1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Trinity???

Discussion in 'Interfaith Discussion' started by destinata7, May 26, 2004.

  1. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    destinata7 how can you possible think that Jesus is the Father and the Son. With all due respect how does this make sense to you??

    Jesus Christ is the Son of God as stated many many times in the bible but NOT ONCE does it state Jesus is the Father.
    Matthew
    3:17:...my beloved Son in whom
    4:3:...thou be the Son of God
    4:6...thou be the Son of God
    8:29...Jesus, thou Son of God
    14:33...of a truth thou art the Son of God
    17:5...my beloved Son in whom..
    26:63...Christ, the Son of God
    27:40...the Son of God
    27:43...I am the son of God
    27:54...this was the Son of God
    There are many more verses that state Jesus was the Son of God but not Jesus the Father. What verses are you reading? For I do believe and know that the early manuscripts have been corrupted through-out the ages by mankind? If you truely believe that Jesus Christ is the Father then I'm sorry to say this but you are living in idolotry. Neither would you know the true Jesus Christ but you wouldn't know God the Creator as well.

    I am aware of several verses in the bible that do say Jesus Christ is God but instead of taking this information at face value or rely on the sincerity of teachers one must truely study the verses to uncover the true meaning.

    A scripture using the word "God" when referring to Jesus Christ is Hebrews 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
    This is apparently a quotation from Psalms 45:6 where the words "God" refers to a man, a man in an exalted position, namely the king. The first three chapters of Hebreeeeews contain a discussion of Christ in the variety of roles he had and the titles he was given; "the brightness of his glory" "being made so much better then the angels" "the Apostle and High Priest of our profession" Every verse leading up to Hebrews 1:8 emphasizes the greatness of Christ thus the titlle of "God" is only a formal title used here to indicate his power and glory. Besides calling a person "God" is not that unique in Oriental usage. In the Bible there are three other specific instances i know of when the words "God" is used of a person. Jehovah called Moses a "god".
    Exodus: 7:1 And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaronn thy brother shall be thy prophet.
    In very common usage the judgeees of Israel were referred to as gods.
    Exodus 22:28 Thou shalt not revile the gods [the judges], nor curse the ruler of thy people.
    The children of the most high are also referred to as gods.
    Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High

    In parts of the east today a king's subjects and servantss would address the king as "lord" or as the "lord and god". A wife speaking of her husband would address in like manner. In the Old Testament Ruth addressed her husband Boaz as her lord. And the Hebrew word for "lord" is adon meaning "god as over-lord" or "headship" Thus Hebrews 1:8 shows Jesus Christ in an exalted position; NOT God the Creator.

    John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My lord and my God. This usuage here I've learned is a precison of a figure of speech called hendiadys which means "one by means of two" Whenever two words are used but only one idea intended, it is this figure hendiadys. One of the two words expresses the fact and the other intensifies it to the superlative degree, thus making the statement especially emphatic. So when Thomas says "My Lord and my God" he was observing the resurrected Christ as "my godly Lord". The word "lord" expresses the fact and the word "godly" intensifies "lord" to the superlative degree

    Another verse is Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The prince of Peace. The words "his name shall be exalted" means that this is the definition of his name. Like "and his name shall be called..." is another example the bible uses of the meaning of a name such as Jacob means "supplanter" and Sarah means "princess" so if Isaiah refers to Jesus Christ it simply tells us the meaning of his name. Not making him these.

    The bible states itself the reason it was written.
    John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. Scripture was written that we might believe he is the Son of God not that we might believe Jesus is God. Even God himself states that Jesus Christ was his Son.

    Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am pleaseed.
    Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
    Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
    and so on..
    John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
    John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ
    John 4:15; Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
    II John 3: Grace be with you, mercy and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.

    John 8 points out that Jesus Christ and God aree clearly two, not one.
    It is also written in your laww, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

    Even today at this time Jesus Christ is not God; he is in the heavenlies at the right hand of God.
    Mark 14:62, 16:19, Acts 7:55, Hebrews 1:3

    There are however some scriptures that say that Jesus Christ and his Father are one. John 10:30 I and my Father are one. but this doesn't indicate that Jesus was God but rather they had a unity of purpose, in a unified effort. "One" is the Greek word hen meaning one in purpose, neuter, not one person which would be heis, masculine.

    There is just too much evidence that indicates Jesus Christ is not God the Creator.
     
