A Roman Catholic on the Trinity

[rrobs]

The Roman Catholic writer Thomas Hart, in his book, To Know and Follow Jesus, commented on a couple of verses in Hebrews.

Heb 2:17,

Wherefore in all things it behoved him (Jesus) to be made like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
​

Heb 4:15,

For we have not an high priest (Jesus) which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.​

"The Chalcedonian formula [the council's decision declaring Jesus both God and man] makes genuine humanity impossible. The conciliar definition says that Jesus is true man. But if there are two natures in him, it is clear which will dominate. And Jesus becomes immediately very different from us. He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He knows the past, present, and future … He knows exactly what everyone is thinking and going to do. This is far from ordinary human experience. Jesus is tempted but cannot sin because he is God. What kind of temptation is this? It has little in common with the kinds of struggles we are familiar with."
​

Indeed, had Jesus known He was God he would not have been at all like the rest of us.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The Roman Catholic writer Thomas Hart, in his book, To Know and Follow Jesus, commented on a couple of verses in Hebrews.

Heb 2:17,

Wherefore in all things it behoved him (Jesus) to be made like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
​

Heb 4:15,

For we have not an high priest (Jesus) which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.​

"The Chalcedonian formula [the council's decision declaring Jesus both God and man] makes genuine humanity impossible. The conciliar definition says that Jesus is true man. But if there are two natures in him, it is clear which will dominate. And Jesus becomes immediately very different from us. He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He knows the past, present, and future … He knows exactly what everyone is thinking and going to do. This is far from ordinary human experience. Jesus is tempted but cannot sin because he is God. What kind of temptation is this? It has little in common with the kinds of struggles we are familiar with."
​

Indeed, had Jesus known He was God he would not have been at all like the rest of us.

He's an incarnation. Some religions dont differienate incarnations from the source.

 

[74x12]

The Roman Catholic writer Thomas Hart, in his book, To Know and Follow Jesus, commented on a couple of verses in Hebrews.

Heb 2:17,

Wherefore in all things it behoved him (Jesus) to be made like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
​

Heb 4:15,

For we have not an high priest (Jesus) which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.​

"The Chalcedonian formula [the council's decision declaring Jesus both God and man] makes genuine humanity impossible. The conciliar definition says that Jesus is true man. But if there are two natures in him, it is clear which will dominate. And Jesus becomes immediately very different from us. He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He knows the past, present, and future … He knows exactly what everyone is thinking and going to do. This is far from ordinary human experience. Jesus is tempted but cannot sin because he is God. What kind of temptation is this? It has little in common with the kinds of struggles we are familiar with."
​

Indeed, had Jesus known He was God he would not have been at all like the rest of us.

One problem with your idea is that Jesus cannot fail either way. He is the Word (John 1:1) and the Word cannot fail. It must always succeed. (Isaiah 55:11)

 

[David T]

Thus is actually one if the more well written Posts.. Usually its dr who meets monte python..

The whole topic god is extremely difficult. In the ancient world there came an extremely obscure story about exactly how difficult the topic actually is. Maybe you hace heard of it. It goes something like this.


The topic of god is so difficult, that god himself could come to earth gather close followers, they could see him raise the dead walk on water, feed thousands with one loaf of bread. The could follow him for 4 years day interacting with him yet inspite of all that, they really had no idea what he was really saying, and were quick to scurry into hiding in confusion the moment he was arrested and executed.



So i would like to know exactly how the calcadonian council who never walked one second with jesus years and years later after his death reading through the texts of those who claimed confusion themselves in person with him be so clear? What magic exactly is at work here with the council?

The intellect is a very funny and stupid thing its easily fooled by its own creations. . Jesus understood this very clearly.. That is unusual.

 

[rrobs]

One problem with your idea is that Jesus cannot fail either way. He is the Word (John 1:1) and the Word cannot fail. It must always succeed. (Isaiah 55:11)

Before going off into other verses on the trinity, how about addressing what Thomas Hart said. We can get to John 1:1 after that.

First of all, I'd like to point out it's Hart's idea, not mine. I happen to agree with what he said, but I've said nothing of my own thoughts on the subject just yet.

Were do you see he failed in his assertions regarding the verses in Hebrews?

