The necessity of the Trinity

[Jane_Doe22]

Jesus never prayed to, to, to the father, he prayed the father, if "to" only in intercessory for someone else. which what the Holy Ghost do. listen, Romans 8:26 "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered".

Ok, you say the Spirit is God, alright who is he praying to? he's God almighty. understand, prayer is only communication, a talk.

That doesn't quite address the question I was meaning to ask. Let me try again: in Mathew 6:9-15, is Christ talking to Himself or a different person?

we'll let God answer that for you, Hosea 4:6 "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

So you believe passing an academic theology test IS required for salvation. Got it.

Jane, tommorrow, we will try to get some information to you that might get you started to understand our position better. ok.

PICJAG.

*Thumbs up for friendlenss.* Feel free to PM me, if you'd like.

 

[APAK]

I must stop you here because Jesus before coming in Flesh is Spirit, listen, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God"

let's take this one step at a time.

BEING: existence always, and that form is eternally, by nature, (FORM), not external, for God is Spirit, not ecternal form, but the same NATURE/Form. so what which was "BORN" was not God, meaning the Spirit. so let's get this stright first.

PICJAG.

Now you said this at least once before, and I disagree again...

Let me explain again…start with verse 6b...

(Php 2:6) Who, though being in the mental image of God, did not consider grasping at being equal with God,

Philippians 2:6 has a few prevailing translations especially part b.

One is what you wrote: “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God"

And the other is what I have written above: “did not consider grasping at being equal with God,” which I believe it more clear and fitting ..both I understand though.

Here another version of Phil 2:6b..KJV

(Php 2:6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Now there is another explanation for your version and the other similar one that I wrote….that because he yielded his will completely to his Father and his Father actually ruled his spirit and will, then of course he would not think it was robbery to be considered equal with God, who is his Father. This never means he was actually the same as his Father in every way. That would be a great leap off the cliff to insanity.

And to your Phil 2:6a explanation again. It is completely incorrect to begin to say Jesus was being in the form or image of his Father then leap to being the same is nature. The Greek work here is not to say Jesus has the intrinic or nature of his Father. Look there would be no need to go through and describe Jesus in the way it does in Phip 2:6 if he was by nature, the same as the Father. Why bother! There was another clearer and simpler purpose in mind. There would be no need to say he is being in a form of….makes no sense… That would another great leap off the cliff to insanity.


See Phil 2:5 opens more of the context. Having the mind of Christ for us as Jesus was referring to himself as having the mind of his Father. It is that clear if you are willing to read verse 5.

(Php 2:5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

I hope you understand my post, completely..cannot have a meaningful discussion if you just cherry-pick verses without understanding the context..


Thanks


Bless you,


APAK

 

[Preacher4Truth]

P4T: I see you are doing what you believe others do, of different beliefs as yours.

No, not quite.

My post was clear enough. Think it through. Those who do not believe in the true Person, the Biblical Person of Christ, they are not converted. Read John 8:24 again, it is very plain.

That said, you're incorrect, I'm not doing what others are doing -- just the opposite in fact; Jude 1:4.

In John 3:11

(Joh 3:11) Truly, truly, I say to you: We speak that which we know and testify of that which we have seen; and you do not welcome our witness.


Now this is verse is not so hard to understand if we already know that Jesus is in the Father as the Father is in him. This occurred began at Jesus’ birth and then increased in intensity after his Baptism with more power of the Father. When Christ witnessed to someone on earth the Father was aware of thought as he commanded it through his spirit. They were then both aware of the same witnessing.


John 5:19; 10:25, 38……

(Joh 5:19) Jesus therefore answered and said to them: Truly, truly, I say to you: The Son can do nothing of himself but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever works He does, these the Son does in like manner.

(Joh 10:25) Jesus answered them: I told you and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name, these testify of me.

(Joh 10:38) But if I do them, though you do not believe me, believe the works; that you may know and understand, that the Father is in me and I in

Bless you,

APAK

The verse is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to understand but for God to reveal these things to them; 1 Corinthians 2:14. Man is not his own agent able to determine and understand spiritual truths. We are given Scriptures to help us discern what is true, what is not, what true conversion looks like, what false conversion looks like. For instance the book of 1 John.

No one can know these things unless it is revealed to them, and God does not reveal himself to every single person that has ever lived. Note Matthew 11:25-30. Note also John 6:29; John 6:63 &c.

 

[APAK]

No, not quite.

My post was clear enough. Think it through. Those who do not believe in the true Person, the Biblical Person of Christ, they are not converted. Read John 8:24 again, it is very plain.

