ECT Our triune God

geralduk

New member
Are you here to learn anything Lon? You have not covered all the possible interpretations for these scriptures.

All possible interpretaions of scripture?!
is it not written that "NO scriptures is for mans own private interpretation"?
How then can the church have a myriad possible interpreations?
Yet so it does .For this reason. That while there are many men who subject the scriptures to thier own wisdom and reasonings.Then you will have in consquence many interpretations and postion on this or that of scripture.
Yet is there not only ONe God? Is he divided? What then knoweth the things of man save the spirit that is in man?LIkewise then what knoweth the things of God save the Spirit of God who knoweth not only "the deep things of God" but also "the mind of God" The scriptures therefor that were writetn by men but inspired by the same Spirit of God and truth is also needed to understand what is written. For if He waneded to so to write so too then is he needed and in the same measure to undestand what is written.
Moreover in Ephesians it is written that God has given to HIS church "Apostles prophets pastors teachers etc for what purpose? For the perfecting of the BRIDE OF Christ unto we (believers ) all come to aunity of THE faith......." Now if faith cometh by undestyanding of the Word of God" It is clear then that to have aunity of the faith there must of nescesity be a untiy of understanding. Not then accordign to this or that interpretation nor indeed accordign to this or that 'school' of theology, But by that understanding and knowldge fo the truth that can only come if any man is willing to follow and therefore be led by HIm "who leadeth us into all truth" and by such mans we come to or arive at a knowldge of the truth.
Now Jesus said "when the Spirit of truth shall come he WILL lead us into all truth" How is it then there are so many interpreations and confusion and nmo settled understanding as to what the truth is?
Has not the Spirit come? This we cannot say for he has come and has been "poured out upon all flesh." Is he no longer leading?
That maybe a clue .Not that he is not leading or seekign to but rather men are nort following where he leadeth.But is rather outside the church knocking at the door.
Concernign the trinity of God then.We shold tread sofly and carefully for we are treading on most Holy Ground seekignot eneter as it were the most Holy place.For are we not in this matetr talking ior seekignto coemto some understanding of the nature of the Godhead? How then can we come to Him for understyanding and think by mANS wisdom we can "know Him who is from the beginning." Moreover if we would seek then we msut come Gods way not ours. Thus not only cant the unregenerated man see with blind eyes thatw hich can only bee seen with spiritual eyes.But neither can the carnal christian recive those things that re spiritualy discerned for the carnal mind cannot recive the things of God.
So Eeven as a new BORN child of God has entered into the tabrbnacle and knows the father and has thier sins for given. There is still the holy place. To be BORNagain is to eneter by that curtain to the palce of sacrafice and the blood shed. Here though ther is the natural light of the sun and the moon as it were.The Holy PLACE has no natural light at all. mans wisdom and reasoning are of no avail. The light in the Holy place COEMS FORM THE 7 BRANCHED lamp and the bread.Signyfying the Spirit and the Word. Thus here aman as of old must put off the old man and put on Christ wash hands ands feet.For who can ascend the hill of the Lord save he who has a pure heart and clean hands. Once entered he must not walk by sight but by faith.Not as ablind man but as one whos eyes of the understandign havign been opened seeks more light.The promise is "that to him who has more shall be given" The aproach then to this subject is very critical. if you get that wrong what you seek will be barred from you,.
These things then are not for interpretation.! but rather a willingnes sto learn .A meakness then .Moreover it needs Grace AND Mercy. fOR WE CANNOT OF OURSELVES do any thing . Yet even a s promised we can be led to green pastures and still waters and come to a place of contentment ansd peace on the matter.Not understanding all .For who can!? But rather in a measure at least coem to know Him who is from the beginning.
The Trinity of God therefore cannot be denied by any truly biblicly BORNagain believer.For they were BOR N or "begotten again by the will of the FATHER"bY jESUS CHRIST the SON BY THE HOLY GHOST! How then can any true child of God deny HIm who begat Him even as it is niot possible for any father to deny his son.Thus the saem Spirit fo truth that bares witnes with our spirit that we are children of God so to does he alsao bare witness to the truth concernign this matter also.Wether we can articulate thew truth iof it in any measure is nethier here nor there,Yet we are to coem to some undrstanding I believe. if only to the foothills of it.
I fear that though the cchurch knows of thier sins forgiven and indeed the father. They know more His acts than His ways.
and while most sem to be little children.There seem to be less "young men inw hom the word of God dwelleth richly and they have overcome the wicked one" Yet are we not so called? to such a high calling?
Moreover that is not the end either. But rather young men are to mature till they become fathers "who know Him who is from the beginning"
A young child knows thier father. they know he loves them and provides for them. They know also that he goes in and comes out.Yet do not know why and for what purpose.or indeed his work.
Much of the church today si liek that its me me me me
and always praying for my needs and pronvison and blessing.There is in some parts the idea that God is mans servant and all men have tio do is pray and ask and God will supply thier every WANT.
True it is that god has and does supply our every need but for what purpose? If not to do HIS WILL?In the outer courtt as it were where ther natutal eye and reasoning prevail. The n so is that attitude remains. But even as the secons curtain is after tjhe same pattern as the first so then are we called to climb alittle higher . and enter into a closer walk with God.
In the Holy place we come to understsand that God is not ourservant but we are here to serve God .That what we seena dnhear outside we are to pray and intercede inside that God may comfort us that we may comfort others. not only this but that we may see things as He ses it and with that comfort and strenegth we recive comfort those without or in need.
here the alter of incence must be always lit. even as we should and must always to pray.
It may be asked what has this to do with the trinity of God. More than you may think.
While men seek to subject the scriptures to the wisdom and the foolishness of man the whole world is spiralling to destruction and the Lord is coming soon.and the bride must get herself ready.
Even in this and the last days there is much contention and even theological seminars teach not the truth it seems but only this ones interpretation and anothers and all of them .Why is that? Do they not know the truth themseklves?
if not they are then teachjing error to teachers and the like who in turn will teach the same interpretations to others.
I am not interested at all in interpretations. I want the TRUTH!
 

