User Tag List

Page 35 of 43 FirstFirst ... 2532333435363738 ... LastLast
Results 511 to 525 of 638

Thread: John 20:28 and the Trinity

  1. #511
    TOL Legend john w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Heavenly Places
    Posts
    18,628
    Thanks
    118
    Thanked 13,048 Times in 9,023 Posts

    Mentioned
    105 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147769
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Are you a KJV only adherent?

    Kind regards
    Trevor
    You are a bible corrector/agnostic/mystic-not a bible believer, but an "Errors only-ist."

    We know.
    Saint John W

  2. #512
    Over 3000 post club Apple7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,018
    Thanks
    313
    Thanked 994 Times in 661 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    154394
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Greetings again Apple7, I do not believe in the Trinity and what has this got to do with Mary anyway?
    You already admitted that you don't even know what The Trinity even is...thus, you admit to rejecting what you don't understand.

    You were the first one to bring Mary into this conversation, thus, the onus is upon you to show her role in The Trinity.



    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    The inspired Scriptures clearly teach that Mary is the mother of Jesus. Making the text larger does not help, but seems to demonstrate your frustration and lack of reasoning. I cannot fathom your reasoning here, and your confusion is obvious to all. What is your subtle differentiation on such a claim?

    Kind regards
    Trevor


    Jesus NEVER declares that Mary is His mother.

  3. #513
    TOL Legend john w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Heavenly Places
    Posts
    18,628
    Thanks
    118
    Thanked 13,048 Times in 9,023 Posts

    Mentioned
    105 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147769
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    It seems that "Liar" is every other word out of your mouth. You must have special favor with the admin to be able to flaunt the TOL policies and rules. Have fun, this is your day.
    Get lost, loser-you're not in my league. And get off this thread, as you are getting picked apart, as you seem to litter dung, out of your mouth.


    So there.

    And get this straight, weak minded, spineless one-denying that Jesus Christ is God, is the definition of "liar."

    Of course, since you're a man pleaser, with no vertebrae, you make nice to the wolves, being an embarrassment. Even you know it.
    Saint John W

  4. #514
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again Rosenritter,
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    1 Timothy 6:16 refers to Christ no matter how it's diagrammed. Christ is he "who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see..." Technically this is God and Christ which are one and the same in this sense (meaning the the person and being) but even if you are thinking they are separate people (as is your inclination) the grammar does not exclude Christ.
    Verse 13 separates God as a separate being from Christ Jesus:
    1 Timothy 6:13 (KJV): I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;
    Thus Christ Jesus is not God in this statement.
    Verse 15 and 16 might be construed to pointing back to verse 13 (blue) or verse 14 (red) for its subject, but no matter which choice is taken, it cannot exclude Christ. Christ only hath immortality.
    God the Father only has immortality, as with Him it is underived. Jesus was given immortality after his resurrection, and before that he was a mortal man, subject to death. The faithful will also be given immortality.

    1 Timothy 6:13–16 (KJV): 13 I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; 14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.
    I read the word “show” in the same sense as John 1:18, in that Jesus will reveal the Father who man cannot see or approach unto. Jesus can be seen and has been seen by the Apostles and others after his resurrection. When Jesus returns he will be seen.
    If that seems like a conflict maybe the problem lies in considering God and Christ (two different designations) as two different people. Obviously God has immortality, but if God and Christ (one being in reality) only hath immortality, there is no conflict.
    The one God, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God are distinct beings.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  5. #515
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again john w,
    Quote Originally Posted by john w View Post
    No, you went off on a tangent, deceiver-the point-3/echad. You are drunk.
    I assume you are alluding to a concept that Trinitarians seek to impose on the OT in order to fit their theory. I doubt whether you have seriously considered this for yourself, but simply repeated what is generally held. I believe that the meaning of “echad” is “one”, revealing that there is One God, the Father, Yahweh. Do you really think that when Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, that Jesus is teaching the Trinity?
    Deuteronomy 6:4–5 (KJV): 4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: 5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

    Mark 12:28–34 (KJV): 28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? 29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. 32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: 33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. 34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

    Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
    You lied-nowhere does the bible assert, teach, that man was made in the image and likeness of angels.
    "And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him,” not in the image of angels. Why did you lie?
    I suggest that you have not properly considered Psalm 8:5.
    Quote Originally Posted by john w View Post
    You are a bible corrector/agnostic/mystic-not a bible believer, but an "Errors only-ist." We know.
    Did you read the summary that is given in Barnes’ Notes, available at Bible Hub? I could quote other Commentaries if this will help.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  6. #516
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again Apple7,
    Quote Originally Posted by Apple7 View Post
    You already admitted that you don't even know what The Trinity even is...thus, you admit to rejecting what you don't understand.
    I doubt that any one understands the Trinity, as it is contradictory and does not agree with the Bible.
    You were the first one to bring Mary into this conversation, thus, the onus is upon you to show her role in The Trinity.
    Jesus NEVER declares that Mary is His mother.
    Mary’s role has no connection with the Trinity as the Trinity does not exist. Mary is the mother of Jesus as the Scriptures clearly states. I am still waiting for the great unveiling of the details of your “challenge”.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  7. #517
    Over 5000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    959
    Thanked 1,773 Times in 1,415 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    192344
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Greetings again Rosenritter, Verse 13 separates God as a separate being from Christ Jesus:
    1 Timothy 6:13 (KJV): I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;