  2. Runt

    Runt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,833
    Ratings:
    +189
    How about this? God is the whole, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are MANIFESTATIONS or ASPECTS of God... kind of like I am Sasha... but I am also a daughter and a friend. Two very different aspects of one larger entity (me!) :)
     
  3. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Destinata7,

    I, too, am not afraid to go against popular opinion. I agree with some of your assertions and can prove what I am about to post with Bible. I don't need any other source to prove that Jesus is The Invisible God.

    • Jesus is the father
    • Jesus is the son
    • Jesus is the Holy Spirit
    • Jesus name baptism is the ONE baptism


    Duet. 32.8 had an idea that you were going to try and throw misinterpreted Bible out in your posts before you did. I guess I haven't been around long enough to see it coming and I really don't like being set up.
    I too would be very happy to show you with Bible only how you error. I have no new revelation of who God is. I have the Bible to tell me plainly who he is.
     
  4. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    Jesus is the father =DOES NOT MAKE SENSE
    Jesus is the son = cool
    Jesus is the Holy Spirit =DOES NOT MAKE SENSE
    Jesus name baptism is the ONE baptism=cool

    Jesus is the Invisible God= DOES NOT MAKE SENSE

    I'm curious though on what bible verses you base these statements from. Will you please explain?
     
  5. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hello, true blood

    I am not attempting to polarize myself or anyone else. I am merely trying to sort truth from rubbish and take away man's intellect from the Christian equation. Please consider the following as I have yours. As a matter of fact your post (being well articulated) has stirred the following results. Sorry in advance about the length. :wink:

    Son.
    a. The Son is not a distinct divine person but is
    the visible image of the invisible God
    (Colossians 1:13-15; Hebrews 1:1-3).
    b. The Son came into existence by the virgin conception
    (Luke 1:35; Galatians 4:4).
    c. The term refers to Christ’s humanity (Romans
    5:10), or sometimes to the union of deity and
    humanity (Matthew 26:64; Hebrews 1:8-9).
    d. It is never used in reference to deity alone,
    never used apart from the humanity of Christ.
    e. Conclusion: the term refers to God’s manifestation
    in flesh.
    3. “God the Son” is a nonbiblical phrase.
    4. Son of God.
    a. The title refers to Christ’s being literally begotten
    by God, not a human father.
    b. It also refers to Christ’s being God in flesh.
    “Son of” means “having the nature or character
    of.” As the unique Son of God, Jesus bore
    the very nature, or perfect likeness, of God
    (John 5:17-18; 10:33). This means He was
    God, for no one else can be perfectly like God
    or equal to Him. (See Isaiah 46:5, 9.)
    5. Son of man.
    a. The title refers to Christ as a perfect or archetypical
    human.
    b. It is also a Messianic allusion.
    6. The terms Word and Son are related but not
    equivalent.
    a. The Word is the eternal God that was manifested
    in the Son.
    b. The Son is the humanity; this term is limited to
    the Incarnation.
    D. The Begotten Son Versus the “Eternal Son”
    1. “Eternal Son” is a nonbiblical phrase.
    ––39––
    2. The beginning of the Son was at the Incarnation
    (Luke 1:35; Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 1:5).
    3. The ending of Sonship role will occur after the
    last judgment (I Corinthians 15:23-28; Ephesians
    5:27).
    a. There will be no more need for redemption or
    mediation.
    b. Christ’s glorified humanity will exist forever
    (Revelation 22:3-4).
    E. Purposes for the Son
    1. To provide salvation for fallen humanity, as the
    sacrificial lamb (propitiation), substitute, kinsman
    redeemer, reconciler, mediator, high priest,
    advocate, second Adam, and example of righteousness.
    a. To put away sin.
    b. To destroy the works of the devil.
    c. To prepare a church for His second coming.
    2. To reveal the Father, serving as apostle and
    prophet.
    3. To establish the Messianic kingdom on earth.
    4. To judge the world.
    F. Creation by the Son (Colossians 1:13-19; Hebrews 1:2)
    1. The One who later became the Son created the
    world.
    2. God created the world with the Son in view
    (depending upon the Son, “through” the Son).
    a. God knew that humans would sin.
    b. God also knew that redemption would be provided
    through the Son, and therefore His original
    purpose in creation would be fulfilled through
    the Son (I Peter 1:19-20; Revelation 13:8).
    3. Though God did not take on the humanity until
    the fullness of time, He acted upon it from before
    creation.
    ––40––
    G. Jesus as the Firstborn or First-begotten (Romans
    8:29; Colossians 1:18; Hebrews 1:6)
    1. He is the only person literally begotten by God.
    2. He was first in the plan of God. (See F-2.)
    3. He was the first person to conquer sin.
    4. He was the first person to conquer death.
    5. He is preeminent (like a firstborn son), the head
    of the church, the head of the human spiritual
    family.
    H. Conclusion about the Son of God
    1. The title of Son always has reference to Christ’s
    humanity, to the Incarnation.
    2. It always has reference to time.
    3. As God, Jesus had all power and knowledge; but
    as the Son (in His humanity), He was limited in
    power and knowledge.
    Scripture Memorization: Luke 1:35; Galatians 4:4
    Definition: Son