meshak

BANNED
Banned
Agreed..as you always take time to express your view of the Trinity, not to be confused with other views that confuse or misrepresent it.

He is confused alright, he is confused that trinity is essential for salvation. All mainstream pastors and priests have to believe this corrupt faith to have their hired position.
 

OneGodInChrist

New member
JWs also deny that they are modern Arians (though they consider him in the truth), but they most certainly are in their Christology (but not in every other point).

I can't believe you just compared a fellow Pentecostal who has been baptized the way the apostles baptized (or we both agree, might have baptized), and has been filled with the Holy Ghost to a JW. And I just stuck up for you Trinitarians when a JW who knocked my door the other day bashed you guys:)
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
I can't believe you just compared a fellow Pentecostal who has been baptized the way the apostles baptized (or we both agree, might have baptized), and has been filled with the Holy Ghost to a JW. And I just stuck up for you Trinitarians when a JW who knocked my door the other day bashed you guys:)

I am NOT comparing UPC to JW. JW is a pseudo-Christian cult. UPC is sectarian, but I consider them Christian brothers with some error and legalism.

My point was that a JW does not think they are Arians, but they are.

A Oneness person does not think they are modalists, but they are.

I am not saying JWs and modalists are in equal error or that they are both cults.
 

Pierac

New member
:doh: I just 'gave' you the superiority complex link. Did it stop you? Nope, not even a tad. You haven't given me anything -why would you try? did you take Hebrew and Greek to start teaching the class now?

Okay, what part of -une, don't you understand? Stop and count to ten or something. The problem is simply this: You are jumping between two apparent contradictions and pitting the ideas against each other instead of grasping them both at the same time. That means it is 'your' problem, in your 'own little head' and 'your own shallow thinking' and not mine at all.

Okay, you are going to miss this I'll give you the bad news first: It is either because you 'can't learn' or that you 'don't want to' that you aren't going to get the answer.

The answer is rather simple:

"...was with and was God." Not only in John 1, not only in Philippians 2, not only in Colossians 1. There are many scriptures that say this about verbatim.


Again you post scripture with no explanation and I quote... "John 1, not only in Philippians 2, not only in Colossians 1." as if some how this magically proves your point! :think:

I can do the same, The answer is rather simple... Ecc 1:6 ; Deu 1:5 ; and Psa 1:2!

Wow, that was easy... just pick random verses and claim they make your point! So, that's how you teach? :think:


So allow me to expose just one of your posted scripture... Philippians 2

The whole context of the passage in Philippians 2 is about being humble, putting God's will and glory first, and serving others’ interest above one's own interest. Although he was in "the form of God" Jesus did not reckon his God-given status as something to be exploited.