    No, it doesn't. That passage is as easily read with "and" linking both forms with equivalence. Such as the following example:

    Isaiah 44:6 KJV
    (6) Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

    Does Isaiah 44:6 prove that there are two different beings called LORD? If I accept your proposed rule then yes, it does. If you are attempting persuasion in earnest, you must recognize that "God and Christ" is not a statement that logically determines two beings.

    Thus Christ Jesus is not God in this statement.
    God the Father only has immortality, as with Him it is underived. Jesus was given immortality after his resurrection, and before that he was a mortal man, subject to death. The faithful will also be given immortality.
    It reads to me that Jesus Christ had that immortality before his resurrection. See John 5:26 "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the son to have life in himself." Jesus never promises to anyone that they shall have life in themselves, but only life in Him.


    1 Timothy 6:13–16 (KJV): 13 I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; 14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

    I read the word “show” in the same sense as John 1:18, in that Jesus will reveal the Father who man cannot see or approach unto. Jesus can be seen and has been seen by the Apostles and others after his resurrection. When Jesus returns he will be seen.
    The one God, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God are distinct beings.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
    I think you missed the point. Diagramming the passage grammatically, where does "who only hath immortality" point to? It either points to "God and Christ Jesus" (verse 13) or "our Lord Jesus Christ" (verse 14) and with it comes the entire package of "dwelling in the light no man can approach" and so on and so forth. They aren't distinct beings, but if they are, then Jesus only hath immortality and not God, and Jesus only dwells in the light no man hath seen nor can see..."

  8. #518
    Over 3000 post club Apple7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,018
    Thanks
    313
    Thanked 994 Times in 661 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    154394
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Greetings again Apple7,I doubt that any one understands the Trinity, as it is contradictory and does not agree with the Bible.

    Mary’s role has no connection with the Trinity as the Trinity does not exist. Mary is the mother of Jesus as the Scriptures clearly states. I am still waiting for the great unveiling of the details of your “challenge”.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

    Take a good look at the cracks in the foundation of your logic.

    How can The Trinity be a contradiction when you previously admitted that you don't even know what it is?

    Further, how can something that you claim does not even exist, be a contradiction?

    Nothing cannot contradict itself if it doesn't exist, like you claim, Trev.

    What a nut-job you are...



  9. #519
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again Apple7,
    Quote Originally Posted by Apple7 View Post
    Take a good look at the cracks in the foundation of your logic. How can The Trinity be a contradiction when you previously admitted that you don't even know what it is? Further, how can something that you claim does not even exist, be a contradiction?
    Nothing cannot contradict itself if it doesn't exist, like you claim, Trev.
    What a nut-job you are...
    You have not responded to the fact that the Scriptures state that Mary is the mother of Jesus. I am not sure of my own sanity, but you seem to be having some minor problems here, and you have used artless tactics to divert attention.
    Quote Originally Posted by Apple7 View Post
    The challenge put forth to you, that you completely and utterly ignored, was to show us the 'birth' verbs employed for YOU, verses HIM.
    Don't skirt the issue, as it will utterly destroy your theology...
    I am still waiting for this great revelation that “will utterly destroy my theology”.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  10. #520
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    No, it doesn't. That passage is as easily read with "and" linking both forms with equivalence.
    If you are attempting persuasion in earnest, you must recognize that "God and Christ" is not a statement that logically determines two beings.
    The distinction between God the Father and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ can be seen in the following:
    Acts 2:22–36 (KJV): 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. 25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: 26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
    Please note that an important reference here, is that Peter quotes and expounds Psalm 110:1, where it speaks of Jesus the Son of God being invited to sit down at the right hand of the One God His Father.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  11. #521
    Over 5000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    959
    Thanked 1,773 Times in 1,415 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    192344
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Greetings again The distinction between God the Father and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ can be seen in the following:
    Acts 2:22–36 (KJV): 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. 25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: 26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
    Please note that an important reference here, is that Peter quotes and expounds Psalm 110:1, where it speaks of Jesus the Son of God being invited to sit down at the right hand of the One God His Father.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
    That doesn't establish distinction in being. The use of different roles and in the keeping some concealment of those roles for a time brings with it the use of metaphor, or "speaking in the third person."

    I'll use an analogy. Imagine a scenario where the owner of a company sent a newly-hired assistant to go to one of his new factories and explain how things were to be run. The assistant has credentials in order and is chosen by the the owner with signed papers and everything. That which is not immediately revealed until the end is that the assistant is the owner, and by taking that guise he gets to see how they will react when they don't think they are being observed.