 

[rrobs]

He's an incarnation. Some religions dont differienate incarnations from the source.

How about addressing the things Hart said about Hebrews before discussing incarnation.

I take it you do not agree with Hart. Where to you see he misunderstands the two verses from Hebrews?

 

[rrobs]

Thus is actually one if the more well written Posts.. Usually its dr who meets monte python..

The whole topic god is extremely difficult. In the ancient world there came an extremely obscure story about exactly how difficult the topic actually is. Maybe you hace heard of it. It goes something like this.

The topic of god is so difficult, that god himself could come to earth gather close followers, they could see him raise the dead walk on water, feed thousands with one loaf of bread. The could follow him for 4 years day interacting with him yet inspite of all that, they really had no idea what he was really saying, and were quick to scurry into hiding in confusion the moment he was arrested and executed.

So i would like to know exactly how the calcadonian council who never walked one second with jesus years and years later after his death reading through the texts of those who claimed confusion themselves in person with him be so clear? What magic exactly is at work here with the council?

The intellect is a very funny and stupid thing its easily fooled by its own creations. . Jesus understood this very clearly.. That is unusual.

I think the topic is difficult once Jesus is made to be God. If he is understood as the son of God and not God the son all the difficulty goes away. Few Christians are willing to even consider that Jesus is not God, so orthodox Christianity has indeed complicated things.

 

[74x12]

Before going off into other verses on the trinity, how about addressing what Thomas Hart said. We can get to John 1:1 after that.

First of all, I'd like to point out it's Hart's idea, not mine. I happen to agree with what he said, but I've said nothing of my own thoughts on the subject just yet.

Were do you see he failed in his assertions regarding the verses in Hebrews?

I'm not trinitarian; so I'm not defending the trinity doctrine. I just think your reasoning is wrong because whether or not Jesus is God; has no bearing on the fact He is the Word made flesh. (John 1:14)

I believe that Hart's ideas are flawed because he is not considering that Jesus(the Word) came to be the Savior; not of Himself, but of us. So God made it so that He could not fail. Because if Jesus failed; then He could not save us.

Isaiah 55:11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Jesus cannot fail because He is the Word made flesh and thus; He must accomplish the will of God. In fact Jesus claimed that heaven and earth may pass away but my words shall not pass away. (Matthew 24:35) So the things Jesus said are forever established more than heaven and earth. This proves Jesus could not fail.

 

[74x12]

I think the topic is difficult once Jesus is made to be God. If he is understood as the son of God and not God the son all the difficulty goes away. Few Christians are willing to even consider that Jesus is not God, so orthodox Christianity has indeed complicated things.

I agree about "God the Son" which is a term never once used in the whole scriptures. That's a trinitarian term about the so called "2nd person in the trinity".

But He is God. It's just that God is not a trinity. God is one person and the Son of God is God manifest in the flesh.

 

[rrobs]

I'm not trinitarian; so I'm not defending the trinity doctrine. I just think your reasoning is wrong because whether or not Jesus is God; has no bearing on the fact He is the Word made flesh. (John 1:14)

I believe that Hart's ideas are flawed because he is not considering that Jesus(the Word) came to be the Savior; not of Himself, but of us. So God made it so that He could not fail. Because if Jesus failed; then He could not save us.

Isaiah 55:11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Jesus cannot fail because He is the Word made flesh and thus; He must accomplish the will of God. In fact Jesus claimed that heaven and earth may pass away but my words shall not pass away. (Matthew 24:35) So the things Jesus said are forever established more than heaven and earth. This proves Jesus could not fail.

If you are right, the two verses in Hebrews that say Jesus was just like us are not true. He couldn't be anything like us if he couldn't fail and yet Hebrews says he was just like us.

John 1:14 says the logos became flesh. That didn't happen until many years after the beginning spoken of in John 1:1, so Jesus was not there in the beginning. There is more to the logos than simply substituting the word Jesus for it.

I'll start a thread specifically on the logos in the next few days.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How about addressing the things Hart said about Hebrews before discussing incarnation.

I take it you do not agree with Hart. Where to you see he misunderstands the two verses from Hebrews?