    Further Reference: David Bernard, “Oneness Christology,”
    in Symposium on Oneness Pentecostalism
    1986 (Hazelwood, Mo.: United Pentecostal Church
    International, 1986); David Bernard, “Jesus Christ,”
    in Doctrines of the Bible (Hazelwood, Mo.: Word
    Aflame Press, 1990).
     
  6. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,652
    ok... so how in the garden of Gethseminy(sp) did Jesus(son) Pray to himself(father), and get visited by himself(spirit) ?
    I'm glad he decided to be merciful to himself....

    wouldn't this sort of thing be more thought of as scitzo? :lol:

    wa:-do
     
  7. destinata7

    destinata7 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Ratings:
    +2
    First of all:

    Juble, I opened up this post titled "The Trinity???" making my intentions clear as to what this topic was about from the very beginning. It doesn't take a brain-child to figure out that I do not believe in the Trinity of the Nicean Creed. Yet you didn't see this coming? Are you even reading the same posts as I am? Once you find that my view does not match yours you repent that you felt sorry that Deut was persecuting me and you change your mind and cheer him on as though he was a divine prophet from the beginning (Deut, you saw this coming).

    Do me a favor and stick to debating my points by logic and scripture and don't try to turn this into a heretical "witch-burning" festival.

    Deut, sometimes your aggressive tone rubs me the wrong way....nevertheless, your presence on this forum is crucial to help some people make sure that what they post has been thought through very carefully. I personally think you go overboard, but I'm glad you're here none-the-less. I'm not posting this to get brownie points with you either...I know better than that.

    Runt, I don't have a problem with this last statement of yours: "God is the whole, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are MANIFESTATIONS or ASPECTS of God", but I call these aspects or manifestations "God-as-represented". The daughter and friend scenario in this case does not apply as in that Jesus and the Invisible God are not the same entity.

    Trueblood, as is so commonly the case, when you can't deal with the scriptures and points that I carefully laid out for you....you choose to simply ignore them and present your own.

    In regards to your statement:" If you truely believe that Jesus Christ is the Father then I'm sorry to say this but you are living in idolotry". What do you base this statement on? Jesus Christ clearly stated that He was the Father, but never once claimed to be the Invisible God. How can you ignore those scriptures?


    To Everyone:

    I have many, many scriptures to back up my beliefs in regards to the Trinity. I do not have the time to post them all at once....neither would it be feasible to read a post so long. Try to have patience for me to get to my replies. My job and my family need alot of my time and attention right now. Don't panic if I do not answer your questions or satatements immediately....this does not mean I do not have a response.

    My next major post will be called "Jesus is the Father" and Trueblood, you will have your scriptures then.

    In regards to your concern about the Bible referring to Jesus as God or the Son of God, here is a scripture for you:

    John 10:33-36
    The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. [34] Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? [35] If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; [36] Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

    This is a reference to the book of Psalms:

    Psalm 82:6
    I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

    The scribes decided when to capitalize or not, but this word "gods" is the same Hebrew word 'elohiym that was used in Genesis "God created the heaven and the earth". Check it out, it's the fourth word in the Bible. It seems pretty controversial that "ye are gods" does it not? It must have been important for Jesus Christ Himself to comment on it.


    Destinata7
     
  8. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Destinata7,
    1.) Point taken but, understand this; I agree that the topic of the 'Trinity" was clear however, your intentions were shrouded and in deed you were baiting.

    2.) I am familiar with opposition and did not switch gears because we disagree. I could not see why Deut. 32.8 would not let the Sabbath thing die until your revealing post was established. I guess I am trying to say I felt spammed. I stopped by this particular topic to discuss "The Trinity ???" and had the feeling I had stepped into a spam trap which I abhor.

    3.) It should be obvious that Deut. 32.8 and I do not agree.

