Defending the Trinity

[Wormwood]

There has been a lot of debate about the nature and biblical validity of the Trinity on various posts recently. I have decided to start a new post on this issue so that the other forums can stay on topic.

The Church has defended the biblical validity to the Trinity throughout history. However, there is a lot of confusion among Christians and non-Christians on this topic because there is very little teaching done about the Trinity in local churches. This leads to all kinds of poor analogies and confusion as to whether there is really any biblical support for the notion in the first place. I contend that there is a tremendous about of biblical support for the concept which is precisely why the Church has passionately defended this doctrine throughout history.

The evidence shows:

1. Jesus declares himself to be Divine.
2. Biblical authors speak of Jesus' Divinity.
3. The Bible often lists Trinitarian formulas.
4. The testimony of early church fathers shows this to be their clear understanding.
5. Messianic prophecies point to a Divine King.
6. Messianic prophecies that God would dwell among us.

Since room does not permit me to go into detail on all of these issues in the opening post, let me just highlight each.

1. Jesus points to his eternal pre-existence in John 8:56-59. What is striking about this passage is that the opponents of Jesus understood Jesus to be making a clear declaration of his divinity (which is why they wanted to kill him). Jesus NEVER corrects them or tells them they have misunderstood his claims about himself. Rather, his response shows that they have understood him correctly. In fact, Jesus uses the term "Son of God" in a divine sense. Jesus could not have been condemned to death if his implications with the term "son of God" was merely indicating an honorary title or that of merely a holy individual. Also, this is the ONLY issue that Jesus responded to at his trial which resulted in the charge of "blasphemy" (not a charge that would have been possible if the claim was merely to be the Christ.) Moreover, Jesus declared that he was equal in honor (John 5:22-23) and identity (John 10:30-31; 14:8-11) with God.

2. There are numerous texts which point to the deity of Jesus. Col. 2:9 declares that the "fullness of God" dwelt in Jesus. Philippians 2:6 says that Jesus existed in the form of God and possessed "equality" with God. Paul declares that he was given authority to be an Apostle by BOTH Jesus and God (Gal. 1:1). Romans 9:5 declares that Jesus is God who is forever blessed. John 1 declares the "Word was God" (which is the most likely interpretation from the Greek in spite of what JW's teach). John 20:28 Thomas declares Jesus to be "my Lord and my God." 1 John 5:20 declares Jesus to be "the true God" and the source of eternal life. Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is the "radiance" of God's glory and he holds all things together. More texts could be referenced, but let this suffice for now.

3. Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit are used in a formula many times in the Bible and in differing orders. Moreover, the "name" not "names" of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit referenced which unites the three into one heading. See Matthew 28:19; 2 Cor. 1:21-22; 13:14; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; Eph. 4:4-6)

4. Ignatius - "I bid you farewell in our God, Jesus Christ" Irenaeus - "...to Christ, our Lord, God, Savior and King..."

5. The messiah-king is to be worshipped (Psalm 2:1). The messiah-king is referred to as "God" (Ps. 45:6). The "branch" is to wear the name "The LORD our righteousness" (Jeremiah 23:5-6). The term used here is God's special name YHWH. God would send the "breaker" to lead his people out of bondage (Micah 2:12-13). This "breaker" would be called "the LORD at their head" (again, the name YHWH is used). Micah prophesied a ruler to come and shepherd God's people and give them peace (Micah 5:2-5) and this shepherd is said to have existed throughout eternity past.

6. Plus there are multiple prophecies of God being among his people used in reference to Jesus (Isaiah 7:14; 9:6-7). Finally, there are many NT passages that refer to YHWH in the OT that are used in reference to Jesus (Joel 2:32; Ps. 68:18; Is. 45:23-24; Psalm 102; Deut. 10:17).

In sum, don't buy the line that there is no biblical or historical support for the Trinity. There is a mountain of evidence. The Bible is abundantly clear and the early church understood Christ in this way. Feel free to make comments or ask questions about these or other texts not listed on this important topic.

 

[Purity]

There is a lot of debate about the nature and biblical validity of the Trinity for good reason as we shall see.

