I agree too.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Trinity
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
I agree too.
SimpleMan77
New member
So what are you trying to say? Or is it sufficient to just muddy the water so it looks like you answered but your answer is ambiguous?
My point is that an occasional typo in a non-doctrinal issue (the name of a person credited for something, for example) doesn't call into question doctrinal teachings and examples that are corroborated by multiple mentions in scripture.
For example, if multiple scriptures referenced baptism in the titles "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost", then there was one mention of baptism in Jesus name, we could assume that the one mention MAY have been recorded in error.
However, because everyone in Acts was baptized in Jesus' name, by everyone from Peter to Paul, we can be sure that it was the way Jesus trained them to baptize.
If that leads us to the question "what about Matthew 28:19?", we have a few choices:
1. Typo - Jesus never said that
2. Disobedience - Jesus said it but disciples chose to disobey
3. Misunderstanding - the men Jesus trained for 3.5 years, 16 hrs a day got it wrong
4. The apostles obeyed Matthew 28:19 because the name of Jesus IS the name of the Father, the name of the Son, and the name of the Holy Ghost.
#4 is correct because the Bible reinforces that over and over. Colossians 2:9 is one such validation.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
SimpleMan77
New member
The Trinity
Jude 1:25
To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
Also, was God's word simply a revelation of himself? Did God's word become flesh? The word was God, and the word became flesh.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Most of us were taught that in Sunday school, but it is not the truth. Jesus is the Christ, not God. It is hard to see beyond what tradition has instilled in out minds friend,, here on TOL we share and explore what we see in the scriptures. As the Apostle Paul tells us, we have one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. May the Lord open our eyes to his truth and give us a deeper understanding of his words.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
Jude 1:25
To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
Also, was God's word simply a revelation of himself? Did God's word become flesh? The word was God, and the word became flesh.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Also, was God's word simply a revelation of himself? Did God's word become flesh? The word was God, and the word became flesh.
The "word" (LOGOS) refers to the "eternal life" that was Jesus Christ himself (1 John 1:1-2). Where it says "the word (LOGOS) became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1:14), it may be referring to the time after the resurrection when the risen Jesus revealed himself to the disciples as "flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39) and "ate and drank" with them before he ascended into heaven (Acts 10:40-42).
SimpleMan77
New member
The "word" (LOGOS) refers to the "eternal life" that was Jesus Christ himself (1 John 1:1-2). Where it says "the word (LOGOS) became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1:14), it may be referring to the time after the resurrection when the risen Jesus revealed himself to the disciples as "flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39) and "ate and drank" with them before he ascended into heaven (Acts 10:40-42).
John 1:1,2 is without controversy a deliberate connection to Genesis 1:1. John says that God made everything by His word, and that word was nothing less than a revelation of the will, purpose and power of God.
God then turned that revelation of his purpose and power into a man, in whom He dwelt without measure. God became man.
You can't deny that the logos of John 1:1 is a reference to God using His word to create the worlds.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
John 1:1,2 is without controversy a deliberate connection to Genesis 1:1. John says that God made everything by His word, and that word was nothing less than a revelation of the will, purpose and power of God.
You're assuming that "the beginning" must refer to the time of the Genesis creation which is contrary to the evidence of how Jesus and the writer of the 4th Gospel usually used the term. For example, Jesus often spoke of "the beginning" as the time when he was with his disciples during his public ministry (e.g. John 6:64; John 8:25; John 15:15; John 16:4).
A number of the other apostolic writers also identified "the beginning" as the time when the public ministry of Jesus "began" (Mark 1:1; Luke 1:2-3; Luke 3:23; Acts 1:21-22). Thus, it's not reasonable to insist the either John 1:1 or 1 John 1:1 must be referring all the way back to Genesis.
SimpleMan77
New member
You're assuming that "the beginning" must refer to the time of the Genesis creation which is contrary to the evidence of how Jesus and the writer of the 4th Gospel usually used the term. For example, Jesus often spoke of "the beginning" as the time when he was with his disciples during his public ministry (e.g. John 6:64; John 8:25; John 15:15; John 16:4).
A number of the other apostolic writers also identified "the beginning" as the time when the public ministry of Jesus "began" (Mark 1:1; Luke 1:2-3; Luke 3:23; Acts 1:21-22). Thus, it's not reasonable to insist the either John 1:1 or 1 John 1:1 must be referring all the way back to Genesis.
