The Trinity

[GodsGrace]

You must know that not everyone turns out to be like his teacher, just like not every son turns out to be like his father....personal ideas can creep in and undo what was taught to you. Look at satan....or Judas. Who could have had better teachers?

Something can even seem as if its from divine revelation and take you somewhere you didn't think you would go....this is what happens to humans.....look at the state of Christendom....how do you think that happened? If Jesus said that the "weeds" would be sown "while men were sleeping" and false ideas were already starting to manifest back in the first century, what makes you think it couldn't happen to Catholicism? It was foretold and it was the only church for centuries.

When you see what it became in those later centuries, do you really believe that it was a reflection of what Jesus taught? It was not even remotely close.....but since people were never encouraged to read the Bible, because it was forbidden to be read in the common language, they were kept in the dark for those centuries unable to check the scriptures for themselves to see if what they were being taught was accurate. (Acts 17:10-11)


Just as the Jews had their Talmud, so too Catholicism had its catechism.....I have been a JW for decades and when I called on Catholic people and asked them to go and get their Bible so that they could follow along in their own scripture, more often than not they came back with a catechism...they didn't really know the difference. I have studied the Bible with many Catholic people over the years and without the word of a lie they knew nothing of what the Bible taught, they just assumed that those who went to seminary knew what they were talking about and accepted it all without question. They were astounded to learn exactly what the Bible teaches because it was contrary to what they had learned at school and at church.


Because we reject the trinity, some suggest that Jehovah’s Witnesses practice a form of Arianism....but we worship neither the “incomprehensible” God of the Trinitarians, nor the “unknown (and unknowable) God” of Arius.

We agree with the apostle Paul: “For us there is one God the Father, from whom all things are.” (1 Corinthians 8:5)

Teachings that led to the development of the Trinity began to be officially formulated in 325 C.E. at the council of Nicaea. According to the New Catholic Encyclopedia, the creed attributed to the Council of Nicaea set out the first official definition of ‘Christian orthodoxy,’ including the definition of God and Christ. Why, though, was it deemed necessary to define God and Christ centuries after the Bible was completed? Is the Bible unclear on these important topics? Did the apostles and first century Christians even know what a trinity was?
Apparently they were in no doubt about who they knew God to be in relation to the Lord Jesus Christ.....
1 Corinthians 8:5-6...
"Indeed, even though there are so-called gods in heaven and on earth—and there are in fact many gods and many lords— 6 for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and through whom we exist." (New Catholic Bible) Where is the Holy Spirit?

Yes!
This is the one.
Too late now
But I have it for the morning...
Have a few comments.
'Night.

 

[GodsGrace]

You must know that not everyone turns out to be like his teacher, just like not every son turns out to be like his father....personal ideas can creep in and undo what was taught to you. Look at satan....or Judas. Who could have had better teachers?

Jane, I asked you how you think Jesus' teachings were carried forward.
If the above if your reply, and personal ideas creep in, then how can we know who to trust?
Why trust the N.T. at all if we can't trust those whom Jesus taught and those that came directly after them?
I mean, do we know more than the Apostolic Fathers knew??

Something can even seem as if its from divine revelation and take you somewhere you didn't think you would go....this is what happens to humans.....look at the state of Christendom....how do you think that happened? If Jesus said that the "weeds" would be sown "while men were sleeping" and false ideas were already starting to manifest back in the first century, what makes you think it couldn't happen to Catholicism? It was foretold and it was the only church for centuries.

When you see what it became in those later centuries, do you really believe that it was a reflection of what Jesus taught? It was not even remotely close.....but since people were never encouraged to read the Bible, because it was forbidden to be read in the common language, they were kept in the dark for those centuries unable to check the scriptures for themselves to see if what they were being taught was accurate. (Acts 17:10-11)

Acts 17:10 I think that was the Bareans.
And I agree with you.
And I agree about what happened to Catholicism.
But because it happened to Catholicism you can't throw out all of Christianity.
It's men that were running the church, and although the church remains holy, some of the men in it, including Popes, were not following the teachings of Jesus, but they were embroiled in worldly matters, what we are taught too beware.
I think we can agree on the above statement of yours.