That said, you're incorrect, I'm not doing what others are doing -- just the opposite in fact; Jude 1:4.




The verse is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to understand but for God to reveal these things to them; 1 Corinthians 2:14. Man is not his own agent able to determine and understand spiritual truths. We are given Scriptures to help us discern what is true, what is not, what true conversion looks like, what false conversion looks like. For instance the book of 1 John.

No one can know these things unless it is revealed to them, and God does not reveal himself to every single person that has ever lived. Note Matthew 11:25-30. Note also John 6:29; John 6:63 &c.

You want me to read John 8:24 for the first time for you...I guess since I've read it many it times it would be counted as again....

Oh I see you are starting your cherry picking rounds because you cannot deny what I wrote back yo you. Just ignore it I guess and move to something more enticing for a trap and not for Truth? And starting with the 'I am' (he) that is supposed to be a gotcha expression which I do not fall for once again. You will have to explain your understanding of it if it so critical to communicate it to me. You are in error if you think it means simply God = Jesus in this verse. I would recommend you research and know that the OT use for YHWH - God Almighty of a similar compounded expression as it is completely different in meaning form the Aramaic or Greek of the NT. And yours is one example of it that you have tried to bait me with....Man trinitarians have no scriptural contextual background or experience for any support.

Bless you as God knows to do indeed

APAK

 

[Harvest 1874]

The trinity doctrine is a conclusion about God as taught in the scriptures. Anything short of recognizing that fact results in idol worship.

Sorry but the only way in which the Trinity is supported by scripture is if the scriptures are wrestled and twisted, something which the apostate church has had plenty of time to perfect.

 

[Harvest 1874]

Says the follower of Russell.

Says the follower of John Ankerberg

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Sorry but the only way in which the Trinity is supported by scripture is if the scriptures are wrestled and twisted, something which the apostate church has had plenty of time to perfect.

I am gathering that you are not a Trinitarian.
I seem to be remembering that you are Bible Student (but not a JW). Is my memory working correctly in that regard?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

You want me to read John 8:24 for the first time for you...I guess since I've read it many it times it would be counted as again....

Oh I see you are starting your cherry picking rounds because you cannot deny what I wrote back yo you. Just ignore it I guess and move to something more enticing for a trap and not for Truth? And starting with the 'I am' (he) that is supposed to be a gotcha expression which I do not fall for once again. You will have to explain your understanding of it if it so critical to communicate it to me. You are in error if you think it means simply God = Jesus in this verse. I would recommend you research and know that the OT use for YHWH - God Almighty of a similar compounded expression as it is completely different in meaning form the Aramaic or Greek of the NT. And yours is one example of it that you have tried to bait me with....Man trinitarians have no scriptural contextual background or experience for any support.

Bless you as God knows to do indeed

APAK

I am also gathering that you are not a Trinitarian. Don't worry-- no hate sauce here.

Would you mind SHORTLY (<200 words) highlighting how your views compare/contrast with the Athanasian Trinity?
The shortness request is simply for ease of conversing/understanding.

 

[Harvest 1874]

I am gathering that you are not a Trinitarian.
I seem to be remembering that you are Bible Student (but not a JW). Is my memory working correctly in that regard?

Yes I am a Bible Student, however despite what some on this site may imagine my non-trinitarian views did no originate with the Bible Students and Pastor Russell. Even before I became a Bible Student when I was still a Baptist I never believed in the trinity, it just made no sense, and with each new take on it being presented it only became all the more unbelievable.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Yes I am a Bible Student, however despite what some on this site may imagine my non-trinitarian views did no originate with the Bible Students and Pastor Russell. Even before I became a Bible Student when I was still a Baptist I never believed in the trinity, it just made no sense, and with each new take on it being presented it only became all the more unbelievable.

Cool, thanks for answering.

How would you say that your current views compare/contrast with the Athanasian Trinity?
Note: I'm human and totally admit my eye gloss over with long post, so it would be appreciated if you could keep the answer short.

 

[Harvest 1874]

Cool, thanks for answering.

How would you say that your current views compare/contrast with the Athanasian Trinity?
Note: I'm human and totally admit my eye gloss over with long post, so it would be appreciated if you could keep the answer short.

I believe post #'s 147 and 159 under the thread, "Are You Saved Because You Believe OR Do You Believe Because You Are Saved?" pretty well sums it up, however if you have a more specific thought or question in mind please asked.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I believe post #'s 147 and 159 under the thread, "Are You Saved Because You Believe OR Do You Believe Because You Are Saved?" pretty well sums it up, however if you have a more specific thought or question in mind please asked.

Ok, clicking over to that post...