This meaning contrast well with the conduct of Adam who unfortunately did consider equality with God anything to be grasped at. Adam wanted to be like God as Genesis 3:5 teaches. Adam tried to grasp at equality with God. But Jesus would not usurp God's authority for selfish advantage. He said, "I came to serve" (Matt. 20:28), not to snatch! At his arrest in the garden, he said, "Do you not think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than 12 legions of angels?" (Matthew 26:53). As the Messiah, God's appointed King, he had every right to call for divine protection. He "emptied himself" of all such Messianic privileges.

Therefore, it can be categorically stated that Philippians 2: 5-11 has nothing to do with Jesus Christ being God in a preexistence state. The importance is really very simple and very practical: how are Christians to conduct themselves in this world? Not by imitating the man Adam who forfeited everything by a grab for power and glory, but by imitating Jesus the Messiah (v.5) who through humility and obedience to God gained it all and more. After all, if Jesus was already God, then verses 9 to 11 are nonsensical. There is no "Therefore also God highly exalted him, and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth." If he was already God, he had this before his birth! No. It is clear that God has given him a new position, a new name (authority), and a new rank that he did not previously possess.

The Greek is very clear here: dio kai means (as in Luke 1:35) "for this reason precisely." Why has God exalted Jesus to His right hand? "Therefore, God has highly exalted him and given him the name above every other name because he is back where he was before as God"? Not at all! He is given the status as a reward for the precise reason that he humbled himself and died. His exalted status is a reward. If we follow the last Adam's pattern, we too will be exalted by God when Christ returns. It is evident, then, that "this hymn does not contained what numerous interpreters seek and find in it: an independent statement about preexistence or even a Christology preexistence… No preexistence of Christ before the world with an independent significance can be recognized even in Philippians 2.


The creed below is the creed of ALL Orthodox Christian Beliefs! All of them!

DEFINITION OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON (451 AD)

Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.


So pay close attention.... The Kenotic Doctrine of Philippians 2 claims that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus’ nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. So Lon... You cannot say that you believe in the Trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the Kenotic Doctrine, and use Philippians 2 as a support verse... (Like you just did!) then you have already rejected the Trinity. You cannot be both.

THAT'S HOW YOU TEACH LON!

Now, I did not say it would be "easy," I said it would be simple. Here is the question from this simple statement: How can something be with and at the same time be the same thing, at the same time?

Your answer? It can't. Yet God says it not only can, but is, right in front of your eyes, multiple times in scripture.

Now, I said the bad news is you probably won't get that, or admit it.
That means you are either stupid or unwilling, right? No other option.

The good news is you don't 'have' to fall into one of those 2. You get to fail by choice or listen to what is being said.

Clean up your mouth, start apologizing, and learn to listen before you speak (not gonna work, I almost guarantee this whole thing was a waste of both our time).


See the next post for a answer on this one... as its getting to long for the attention span of MOST corporation entertainment Church members to read!



What you need to teach are biblical truths, not human traditions that often are diametrically opposite from the teachings of the Scriptures. The fact is, you teach perversions — and are wrong.
:poly::sherlock:
Paul
 

Pierac

New member
Now, I did not say it would be "easy," I said it would be simple.

Here is the question from this simple statement: How can something be with and at the same time be the same thing, at the same time?

Your answer? It can't. Yet God says it not only can, but is, right in front of your eyes, multiple times in scripture.

This is why you fail Lon... You read scripture into your world view... rather than out of Hebraic teaching and history from which it was written! Pay attention, and you will see your simple statement over and over again in Hebrew teaching and history! Yet, not like you wanted it to say!

Agency

The foundation of our Bible is the OT. It contains the first three-quarters of our Bible. It stands to reason that if we misunderstand this Hebrew foundation then we construct a system of error. The art of successful reading is generally to let the last quarter of a book agree with the first three-quarters. As the grand finale of the Bible, the NT agrees with and is consistent with its OT heritage. It might sound like an over-simplification to say that the Bible is a Hebrew book and must be approached through "Hebrew eyes;" however, it was written within the culture and thought-forms of the Middle East. In order to understand its message we must become familiar with the thought-forms, the idioms, the culture and the customs of those who lived in Biblical times. Every sincere reader of the Bible understands this. Doing it is the challenge.

H. N. Snaith in his book, "The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament," writes "Christianity itself has tended to suffer from a translation out of the Prophets and into Plato." (p161) "Our position is that the reinterpretation of Biblical theology in terms of the ideas of the Greek philosophers has been both a widespread throughout the centuries and everywhere destructive to the essence of the Christian faith." (p187.). Snaith also makes this remark that if his "thesis" is correct: "then neither Catholic nor Protestant theology is based on Biblical theology. In each case we have a denomination of Christian theology by Greek thought We hold that there can be no right (theology) until we have come to a clear view of the distinctive ideas of both Old and New Testaments and their differences from the pagan ideas which have so largely dominated Christian thought." (p188.).