Let's take one idea at a time because you post a lot and I don't have a lot of time.
Let's decide if the Apostolic Fathers knew more than we know today.

Who can we trust, if not them?
You made a comment that the N.T., MAYBE, was not even necessary to be put together as a book.
Did I understand that correctly?
Is this what you believe?

So, 2 questions:
Who can we trust?
Is the N.T. necessary in written form?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Jane, I asked you how you think Jesus' teachings were carried forward.
If the above if your reply, and personal ideas creep in, then how can we know who to trust?
Why trust the N.T. at all if we can't trust those whom Jesus taught and those that came directly after them?
I mean, do we know more than the Apostolic Fathers knew??

We need to know what the apostles knew.....the AF’s tried hard to carry on what they taught, but it was an uphill battle with apostasy already knocking. It was foretold that Christianity would apostatize just as Judaism did...and for the same reasons...poor leadership. Instead of taking the humble position of the servants of the congregation, religious leaders became proud and wanted power over the people....they demanded prominence and fancy titles, along with distinctive garb and educational accomplishments that would identify them at a glance. They lost what what Jesus taught them and instead mocked him by their disobedience...imitating the Pharisees.

Since it was foretold...why do you think God allowed it to happen...twice?

Acts 17:10 I think that was the Bareans.
And I agree with you.
And I agree about what happened to Catholicism.
But because it happened to Catholicism you can't throw out all of Christianity.
It's men that were running the church, and although the church remains holy, some of the men in it, including Popes, were not following the teachings of Jesus, but they were embroiled in worldly matters, what we are taught too beware.
I think we can agree on the above statement of yours.

That is just the point...what I am throwing out is not “Christianity” and never was. Jesus' teachings became corrupted and so genuine Christianity became overgrown with the devil's “weeds”. By the time of Constantine it was completely off the rails. These weeds became “the church” and today those teachings are still very much a part of what all of Christendom is founded on....no matter the denomination.

If your foundations are shaky, Jesus said that is like building on sand.....we have to build on the Rock who is Jesus Christ. The “storm” is coming and only those founded on the rock will survive it.

Let's take one idea at a time because you post a lot and I don't have a lot of time.
Let's decide if the Apostolic Fathers knew more than we know today.

Who can we trust, if not them?

We can trust the original apostles and those they taught, but not the ones who came after them.
The apostasy did not happen overnight....it was a slow and gradual adoption of ideas that crept in over time. The human lifespan is short....but the devil has been with us from the beginning....he knows how to manipulate and to promote ideas that appeal to human nature....and he has had all the time in the world to cultivate and water his 'weeds'.

In Daniel's prophesy on "the time of the end" (which I believe we are witnessing right now) God was going to "purify, cleanse, and refine" a people and provide abundant knowledge.

Daniel 12:4, 9-10 RSVCE....
"But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”

He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many shall purify themselves, and make themselves white, and be refined; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but those who are wise shall understand."

Today, we have so much more knowledge than we have ever had, but the wicked, God said would just continue on in their evil ways....refusing the cleansing and receiving no understanding. Only the wise would have God's blessing of understanding about what is happening.

You made a comment that the N.T., MAYBE, was not even necessary to be put together as a book.
Did I understand that correctly?
Is this what you believe?

No, that is not what I said...maybe you have me mixed up with someone else? The Greek scriptures are part of God's word inspired by him to teach us what Jesus commanded.

So, 2 questions:
Who can we trust?
Is the N.T. necessary in written form?

Of course. It is an authentic part of God’s word after all....Not written by men who wrote their own thoughts, but who were inspired to write God’s thoughts in their own words. (2 Timothy 3:16, 17)

The complete word of God was not available to the first century Christians and because Jesus was Jewish, he taught from the Hebrew Scriptures, so these are as important to us as the Greek Scriptures. It is one story, from Genesis to Revelation. But if you fail to incorporate the whole book in your investigations, you miss so much....particularly the prophesies about the new world to come. (2 Peter 3:13) What God originally planned as the future of mankind will yet see its fulfillment. (Isaiah 55:11)

The future of mankind is almost entirely earthly, because he created us to live on earth as our permanent home. Only a “few” are chosen for positions of rulership in heaven with Christ, (Revelation 20:6) but those of a created “clergy” class wanted those positions on earth.....hence we see in the way they dress and the titles they hold that they have elevated themselves above the masses, just like the Pharisees did....which is against everything Christ taught. He taught that all were "brothers".