    4.) I would never consort to throwing the proverbial first stone; nor would I set alight a witch as I am neither the judge nor the executioner. My beef was simply that I felt duped and I didn't/don't like it.
     
  9. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0


    How can God pray and still be God? By definition, God in His omnipotence has no need to pray,
    and in His oneness has no other to whom He can pray. If the prayers of Jesus prove there are two persons in the Godhead, then one of those persons is subordinate to the other and therefore not fully or truly God. What, then, is the explanation of the prayers of Christ? It can only be that the human nature of Jesus prayed to the eternal Spirit of God. The divine nature did not need help; only the human nature did. As Jesus said at the Garden of Gethsemane, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew26:41). Hebrews 5:7 makes it clear that Jesus needed to pray only during “the days of his flesh.” During the prayer at Gethsemane, the human will submitted itself to the divine will. Through prayer His human nature learned to submit and be obedient to the Spirit of God (Philippians 2:8; Hebrews 5:7-8). This was not a struggle between two divine wills, but a struggle between the human and divine wills in Jesus. As a man Jesus submitted Himself to and received strength from the Spirit of God. Some may object to this explanation, contending that it means Jesus prayed to Himself. However, we must realize that, unlike any other human being, Jesus had two perfect and complete natures—humanity and divinity. What would be absurd or impossible for an ordinary man is not so strange with Jesus. We do not say Jesus prayed to Himself, for that incorrectly implies Jesus had only one nature like ordinary men. Rather, we say the human nature of Jesus prayed to the divine Spirit of Jesus that dwelt in the man. The choice is simple. Either Jesus as God prayed to the Father or Jesus as man prayed to the Father. If the former were true, then we have a form of subordinationism or Arianism in which one person in the Godhead is inferior to, not co-equal with, another person in the Godhead. This contradicts the biblical concept of one God, the full deity of Jesus, and the omnipotence of God. If the second alternative is correct,
    and we believe that it is, then no distinction of persons in the Godhead exists. The only distinction is between humanity and divinity, not between God and God.

    Further Reference: David Bernard, “Oneness Christology,”
    in Symposium on Oneness Pentecostalism
    1986 (Hazelwood, Mo.: United Pentecostal Church
    International, 1986); David Bernard, “Jesus Christ,”
    in Doctrines of the Bible (Hazelwood, Mo.: Word
    Aflame Press, 1990).
     
  10. destinata7

    destinata7 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Ratings:
    +2
    Juble,

    This debate is getting very Deut-esque. I could just let your comments go, but I feel the need to clarify a few point so as to avoid the "heretical witch-burning" I spoke of.

    "I see now that you saw this blasphemous post from destinata7 coming from his first post and I did not. I also have to admit that I knew nothing about that particular heritical movement."


    In the light of the above quote in a post made by yourself let me review your last points:


    Destinata7,
    1.) Point taken but, understand this; I agree that the topic of the 'Trinity" was clear however, your intentions were shrouded and in deed you were baiting.


    What am I precisely baiting? For someone who might be interested in some of my viewpoints to go to a website whereby they may get more information on what I believe? What was it about my "Jesus is Not the Invisible God" post that suddenly revealed this to you? Is it not the content of that post that bothered you? If so, let us civilly address the points from that post that are troubling you specifically.

    2.) I am familiar with opposition and did not switch gears because we disagree. I could not see why Deut. 32.8 would not let the Sabbath thing die until your revealing post was established. I guess I am trying to say I felt spammed. I stopped by this particular topic to discuss "The Trinity ???" and had the feeling I had stepped into a spam trap which I abhor.

    Let me ask you this question: Do spammers usually take hours of their time to discuss issues on the site they are spamming? Making this acusation is not relevant to my points on the Trinity anyway!

    3.) It should be obvious that Deut. 32.8 and I do not agree.

    You agreed on Deut's harrassment of me.

    4.) I would never consort to throwing the proverbial first stone; nor would I set alight a witch as I am neither the judge nor the executioner. My beef was simply that I felt duped and I didn't/don't like it.

    Using the words "blasphemous" and "heretic" when speaking of someone sounds like you were throwing a proverbial stone. As to not being a "judge or executioner", your statement definitely had a "judgment" tone. I take exception to those types of attitudes toward people with alternate beliefs.

    By viewing some of your other posts it seems like you hold some intelligent views of the Bible. Can you please focus on those views and avoid making the type of statements as stated above.

    So, let us put this behind us and see if theres any form of christian forgiveness in ourselves. Give me some scriptures!