With the passing of many centuries since Scriptures were written much of the original intent has been buried under the accretions of generations of human tradition. According to Mr. Deuble a lot of Bible confusion can be cleared up by understanding "The Principle of Agency."

A common feature of the Hebrew Bible is the concept (some even call it the "law") of Jewish agency. All Old Testament scholars and commentators recognize that in Jewish custom whenever a superior commissioned an agent to act on his behalf, the agent was regarded as the person himself. This is well expressed in the Encyclopedia of the Jewish religion.
Thus in Hebrew custom whenever an agent was sent to act for his master it was as though that lord himself was acting and speaking. An equivalent in our culture to the Jewish custom of agency would be one who is authorized to act as Power of Attorney, or more strongly one who is given Enduring Power of Attorney. Such an agent has virtually unlimited powers to act on behalf of the one who appointed him.

Let's look at one of the stories in the Old Testament with this new mindset. In the story of Moses and the burning bush in Exodus 3, "who" is it who appears to Moses and talked to him? My answer once was typical of the vast majority in the Church. Of course it was God himself, Yahweh, who spoke to Moses. After all, the text states that "'God' called to him from the midst of the bush and 'said', 'Moses, Moses!'" (v4).
Verse 6 is even more convincing when the same speaker says, "'I am' the 'God' of your father, 'the God' of Abraham, 'the God' of Isaac, and 'the God' of Jacob.' Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at 'God'." Surely it was Jehovah God himself who appear to Moses and who personally spoke? But what do we make of verse 2 that prefaces this narrative by stating that "'the angel of the LORD' appeared" to Moses from the midst of the brush? Many scholars have declared this angel to be God himself, even the pre-existing Christ. They make much of the definitive article and point out that this was a particular angel not just any angel.
This is a fancy bit of footwork that disregards the Hebrew text as we shall see. If we turn to the New Testament's commentary on this incident, we will see how Hebrews understood their own Scriptures.

Let us now turn to answer our question: Who is it who appears to Moses and talks to him? The martyr Stephen was a man "filled with the Holy Spirit." Let's listen to his commentary on the burning bush incident. He clearly states that it was "an angel who appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning bush" (Acts 7:30) As Moses approached this phenomenon, "there came the voice of the Lord: I am the God of your father. The Lord said to him, 'Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground. (31-33).

Quite clearly this is an example of agency. It is an angel who appears to Moses and it is the angel who speaks. But note that this angel evens speaks for God in the first person. The angel of the Lord says, "I am God." The angel is distinguished from God yet identified with him. In Hebrew eyes, it is perfectly natural to consider the agent as the person himself. In Hebrew thought, homage given to God's agent or representative is homage ultimately given to God Himself.

Let's look at just one more example. In Acts 12, the apostle Peter is in jail about to be executed. But while he was asleep, "behold, an angel of the Lord suddenly appeared, and a light shone in the cell; and he struck Peter's side and roused him, saying, 'Get up quickly.' And his chains fell off his hands. And the angel said to him, 'Gird yourself and put on your sandals and follow me'" (Acts 12:7-8). Peter thought he was dreaming. As he followed the angel past the guards, out through the iron gate which "opened for them by itself," Peter "did not know what was being 'done by the "angel"' was real, but thought he was seeing a vision"(v.9).
Now the Church was meeting in a house and praying for Peter's release. Peter started banging on the house door and Rhoda, the servant girl went to open the door Once Peter was eventually inside you can imagine the stir in that place. Peter motions with his hand for everyone to be quiet. He told them his incredible story. And what did he say? "He described to them how 'the LORD' had led him out of prison" (v.17).

So who really did get Peter out of jail? The angel or the Lord? The text says both did. But we know that the Lord sent the angel to do the actual work. To the Hebrew mind, it was really the Lord who rescued Peter.

There are many such OT examples. An agent of God is actually referred to as God, or the Lord himself. In Genesis 31:11-13 Jacobs said to his wives, "'The angel' of God 'said' to me in a dream 'I am the God' of Bethel." Here is an angel speaking as though he was God Himself. He speaks in the first person: "I am the God of Bethel." Jacob was comfortable with this concept of agency.