In his condemnation of the Pharisees Jesus said....
"5 “Everything they do is meant to attract the attention of others. They widen their phylacteries [little boxes containing tiny parchment scrolls] and lengthen their tassels. 6 They love to have places of honor at banquets and the best seats in synagogues, 7 and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be addressed as ‘Rabbi.’
8 “But do not allow yourselves to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master, and you are all brethren. 9 Call no one on earth your father, for you have but one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 You must not be called ‘teacher,’ for you have only one Teacher, the Christ. 11 The greatest among you must be your servant. 12 All those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all those who humble themselves will be exalted." (Matthew 23:5-12)

The priesthood for Christ’s followers was in the future in heaven, but the clergy usurped these positions by choosing themselves, and making their positions on earth as if that meant anything to God.

The “elect” (saints) are of God’s choosing.....men cannot choose themselves, nor can a church “lobby” God to make someone a “saint”. The idea is preposterous!

 

[GodsGrace]

We need to know what the apostles knew.....the AF’s tried hard to carry on what they taught, but it was an uphill battle with apostasy already knocking. It was foretold that Christianity would apostatize just as Judaism did...and for the same reasons...poor leadership. Instead of taking the humble position of the servants of the congregation, religious leaders became proud and wanted power over the people....they demanded prominence and fancy titles, along with distinctive garb and educational accomplishments that would identify them at a glance. They lost what what Jesus taught them and instead mocked him by their disobedience...imitating the Pharisees.

Since it was foretold...why do you think God allowed it to happen...twice?


That is just the point...what I am throwing out is not “Christianity” and never was. Jesus' teachings became corrupted and so genuine Christianity became overgrown with the devil's “weeds”. By the time of Constantine it was completely off the rails. These weeds became “the church” and today those teachings are still very much a part of what all of Christendom is founded on....no matter the denomination.

If your foundations are shaky, Jesus said that is like building on sand.....we have to build on the Rock who is Jesus Christ. The “storm” is coming and only those founded on the rock will survive it.


We can trust the original apostles and those they taught, but not the ones who came after them.
The apostasy did not happen overnight....it was a slow and gradual adoption of ideas that crept in over time. The human lifespan is short....but the devil has been with us from the beginning....he knows how to manipulate and to promote ideas that appeal to human nature....and he has had all the time in the world to cultivate and water his 'weeds'.

In Daniel's prophesy on "the time of the end" (which I believe we are witnessing right now) God was going to "purify, cleanse, and refine" a people and provide abundant knowledge.

Daniel 12:4, 9-10 RSVCE....
"But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”

He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many shall purify themselves, and make themselves white, and be refined; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but those who are wise shall understand."

Today, we have so much more knowledge than we have ever had, but the wicked, God said would just continue on in their evil ways....refusing the cleansing and receiving no understanding. Only the wise would have God's blessing of understanding about what is happening.


No, that is not what I said...maybe you have me mixed up with someone else? The Greek scriptures are part of God's word inspired by him to teach us what Jesus commanded.


Of course. It is an authentic part of God’s word after all....Not written by men who wrote their own thoughts, but who were inspired to write God’s thoughts in their own words. (2 Timothy 3:16, 17)

So aren't those that teach you "men who wrote their own thoughts?"
Don't you trust those who were "inspired to write God's thoughts in their own words" better?

John 16:7-8
7But I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I am leaving; for if I do not leave, the [e]Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.
8And He, when He comes, will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment:


John 16:13
13But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.


1 Thessalonians 5:19
5for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sakes.

Who are the above verses speaking of?

The complete word of God was not available to the first century Christians and because Jesus was Jewish, he taught from the Hebrew Scriptures, so these are as important to us as the Greek Scriptures. It is one story, from Genesis to Revelation. But if you fail to incorporate the whole book in your investigations, you miss so much....particularly the prophesies about the new world to come. (2 Peter 3:13) What God originally planned as the future of mankind will yet see its fulfillment. (Isaiah 55:11)

Of course the bible is a complete thought.