The Church has defended its dogma throughout history with the view of defining the substance of the Godhead. Many Christians are confused on the subject especially those who read their Bibles thoroughly who are willing to ask insightful questions which lead to insightful answers.

They do not wish to put their trust in men and their interpretations; there are Christians who value their salvation sufficiently enough to challenge the philosophies of men throughout the ages, men who have left their indelible mark of religious dogma to their own hurt.

There is however tremendous Biblical support for a Godhead as we shall see God willing.

Firstly, I believe its important to identify the differences between Jesus Christ & his Father as taught in the Bible:

Wormwood needs to be careful in drawing to conclusions about Jesus which clearly was not the intent of the Holy Prophets and Apostles. A fine balance will be drawn from these passages which emphasises the degree to which God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. 2 Cor 5:19

Where Wormwood will endeavour to highlight the divinity of Jesus as in his opening post has he provided his humanity? So straight away we can identify an imbalance in wormwoods hermeneutics.

So lets consider the differences:

- There is only one God, it is impossible that Jesus could be God; if the Father is God and Jesus is also God, then there are two Gods. "But to us there is but one God, the Father" (1 Cor. 8:6). 'God the Father' is therefore the only God. It is therefore impossible that there can be a separate being called 'God the Son'.

The Bible is silent on the phrase "God the Son" - its nowhere to be found.

The Old Testament likewise portrays Yahweh, the one God, as the Father (e.g. Isa. 63:16; 64:8).

- In addition to this one God, there is the mediator, the man Christ Jesus - "...and one mediator...". That word "and" indicates a difference between Christ and God.

Whereas the doctrine of the Trinity aims to remove all difference between God and Jesus we find continually Jesus is being portrayed as one lower in the hierarchical arrangement of divine things.

- Christ being the "mediator" means that he is a go-between. A mediator between sinful man and sinless God cannot be sinless God Himself; it had to be a sinless man, of sinful human nature. "The man Christ Jesus" leaves us in no doubt as to the correctness of this explanation. Even though he was writing after the ascension of Jesus, Paul does not speak of "the God Christ Jesus".

The Bible states "God is not a man" (Num. 23:19; Hos. 11:9); yet Christ was clearly "the son of man", as he is often called in the New Testament, "the man Christ Jesus". He was "the Son of the Highest" (Luke 1:32). God being "The Highest" indicates that only He has ultimate highness; Jesus being "the Son of the Highest" shows that he cannot have been God Himself in person. The very language of Father and Son which is used about God and Jesus, makes it obvious that they are not the same. Whilst a son may have certain similarities to his father, he cannot be one and the same person, nor be as old as his father.

In line with this, there are a number of obvious differences between God and Jesus, which clearly show that Jesus was not God himself:-

GOD & JESUS
"God cannot be tempted" (James 1:13). Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are" (Heb. 4:15).
God cannot die - He is immortal by nature (Ps. 90:2; 1 Tim. 6:16). Christ died for three days (Mt.12: 40; 16:21).
God cannot be seen by men (1 Tim. 6:16; Ex. 33:20). Men saw Jesus and handled him (1 John 1:1 emphasizes this).

When we are tempted, we are faced with a choice between sin and obedience to God. Often we choose to disobey God; Christ had the same choices, but always chose to be obedient. He therefore had the possibility of sinning, although he never actually did. It is unthinkable that God has any possibility of sinning. Scripture is clear in that the seed of David promised in 2 Sam. 7:12-16 was definitely Christ (Rom 1:3) . 2 Sam 7:14 speaks of Christ's possibility of sinning: "If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him.

I believe if this discussion is to be fruitful we will need to see from Wormwood a doctrinal balance which at this time is lacking although the discussion is very early on I am fearful Wormood will endeavour to deify Christ beyond his current position as at the right hand side of the Father on High.

Certainly we all can be assured the doctrine of the Trinity goes well beyond the Word of God as recorded in the Bible.

Purity

 

[Wormwood]

Purity,

My post is in regard to the Triune nature of God. This post is not about the nature of Christ. So, in order to establish an understanding of the Trinity, the focus is on Jesus as God. Clearly Jesus is human as well as divine. I am not sure exactly what your point is. If there is anything lacking in my OP it is an explanation of the Holy Spirit as a person of the Trinity. I can deal with that issue later if it pleases you.