    Destinata7
     
  11. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Okay let us start then.
    I have addressed every single point you have made in the above post that you presented. I would ask you to thoroughly read them and respond with any questions you would like.

    My question to you is; who is the invisible God then?
     
  12. destinata7

    destinata7 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Ratings:
    +2


    I'm trying to see where you anwered all of my points (one through eight). You're not talking about the post you recently made how Jesus prays to Himself are you?
     
  13. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Jesus Christ is not the Ultimate Invisible God (Yahshadvah)

    I submit that He is. Consider:

    The Son is not a distinct divine person but is
    the visible image of the invisible God
    (Colossians 1:13-15; Hebrews 1:1-3).

    “God the Son” is a nonbiblical phrase.
    Son of God.
    a. The title refers to Christ’s being literally begotten
    by God, not a human father.
    b. It also refers to Christ’s being God in flesh.
    “Son of” means “having the nature or character
    of.” As the unique Son of God, Jesus bore
    the very nature, or perfect likeness, of God
    (John 5:17-18; 10:33). This means He was
    God, for no one else can be perfectly like God
    or equal to Him. (See Isaiah 46:5, 9.)

    1) Can God die? Even for one minute?

    No, God cannot die but, the body he made for himself can and did and rose again on the third day.

    Son of man.
    a. The title refers to Christ as a perfect or archetypical
    human.
    b. It is also a Messianic allusion.
    The terms Word and Son are related but not
    equivalent.
    a. The Word is the eternal God that was manifested
    in the Son.
    b. The Son is the humanity; this term is limited to
    the Incarnation.
    The Begotten Son Versus the “Eternal Son”
    “Eternal Son” is a nonbiblical phrase.

    The beginning of the Son was at the Incarnation
    (Luke 1:35; Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 1:5).
    The ending of Sonship role will occur after the
    last judgment (I Corinthians 15:23-28; Ephesians
    5:27).
    a. There will be no more need for redemption or
    mediation.
    b. Christ’s glorified humanity will exist forever
    (Revelation 22:3-4).
    Purposes for the Son
    To provide salvation for fallen humanity, as the
    sacrificial lamb (propitiation), substitute, kinsman
    redeemer, reconciler, mediator, high priest,
    advocate, second Adam, and example of righteousness.
    a. To put away sin.
    b. To destroy the works of the devil.
    c. To prepare a church for His second coming.
    To reveal the Father, serving as apostle and
    prophet.
    To establish the Messianic kingdom on earth.
    To judge the world.
    Creation by the Son (Colossians 1:13-19; Hebrews 1:2)
    The One who later became the Son created the
    world.
    God created the world with the Son in view
    (depending upon the Son, “through” the Son).
    a. God knew that humans would sin.
    b. God also knew that redemption would be provided
    through the Son, and therefore His original
    purpose in creation would be fulfilled through
    the Son (I Peter 1:19-20; Revelation 13: .
    Though God did not take on the humanity until
    the fullness of time, He acted upon it from before
    creation.

    2) Can God's "personalities" have conflicting wills?

    I Refer you to the Gethsemane post.

    3) Can God forsake Himself?


    No, God cannot forsake Himself. God cannot live with sin hence “the lamb that taketh away the sins of the world”. The sins were placed squarely on Jesus’ shoulders, God’s Spirit departs, Jesus (the man) dies and “It is finished”. God did not forsake Himself.


    4) Are we God?

    Only if you are a humanist in every sense of the term.

    5) Can God be "begotten"?

    Interesting question. I’ll start my reply with some questions for you; According to the Bible is there anything God is unable to do with the exception of sin? Did not Jesus profess to be God? Did not God say that His ways are far above ours? Did the Bible say that the Word became flesh? Did the Bible say that the Word was God?
    Yes God could place Himself in a body; just ask Ezekiel what things God is capable of doing.

    6) Can God "learn" to be obedient when He is omniscient (already knows everything)?

    Again I refer you to the Gethsemane post.

    7) Can God's mind be truly put into your human body? (Physical mind or spiritual mind...it doesn't matter for this point)

    Absolutely! When you have been obedient or submissive to His will and have separated your self from selfish desires/worldliness and seek a life of holiness then you are on your way. Acts2:38-39 is how this is accomplished according to the Holy Spirit who spake through Peter on Pentecost. Repent, be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sins, and receive the Holy Spirit (Comforter). The answer is absolutely yes.