Who was God speaking to in Genesis?
It is accepted Christian theology that God was speaking the the Godhead...to Himself, as some might say.
This has been accepted from the beginning when the Word of God was available through the letters that were written and that were circulated among the Christian brethren in that part of the world.

And this idea of the Holy Spirit was taken from verses in scripture, as above.

In the year 180, when Christianity was still pure, Irenaeus taught this:
For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom (Jesus and the Holy Spirit, as He is called in the O.T.)
the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things.
This is to whom He speaks saying, "Let us make man after our image and likeness".
Ireneaus 180AD

Reading from both the O.T. and the N.T. those that came right after The Apostolic Fathers believed
what scripture had to say.

The future of mankind is almost entirely earthly, because he created us to live on earth as our permanent home. Only a “few” are chosen for positions of rulership in heaven with Christ, (Revelation 20:6) but those of a created “clergy” class wanted those positions on earth.....hence we see in the way they dress and the titles they hold that they have elevated themselves above the masses, just like the Pharisees did....which is against everything Christ taught. He taught that all were "brothers".

In his condemnation of the Pharisees Jesus said....
"5 “Everything they do is meant to attract the attention of others. They widen their phylacteries [little boxes containing tiny parchment scrolls] and lengthen their tassels. 6 They love to have places of honor at banquets and the best seats in synagogues, 7 and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be addressed as ‘Rabbi.’
8 “But do not allow yourselves to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master, and you are all brethren. 9 Call no one on earth your father, for you have but one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 You must not be called ‘teacher,’ for you have only one Teacher, the Christ. 11 The greatest among you must be your servant. 12 All those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all those who humble themselves will be exalted." (Matthew 23:5-12)

The priesthood for Christ’s followers was in the future in heaven, but the clergy usurped these positions by choosing themselves, and making their positions on earth as if that meant anything to God.

The “elect” (saints) are of God’s choosing.....men cannot choose themselves, nor can a church “lobby” God to make someone a “saint”. The idea is preposterous!

The above does not interest me right now.
We're discussing the deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Can you show me from scripture that Jesus or the Holy Spirit are not God?
I know a negative is difficult to prove...but then on WHAT do you base your belief that they are not God?

 

[Aunty Jane]

So aren't those that teach you "men who wrote their own thoughts?"
Don't you trust those who were "inspired to write God's thoughts in their own words" better?

I trust that there was going to be a “cleansing, purifying and refining” of God’s worshippers in this “time of the end”, and that if there wasn’t a lot of impurities discernible at this time, then no “cleansing, purifying and refining” would be necessary.

Viewing what “Christianity” has become in today’s world, I can surely see the need to clean up their act. But the wicked were not going to change...they would just continue on in their old ways, oblivious of the need to clean up their worship, now contaminated with all manner of ill-conceived ideas and practices, accepted for so long that they mistake what they are practicing and believing for genuine Christianity.....I do not see even a remote connection.

Who are the above verses speaking of?

Not until the fourth century C.E. did the teaching that the holy spirit was a person and part of the “Godhead” become official church dogma. Early church “fathers” did not so teach; Justin Martyr of the second century C.E. taught that the holy spirit was an ‘influence or mode of operation of the Deity’; Hippolytus likewise ascribed no personality to the holy spirit. The Scriptures themselves unite to show that God’s holy spirit is not a person but is God’s active force by which he accomplishes his purpose and executes his will.

In John’s account of Jesus’ words regarding the holy spirit, his remarks must be taken in context. Jesus personalized the holy spirit when speaking of that spirit as a “helper” (which in Greek is the masculine substantive pa·raʹkle·tos). Properly, therefore, John presents Jesus’ words as referring to that “helper” aspect of the spirit with masculine personal pronouns. On the other hand, in the same context, when the Greek "pneuʹmais" used, John employs a neuter pronoun to refer to the holy spirit, pneuʹma itself being neuter. Hence, we have in John’s use of the masculine personal pronoun in association with pa·raʹkle·tos an example of conformity to grammatical rules, not an expression of doctrine. "Autos" (Greek) translated as "HE", can mean "it", "she", "they", etc.....so it does not always say what you assume it does in English. Bias determines a lot in translation. The NWT translates "autos" as "that one" which is just as valid.