So what exactly is your disagreement? If you understood the position of Trinitarians, you would see that we do see a difference between Jesus and the Father. We are not Modalists.

Yes, Jesus is the mediator between God and man. Jesus was a human being who was in very nature and form God, as I clearly laid out. Thus, we see God being able to identify with us in temptation and death through the man Jesus of Nazareth. Thus, God is our Savior as the Scriptures teach. God receives all the glory and worship, as the Trinitarian view supports. God is not delegating his work of salvation or glory to a third party as your post seems to indicate.

 

[Purity]

Clearly Jesus is human as well as divine.

That's the point - its not clear.

Can you provide a Bible passage that teaches to the nature of Christ being divine and mortal? What you are suggesting is a man who is made of sinful flesh but simultaneously clothed with divine nature.

I will wait for your high context passage speaking to the Lords nature before highlighting your many inferences concerning the nature of God and Christ.

Purity

 

[Wormwood]

I think that is the primary purpose of my OP: to show that Christ is divine. I can certainly post scriptures that relay his humanity if you wish. Although I think the "mortality" of Christ is clearly displayed on the cross and is highlighted in John and 1 John. I think your "made of sinful flesh" statement is a theologically loaded statement that I don't have time to address at this point. Anyway, I encourage you to look up the Scriptures I posted above on the topic of Christ's divinity.

 

[Purity]

I think that is the primary purpose of my OP: to show that Christ is divine. I can certainly post scriptures that relay his humanity if you wish. Although I think the "mortality" of Christ is clearly displayed on the cross and is highlighted in John and 1 John. I think your "made of sinful flesh" statement is a theologically loaded statement that I don't have time to address at this point. Anyway, I encourage you to look up the Scriptures I posted above on the topic of Christ's divinity.

I think if your purpose was to prove Jesus became divine (in nature) you would certainly fall within the bounds of Scripture - him being clothed with immortality as being the firstfruits of them that sleep is the foundation of true Christian hope. If of course you believed Jesus was already in possession of this divine nature during his probation in the flesh then you would not be upholding true Bible teaching but Church dogma.

Your statement here...

Wormwood, on 28 Mar 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

Clearly Jesus is human as well as divine.

Could not be supported by Scripture which places you in a tenuous position and makes this thread very transparent indeed.

Revealing these unsubstantiated claims for what they are is essential as it provides the Christian a worldview they may not have known existed before.

What I find intriguing with this discussion is very rarely do Christians consider entering the mind of Jesus to ask him what his thoughts about his nature were.

Mark 10:18 Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone"

I don't know what you would do with such a passage if you held the Trinity? The doctrine of incarnation is again nowhere found in the Bible.

Paul later stated "no not one!" Rom 3:10 who was quoting from Psa 14:1-3

Of course any Bible student worth his weight in gold would know the context of Psalm 14:5 reveals God (alone) is in the generation of the righteous” so it was that “God was in Christ” 2 Cor 5:19

Jesus knew in his nature, its propensities and desire dwelt no good thing - Rom 7:18.

This is what makes your theology rather disappointing - you hold a set of doctrines which oppose the very teachings of Christ in relation to his nature; the irony of course it was this very sinful nature which he was raised up to destroy.

Go figure ah!

Anyway you couldn't provide the context for your incarnate nature like Floyd could not provide OT Scripture to support the Trinity.

Thanks for the brotherly spirit Wormwood - I still respect your wisdom and guidance in this forum and God willing these matters will be clarified upon the Masters coming.

Purity

It was remiss of me not to add when Jesus said “Why callest me good” - Jesus was fulfilling and echoing the words of David from Psa 16:2 Speaking of God’s promised ‘Holy One’ Psalm 16:10

• RSV: “I have no good apart from thee”
• Roth: “My goodness mounteth not to thee” cp. 1 Cor 1:26-31
• LXX: “Thou hast no need of my goodness”

The Biblical context to this one verse spoken by Christ suggests on all levels any goodness Jesus had in his possession belonged to his Father and not himself. If you believed Jesus was God he would be lieing as to the origin of his goodness and his humility would be false indeed. Of course we know Jesus was born of a woman Gal 4:4 and bore our nature entirely Rom 8:3 Heb 2:14 etc. His message was true - his humility sincere

 

[Floyd]

Good comments Wormwood.
Purity: how do you rationalise (or should I say corrupt) Luke 1:35?
Floyd.

