ZebraHug said:
Exactly, man trying to attain to the deep counsel of God. Sort to think like him and stumbled as he stepped.ZebraHug said:
Is believing in the trinity necessary to be a christian?
- Thread starter JB_Reformed Baptist
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yes! Rom 1:20. Believing there is a God is on the same level as us believing we exist. Believing in Jesus being deity however, is like believing in gravity, you have to have an encounter before you believe. Once you have, you can never doubt it, Cor 12:3. Either you have received Jesus, or you have not.SilenceInMotion said:
I agree with your first statement but your second :wacko:. You have to consider verses like Mark 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God and John 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee.ZebraHug said:
Add to this that Jesus is Lord (Cor 12:3), God is God and the Holy Spirit is God (Eph 4:30) and imho the correct parallel to draw of the trinity is a marriage. Separate individuals married together spiritually.
I think a better parallel is one individual with separate, coexistent states of being.KingJ said:
Butch5 said:
Butch5 said:
Here we go, by definition, as in church history. GOD is the father, son and Holy Ghost. But the father is not the son nor vice versa or the spirit the father or son or the son or father the Holy Ghost.
I think I got that sorted according to the formula that is commonly accepted by the masses within the "church".
I have to agree with that. However, I think there is a tendency with some to go beyond that and say GOD is three separate persons. That's just weird.JB_Reformed Baptist said:Here we go, by definition, as in church history. GOD is the father, son and Holy Ghost. But the father is not the son nor vice versa or the spirit the father or son or the son or father the Holy Ghost.
I think I got that sorted according to the formula that is commonly accepted by the masses within the "church".
What about that God is two persons with the same substance and nature. The Holy ghost the manifestation of God the father and Son and not a third person.HeRoseFromTheDead said:
I'm more inclined to think of GOD as one individual with three distinct, coexistent states of being (not three modes), much as we are fashioned. The son is not the father, nor vice versa; but the son is the image or visible form of the invisible father through whom the father interacts with and rules his creation. It truly is a mystery.JB_Reformed Baptist said:
Thanks,JB_Reformed Baptist said:Here we go, by definition, as in church history. GOD is the father, son and Holy Ghost. But the father is not the son nor vice versa or the spirit the father or son or the son or father the Holy Ghost.
I think I got that sorted according to the formula that is commonly accepted by the masses within the "church".
I wanted to see if you were using the modern understanding of the Trinity. I believe in the Trinity but not the modern definition. I hold to the Nicene Creed definition of the Trinity which is the view held by the earliest Christian. God in the NT is translated from "Theos" which means divine. I believe the Father is divine, the Son is divine, and the Holy Spirit is divine, thus all three are deity (God). However, as you said, the Father is not the Son and not the Spirit.
OK. Thanks Butch for participating in the discussion.Butch5 said:
HeRoseFromTheDead said:
When you say co-existent states, could you elaborate on that, from a pragmatic point of view?HeRoseFromTheDead said:
What I mean is Why state and not titles(names that express something about him)?
Not states... states of being, or states or existence just like we have. We have a physical state of being (our body), a spiritual state of being (our spirit), and a mental state of being (or whatever you want to call it, but basically our mind). Each is separate and unique, but all coexist together as one whole being.JB_Reformed Baptist said:
Such an analogy (tripart state), may be the best that mankind can and ever will come up with.HeRoseFromTheDead said:
To answer the original question, I think one if one understands who Jesus is he will by default believe in the Trinity or at least the deity of Christ. Both Son and the Spirit proceed from God, as such they must also be deity.JB_Reformed Baptist said:OK. Thanks Butch for participating in the discussion.
When you say co-existent states, could you elaborate on that, from a pragmatic point of view?
What I mean is Why state and not titles(names that express something about him)?
I'm not sure the son proceeds from God in the sense as the spirit. The 'word' has always existed. However, the son(the man) came on the scene during history and in that sense proceeded from the father,-as our children proceed from us as men. In the mind of God 'the son' existed before time. The same could be said of "the father". As these are titles expressing God's nature.Butch5 said:
In the final analysis as you said "at least in the deity of Christ Jesus". Bottom line GOD= Father + Son + Holy Ghost.
SHALOM
Remember, I don't hold to the modern idea of the Trinity. Jesus, the Word, came out of God, that is what He said in John 8.JB_Reformed Baptist said:I'm not sure the son proceeds from God in the sense as the spirit. The 'word' has always existed. However, the son(the man) came on the scene during history and in that sense proceeded from the father,-as our children proceed from us as men. In the mind of God 'the son' existed before time. The same could be said of "the father". As these are titles expressing God's nature.
In the final analysis as you said "at least in the deity of Christ Jesus". Bottom line GOD= Father + Son + Holy Ghost.
SHALOM
KJV John 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. (Joh 8:42 KJV)
The Greek text uses the word "ek" which means out of. Literally, He came out of God. This is the early Christian understanding of the Christ.