Who was God speaking to in Genesis?
It is accepted Christian theology that God was speaking the the Godhead...to Himself, as some might say.
This has been accepted from the beginning when the Word of God was available through the letters that were written and that were circulated among the Christian brethren in that part of the world.

The beginning of what? Until Catholicism introduced the trinity, there was no such thing as a "godhead", and no such thing as a "holy ghost".

Since God's son was by his side as a "master worker" (Proverbs 8:30-31) and Colossians 1:15-17 tells us that creation came from the Father "THROUGH" the son, we can assume that by means of God's spirit all things came into existence by the 'team' working in conjunction.

In the year 180, when Christianity was still pure, Irenaeus taught this:
For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom (Jesus and the Holy Spirit, as He is called in the O.T.)
the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things.
This is to whom He speaks saying, "Let us make man after our image and likeness".
Ireneaus 180AD

Reading from both the O.T. and the N.T. those that came right after The Apostolic Fathers believed
what scripture had to say.

Yes they did......but there is no mention of a trinity in anything they said. It is implied by the church, but never stated by the apostles or those whom they taught until later....like I said the foretold apostasy did not happen overnight, but gradually over the centuries as men gained more control and a clergy class emerged who mirrored the Pharisees, not the apostles.

 

[Wrangler]

Not until the fourth century C.E. did the teaching that the holy spirit was a person and part of the “Godhead” become official church dogma.

Most don’t realize this.

 

[tigger 2]

GodsGrace wrote: "In the year 180, when Christianity was still pure, Irenaeus taught this:
For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom (Jesus and the Holy Spirit, as He is called in the O.T.)
the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things.
This is to whom He speaks saying, 'Let us make man after our image and likeness'."
Ireneaus 180AD
...............................................

Irenaeus


“... neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in His own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord supreme .... the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; it is incumbent on us to follow ... their testimonies to this effect.” (ANF, 1:422, ‘Against Heresies’)

* * * *

“Such, then, are the first principles of the Gospel: that there is one God, the Maker of this universe; He who was also announced by the prophets ... which proclaim the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ignore any other God or Father except Him.” (ANF, 1:428, ‘Against Heresies’)

* * * *

“And that the whole range of the doctrine of the Apostles proclaimed one and the same God ... That He was the Maker of all things, that He was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that He was the God of glory, - they who wish may learn from the very words and acts of the Apostles, and may contemplate the fact that God is one, above whom is no other.” (ANF, 1:434, ‘Against Heresies’)

* * * *

“For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him forever, seeing that He alone is our Father.” (ANF, 1:399-400, ‘Against Heresies’)

* * * *

“If, for instance, anyone asks, ‘what was God doing before He made the world?’ we reply that the answer to such a question .... remains with God, and it is not proper for us to aim at bringing forward foolish, rash, and blasphemous suppositions [in reply to it] .... For consider all ye who invent such opinions, since the Father Himself is alone called God ... since, moreover, the Scriptures acknowledge Him alone as God” - (ANF, 1:400, ‘Against Heresies’)

* * * *

“... no one is termed God by the Apostles when speaking for themselves, except Him who truly is God, the Father of our Lord.” - (ANF, 1:553, ‘Against Heresies’)

* * * *

“ ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,’ and all other things in succession; .... Now, that this God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Paul the apostle also has declared, [saying] ‘There is one God, the Father, who is above all {Eph. 4:6; cf. 1 Cor. 8:6}, …’ ” - (ANF, 1:362)

* * * *

“It is easy to prove from the very words of the Lord [Jesus], that he acknowledges one Father and Creator of the world, and Fashioner of man ... and that this One is God over all” - (ANF, 1:370)

Like most, if not all, Ante-Nicene Fathers Irenaeus taught that “Wisdom” speaking at Prov. 8:22-30 is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ, the Word. In fact, the very trinitarian writers of ANF admit also:

"Prov. viii 22-25. This is one of the favourite Messianic quotations of the Fathers, and is considered as the base of the first chapter of St. John’s Gospel." - ANF 1:488, f.n. #10.

