The Trinity: Was Athanasius Scripturally Right?

[Dogknox20]

Interesting you align yourself with the doctrine and not explaining the Bible.

I reply; "God is love" the scriptures tell us "God is Love"! To love perfectly, to have PERFECT love you cannot love yourself.... God is PERFECT!! Logic alone says; to perfectly love you need another, someone other, because "God is perfect love" he needs someone to love other then himself!!! If God always existed then the son had to always exist scriptures tell us God loves his son.. Jesus! If Jesus never was then God the PERFECT LOVE would not exist because God would not be perfect!

John 1 tells us "The word is God".. AND John 1 also tells us... "The word became flesh and dwelt among us"! Clearly from the scriptures; anyone with even half a brain would conclude God dwelt among us, that God became man/flesh! You would have to reject outright or twist and massage John 1 to make it say differently!

Luke 1 tells us Zechariah was a high priest.. Zechariah was charged with going into the Holy of Holies, all KNOW beyond all doubt Jews believe in ONE GOD and only one God! Zechariah the Jew believed in ONE God his wife Elizabeth must have believed in ONE and ONLY ONE God! All know in the Old Testament, the book of God' holy word; God is called LORD! Mary come to visit Elizabeth in Luke 1, Elizabeth greets her with these words "Mother of My God"! Elizabeth would be blaspheming and condemning herself because she proclaimed Mary's child "God" EVERY...
YoursTrue every place in the Gospel of Luke 1 the word "LORD" means God! You cannot switch the word "LORD" out of the chapter without taking the meaning away of God! Example... 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.” OR 46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

 

[YoursTrue]

I reply; "God is love" the scriptures tell us "God is Love"! To love perfectly, to have PERFECT love you cannot love yourself.... God is PERFECT!! Logic alone says; to perfectly love you need another, someone other, because "God is perfect love" he needs someone to love other then himself!!! If God always existed then the son had to always exist scriptures tell us God loves his son.. Jesus! If Jesus never was then God the PERFECT LOVE would not exist because God would not be perfect!

John 1 tells us "The word is God".. AND John 1 also tells us... "The word became flesh and dwelt among us"! Clearly from the scriptures; anyone with even half a brain would conclude God dwelt among us, that God became man/flesh! You would have to reject outright or twist and massage John 1 to make it say differently!

Luke 1 tells us Zechariah was a high priest.. Zechariah was charged with going into the Holy of Holies, all KNOW beyond all doubt Jews believe in ONE GOD and only one God! Zechariah the Jew believed in ONE God his wife Elizabeth must have believed in ONE and ONLY ONE God! All know in the Old Testament, the book of God' holy word; God is called LORD! Mary come to visit Elizabeth in Luke 1, Elizabeth greets her with these words "Mother of My God"! Elizabeth would be blaspheming and condemning herself because she proclaimed Mary's child "God" EVERY...
YoursTrue every place in the Gospel of Luke 1 the word "LORD" means God! You cannot switch the word "LORD" out of the chapter without taking the meaning away of God! Example... 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.” OR 46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

There is a history to that. Also, as you likely know, the Bible was not written in English, and the originals are no longer available. So scholars and translators must do the best they can in understanding what is available. God, being the highest source of wisdom, the Creator, wanted to express His love beyond his own person. The expression "God with us," does not mean that God-in-the-person-of-flesh was literally with mankind. I believe the following to be true, at John 1:18,
"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him."
Anything that might appear to be to the contrary must be taken in context and held to the light of understanding.

 

[firedragon]

There is a history to that. Also, as you likely know, the Bible was not written in English, and the originals are no longer available. So scholars and translators must do the best they can in understanding what is available.

The main work of the scholar is to provide the critical text ultimately for the translator to get on with his work. This is in reference to your statement. What I am interested in is to understand what is the relationship with this statement to what followed.

"The expression "God with us," does not mean that God-in-the-person-of-flesh was literally with mankind. I believe the following to be true, at John 1:18,
"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him."
Anything that might appear to be to the contrary must be taken in context and held to the light of understanding."