I think we need to use the word "God" carefully when discussing the Trinity so as not to confuse. That is why I used divine or deity. The word God is used in two senses in the Scriptures, it is used as name for the Father, and it is also used as a title. We have to be careful to determine how the word is being used. In the NT it is used most often in reference to the Father, however, there are a few instances where the word is used as a title for Jesus. It is there two senses that people confuse and end up not understanding the Trinity because they try to reconcile three are one. That is not what the Trinity is teaching. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in essence or nature. In other words they are of the same substance for lack of a better word. Just as a son is of the same essence or substance as his father. A son is no more nor no less human than his father. Yet, the son is not his father.
Provide source please.Butch5 said:
Also, it may be the case that he was begotten in the mind of God before it came into force. Such as the crucifixion and all things for that matter that pertain to this system.
Butch5 said:
Are we dealing with an issue of semantics here? Obviously the logos preexisted all creation, and obviously the logos became the son. But the manifestation as flesh implies that the logos was not the son before that point. Doesn't the term son simply refer to the eternal logos' manifestation as flesh and blood, born of a woman in the dimensions of time and space?JB_Reformed Baptist said:
Here is Alexander of Alexandria in refuting Arianism.JB_Reformed Baptist said:
12. Concerning whom we thus believe, even as the Apostolic Church believes. In one Father unbegotten, who has from no one the cause of His being, who is unchangeable and immutable, who is always the same, and admits of no increase or diminution; who gave to us the Law, the prophets, and the Gospels; who is Lord of the patriarchs and apostles, and all the saints. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God; not begotten of things which are not, but of Him who is the Father; not in a corporeal manner, by excision or division as Sabellius and Valentinus thought, but in a certain inexplicable and unspeakable manner, according to the words of the prophet cited above: “Who shall declare His generation? ” Since that His subsistence no nature which is begotten can investigate, even as the Father can be investigated by none; because that the nature of rational beings cannot receive the knowledge of His divine generation by the Father. But men who are moved by the Spirit of truth, have no need to learn these things from me, for in our ears are sounding the words before uttered by Christ on this very thing,” No man knoweth the Father, save the Son; and no man knoweth who the Son is, save the Father.” That He is equally with the Father unchangeable and immutable, wanting in nothing, and the perfect Son, and like to the Father, we have learnt; in this alone is He inferior to the Father, that He is not unbegotten. For He is the very exact image of the Father, and in nothing differing from Him. For it is clear that He is the image fully containing all things by which the greatest similitude is declared, as the Lord Himself hath taught us, when He says, “My Father is greater than I.” And according to this we believe that the Son is of the Father, always existing. “For He is the brightness of His glory, the express image of His Father’s person.” But let no one take that word always so as to raise suspicion that He is unbegotten, as they imagine who have their senses blinded. For neither are the words, “He was,” or “always,” or “before all worlds,” equivalent to unbegotten. But neither can the human mind employ any other word to signify unbegotten. And thus I think that you understand it, and I trust to your right purpose in all things, since these words do not at all signify unbegotten. For these words seem to denote simply a lengthening out of time, but the Godhead, and as it were the antiquity of the only-begotten, they cannot worthily signify; but they have been employed by holy men, whilst each, according to his capacity, seeks to express this mystery, asking indulgence from the hearers, and pleading a reasonable excuse, in saying, Thus far have we attained. But if there be any who are expecting from mortal lips some word which exceeds human capacity, saying that those things have been done away which are known in part, it is manifest that the words,” He was,” and “always,” and “before all ages,” come far short of what they hoped. And whatever word shall be employed is not equivalent to unbegotten. Therefore to the unbegotten Father, indeed, we ought to preserve His proper dignity, in confessing that no one is the cause of His being; but to the Son must be allotted His fitting honour, in assigning to Him, as we have said, a generation from the Father without beginning, and allotting adoration to Him, so as only piously and properly to use the words,” He was,” and “always,” and “before all worlds,” with respect to Him; by no means rejecting His Godhead, but ascribing to Him a similitude which exactly answers in every respect to the Image and Exemplar of the Father. But we must say that to the Father alone belongs the property of being unbegotten, for the Saviour Himself said, My Father is greater than I.” And besides the pious opinion concerning the Father and the Son, we confess to one Holy Spirit, as the divine Scriptures teach us; who hath inaugurated both the holy men of the Old Testament, and the divine teachers of that which is called the New.
Early Church Fathers - – Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down To A.D. 325.
The teaching of Simon Cephus Ante-Nicene Father volume 8
And on this account it is right that we should worship Him, because He is to be worshipped together with His Father, and that we should not worship creatures, who were created for the worship of the Creator. For He is Himself the God of truth and verity; He is Himself from before all worlds and creatures; He is Himself the veritable Son, and the glorious fruit which is from the exalted Father.
Early Church Fathers - – Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down To A.D. 325.
Similar threads