Here, then, is what Irenaeus taught about the Son of God, Wisdom, the Word, speaking at Prov. 8:22-25:

‘The Lord {“Jehovah/YHWH” in original Hebrew manuscripts} created me the beginning of His ways in His work ... before all the hills, He brought me forth ... when He made the foundations of the earth strong, I was with Him preparing [them].’ .... There is therefore one God, who by {through} the Word and Wisdom created and arranged all {other} things. - ANF 1:488.

Only fragments of manuscripts containing the original Greek remain. Irenaeus’ “Against Heresies” exists today in full only in a single Latin translation from the original Greek language. It is thus not surprising that trinitarian-supporting “evidence” may be found in the single trinitarian-recopied, trinitarian-translated, trinitarian-redefined manuscript available today. But certainly this respected early Christian writer whom today's trinitarian scholars “credit” with the very “formulation” of the trinity doctrine would not have made the many clear non-trinitarian statements recorded above if he had really believed in or taught a trinity (or “Binity”)!

Obviously the many trinitarian copyists who handled (and mishandled) Irenaeus’ writing down through the centuries could (and did) change some non-trinitarian thoughts into trinitarian thoughts. But they would certainly never change trinitarian thoughts into non-trinitarian thoughts (especially if they wished to stay alive and intact). Therefore, those many non-trinitarian statements still remaining must be Irenaeus’ original teaching!

 

[Pierac]

Tertullian writing around the year 200 AD to a friend of his called Praxeas states:

Chap. III. vv. 1. "The majority of believers, are STARTLED at the Dispensation (of the Three in One)...

They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods...

While the Greeks actually REFUSE to understand the oikonomia, or Dispensation" (of the Three in One)."

This is an incredible statement. Tertullian himself states that the majority of believers are startled when he tells them of the dispensation of the three in one. Why are believers startled at this teaching if it is supposed to be the core of Christianity from the beginning? Because it was not! This is why they are startled. The Greeks (Greek Christians) refused to accept this idea at all and accused him of worshipping two and three gods.

 

[APAK]

Tertullian writing around the year 200 AD to a friend of his called Praxeas states:

Chap. III. vv. 1. "The majority of believers, are STARTLED at the Dispensation (of the Three in One)...

They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods...

While the Greeks actually REFUSE to understand the oikonomia, or Dispensation" (of the Three in One)."

This is an incredible statement. Tertullian himself states that the majority of believers are startled when he tells them of the dispensation of the three in one. Why are believers startled at this teaching if it is supposed to be the core of Christianity from the beginning? Because it was not! This is why they are startled. The Greeks (Greek Christians) refused to accept this idea at all and accused him of worshipping two and three gods.

Excellent work. Although expect those that believe in this 2 or 3 gods in one God and pagan concept to ignore these words of Tertullian as being fake or misquoted. They will ride their 2/3 gods in one God till death, and only remember Tertullian as one of their major church fathers that believed in it.

As they say, there are at least two sides to a story, and those that have something to hide will only show you the one side they want you to see and believe in.

 

[Cooper]

Tertullian writing around the year 200 AD to a friend of his called Praxeas states:

Chap. III. vv. 1. "The majority of believers, are STARTLED at the Dispensation (of the Three in One)...

They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods...

While the Greeks actually REFUSE to understand the oikonomia, or Dispensation" (of the Three in One)."

This is an incredible statement. Tertullian himself states that the majority of believers are startled when he tells them of the dispensation of the three in one. Why are believers startled at this teaching if it is supposed to be the core of Christianity from the beginning? Because it was not! This is why they are startled. The Greeks (Greek Christians) refused to accept this idea at all and accused him of worshipping two and three gods.

People are so thick they do not realise the greatness of the creator for whom all things are possible.
.

 

[Wrangler]

People are so thick they do not realise the greatness of the creator for whom all things are possible.
.

Jesus died.

 

[Cooper]

Jesus died.

And rose again.
.

 

[Wrangler]

And rose again.
.

That Jesus died is how you know he is not God.