In the next chapter, Jacob wrestled with "a man" until dawn, but he says he had "seen God face to face" (Gen 32:24-30). So was at this time when God appear to Jacob as a man? Perhaps as some have suggested it was actually the Lord Jesus himself, as the second member of the triune God, who wrestled with Jacob.

Not at all according to Hosea 12:3-4 which says, "As a man he [Jacob] struggled with God; he struggled with "the angel" and overcame him. So the one who is called both "a man" and "God" in Genesis is identified as an angel in Hosea. This is a perfect example of Jewish agency where the agent is considered as the principal.

There is another instance of agency in Exodus 7. God tells Moses he will make him "God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet" (Exodus 7:1). Moses is to stand before the king of Egypt with the full authority and backing of heaven itself. Then God says, By this you shall know that I am the LORD: behold, I will strike the water that is in the Nile with the staff that is in "My hand", and it shall be turned to blood" (v.17). But observe carefully that just two verses later the LORD says to Moses, "Say to Aaron, take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt that they may become blood" (v.19). God says He Himself will strike the waters with the staff in His own hand. Yet, it was Aaron's hand that actually held the rod. Aaron is standing as God's agent in the very place of God himself. There is identification of the agent with his Principle. In Biblical terms, Moses and Aaron are "God" (Heb. elohim) to Pharaoh!

Sometimes this concept of agency has caused the translators of our Bible difficulties. The Hebrew word for "God"(elohim) has a wide range of meanings. Depending on context, it can mean the Supreme Deity, or "a god" or "gods" or even "angels" or human "judges." This difficulty is reflected in verses like Exodus 21:6

The KJV reads "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges;"
The NIV reads "then his master must take him before the judges."
But
The NASB reads "then his master shall bring him to God"
So too the RSV "then his master shall bring him to God"

Clearly, because the judges of Israel represented God as His agents, they are called "God," elohim. As the slave gave his vow before these representatives of God, he was in fact making a binding vow before Jehovah. The agents were as God.

Another example that we have time for in this brief overview, is in Judges 6:11-22. "The angel of the LORD came and sat under the oak tree while Gideon was threshing wheat". As 'the angel of the LORD appeared to him,' he greeted Gideon with the words, "The LORD is with you, O valiant warrior." We can hear Gideon's disbelief when he says to the angel, "Oh my lord, if the LORD is with us, why then has all this happened to us?" Now notice a change in the text at Judges 6:14: "And the LORD looked at him and said, 'Go in this your strength and deliver Israel from the hand of Midian. Have not I sent you?" At this point Gideon murmurs and throws up excuses as to why he could not rescue Israel from their enemies. "But the LORD said to him, 'Surely I will be with you, and you shall defeat Midian as one man.'" Notice how the angel who is speaking on God's behalf actually uses the first person personal pronoun. And the text clearly says that when the angel looked at Gideon it was God himself who looked at him: And the LORD looked at him." Gideon is not confused regarding who he is looking at or who is speaking to him. For as "the angel of the LORD vanished from his site," he exclaimed, "I have seen the angel of the LORD face-to-face." (V.22). We know that the angel of the LORD is the agent and not literally God, because the Scriptures are absolutely clear that no one has ever seen God himself (John 1:18; 1 Tim 6:16; 1 John 4:12). Many scholars have failed to take this very Hebrew way of looking at things into account. They have literally identified the angel of the LORD with God Himself. All confusion is dissipated when we understand the Jewish law of agency: "a person's agent is regarded as the person himself."

There is one last very clear OT example of Hebrew Principle of Agency. It comes from Deuteronomy 29. Moses summons all of Israel and says to them, "You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh and all his servants and all his land; the great trials which your eyes have seen, those great signs and wonders" (v.2-3).

Moses continues to recite for the people all that God has done for them. But notice that in verse 6, while still reciting all God's wonders, Moses suddenly changes to the first person and says, "You have not eaten bread, nor have you drunk wine or strong drink, in order that you might know that I am the LORD your God." It is obvious that God himself is not personally speaking to the people. Moses is preaching. But Moses as the agent of God can speak as though he is the Lord himself. What is happening here? God is speaking through His man, His appointed representative. Therefore, he can move from speaking in the third person, "the LORD did this and that for you" to the first person: "I am the LORD your God doing this and that."

Knowing this principle helps us with other apparent difficulties, even seeming contradictions through the Scriptures. Lets look at one New Testament example. The story that has created a problem to many minds is the one concerning the healing of the Centurion's servant. In Matthew's account (Matt 8:5-13), it is the Centurion himself who comes to Jesus and begs him to heal his servant. The Centurion himself says, "Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering great pain" (v.6).

