sin.... Silly Child!!!

"Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way ... Take ye heed of him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke him not (be not rebellious against him): for he will not pardon your transgression; (SIN) for my name is in him" "But if you truly obey his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. "For My angel will go before you… (Exodus 23:20-23).

In this passage the angel was to be for Israel in the place of God; he was to speak God's words, and judge them. In fact the angel expressed God's name; he was God for them. Now if this was true of an angel of the Lord, how much more of the Son of God himself? Hence these sayings:

Heb 1:1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He (God) appointed heir of all things, through (on account of) whom also He (God) made the world.

Isa 6:7 He touched my mouth with it and said, "Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is forgiven."

Yep.... one hot coal on the lips.... all with out Jesus dying on the cross for Isaiah... and his sins were forgiven.... Don't be such a Biblical Child.... Teaching only what your told.... My friend... Hot coals did just as Good for Isaiah as the death of Jesus... did for you and me... when you dealing with the God of Jesus!

Paul

 

[Pierac]

Psalms 110:1

Psa 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

Psalms 110:1 is a unusual verse. It is referred to in the New Testament 23 times and is thus quoted much more often than any other verse from the Old Testament. It’s importance must not be overlooked. It is a psalm that tells us the relationship between God and Jesus.

Psalms 110:1 is a divine utterance although poorly translated if your version leaves out the original word "oracle". It is “the oracle of Yahweh” (the One God of the Hebrew Bible, of Judaism and New Testament Christianity) to David's lord who is the Messiah, spoken of here 1000 years before he came into existence in the womb of the Virgin Mary.

I want to bring attention to the fact that David's lord is not David's Lord. There should be no capital on the word "lord." The Revised Version of the Bible (1881) corrected the misleading error of other translations which put (and still wrongly put) a capitol L on lord in that verse.

He is not Lord God, because the word in the inspired text is not the word for Deity, but the word for human superior- a human lord, not a Lord who is himself God, but a lord who is the supremely exalted, unique agent of the one God.

The Hebrew word for the status of the son of God and Psalms 110:1 is adoni. This word occurs 195 times in the Hebrew Bible and never refers to God. When God is described as "the Lord" (capital L) a different word, Adonai, appears. Thus the Bible makes a careful distinction between God and man. God is the Lord God (Adonai), or when his personal name is used, Yahweh, and Jesus is his unique, sinless, virginally conceived human son (adoni, my lord, Luke 1:43; 2:11). Adonai is found 449 times in the Old Testament and distinguishes the One God from all others. Adonai is not the word describing the son of God, Jesus, and Psalms 110:1. adoni appears 195 times and refers only to a human (or occasionally an angelic) lord, that is, someone who is not God. This should cut through a lot of complicated post Biblical argumentation and create a making which in subtle ways that secures the simple and most basic Biblical truth, that God is a single person and that the Messiah is the second Adam, "the Man Messiah" (1 Tim. 2:5).

Let's have a look at a few Old Testament verses that show us the clear distinction alluded to here. In Genesis 15:2, Abraham prays to God and says, "O LORD, God [Adonai Yahweh], what will you give me, since I am childless?" In another prayer Abraham's servant addresses God: "O LORD, God of my lord Abraham, please grant me success today" (Gen. 24:12). The second word for "my lord" here is adoni which according to any standard Hebrew lexicon means "Lord," "Master," or "owner." Another example is found in David's speech to his men after he had cut off the hem of King Saul's robe and his conscience bothered him: "So he said to his men, far be it from me because of the Lord [here the word is Yahweh, Lord God] that I should do this thing to my lord [adoni].”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, page 157. states… "The form Adoni (‘my lord’), a royal title (Sam. 29:8), is to be carefully distinguished from the divine title Adonai (‘Lord’) used of Yahweh. Adonai the special plural form [the divine title] distinguishes it from adoni [with short vowel] = ‘my lords.’” Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 3, page 137. States… “lord in the Old Testament is used to translate Adonai when applied to the Divine Being. The [Hebrew] word… has a suffix [with a special pointing] presumably for the sake of distinction... between divine and human appellative.” Wigram, The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the Old Testament, p. 22. states…

“The form ‘to my lord,’ I’adoni, is never used in the Old Testament as a divine reference… the general excepted fact is that the masoretic pointing distinguishes divine reference (adonai) from human references (adoni).”

“The Hebrew Adonai exclusively denotes the God of Israel. It is attested about 450 times in the Old Testament…Adoni [is] addressed to human beings (Gen 44:7; Num 32:25; 2 Kings 2:19, etc.). We have to assume that the word Adonai received it’s special form to distinguish it from the secular use of adon [i.e. adoni]. The reason why [God is addressed] as Adonai [with long vowel] instead of the normal adon, adoni or adonai [short vowel] may have been to distinguish Yahweh from other gods and from other human Lord's.” from

Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible, p. 531.