    But let's but a twist into this story. At the end when the assistant identifies himself, there is one person (or even a small group) that declare that there is only one owner for the company, and they know that the owner is called Owner, or Mr. Smith, therefore this "Jason" is not the Owner. As proof they point to the signed papers from the owner authorizing Jason the Assistant to act in his behalf as his representative. Nothing makes a dent in this belief, as they always point back to the SIGNED PAPERS FROM THE OWNER identifying Jason as his assistant from when he introduced himself to the factory foreman. "See? Incontrovertible proof... " and nothing from the Owners letters or lawyers and his official statements or from Jason will convince them otherwise.

    That's where we are right now. Do you at least understand why references to the promised Messiah as "my Holy One" and the like aren't being persuasive? Or why continually citing the names "Father" and "Son" fail to make your point? Concealment and metaphor are expected and thus are not those "proofs" that you think they are or want them to be.

  12. #522
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again Rosenritter,
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    That doesn't establish distinction in being. The use of different roles and in the keeping some concealment of those roles for a time brings with it the use of metaphor, or "speaking in the third person."
    Do you at least understand why references to the promised Messiah as "my Holy One" and the like aren't being persuasive? Or why continually citing the names "Father" and "Son" fail to make your point? Concealment and metaphor are expected and thus are not those "proofs" that you think they are or want them to be.
    I appreciate your attempt to explain your perspective, but I am not willing to agree with your view, neither willing to go down your path of thought on this. In response I will state my position. I believe that there is one being, One God, God the Father and he gave birth to and developed a son, the Son of God, a separate being, a man, our Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus has now been exalted and given immortality and is seated at the right hand of God. He is still a man, and God the Father is still the only One God.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  13. #523
    Over 5000 post club 6days's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,997
    Thanks
    1,080
    Thanked 4,075 Times in 2,426 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1826639
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    I believe that there is one being, One God, God the Father
    Yes there is one God...That is Scriptural
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    and he gave birth to and developed a son
    No... That is NOT scriptural

    Here is what Scripture says

    1.“The LORD our God, the LORD is one!” Dt 6:4 (God is one)

    2. “Our Father in Heaven…” Matt. 6:9 (The Father is God)

    3. “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form…” Col 2:9 (Jesus, the Son, is God)

    4. “…why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit?...You have not lied to man but to God!” Acts 5:3–4 (The Holy Spirit is God)

    5. “I (Jesus) came from the Father…” John 16:28 (The Father is not the Son)

    6. “I (Jesus) will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate to be with you forever — the Spirit of Truth.” John 14:16–17 (The Son is not the Spirit)

    7. “…the Spirit of Truth who goes out from the Father…” John 15:26 (The Spirit is not the Father)
    Without Genesis, absolutely nothing makes sense in all of Scripture.

  14. #524
    TOL Legend john w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Heavenly Places
    Posts
    18,628
    Thanks
    118
    Thanked 13,048 Times in 9,023 Posts

    Mentioned
    105 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147769
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Greetings again john w, I assume you are alluding to a concept that Trinitarians seek to impose on the OT in order to fit their theory. I doubt whether you have seriously considered this for yourself, but simply repeated what is generally held. I believe that the meaning of “echad” is “one”, revealing that there is One God, the Father, Yahweh. Do you really think that when Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, that Jesus is teaching the Trinity?
    Deuteronomy 6:4–5 (KJV): 4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: 5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

    Mark 12:28–34 (KJV): 28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? 29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. 32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: 33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. 34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

    I suggest that you have not properly considered Psalm 8:5.
    Did you read the summary that is given in Barnes’ Notes, available at Bible Hub? I could quote other Commentaries if this will help.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
    You're a moron, Trevor, not following others' points/argument. And, you're not a bible believer; thus, slower....I do not engage bible correctors, generally-only bible believers.

    I suggest you get saved, Christ rejector, as that fake "Jesus" of your mind, if not God, is not the "kinsman redeemer," and is in no position to buy back, save/deliver anyone.

    So there.
    Saint John W

  15. #525
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    14,517
    Thanks
    4,233
    Thanked 1,919 Times in 1,549 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    79 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    Yes there is one God...That is ScripturalNo... That is NOT scriptural

    Here is what Scripture says

    1.“The LORD our God, the LORD is one!” Dt 6:4 (God is one)

    2. “Our Father in Heaven…” Matt. 6:9 (The Father is God)

    3. “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form…” Col 2:9 (Jesus, the Son, is God)

    4. “…why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit?...You have not lied to man but to God!” Acts 5:3–4 (The Holy Spirit is God)

    5. “I (Jesus) came from the Father…” John 16:28 (The Father is not the Son)

    6. “I (Jesus) will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate to be with you forever — the Spirit of Truth.” John 14:16–17 (The Son is not the Spirit)

    7. “…the Spirit of Truth who goes out from the Father…” John 15:26 (The Spirit is not the Father)

    How do you reconcile your trinity with Jesus' word of His Father is the only true God?


    I know you cannot without twisting away like you just did in above post.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us