He references creation here, so it is without controversy referring to the same beginning that Genesis 1:1 is.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
He references creation here, so it is without controversy referring to the same beginning that Genesis 1:1 is.
Jesus wasn't with his disciples during the Genesis creation. That is silly. Moreover, John the baptizer could not have been "testifying about the light coming into the world" (John 1:7-9) when he didn't exist during the time of the Genesis creation either.
What you're missing is that the context of the Prologue is about the time when the apostles began to hear the preaching of John the baptizer and to follow Jesus. The allusions to the Genesis creation language are only by analogy. The "beginning" and the "word" and the "light" and the "darkness" throughout the 4th Gospel are actually referring to the circumstances of Jesus' public ministry.
SimpleMan77
New member
Jesus wasn't with his disciples during the Genesis creation. That is silly. Moreover, John the baptizer could not have been "testifying about the light coming into the world" (John 1:7-9) when he didn't exist during the time of the Genesis creation either.
What you're missing is that the context of the Prologue is about the time when the apostles began to hear the preaching of John the baptizer and to follow Jesus. The allusions to the Genesis creation language are only by analogy. The "beginning" and the "word" and the "light" and the "darkness" throughout the 4th Gospel are actually referring to the circumstances of Jesus' public ministry.
John 1:1-3
John
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things WERE MADE BY HIM; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
The it (the word) became a Him (according to John 1:14), so John is saying "all things were made by the word". There is no controversy here - "all things were made" is referring to creation. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
John 1:1-3
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things WERE MADE BY HIM; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
If you look further in the context of the Prologue, the writer explained what he meant by the "all things were made through him" (John 1:3). In John 1:17, the writer used the same language when he said "grace and truth WERE MADE BY Jesus Christ."
The it (the word) became a Him (according to John 1:14), so John is saying "all things were made by the word". There is no controversy here - "all things were made" is referring to creation. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".
You are misrepresenting the biblical text on several points. First, "all things were made" never refers to "creation" in the 4th Gospel. Second, the verb GINOMAI in John 1:3 doesn't not mean "to create" and does not appear in the text of Genesis 1:1. Third, the pronouns OUTOS and AUTOS do not mean "it" when they are used in a context that refers them to people.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL[/QUOTE]
SimpleMan77
New member
[/QUOTE]If you look further in the context of the Prologue, the writer explained what he meant by the "all things were made through him" (John 1:3). In John 1:17, the writer used the same language when he said "grace and truth WERE MADE BY Jesus Christ."
You are misrepresenting the biblical text on several points. First, "all things were made" never refers to "creation" in the 4th Gospel. Second, the verb GINOMAI in John 1:3 doesn't not mean "to create" and does not appear in the text of Genesis 1:1. Third, the pronouns OUTOS and AUTOS do not mean "it" when they are used in a context that refers them to people.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
You're simply arguing with scripture. All things were made by him - the Word who became flesh. Of course the pronouns are referring to Him. The it became a Him, no longer referred to as an it.
The verb GINOMAI was used in Matthew 8:13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done (GINOMAI) unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.
The power of creation in His word.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
My point is that an occasional typo in a non-doctrinal issue (the name of a person credited for something, for example) doesn't call into question doctrinal teachings and examples that are corroborated by multiple mentions in scripture.
For example, if multiple scriptures referenced baptism in the titles "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost", then there was one mention of baptism in Jesus name, we could assume that the one mention MAY have been recorded in error.
However, because everyone in Acts was baptized in Jesus' name, by everyone from Peter to Paul, we can be sure that it was the way Jesus trained them to baptize.
If that leads us to the question "what about Matthew 28:19?", we have a few choices:
1. Typo - Jesus never said that
2. Disobedience - Jesus said it but disciples chose to disobey
3. Misunderstanding - the men Jesus trained for 3.5 years, 16 hrs a day got it wrong
4. The apostles obeyed Matthew 28:19 because the name of Jesus IS the name of the Father, the name of the Son, and the name of the Holy Ghost.
#4 is correct because the Bible reinforces that over and over. Colossians 2:9 is one such validation.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Eusebius 4th Century Church Historian Proves Matthew 28:19 is Spurious.
The 4th Century Church Historian wrote a famous book called ""THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL"'
In 7 places Eusebius quotes Matthew 28:19 and NEVER includes the Trinitarian formula The Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
(1) Book III, Chapter 7, 136 (a-d), p. 157
(2) Book III, Chapter 6, 132 (a), p. 152
(3) Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159
(4) Book IX, Chapter 11, 445 (c), p. 175
(5) Book I, Chapter 3, 6 (a), p. 20
(6) Book I, Chapter 5, 9 (a), p. 24
(7) Book I, Chapter 6, 24 (c), p. 42
This is proof that sometime after the 4th century the gospels were being edited.