 

[Purity]

Good comments Wormwood.
Purity: how do you rationalise (or should I say corrupt) Luke 1:35?
Floyd.

Ah Floyd welcome!

Are you referring to the overshadowing of Divine Power upon Mary to cause conception i.e The Holy Spirit?

Needs neither rationalising or corrupting...its speaking plainly about Yahweh's anointed (Psa 89:20)

So we have...

“Power of the highest” - Have you ever noticed how this expression is used of His other spiritual children Psa 87:1,2,3,4,5
“The holy thing” - Grk: “Holy begotten thing”. “The only begotten” John 1. The centre of offerings. “The hallowed thing of Yahweh” Lev 19:5,6,7,8
“Called son of God” - His character determined this Rom 1:3-4, however not many discerned it - Nathaniel Jn 1:49, Peter Matt 14:33, Jn 6:69, Matt 6:16, Martha Jn 11:27 and at the last, the
Roman centurion Matt 27:54

So you have the Power of the Most High (Holy Spirit) overshadowing Mary to bring forth conception of a hallowed child who was begotten of a woman, whose character was not fully understood though many like yourself have grappled to do so but all have fallen short.

Floyd you opened the door but will you walk through?

Purity

“Called son of God”

 

[Floyd]

I find it puzzling that you can speak so reverently but deny God's Truth?
What you said is basic; but do you mean what you say?
What will you do with: Zech.14:9 ?
Floyd.

 

[Wormwood]

Purity,

Your writing is very unclear. What exactly are you proposing? Jesus was not divine but "became" divine? It seems you are either arguing for modalism or you are a Mormon. Why don't you just say what it is you believe rather than dancing about with all of the comments about what good bible students understand about context, how disappointing my theology is and so forth.

I have no idea what you are proposing with 1 Cor. 1 and how that relates to Jesus' words that God alone is good. I think you have a very poor understanding of Trinitarian doctrine which is leading to much of your confusion. I suggest you do some more research in this area.

 

[ChristianJuggarnaut]

At the incarnation the one true God robed Himself in flesh and became a man in order to become our kinsmen redeemer. He did not become divine as He was God already.

Notwithstanding, Jesus still had a human nature through His mother. It is because of this that He said things that "seemed" to put Him lower than "the Father" but He was the father, the fullness of God dwelt in Jesus Christ.

So, in this manner there is no trinity, there is one God manifested in three (or more) forms. Not modalism but oneness.

 

[DPMartin]

Well wormwood if you are looking for a simple explanation of what is referred to as the trinity, (note, trinity is a theology ) started by I do believe a priest in the eastern halve of the then Catholic Church that the then authorities of the Church adopted as official Catholic theology and teaching could be as far back as the 500's AD, or farther, not sure without looking it up.

　
It’s again, simple, if you look at it scripturally. Needless to say the Lord our God is a living being. Hence all living beings have presence, and express themselves in their presence. If you look to the second verse in Gen one can see that God was not Present in His creation in the first verse and then was when His Spirit moved upon the face of the waters. And then in the third verse He expresses His Will by speaking and says. There was no one else there but the creation that He just made that was not yet experiencing His Presence therein. Note that He didn’t speak to the creation from without the creation. He first became Present therein then spoke to the creation. Therefore in His Presence in and creation, in His Presence.

Anyways, I don’t hear you if I’m not in your presence and visa versa. We can even be aware of the probability of each other but without being in the presence of the other nothing is truly known of each other. As in first hand knowledge. You are a living being and you express your will in your presence. Hence the Father that the Word is from also known as the only begotten of the Father (hence Son) because of God is God’s Word in God’s Presence and God’s Word is Lord over all because all was made through God’s Word.