However, the parallel account in Luke (Luke 7:1-10) states that the Centurion did not personally go and speak to Jesus. He actually sent or commissioned as his agents "some Jewish elders." These Jewish elders pleaded with Jesus on behalf of the Centurion saying, "He is worthy for you to grant this to him; for he loves our nation, and it was he who built us our synagogue" (v.4-5)

So who actually went to Jesus here? Did these gospel writers get confused? Are the detractors perhaps right to say that the Bible is full of errors and contradictions? Not at all! The difficulty is cleared up when we understand the Hebrew mind behind these Scriptures. The answer to who actually stood before Jesus is the elders. They had been sent by the Centurion. Matthew in typical Hebrew idiom has the Centurion himself there and speaking in the first person before Jesus. The agent is as the principal himself.

Jesus claimed to represent God like no other before or after him. He claimed to be the unique spokesman for God his Father and to speak the ultimate words of God. He claimed to act in total accord and harmony with God like no other. He claimed to be the Son of God, the Christ or Messiah, and the agent of the Father. The NT claims that he who sees Jesus sees the Father. He who hears Jesus the Son hears the words of God Himself.

The New Testament puts this theory about the angel of the Lord being Jesus in his preexistence to rest in Hebrews 1: "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son" (v 1-2).
So, the Son of God "did not speak" in the Old Testament days! Back in those days God spoke in various ways and only in "portions," whether by vision or by prophet or by angel. It is only since Jesus Christ was brought into existence at birth and appeared "in these last days" that we have heard God speak "in his Son." This is axiomatic. Jesus Christ was not God's messenger before his appearance as a man, born of Mary in history. Look at the scriptures:

Act 7:53 you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it."

Gal 3:19 Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made.

Heb 2:2 For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty,


Now let's review one last example and look at Exodus 23:20-23. Notice 'my name is in him!' (agency)

"Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way ... Take ye heed of him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke him not (be not rebellious against him): for he will not pardon your transgression; for my name is in him" "But if you truly obey his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. "For My angel will go before you… (Exodus 23:20-23).

In this passage the angel was to be for Israel in the place of God; he was to speak God's words, and judge them. In fact the angel expressed God's name; he was God for them. Now if this was true of an angel of the Lord, how much more of the Son of God himself? Hence these sayings:

"This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent ... I (Jesus) have manifested thy name unto (the disciples) ... Holy Father, keep in thy name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one" (John 17:3,6,11).

"I and my Father are one" (John 10:30).

Jesus, then, enjoyed a unity of mind and Spirit with the Father, so that he could say, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9). For the disciples Jesus was in the place of God; he spoke God's words, proclaimed God's truth, and pronounced His judgements.

Hebrews 1:1 makes more sense now:
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world (ages).

[The Net bible adds… The temporal (ages) came to be used of the spatial (what exists in those time periods). See Heb_11:3 for the same usage.]

Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds (ages) were prepared by the word (ρημα G4487) of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Jesus had every right to claim to be God because God was in Him doing His works.

"Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which god performed through him in your midst" (Acts 2:22).


Paul

You fail to understand because scriptures NEVER teaches or says.... with and at the same time be the same thing! LON your quoting with your traditions of men... Not Scripture! :rolleyes:

Lon, I belong to no denomination, and support No Man's Agenda! Why do you? I'm part of the body of Christ, not men who let other men Lord over them! I will always make you look foolish when you post against me, with what others have told you to believe. Why do you let other (Men) fill the roll of the Christ in your life? :rolleyes:


:poly::sherlock:
Paul
 

Pierac

New member
:readthis::think:
We agree that Jesus is God, that the Holy Spirit's role is to point to Jesus... Jesus also glorifies His Father and lifts Him up. Since all 3 are God, it is right to worship each or the triune God. In Rev. 4-5, the Father and Lamb are worshipped equally. It is all redundant if it is just 'Jesus only'. The Spirit is the servant of the Godhead. The normative pattern is to pray to the Father in the name of Jesus. We can also ask Jesus anything in His name since He is also God.

The triune God is absolutely unified, so things about the Son apply to the Father, etc. However, there is also functional subordination with the Son turning all things to the Father that He may be all in all. If God is just Jesus, representing Father/Son/Spirit as personally distinct with clear language is a lie.

Did you read or even listen out loud to what you said to the traditions of men crap you just posted? :think:

Here... let's just pick this peace of crap comment apart and try to find scripture to support it!