Its a simple statement:

1. Jesus is an incarnation
2. People do not differientate between incarnation and source

`1. Jesus as an incarnation is all throughout the NT
2. There are many denominations who dont differientate incarnation and source-not just The Church.

 

[74x12]

If you are right, the two verses in Hebrews that say Jesus was just like us are not true. He couldn't be anything like us if he couldn't fail and yet Hebrews says he was just like us.

John 1:14 says the logos became flesh. That didn't happen until many years after the beginning spoken of in John 1:1, so Jesus was not there in the beginning. There is more to the logos than simply substituting the word Jesus for it.

I'll start a thread specifically on the logos in the next few days.

I don't agree. He can face temptation in the flesh and yet be confident that He will not fail since He is the Word sent from God and must succeed.

The scriptures also claim that by Him all things were made. (John 1:3) And yet it says that God made the heavens by His Word, by the breath of His mouth. (Psalm 33:6) So, surely Jesus is the Word of God.

Besides your idea opens up a whole can of worms about the consequences of a failed Messiah. So hypothetically; if the Messiah failed and somehow He sinned; then what? There is no spotless Lamb for sacrifice. So, therefore no salvation for anyone. This alone should be enough reason to realize that God would not allow Jesus to fail.

Finally, Jesus' success was foreknown before the foundation of the world according to 1 Peter 1:19-20. Here we see that Jesus was as a Lamb unspotted and unblemished. That means He had no failing and no sin. And that this was known before the foundation of the world. That means it was already a sure thing. So we should take into account every jot and tittle of the scriptures so we can come to the correct view of the mystery of Jesus Christ.

 

[rrobs]

Its a simple statement:

1. Jesus is an incarnation
2. People do not differientate between incarnation and source

`1. Jesus as an incarnation is all throughout the NT
2. There are many denominations who dont differientate incarnation and source-not just The Church.

I really want to get people's comments on Hart's assertion instead of going off on a tangent. Hart didn't say anything about incarnation. It's not mentioned in the Bible either for that matter.

 

[rrobs]

I don't agree. He can face temptation in the flesh and yet be confident that He will not fail since He is the Word sent from God and must succeed.

The scriptures also claim that by Him all things were made. (John 1:3) And yet it says that God made the heavens by His Word, by the breath of His mouth. (Psalm 33:6) So, surely Jesus is the Word of God.

Besides your idea opens up a whole can of worms about the consequences of a failed Messiah. So hypothetically; if the Messiah failed and somehow He sinned; then what? There is no spotless Lamb for sacrifice. So, therefore no salvation for anyone. This alone should be enough reason to realize that God would not allow Jesus to fail.

Finally, Jesus' success was foreknown before the foundation of the world according to 1 Peter 1:19-20. Here we see that Jesus was as a Lamb unspotted and unblemished. That means He had no failing and no sin. And that this was known before the foundation of the world. That means it was already a sure thing. So we should take into account every jot and tittle of the scriptures so we can come to the correct view of the mystery of Jesus Christ.

Can you be tempted and know you can not fail? I trust you will answer that in the negative. So if you can fail but Jesus can't fail, how does that make Jesus just like you, as Hebrews clearly says he is.

Yes, Jesus started out without blemish (a result of the virgin birth). So did Adam. Adam lost it but Jesus didn't. He could have lost it by disobedience, but he, unlike Adam, chose to always to obey God and thus remained the sacrificial lamb without blemish which was required for our redemption. He had free will, just like the rest of us.

Had he failed we would still be waiting for redemption as you said. God did not force Jesus into sacrificing his life. Jesus even said he didn't want to die, but that, "not my will, but thine be done." Jesus had a choice in the matter, just like we all have a choice to follow God or not.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Incarnation just means something/someone made flesh. The nature of the flesh isnt mentioned. So, when the bible says jesus became a visible image of an invisible god, that, by definition, is an incarnation. Whether he is god or not, again, depends on the person. Some people cannot differienate the incarnation from the source (trinitarians) others can (non-trinitarians).

Wherefore in all things it behoved him (Jesus) to be made like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

He cant make the world unto anyone without any type of affiliation and influence from his father to do so. If jesus was human, he can die. His spirit will also be judged. His spirit can go either to hell or heaven (however defined) just like all other humans.