 

[sojourner]

You can't have a person in human flesh fully human and fully God. Period.

Obviously you can. The Church Fathers have known this for years. Seems you have a lot of catching up to do.

You're going to tell me that there's an ineffable quality to theology, therefore Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time?

Isn't that what I said?

Don't leave out that some believe he stayed God-in-the-flesh

I can't help what "some believe." Others believe other things. It isn't a crime.

I suggest you go to the scriptures.

I could while away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers,
Consulting with the rain;
And my head I'd be a scratchin'
While my thoughts are busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain.

You're the teacher. You don't know?

You're avoiding.

Interesting you align yourself with the doctrine and not explaining the Bible.

Interesting you align yourself against the doctrine when you haven't read it.

 

[firedragon]

Obviously you can. The Church Fathers have known this for years. Seems you have a lot of catching up to do.

You mean the church fathers believed. Known is your interpretation of their belief to affirm your own faith. You are making a faith statement.

And the whole discussion has been on how much the church fathers disagreed. Are you a trinitarian? If you are do you have any church father believing in the trinity as you believe prior to the 4th century?In fact didn't they believe different?

With all of this how could you say "they knew" as evidence to your faith claim?

 

[sojourner]

You mean the church fathers believed. Known is your interpretation of their belief to affirm your own faith. You are making a faith statement.

And the whole discussion has been on how much the church fathers disagreed. Are you a trinitarian? If you are do you have any church father believing in the trinity as you believe prior to the 4th century?In fact didn't they believe different?

With all of this how could you say "they knew" as evidence to your faith claim?

They wrote the doctrine. And yes, doctrines change, as do specific beliefs, over time. That's the way it's always been. The Church isn't a museum-piece, but an organic thing that grows and changes over time.

 

[Katzpur]

Katzpur I disagree with your words.... The Scriptures most definitely teach "Trinity"!!
The Great Commission...... "Go make disciples of all nations baptizing them in .. The Name of the father" ..Katzpur With the AUTHORITY of the father!
Katzpur When you speak in a persons name you are representing that very same person! You are thus speaking with their authority!
In the name of the Son.... "With the AUTHORITY of the son!" & In the name of the Holy Spirit..."With the Authority of the Holy Spirit"!

Jesus gave his One Holy Catholic Church the AUTHORITY to represent God! LOOK.... This verse comes just before in the Great Commission.. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples ........ Clearly Jesus is passing on the authority of God to his One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church! AND.......

Katzpur and just after Jesus gave all the authority of God to his Church he also said..... "Go and TEACH all nations"..... The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church TEACHES with the AUTHORITY of God "TRINITY"! WAIT.....
Katzpur wait.... There is more... Jesus finished the "Great Commission" with these words.... "I am with you ALWAYS to the end of time"! This means if you think Jesus' church failed you must reject the words of Jesus as a lie! You MUST reject Jesus is always with his holy body to the end of time! Jesus started with his church he built it on ROCK he is still to this day with his holy Church!

So go and make followers of all people in the world. Baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. 20 Teach them to obey everything that I have told you to do. You can be sure that I will be with you always. I will continue with you until the end of time.”

Just so that you understand me, Dogknox, I do believe in the Godhead. I believe that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all God. I just don't believe in the wording of the 4th and 5th century creeds.

 

[firedragon]

Just so that you understand me, Dogknox, I do believe in the Godhead. I believe that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all God. I just don't believe in the wording of the 4th and 5th century creeds.

You believe in the trinity but you just dont use the word trinity.

 

[SLPCCC]

I like people to find their own answers. Therefore I will tell you that there is nothing to say that Jehovah created Jesus as Michael the archangel. This does not mean that Michael is not another name for the Son of God. It's kind of like looking at the gospel account and seeing Jesus (not Michael) praying to God asking for help. First you have to read the scriptures. Then you need to pray for God's holy spirit to help you understand them.