 

[GodsGrace]

That Jesus died is how you know he is not God.

That He rose again is how you know He is....

Later re your questions, which were for Davy, I think.
But no matter.

 

[Wrangler]

That He rose again is how you know He is

Nothing more than a man whose lifeless corpse was acted on by God to fulfill his promise to us. See Acts 3, 17:31.

 

[GodsGrace]

Excellent work. Although expect those that believe in this 2 or 3 gods in one God and pagan concept to ignore these words of Tertullian as being fake or misquoted. They will ride their 2/3 gods in one God till death, and only remember Tertullian as one of their major church fathers that believed in it.

As they say, there are at least two sides to a story, and those that have something to hide will only show you the one side they want you to see and believe in.

What side is Pierac showing APAK?

 

[GodsGrace]

Tertullian writing around the year 200 AD to a friend of his called Praxeas states:

Chap. III. vv. 1. "The majority of believers, are STARTLED at the Dispensation (of the Three in One)...

They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods...

While the Greeks actually REFUSE to understand the oikonomia, or Dispensation" (of the Three in One)."

This is an incredible statement. Tertullian himself states that the majority of believers are startled when he tells them of the dispensation of the three in one. Why are believers startled at this teaching if it is supposed to be the core of Christianity from the beginning? Because it was not! This is why they are startled. The Greeks (Greek Christians) refused to accept this idea at all and accused him of worshipping two and three gods.

It's not proper that you quote something from the internet and claim it as yours.
Your above quote is from heavennet.net.

Please give credit to your sources as is commonly done.

If you wish to use the internet, those reading along, including @Aunty Jane and @APAK and @Wrangler,
would do well to read the following and do some real studying.

Jesus is referred to as THE GLORY, as in the O.T. The Glory is referring to God Father and ONLY to God.
Calling Jesus The Glory is MORE THAN referring to Him as God.
The biblical quotes are in the following statement which is in response to Islamic theology which does not accept
Jesus as God.

Maybe you all are Muslims?
Again, I can only repeat that if you do not believe Jesus is God, it is your free-will prerogative,
but then you cannot call yourselves a Christian.



“James speaks of our Lord by name only twice, and on both occasions he gives Him the full title of reverence: ‘the (our) Lord Jesus Christ’ (1.1, 2.1) – coupling Him in the one case on equal terms with God, and in the other adding further epithets of divine dignity. Elsewhere he speaks of Him simply as ‘the Lord’ (57,8 [14], [15]) in contexts which greatly enhance the significance of the term. The pregnant use of ‘the Name,’ absolutely, which we found current among the early Christians as reported in the Acts, recurs here; and James advises in the case of the sick people that they be prayed over, while they are anointed with oil ‘in the Name’ (514). The ‘Name’ intended is clearly that of Jesus, which is thus in Christian usage substituted for that of Jehovah. A unique epithet, equally implying the deity of the Lord, is applied to Him in the exhortation, ‘My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Glory, with respect to persons’ (21).

‘Glory’ seems to stand here in apposition to the name, ‘our Lord Jesus Christ,’ further defining Him in His majesty. There is here something more than merely association of our Lord with glory, as when we are told that He had glory with God before the world was (Jno 175), and after His humiliation on earth (though even on earth He manifested His glory to seeing eyes, Jno 114, 211, 1722) entered again into His glory (Lk 2426, Jno 1724, 1 Tim 316, Heb 29, cf. Mt 1928, 2531, [Mk 1037]), and is to come again in this glory (Mt 1627, 2430, 2531, Mk 838, 13.26, Lk 926, 2127, Titus 213, 1 P 413). We come nearer to what is implied when we read of Jesus being ‘the Lord of glory’ (1 Cor 28), that is He to whom glory belongs as His characterizing quality; or when He is described to us as ‘the effulgence of the glory of God’ (Heb 13).