Thoughts as I'm reading #147 (this is just my train of thought):
I didn't think that Bible Students were Arain. Hmm. Is the Arian position a match for Bible Students, or a approximation by others?
An aside-- Also I really do perter to hear people explain their own views rather than anti-X sites which inevitably misconstrued things. It's much better to get things from first hand sources and ask "Mike what do you believe?"
Noticing the use of "it is exactly when this divinity began", signifying it did have a start point. Would be useful to later go into the definition of divinity.
"We believe that in our Lord’s pre-existence that is his existence prior to having taken the form of a bond-servant, that he was THE Chief Arch-angel" Pretty similar to JW.
I do appreciate the thoroughness discussing Christ's pre-mortal existence. Then noting that it is believed angels are mortal. Flat out saying Christ was a creation.
It is different how ideas about other creatures do vary throughout different groups.

That's probably enough to talk about before moving on to 159.

 

[CoreIssue]

Says the follower of John Ankerberg

Not a follower, a respecter of. As well as the late Walter Martin. And a number of other solid Christians. All of whom say Followers Russell are a cult.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

You want me to read John 8:24 for the fi

APAK

No need to get snarky and go ad hominem. OK? Stick to the texts, not your long knowledge of experience and personal greatness and achievements.

Frankly your post didn't make much sense, not that it was deep, it was just disconnected blather.

Here's the bottom line: You're making anyone a believer, no matter what they believe.

Guess what my friend: You're wrong.

Believers aren't whatever they decide, nor are they "believers" who have a wrong Christ. That just makes them believers in a make-believe Jesus.

That's why I provided the text of John 8:24, and Matthew 11:25-30 &c.

The Jesus of Mormonism, JW's and many on here is not the Jesus of Scripture. They don't believe the statement and person of Jesus who said "unless you believe that I am he." So, they believe in a different Jesus. Perhaps you do as well.

Going back to the Scripture I provided, the solemn warning is there: If a person does not believe according to this statement of Christ; "unless you believe that I am he" that person will die in their sins. Make sense, or do you just disagree that the person needs to have the true biblical revelation of Christ as evidence of true conversion?

Now, you can either go ad hominem, callow, or you can deal with the texts and be clear.

What I see you saying is a person can believe whatever they want about the person of Christ since you lamely attempted to turn the table back on me for providing Scriptural evidence they are not believers. That's what I'm saying, on authority of Scripture: Wrong belief, in wrong Jesus is not a believer.

 

[APAK]

I am also gathering that you are not a Trinitarian. Don't worry-- no hate sauce here.

Would you mind SHORTLY (<200 words) highlighting how your views compare/contrast with the Athanasian Trinity?
The shortness request is simply for ease of conversing/understanding.

Well let me give it a shot for you..

In short, I do not believe in any rigid and archaic religious creed or statement of loyalty especially any that involve a so-called trinity. The Athanasian trinity is not scriptural as any other form that became popular by the 6th century AD. I believe though it adds a major difference in the commonly used trinity support of the Nicene creed.

It stated that the Father AND Christ both independently emanates and transmits the spirit of God. Only the Father does have this attribute, although, Jesus was in an immortal state and given authority to use and dispense portions of the Father’s spirit to others and only by the will of his Father only. Jesus partook of the divinity of the Father. Here is an example of this in scripture when Jesus breathed on his disciples and gave them a portion of the spirit of God for a specific purpose; to forgive sins, AT LEAST. Scripture is silent on these details. In Jesus’ immortal state he could ‘use’ the Spirit of his Father for many services and tasks for himself and to others.

(Joh 20:21) Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
(Joh 20:22) And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
(Joh 20:23) Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

BL: The Father is the Spirit of God and Jesus later partook of this Spirit by the will of his Father.

So, I do not agree with this or any form of a Trinity. There is only one God our Father, and one Lord and Savior that was born as a man with his Father’s spirit from his conception. He was truly the first-born believer in God.

There are two beings (Father and Son) and the latter is planned and created by the first for mankind’s benefit. There are no 3 beings or personalities in one artificial and non-descript God, as the primary actors in scripture.

Bless you,

APAK

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Well let me give it a shot for you..

Now I see where you're coming from, you're not a converted person.

And this won't end well as concerning your next blunders:

There are two beings (Father and Son) and the latter is planned and created by the first for mankind’s benefit.

So, you fall under the category of whom Jesus referred to in John 8:24. Christ is Jehovah of the OT, he is not a created being.

There are no 3 beings or personalities in one artificial and non-descript God, as the primary actors in scripture.

Only because you cannot see what is clearly in Scripture, 1 Corinthians 2:14.