For we have not an high priest (Jesus) which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.

He was tempted but did not sin. We are tempted, and we do sin. You arent saved by your temptation but by the act of sinning itself. He is not liek all people.

"The Chalcedonian formula [the council's decision declaring Jesus both God and man] makes genuine humanity impossible.

The conciliar definition says that Jesus is true man. But if there are two natures in him, it is clear which will dominate.

And Jesus becomes immediately very different from us. He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He knows the past, present, and future … He knows exactly what everyone is thinking and going to do.

This is far from ordinary human experience. Jesus is tempted but cannot sin because he is God. What kind of temptation is this? It has little in common with the kinds of struggles we are familiar with."

Basically, I said the same above without yet reading it. Interesting.

Indeed, had Jesus known He was God he would not have been at all like the rest of us.

He knew he was the image of god/visible god/son of god/whatever phrase that states the relationship between source and subordiante.

Some people cannot tell the difference between incarnation and source. Others can. I agree with @74x12 In post #8. Does it matter?

 

[74x12]

Can you be tempted and know you can not fail? I trust you will answer that in the negative. So if you can fail but Jesus can't fail, how does that make Jesus just like you, as Hebrews clearly says he is.

I could be tempted and know I will not fail. That it is just a matter of faith. If God told me before hand that I would not fail and I would pass the test; that would make the test easier as long as I had faith in the promise. But it would not necessarily make the test easy. Easier is not necessarily easy. So, of course Jesus was severely tempted and had to live by faith as we. That is He had to trust the promises of God. I am sure Jesus knew the veiled meaning of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 69 among many other scriptures. Which predicted His crucifixion and triumph. So it was not hidden to Jesus that He would succeed. As long as Jesus understood the correct interpretation of the prophecies concerning Himself; then He had to know. But the test was continuing to believe the promises of God. As we know this was satan's temptation "If thou be the Son of God ..." So satan just wanted Him to doubt that He was who God had already said that He was.

Yes, Jesus started out without blemish (a result of the virgin birth). So did Adam. Adam lost it but Jesus didn't. He could have lost it by disobedience, but he, unlike Adam, chose to always to obey God and thus remained the sacrificial lamb without blemish which was required for our redemption. He had free will, just like the rest of us.

My point is that we see that 1 Peter 1:19-20 indicates His actual blood was foreknown from the foundation of the world. So it was apparent to God that Christ would succeed.

Had he failed we would still be waiting for redemption as you said. God did not force Jesus into sacrificing his life. Jesus even said he didn't want to die, but that, "not my will, but thine be done." Jesus had a choice in the matter, just like we all have a choice to follow God or not.

Sorry but I must disagree. The fact Jesus is the only Messiah is apparent from the things He claimed. Read John 10:1-15 This makes it clear that the Father knows Jesus as the "Good Shepherd" that gives His life for the Sheep and the Father knows Jesus as the Door of the sheepfold. All that came before were "thieves and liars". So they never were the true Messiah. Jesus is the only option. The only Chosen One. The only possible Savior.

 

[74x12]

Some people cannot tell the difference between incarnation and source. Others can. I agree with @74x12 In post #8. Does it matter?

Yes, I meant in context of the actual debate it doesn't make a difference.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes, I meant in context of the actual debate it doesn't make a difference.

Im confused

I'm not trinitarian; so I'm not defending the trinity doctrine. I just think your reasoning is wrong because whether or not Jesus is God; has no bearing on the fact He is the Word made flesh. (John 1:14)​

How can this mean anything else regardless the context?

 

[74x12]

Im confused

I'm not trinitarian; so I'm not defending the trinity doctrine. I just think your reasoning is wrong because whether or not Jesus is God; has no bearing on the fact He is the Word made flesh. (John 1:14)​

How can this mean anything else regardless the context?

His argument is that Jesus cannot be God because that means Jesus could not fail. So I was saying that the since Jesus is the Word; therefore we already know Jesus could not fail.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

His argument is that Jesus cannot be God because that means Jesus could not fail. So I was saying that the since Jesus is the Word; therefore we already know Jesus could not fail.

But thats true regardless if he is god (as defined in the OP) or not?