Thing is, God’s will is so powerful it’s God, God’s Word is so powerful it’s God, and God’s Presence is so powerful it’s God, because nothing is above any of the three features that are experienced by those who know the Lord God. Because He is the Living God, who has will, expressed, in His Presence.

 

[Wormwood]

At the incarnation the one true God robed Himself in flesh and became a man in order to become our kinsmen redeemer. He did not become divine as He was God already.

Notwithstanding, Jesus still had a human nature through His mother. It is because of this that He said things that "seemed" to put Him lower than "the Father" but He was the father, the fullness of God dwelt in Jesus Christ.

So, in this manner there is no trinity, there is one God manifested in three (or more) forms. Not modalism but oneness.

CJ,

One God in three "forms" or "modes" is the very definition of modalism/Sabellianism. That view is incongruent with Trinitarian beliefs and in my opinion is not representative if what we see in Scripture. Jesus was not merely talking to himself as he prayed in the garden. There are three persons of the Trinitarian God, not one God in three different manners of displaying himself.

DPMartin,

From what I understand what you are saying (it doesn't seem very clear to me), you also are arguing for a type of Sabellianism. The Trinity is one God consisting of three "persons." It is not one God with different forces that are labeled God. There are actual persons in the Trinity that exist in community that actually speak to each other, interact with each other and love each other.

 

[ChristianJuggarnaut]

Wormwood

Interesting fact coming. Modalism Sabellianism and the Trinity have one important common aspect.

None of them (the words) are in the bible. Logic follows that they are all teachings of man. What is in the bible? A virtual plethora of explanations that God is one.

Before configuring an argument against what I have said, please just think about it. Could it be this simple?

 

[lforrest]

It is indeed simple:

Wormwood has posted evidence that Jesus is God
I think we can all agree that the Father and The Holy Spirit is God

That makes three persons God, a concept that is abbreviated by the term "Trinity".

 

[ChristianJuggarnaut]

I see no mention of three persons either. I do see one God.

 

[DPMartin]

DPMartin,

From what I understand what you are saying (it doesn't seem very clear to me), you also are arguing for a type of Sabellianism. The Trinity is one God consisting of three "persons." It is not one God with different forces that are labeled God. There are actual persons in the Trinity that exist in community that actually speak to each other, interact with each other and love each other.

Quite right there wormwood you don’t understand, almost to the point of refusing to understand. Catholicism also teaches that Jesus is God in the flesh therefore you explain your understanding of how that works, in your version of the "trinity" but you don’t have one do you?

The Father is in Heaven and where is heaven, you should look that up as in what Jesus says about where heaven is. And not your favorite theology of the day. First you’ve got to understand it before you defend it.

 

[Purity]

I find it puzzling that you can speak so reverently but deny God's Truth?
What you said is basic; but do you mean what you say?
What will you do with: Zech.14:9 ?
Floyd.

Floyd

How many verses will you be skipping over? Is this a game of leapfrog where I show you the correct understanding and you simply move onto the next verse?

Luke 1:35 was explained in keeping with the prophets and apostles and yet your response neither acknowledged - quote "how do you rationalise (or should I say corrupt)" Luke 1:35

Now you wish me to explain Zech 14:9

May I ask how many verses will you require me to explain?

Its a fair question is it not?

By the way did it concern you a little all the references in support of my understanding that Jesus is the Son of God and not God the Son?

Does this register on any level with you, or am I wasting my time here?

Purity

I have no idea what you are proposing with 1 Cor. 1 and how that relates to Jesus' words that God alone is good.

Yes I should have made the connection obvious.

The Rich Man as you may know was a Pharisee who believed he possessed a legal right to righteousness. If a person holds legalism over promise then by its very foundation a person must be inherently good. This is why he was so focused on goodness. Jesus being a great and wise teacher must by the law be inherently good. This pharisaic understanding was born out of the belief that all believers had a legal right of inheritance through their lineage back to Abraham. Jesus perceived the mans motives were in error as he knew man held nothing in his possessing, at all, which is good. Man has no goodness in him inherently. Jesus taught this man that any goodness came from God.