 

[CoreIssue]

No need to get snarky and go ad hominem. OK? Stick to the texts, not your long knowledge of experience and personal greatness and achievements.

Frankly your post didn't make much sense, not that it was deep, it was just disconnected blather.

Here's the bottom line: You're making anyone a believer, no matter what they believe.

Guess what my friend: You're wrong.

Believers aren't whatever they decide, nor are they "believers" who have a wrong Christ. That just makes them believers in a make-believe Jesus.

That's why I provided the text of John 8:24, and Matthew 11:25-30 &c.

The Jesus of Mormonism, JW's and many on here is not the Jesus of Scripture. They don't believe the statement and person of Jesus who said "unless you believe that I am he." So, they believe in a different Jesus. Perhaps you do as well.

Going back to the Scripture I provided, the solemn warning is there: If a person does not believe according to this statement of Christ; "unless you believe that I am he" that person will die in their sins. Make sense, or do you just disagree that the person needs to have the true biblical revelation of Christ as evidence of true conversion?

Now, you can either go ad hominem, callow, or you can deal with the texts and be clear.

What I see you saying is a person can believe whatever they want about the person of Christ since you lamely attempted to turn the table back on me for providing Scriptural evidence they are not believers. That's what I'm saying, on authority of Scripture: Wrong belief, in wrong Jesus is not a believer.

What does it matter? Why are you preaching to others?

Since God ran his lottery on who would be saved would not what you're doing is a complete waste of time in your belief.

 

[APAK]

Now I see where you're coming from, you're not a converted person.

And this won't end well as concerning your next blunders:



So, you fall under the category of whom Jesus referred to in John 8:24. Christ is Jehovah of the OT, he is not a created being.



Only because you cannot see what is clearly in Scripture, 1 Corinthians 2:14.

Well I really did not want to answer someone that lacks understanding of scripture and also calls himself a preacher. Folks like you need to be spotlighted for others to review and scrutinize, in a public forum.

Yes, you are correct, I'm not a convert of your religious order. I'm a converted spirit in Christ and I love every moment of it. Glory to his name and his beloved Son that died for me and you. Amen

Bless you as God knows,

APAK

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Well let me give it a shot for you..

In short, I do not believe in any rigid and archaic religious creed or statement of loyalty especially any that involve a so-called trinity. The Athanasian trinity is not scriptural as any other form that became popular by the 6th century AD. I believe though it adds a major difference in the commonly used trinity support of the Nicene creed.

It stated that the Father AND Christ both independently emanates and transmits the spirit of God. Only the Father does have this attribute, although, Jesus was in an immortal state and given authority to use and dispense portions of the Father’s spirit to others and only by the will of his Father only. Jesus partook of the divinity of the Father. Here is an example of this in scripture when Jesus breathed on his disciples and gave them a portion of the spirit of God for a specific purpose; to forgive sins, AT LEAST. Scripture is silent on these details. In Jesus’ immortal state he could ‘use’ the Spirit of his Father for many services and tasks for himself and to others.

(Joh 20:21) Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
(Joh 20:22) And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
(Joh 20:23) Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

BL: The Father is the Spirit of God and Jesus later partook of this Spirit by the will of his Father.

So, I do not agree with this or any form of a Trinity. There is only one God our Father, and one Lord and Savior that was born as a man with his Father’s spirit from his conception. He was truly the first-born believer in God.

There are two beings (Father and Son) and the latter is planned and created by the first for mankind’s benefit. There are no 3 beings or personalities in one artificial and non-descript God, as the primary actors in scripture.

Bless you,

APAK

Big-picture note: I am asking to understand what you believe, and for no purpose other than that. I'm not here to hate on anyone or "prove" anything "right" or anything like that.

I thank you for your response here. It directly addressed my question, stated your beliefs, was thorough, but not overly lengthy. Thank you.

Your reply was actually so thorough, I don't really have any clarification questions. So instead asking some expansion ones:
- Could you explain your view on the Spirit?
- I noticed that your explanation here was similar to Harvest1874's. Are you by chance a Bible Student or JW as well?
- Do you consider having a proper academic understanding of God to be prerequisite to salvation?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

The Jesus of Mormonism, JW's and many on here is not the Jesus of Scripture. They don't believe the statement and person of Jesus who said "unless you believe that I am he." So, they believe in a different Jesus. Perhaps you do as well.

FWIW: I 100% guarantee that what you think "Mormons" believe about Christ does not match actual LDS Christian beliefs.
If you want, I can clarify what actual beliefs are. If you don't care and want to argue against ideas that people don't actually belief, that's your choice and whatever.