The triune God is absolutely unified, so things about the Son apply to the Father, etc. However, there is also functional subordination with the Son turning all things to the Father that He may be all in all

I found no verse about the role of the Holy Spirit... to point to Jesus. Yet you post as if you got the Spirit down straight for us all! Wow, your good except not a single verse that says this... :think:

So what does scripture teach us about the Spirit? Let's look at actual scripture!


When reading in Exodus, I myself came upon the phrase "the finger of God." I was aware that the same phrase was used in the book of Luke regarding the method Jesus uses to cast out demons. I decided to do a phrase study using e-Sword. The following information is from my latest research.

Exo 8:19 Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, "This is the finger of God." But Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the LORD had said.
Exo 31:18 And he gave to Moses, when he had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.


Luk 11:14 Now he was casting out a demon that was mute. When the demon had gone out, the mute man spoke, and the people marveled. 15 But some of them said, "He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons," 16 while others, to test him, kept seeking from him a sign from heaven… Luk 11:20 But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
I had also come upon Scriptures that says Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God. This would strongly lead to the conclusion that the finger of God is the Spirit of God the Father.


Mat 12:22 Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, "Can this be the Son of David?" 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, "It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons."
Mat 12:28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.


When you connect Luke 11:20 with Matthew 12:28 then you get the understanding of what the finger of God is.
Luk 11:20 But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
Mat 12:28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.


Now the same is true with the Holy Spirit. We also have in the Bible two parallel teachings of the same subject one Matthew and one in Luke.

Luk 12:11 And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not be anxious about how you should defend yourself or what you should say, 12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say."

Mat 10:19 When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. 20 For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.


Likewise, when you connect to Matthew 10:20 with Luke 12:12 you get an understanding of what the Holy Spirit is. It is the Spirit of the Father. There is no separate being called the Holy Spirit. Again that's why the Holy Spirit is never worshiped, prayed to, or has a seat on a throne.



How many times do I have to show you this godrulz? :poly::sherlock:
Paul
 

Lon

Well-known member
This is why you fail Lon... You read scripture into your world view... rather than out of Hebraic teaching and history from which it was written! Pay attention, and you will see your simple statement over and over again in Hebrew teaching and history! Yet, not like you wanted it to say!
You fail.

Hmmm, so I'm following man....

Who are you following?

Why don't you realize your tongue has discreditted you from conversation about truth, godliness, and righteousness?


You fail to understand because scriptures NEVER teaches or says.... with and at the same time be the same thing! LON your quoting with your traditions of men... Not Scripture! :rolleyes:

You are trying to correct me with a log in your eye, like perversion is a virtue to be embraced. People unrepentent at all, as you are over this, are called what? What are we to do with them? I've repeatedly called you to renounce this but you will not.
So, look back up there, Paul. You chide me about following man (strawmen) but then want me to follow you? You want to be my guru? How does this even make sense in your brain? Try using it for a change and then realize most of us are also looking for a vituous soul. You slit your own theological neck~!

Lon, I belong to no denomination, and support No Man's Agenda! Why do you? I'm part of the body of Christ, not men who let other men Lord over them! I will always make you look foolish when you post against me, with what others have told you to believe. Why do you let other (Men) fill the roll of the Christ in your life? :rolleyes:


:poly::sherlock:
Paul

:doh: ...means it is your' problem...not mine....

...you are going to miss this... because you 'can't learn' or ...you 'don't want to...'
... guarantee this whole thing...a waste of both our time.
Repent. I haven't anything else to say to you.
 

Lon

Well-known member
The indwelling of the believer by the Spirit of God, reveals that Jesus is God.

Joh 14:16 Then I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you forever —
Joh 14:17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot accept, because it does not see him or know him. But you know him, because he resides with you and will be in you.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him and he with Me.

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?

1Co 3:16 Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?

Acts 5:3-4 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? "While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."
 

keypurr

Well-known member
I would guess than we only have to be sure that it is God knocking at our door.

Prove all things, that is what it says. No blind faith.

Peace
 

Apple7

New member
My last post on this thread...

"But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObXL8IlfyFk




Your theology of the Father being the Son being the Spirit does not have any scriptural support, brother.