If David the Psalmist had expected the Messiah to be the Lord God he would not have used "my lord" (adoni), but the term used exclusively for the one God, Jehovah- Adonai. Unfortunately, though, many English translations which faithfully preserved this distinction elsewhere capitalize the second "lord" only in Psalms 110:1. This gives a misleading impression that the word is a divine title.


Occasionally, it will be objected that this distinction between Adonai and adoni was a late addition to the Hebrew text by the Mesorites around 600 to 700 AD and therefore is not reliable. This objection needs to be considered in the light of the fact that the Hebrew translators of the Septuagint (the LXX) around 250 B.C. recognize and carefully maintained this Hebrew distinction in their work. They never translated the second “lord” of Psalm 110:1 (“my lord,” kyrios mou) to mean the Deity. The first LORD of Psalm 110:1 (the LORD, Ho Kyrios) they always reserve for the one God, Jehovah.

Both the Pharisees and Jesus knew that this inspired verse was crucial in the understanding of the identity of the promised Messiah. Jesus quoted it to show the Messiah would be both the son (descendent) of King David and David's “lord” (see Matt. 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44). This key verse, then, quoted more than any other in the New Testament, authorizes the title "lord" for Jesus. Failure to understand this distinction has led to the erroneous idea that whenever the New Testament calls Jesus "Lord" it means he is the Lord God of the Old Testament.

Paul

 

[Pierac]

Correct YHWH said let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness plus many other such verses . Since man was not made in the likeness of angels that excludes angels in the US/OUR equation .

Really? How do you not know if God was talking to Satan like in Job?

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.
Job 1:7 The LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come?" Then Satan answered the LORD and said, "From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it."

For all you know.... The Lord God was talking to Satan as in Job.... when God created Adam... see... you can make scripture say anything!! Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

When God says "let us make man in our image" are we being taught that the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit are together creating human beings? How is it that when some read this statement their minds immediately think of "let us three"? The verse says nothing about God speaking to the Son or to the Holy Spirit. It simply says that God addressed someone else or some others than Himself. The “us” could refer to just one other, or to many others. But who is this someone or who are these others to whom God speaks here?

The Hebrews understood that God addressed His heavenly court, the angelic host and that He allowed them to watch his master-work in creating mankind unfold. This is quite reasonable, for there are other times when God involves the angels in His work. In Isaiah 6, God is seen in His Heavenly temple with the cherubs and all the heavenly court. There God asks, "Whom shall I send, and whom will go for us?" (v.8). It is certainly the case in 1 Kings 22:19-20 where the Lord is seen "sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by Him on His right and on His left" and he asked the heavenly court ‘“who will entice Ahab to go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead?’ And one said this while the other said that."

Let’s return to Genesis 1:26. It is reasonable to suggest then that God in some way took the angels into confidence with Himself when he created Adam? This is collaborated in Job 38:4, 7 where God says that when He laid the foundations of the earth "all the sons of God shouted for joy." The sons of God are of course the angels as Job 1:6 and 2:1 confirm. God's own testimony is that the work of creation, "the heavens," "the earth" and "all things" were His work alone. This fact is established right away at the very outset of Genesis 1 where we are first introduced to God (elohim) the Creator. It is also clear that when he came to create Adam and Eve he told the angels to watch in awe. In this way the heavenly hosts participated as spectators of the miracle of man's creation.

Now if you're still not convinced that the God of creation is one God and not three in one, here is our Lord Jesus own commentary on Genesis 1:26. He will settle this issue for us.

In Matthew 19:4 and Mark 13:19 Jesus tells us…

Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female,

Mark 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, and never will be.

According to Jesus himself the creator God was not "We who made them from the beginning" but a single person He! Jesus does not include himself in the Genesis 1 creation of Adam, and He is also telling us that God (Father) Created all from the beginning.

Or... You can just go with God talking to Satan when creating man... in Gen 1:26

Paul

 

[Marymog]

Do you have a verse that says one cannot be without the other 2?

Do you have a verse where they disagree with each other?

 

[Pierac]

Do you have a verse that says one cannot be without the other 2?

I Think Marymog is looking for this verse....

Joh 17:22 "The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one;

One what???

One in unity Marymog... not one being!!!

Study harder...


Oh.... when you reply... and you will.... get ready to bend over and get a Biblical spanking... but much harder than the one in this post!!! :smlhmm:


Paul