When the Roman Catholic Church was "keeper" of the NT Scriptures the Monks were monkeying with the text.
Jude 1:25
To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
Also, was God's word simply a revelation of himself? Did God's word become flesh? The word was God, and the word became flesh.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Jude 24-25New American Standard Bible (NASB)
24 Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, 25 to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.
In context, Jude mentions God and THEN he mentions Jesus. I think this passage is more of a proof text showing Jesus is NOT God.
I have one thank you, So who is the Master and Redeemer, the Messiah? What does that mean?
In the Jewish Talmud, "KINGS" the Messiah is a man and not a god.
One quick scripture.
Acts 5:3-4 New King James Version (NKJV)
3 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? 4 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.”
The Holy Spirit. Some observations.
How come the Holy Spirit doesn’t have a name?
God the son is named Jesus.
God the Father is named Yahweh.
So why no name for the Holy Spirit?
Compare the following verses.
Genesis 1:1-2
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
Psalm 33:6
6 By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,
And by the breath of His mouth all their host.
Notice the parallelism between the two verses.
Bt what is really interesting is that the word “Spirit” in Genesis 1:2 and the word “breath” in Psalm 33:6 are exactly the same word. Strong’s # 7307
The Spirit of God is nothing more than the breath of Yahweh.
Compare the following verses.
Matthew 12:28
28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
Luke 11:20
20 But if I cast out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
In these parallel verses the Holy Spirit is the finger of God.
Is the Holy Spirit God’s breath, or God’s finger ?
I think that the “no name” Holy Spirit is the “power” of God and not God.
John 1:1,2 is without controversy a deliberate connection to Genesis 1:1. John says that God made everything by His word, and that word was nothing less than a revelation of the will, purpose and power of God.
God then turned that revelation of his purpose and power into a man, in whom He dwelt without measure. God became man.
You can't deny that the logos of John 1:1 is a reference to God using His word to create the worlds.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
I do deny what you say.
Jesus is not God.
Jesus never claims to be God. He only claims to be the Messiah.
The overwhelming number of Trinity proof texts come from John's gospel and that gospel was written almost 100 years after Jesus walked the earth when the Trins were starting to promote their apostasy. But even then....John's gospel only says it was written to prove Jesus is the Messiah ...NOT God.
You're simply arguing with scripture. All things were made by him - the Word who became flesh. Of course the pronouns are referring to Him. The it became a Him, no longer referred to as an it.
The verb GINOMAI was used in Matthew 8:13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done (GINOMAI) unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.
The power of creation in His word.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL[/QUOTE]
Acts 2:22-24
22"Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--
23this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. 24"But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power
Peter makes it clear ...Jesus is a man....and God DID IT ALL
I do deny what you say.
Jesus is not God.
Jesus never claims to be God. He only claims to be the Messiah.
The overwhelming number of Trinity proof texts come from John's gospel and that gospel was written almost 100 years after Jesus walked the earth when the Trins were starting to promote their apostasy. But even then....John's gospel only says it was written to prove Jesus is the Messiah ...NOT God.
Good points. Moreover, most of the Trinity proof-texts come from a misunderstanding of the language in the 4th Gospel (beginning at John 1:1 and going all the way to John 20:28).
He references creation here, so it is without controversy referring to the same beginning that Genesis 1:1 is.
There is no reference to "creation" anywhere in the Prologue. If you look up "all things" throughout the 4th Gospel, you'll discover that it refers to what Jesus was given to disclose to the Jews during his public ministry (John 3:35; John 4:25; John 5:20; John 13:3; John 14:26; John 15:15).
You're simply arguing with scripture. All things were made by him - the Word who became flesh. Of course the pronouns are referring to Him. The it became a Him, no longer referred to as an it.
The verb GINOMAI was used in Matthew 8:13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done (GINOMAI) unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.
The power of creation in His word.
A "healing" is not a "creation." Your example from Matthew 8:13 shows tht GINOMAI doesn't refer to the origin of anything. It refers to something that happens with something that already exists. Please look at how the writer of the 4th Gospel used the same language in the context of the Prologue:
JOHN 1:3 ... "all things came (GINOMAI) through (DIA) him"
JOHN 1:17 .. "grace and truth came (GINOMAI) through (DIA) Jesus Christ."