Its like men today who believe man is born with an immortal essence (or soul) man is preoccupied with this erroneous teaching that it taints the majority of the Bible to the point they understand nothing of truth. This man likewise had been taught that if a man is deemed righteous by the law then he must be inherently good.

"What good thing can I do"
"Good master"

Its as though he is categorising all the good things he can do!

But what of Jesus' reply?

"Why call thou me good?"

Answer = Mark 10:18

What you do not understand wormwood because of your ignorance (this is not your fault by the way); if there was a man in all the earth who could claim goodness it was Christ. No other man could ever have claimed goodness like the Lord Jesus Christ - so why did he not? If he had an immortal soul surely this is good? If he were God Himself surely this is good? if he were Gods only begotten son surely this is good?

Wasn't he a perfect man? did he not obey his Father at every stage in his life? Was Jesus simply speaking a veneer of humility? Was it a show as it were to perform humility falsely?

This cannot be wormwood.

So you have an issue here wormwood - If God found his son to be perfect in his obedience to Him throughout his life why then would Jesus say don't call me good!

You see that's the point of the cross isn't it wormwood?

Three men hanging there one either side of a good man? Was there goodness in either of the men hanging beside Jesus? You would say with absolutely not!!!!! But there is a man in the middle who to you and I is perfect but Jesus himself states emphatically ther e nothing in him which is good - no goodness inherently in him - nothing!

And you wormwood have to live and accept this knowledge?

If you wormwood ran past that cross, even you with all your wrong doctrines you would see the truth of Hab 2:4KJV - would you not? Putting aside your immortal soulism and trinaterian doctrines you could see the fulfilment of Hab 2:4?

The cross was a curse to the Law!

For your sake I hope so - a just "man" shall live by faith!" not a just God pretending to be man!" not a façade God man living by faith but a mortal man a Just one living by faith alone shall be made or declared to be righteous - nothing in that man which is good.

How does that sit wormwood - Jesus still declaring from the cross in his actions "DONT CALL ME GOOD!"

Now I doubt very much you read Psalm 16 - I hope you did, but I very much doubt the understanding was revealed to you (sad but true) God's promised son was called the Holy One but look at verse Psalm 16:2

So lets look at the Holy One (Jesus Christ) speaking:

***************Even if you believed Jesus was God and that he pre-existed, well you have a huge problem to overcome don't you wormwood?***********************

Preserve me, O God, for in you I take refuge. I say to the Yahweh, “You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you.”

I say to the Lord, “You are the Lord, my only source of well-being.”2 (NET note 2 Heb “my good [is] not beyond you.” For the use of the preposition עַל (’al) in the sense of “beyond,”

The Septuagint state "thou has no need of my goodness"

So Jesus His Holy One who you say is God has no goodness at all that God needs?

Here is the Tanahk translation from the orginal Hebrew:

I say to the Lord, “You are my Lord, my benefactor; there is none above You" Translators Note: “I have no good but in You.”

Even Peter stated that David wrote that Psalm concerning Christ and not David himself.

So what's incredible about these passages is this.

1. You have the Psalmist calling Jesus God's Holy One.
2. You have this Holy One in possession of nothing good - no goodness in Jesus which God requires.
3. You have Jesus out of his own mouth state there is no goodness in him at all!

Now look at 1 Cor 1:26

1:26 Think about the circumstances of your call,26 brothers and sisters.27 Not many were wise by human standards,28 not many were powerful, not many were born to a privileged position.29 1:27 But God chose what the world thinks foolish to shame the wise, and God chose what the world thinks weak to shame the strong. 1:28 God chose30 what is low and despised in the world, what is regarded as nothing, to set aside what is regarded as something, 1:29 so that no one can boast in his presence.

You wormwood ought to be those in verses 26-29. (Read it again to confirm this as truth!)

Now read this carefully.