You make me laugh. You have nothing to say because you can't come up with any real scriptural support. I think you have to be in denial about Jesus being equal with God in every way because you can lose your JW friends if you don't. You know they kick everybody out who disagrees with them. I'm surprised you still here. Most run away from debates they can't win. LOL Like the others who were here at the beginning. Once they saw that they were losing, they ran away faster then you can say Emoji! LOL

 

[metis]

There is simply no way that YHWH is translated as Lord. First get that straight.

Here, maybe this will cure your ignorance on the subject: Names of God in Judaism - Wikipedia

 

[metis]

Jesus isn't the right way of saying the name of God's SON. Give it up.

Neither is the word "God", so you're contradicting yourself. Words and names are translated from one language to another, so this really isn't rocket science, let me tell ya.

 

[YoursTrue]

Neither is the word "God", so you're contradicting yourself. Words and names are translated from one language to another, so this really isn't rocket science, let me tell ya.

Oh my! What a non-answer. Sad really. I can see how it works when someone just doesn't want to face facts or "the truth." No, sir, God is not translated as Jesus, Lord is not translated as Jesus, and there is no "J" sound in Hebrew either.

 

[YoursTrue]

You make me laugh. You have nothing to say because you can't come up with any real scriptural support. I think you have to be in denial about Jesus being equal with God in every way because you can lose your JW friends if you don't. You know they kick everybody out who disagrees with them. I'm surprised you still here. Most run away from debates they can't win. LOL Like the others who were here at the beginning. Once they saw that they were losing, they ran away faster then you can say Emoji! LOL

Let me ask you this question -- there are rather famous commentators who have said that Michael IS the Son of God. If I provide them for you, I'm assuming you'll make your own choice anyway. So learn to do the research in reference to your "questions." There is no way I would ever think that Jesus was God = to two other persons of a combination of persons comprising a "being" called God. Nope. Sorry, it just doesn't work. If it works for you, fine, enjoy it.

 

[Katzpur]

You believe in the trinity but you just dont use the word trinity.

I don't believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are "co-equal," for one thing. I believe the Father is greater than the Son -- just as the Son says is the case. There are other issues, too, so no, I don't believe in the Trinity. I believe in the Godhead, as it was understood in the 1st century and not the Trinity as it came to be taught in the 4th and 5th centuries.

 

[YoursTrue]

Neither is the word "God", so you're contradicting yourself. Words and names are translated from one language to another, so this really isn't rocket science, let me tell ya.

The word Lord is often used traditionally and misleadingly as a substitute for the tetragrammaton in many translations. Do you know what the Hebrew word for Lord is?

 

[firedragon]

I don't believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are "co-equal," for one thing. I believe the Father is greater than the Son -- just as the Son says is the case. There are other issues, too, so no, I don't believe in the Trinity. I believe in the Godhead, as it was understood in the 1st century and not the Trinity as it came to be taught in the 4th and 5th centuries.

Similar to Arianism.

 

[Katzpur]

Similar to Arianism.

In some ways.

 

[SLPCCC]

Let me ask you this question -- there are rather famous commentators who have said that Michael IS the Son of God. If I provide them for you, I'm assuming you'll make your own choice anyway. So learn to do the research in reference to your "questions." There is no way I would ever think that Jesus was God = to two other persons of a combination of persons comprising a "being" called God. Nope. Sorry, it just doesn't work. If it works for you, fine, enjoy it.

You can always find a Jehovah's witness apologist or one or two scholars who opposes, but it's what do the majority of neutral schalars say, historical records and the scriptures all on one is what counts. Jesus being Michael is an invention that comes from the Watchtower. You have to stop using the JW.org if you want historical and biblical facts. You saw yourself how they misquoted scholars in their literature when I compared their quotes to the actual quotes.

 

[firedragon]

In some ways.

You mean you're a JW?

 

[metis]

Oh my! What a non-answer. Sad really. I can see how it works when someone just doesn't want to face facts or "the truth." No, sir, God is not translated as Jesus, Lord is not translated as Jesus, and there is no "J" sound in Hebrew either.

My, how you manged to totally screw what I posted up.

I give up.