Scripture clearly and plainly shows that they are not each other, as thus…


The Father is not the Son (John 3.17, 35; 5.22-23, 31-32; 8.16-18; 11.41-42; 12.28; 14.31; 17.1-26; Rom. 1.7; 1 Cor. 1.3; 15.24-28; 2 Cor. 1.2; Gal. 1.3; 4.4; Eph. 1.2; 6.23; Phil. 1.2; 1 Thess. 1.1; 2 Thess. 1.1-2; 1 Tim. 1.1-2; 2 Tim. 1.2; Tit. 1.4; Philemon 1.3; James 1.1; 2 Pet. 1.2; 1 John 4.10; 2 John 3)

The Father is not the Spirit (Mat 28.19; John 14.16, 15.26; Romans 8.26-27; Luke 3.21-22)

The Son is not the Spirit (Mat 28.19; John 14.16, 15.26, 16.7)
 

Pierac

New member
You fail.

You are trying to correct me with a log in your eye, like perversion is a virtue to be embraced. People unrepentent at all, as you are over this, are called what? What are we to do with them? I've repeatedly called you to renounce this but you will not.
So, look back up there, Paul. You chide me about following man (strawmen) but then want me to follow you? You want to be my guru? How does this even make sense in your brain? Try using it for a change and then realize most of us are also looking for a vituous soul. You slit your own theological neck~!

Repent. I haven't anything else to say to you.

Wow, not a single comment about how I ripped your Philippians 2 traditions of men support verse... you use to pieces! :doh:

I know it's hard for you... But try for at least one post to stop judging me personally and put forth some attempt to show how I'm using scripture wrong. (You know, like I do to you!) :rolleyes:


Lon, you have to at least start, before you can say your done! :doh:

Drop the traditions of men crap Lon... Try to actually face me head on without hiding behind the labeling of a person, just so you can dismiss them without debate! :rolleyes:

Your weak in true faith, as you fear... much!


1Jo 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.

You fear me... because I expose the traditions of men whom you follow! Your fear keeps you from being perfected in love!
:poly::sherlock:
Paul
 

Lon

Well-known member
Wow, not a single comment about how I ripped your Philippians 2 traditions of men support verse... you use to pieces! :doh:
This is the self-delusion thing again. I honestly don't have a rebuttal to delusion. It is a personal problem and only those closest to you can or could have helped. You have not clear self-assessment ability. You've done nothing you've thought you've done. Nothing, except for disgusted me and brought your faith and witness into question - for which you've yet to address. Seriously, aren't you ashamed at all? Not even an iota?

You can try and rip God's word apart all you like. That's between you and God and has nothing to do with me.

I know it's hard for you... But try for at least one post to stop judging me personally and put forth some attempt to show how I'm using scripture wrong. (You know, like I do to you!) :rolleyes:
Judging you? You judge yourself. I'd have apologized a long time ago and begged forgiveness and then would have probably dropped my log-in access for a year or two.

Lon, you have to at least start, before you can say your done! :doh:
I did. I asked for an apology.

Drop the traditions of men crap Lon... Try to actually face me head on without hiding behind the labeling of a person, just so you can dismiss them without debate! :rolleyes:
Anti-intellectual has never worked for me. Let's let that be your own special thing.
Your weak in true faith, as you fear... much!
1Jo 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.

You fear me... because I expose the traditions of men whom you follow! Your fear keeps you from being perfected in love!
:poly::sherlock:
Paul
This is self-granduer-delusional. I'm way beyond the need for a popularity contest. I'm not much of a follower. Traditional? Yes, but that doesn't mean I give or gave allegiance easily. No, you'd have to earn that.
You've lost a lot of ground since I've met you on TOL. Your trinity talk thread didn't even spark my interest the first time, let alone this third time I've seen 'advertising' for it. My thread wasn't really made to banter with you. We've gone a few rounds in arian's threads so you can hold on to those special memories.
I really can't help or fix delusional. It is a special thing all your own and for those selective few who know you. Your online acquaintances can't do anything for you. I can't do anything for you.
 
Last edited:

Seydlitz77

New member
Wow Lon that was some serious smack I'm impressed. :thumb:

Now I'm wondering if people will leave well enough alone and actually allow you true trinitarians to actually converse and support one another in this thread. :think:
 

Lon

Well-known member
A contribution from Wiley:
TO ALL,

Titus 2:13-14 is one of the clearest passages in scripture that teaches that Christ is God and Savior.

looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.

1. The verse EXPLICITLY says that Jesus Christ is our God and Savior.

2. It is EXPLICITLY stated that Jesus died to redeem us for Himself as His own special people. If Jesus is not God shouldn't He make us God's people instead of a people for "His own?"
 
Top