1:30 He is the reason you have a relationship with Christ Jesus,31 who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 1:31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”32

Lets assume God has chosen you wormwood - you don't strike me to be a higher intellectual with numerous letters after his name. God has not chosen the wise of this world to be His children and while believers are not fools they can have the truth revealed to them. This is what God has chosen - no one here can puff out their chest and boast in their great intellect of being called for any self worth. The wisdom and knowledge has only ever belonged to God Himself. Jesus understood this and so should the Corinthian believers! None of the children of God have ever been in possession of this wisdom and knowledge because God alone is full of Goodness - The Psalmist declares this to be true, Peter in Acts 2 declares this to be true, Christ himself declares this to be true, Paul declares this to be true BUT wormwood believes Jesus is God - wormwood believes God emptied Himself to become man - wormwood believes in God the Son not the Son of God as taught in the Bible.

Jesus is OF God - God made him wise; God gave him knowledge; God gave him life - a beginning one begotten of the Father. If Jesus was righteous its because God made him righteous; if Jesus were sanctified its because God sanctified him; If Jesus were redeemed it was God how redeemed him.

Who else can redeem a dead man who is dead but God?

“Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

Did this include the Lord Jesus Christ?...yes it did - even Christ boasted in Yahweh.

So everything which Jesus was it was of God - Jesus had no inherent goodness none whatsoever.

I have a cloud of witnesses wormwood David, Peter, Paul, Jesus and God Himself to declare Jesus had no goodness in himself as a mortal condemned man.

Who are your witnesses?

Are these your witnesses?

250 attendees to a council meeting at Nice in 325AD?

I hope for your sake this will not be your answer when the Master returns.

Purity

 

[Floyd]

Zech.14:9 was given, not for explanation, but to see what you did with the statement!
You did not give your Affiliation?
Floyd.

 

[Purity]

Zech.14:9 was given, not for explanation, but to see what you did with the statement!
You did not give your Affiliation?
Floyd.

Why don't you put up your understanding / statement?
My affiliation is best expressed here Gal 4:28 and not of church dogmas
Purity

If you guys want to keep your incestuous relationship going with the same 11 people posting on the same 4 threads...state that. However, if you want to grow and actually be a nondenominational forum board...don't force people to believe what you do. State your argument...and let the best one win. (Yes, whether you want to admit it or not, that was a play of "this is what you agreed to, believe it or go")

SL

I agree whole heartedly with your post - let the arguments come forth and allow those to deal with them openly without fear of reprisal or threats of heresy, after all, this was the behaviour of those who stood against Christ and his truth.

Purity

I do not have the power to ban members, and am not interested in it, My interests are with protecting the essential core of the faith.

When you bite into a rotten apple what do you do?

As a Christian forum it should never be in a situation where an alternative view is condemn as a result of upholding a set of man made rules - surely history has taught us this much?
Purity

Quite right there wormwood you don’t understand, almost to the point of refusing to understand. Catholicism also teaches that Jesus is God in the flesh therefore you explain your understanding of how that works, in your version of the "trinity" but you don’t have one do you?

You have gone to the heart of the problem with believing in a hypostatic union.

“By incarnation He became Man and hence could act as a human Priest. As God, His priesthood could be everlasting after the order of Melchizedek, and He properly could be a Mediator between God and man.”

This teaching is incoherent, unexplainable, indefinable on every level so much so there is absolutely no Scripture anywhere in the earth to supports its teaching - totally designed and fabricated by philosophers for philosophers.

This is why believers like Wormwood and Floyd become agitated because they strive to uphold a mystery when the Scripture has plainly stated the Mystery has been revealed in its entirety.

Purity

Supporting Scripture:

given the mystery of the kingdom of God, Mk 4:11

to be uninformed of this mystery Ro 11:25

revelation of the mystery which has been Ro 16:25

but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, 1 Co 2:7

Behold, I tell you a mystery; 1Co 15:51

known to us the mystery of His will, Eph 1:9

there was made known to me the mystery, Eph 3:3

my insight into the mystery of Christ, Eph 3:4

mystery which for ages has been hidden Eph 3:9

This mystery is great; but I am speaking Eph 5:32

with boldness the mystery of the gospel, Eph 6:19

the mystery which has been hidden from Col 1:26

of this mystery among the Gentiles, Col 1:27

in a true knowledge of God’s mystery, Col 2:2

may speak forth the mystery of Christ, Col 4:3