The thought of the writer seems to be fixed on those Old Testament in which Jehovah is described as ‘Glory’: e. g., ‘For I, saith Jehovah, will be unto her a wall of fire round about, and I will be the Glory in the midst of her’ (Zech 25). In the Lord Jesus Christ, James sees the fulfillment of these promises: He is Jehovah come to be with His people; and, as He has tabernacled among them, they have seen His glory. He is, in a word, the glory of God, the Shekinah: God manifest to men. It is thus that James thought and spoke of his own brother who died a violent and shameful death while still in His first youth! Surely there is a phenomenon here which may well waken inquiry.” (Benjamin B. Warfield, The Lord of Glory: A Classic Defense of the Deity of Jesus Christ [Solid Ground Christians Books, Birmingham, Alabama: First Printing, November 2003],

The Witness of the Catholic Epistles, pp. 264-265; bold emphasis ours)“James speaks of our Lord by name only twice, and on both occasions he gives Him the full title of reverence: ‘the (our) Lord Jesus Christ’ (1.1, 2.1) – coupling Him in the one case on equal terms with God, and in the other adding further epithets of divine dignity. Elsewhere he speaks of Him simply as ‘the Lord’ (57,8 [14], [15]) in contexts which greatly enhance the significance of the term. The pregnant use of ‘the Name,’ absolutely, which we found current among the early Christians as reported in the Acts, recurs here; and James advises in the case of the sick people that they be prayed over, while they are anointed with oil ‘in the Name’ (514).

The ‘Name’ intended is clearly that of Jesus, which is thus in Christian usage substituted for that of Jehovah. A unique epithet, equally implying the deity of the Lord, is applied to Him in the exhortation, ‘My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Glory, with respect to persons’ (21). ‘Glory’ seems to stand here in apposition to the name, ‘our Lord Jesus Christ,’ further defining Him in His majesty. There is here something more than merely association of our Lord with glory, as when we are told that He had glory with God before the world was (Jno 175), and after His humiliation on earth (though even on earth He manifested His glory to seeing eyes, Jno 114, 211, 1722) entered again into His glory (Lk 2426, Jno 1724, 1 Tim 316, Heb 29, cf. Mt 1928, 2531, [Mk 1037]), and is to come again in this glory (Mt 1627, 2430, 2531, Mk 838, 13.26, Lk 926, 2127, Titus 213, 1 P 413). We come nearer to what is implied when we read of Jesus being ‘the Lord of glory’ (1 Cor 28), that is He to whom glory belongs as His characterizing quality; or when He is described to us as ‘the effulgence of the glory of God’ (Heb 13).

The thought of the writer seems to be fixed on those Old Testament in which Jehovah is described as ‘Glory’: e. g., ‘For I, saith Jehovah, will be unto her a wall of fire round about, and I will be the Glory in the midst of her’ (Zech 25). In the Lord Jesus Christ, James sees the fulfillment of these promises: He is Jehovah come to be with His people; and, as He has tabernacled among them, they have seen His glory. He is, in a word, the glory of God, the Shekinah: God manifest to men. It is thus that James thought and spoke of his own brother who died a violent and shameful death while still in His first youth! Surely there is a phenomenon here which may well waken inquiry.” (Benjamin B. Warfield, The Lord of Glory: A Classic Defense of the Deity of Jesus Christ [Solid Ground Christians Books, Birmingham, Alabama: First Printing, November 2003]

source: Reply To: Matt 1 21 as evidence for the Trinity – Heaven Net


Interesting, isn't it, that I've used the same source YOU did to support the opposit view...

And, here we have proof that you have no understanding of the Trinity and that you side with Islam regarding the deity of Christ.

 

[APAK]

What side is Pierac showing APAK?

Truth GG, the naked public truth

 

[GodsGrace]

Nothing more than a man whose lifeless corpse was acted on by God to fulfill his promise to us. See Acts 3, 17:31.

God Father will be very happy to hear your statements....
Read what God Father believes about His Son:

John 5:20
For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will marvel.

John 17:24
Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Ephesians 1:6
to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

Matthew 3:17
and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.”

Mark 12:6
He had one more to send, a beloved son; he sent him last of all to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’


YOU call Jesus a man...
When God's Word says He is:

His Son
His Beloved
His Glory
His Respected Son

 

[GodsGrace]

Truth GG, the naked public truth

Take the time to read the article @Pierac used as support.
And see my post no. 418

Have some intellectual honesty at least.