    8.) James 1:13 says that God cannot be tempted with evil. Hebrews chapter two says that Jesus Christ was tempted just as we are tempted.

    Again, I have already mentioned the dual nature of Jesus during His Earthly ministry.


    PS My view of the Trinity is this:

    1) Jesus Christ is the Father and the Son

    This we agree on.

    2) Jesus Christ is not the Invisible God

    This we disagree on.

    3) The Holy Spirit is not the Invisible God or the Father in the sense that many people believe

    This we disagree on.

    4) Jesus Christ the Father/Son is our exclusive ambassador to the Invisible God

    Uh, no.



    I know you may already be preparing an answer but, on the outside chance you may have forgotten;

    My question to you still is; who is the invisible God then?


    Further Reference: David Bernard, “Oneness Christology,”
    in Symposium on Oneness Pentecostalism
    1986 (Hazelwood, Mo.: United Pentecostal Church
    International, 1986); David Bernard, “Jesus Christ,”
    in Doctrines of the Bible (Hazelwood, Mo.: Word
    Aflame Press, 1990).
     
  14. destinata7

    destinata7 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Ratings:
    +2
    I wrote the above eight questions to ascertain some of the stances of people viewing this forum. I agree with much of your philosophy as pertaining to the dual nature of Jesus Christ. Remember, I believe He is the Father and the Creator of this world. Here is a link to an article pertaining to the dual nature of Jesus called “The Jesus Twins”. www.soundtron.com/jesustwins.html

    However, there is substantial evidence in the Bible that Jesus the Father is not the Invisible God. He is our representation to the Invisible God and He is the best “image” of what the Invisible God personifies that exists in this Universe.

    Keep in mind also that the Invisible God has no form.

    "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature..."
    Colossians 1:15

    In this scripture Jesus is described as the image of the Invisible God. The word image means a copy or double of the original but is not the original. Therefore, Jesus, the only begotten Son is the representative or as "God represented" of the Invisible God.

    Why is the Invisible God invisible?

    The Invisible God cannot be bound or confined by a "rule of form". A rule of form is anything that can be seen or is in a physical state or physical body of existence. To put the Invisible God into a physical form would be to limit and confine the sheer limitlessness of Gods' Holy Essence.

    Solomon stated in 2 Chronicles 2:6:

    "Who is able to build him (God) a house, seeing the heaven of heavens cannot contain him?"

    Remember, the Bible says that "no man has seen God" yet Jesus said, "when you've seen me, you've seen the Father". No man has seen God(the Invisible) because the I-Am is Invisible and has no form. The Invisible God is pure love that is unlimited and cannot be contained in a mortal body in it's entirety.

    If you would like to know more about the Invisible God and my beliefs concerning I-AM, click on the link below and listen to a free audio download titled “Who is God?”

    www.soundtron.com/audio16.html


    I will give you further information regarding the Invisible God after I have finished posting the other points that I promised to cover.

    Destinata7
     
  15. completelyunbiased

    completelyunbiased New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +0
    This makes a lot of sense, destinata7. It irons out many of the contradictions I find with traditional 'trinity' beliefs.

    Consider 1 Tim 6:15, 16:

    "The blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortailty, dwelling in the light WHICH NO MAN HATH SEEN, nor can see to whom be honour and power everlasting."

    This verse also states that no man has seen God, and yet Jesus plainly states that he and the father are the same in John 14:9. It seems quite clear that the bible's authors understood the 'Invisible God', as Collosians 1:15 describes him, to be a completely different 'person' from Jesus (and therefore the Father). The titles 'King of kings' and 'Lord of lords' also seem to suggest the existence of a heavenly hierarchy.

    You've got my attention destinata7...
     
  16. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Okay, now I am really confused.
    Let me see if I'm tracking; the Father and the Son are one and the same but, neither of them is the Holy Spirit or the invisible God right? And the Holy Spirit also is not the invisible God right? Does this sum up your stance thus far?
    I need to know before I can fully respond.
     
  17. destinata7

    destinata7 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Ratings:
    +2
    As sunlight from the sun shines on the earth and gives it life, so is the Holy Spirit from the Invisible God which shines on us and through us and gives us life. Sunlight is from the sun, but technically not the sun. So is the Holy Spirit.

    Yes, I stated all of these points clearly in a previous post, but I will reiterate them for you:

    1) Jesus is the Father

    2) Jesus is the Son

    3) Jesus is not the Invisible God

    4) Jesus is not the Holy Spirit

    5) The Invisible God is not the Holy Spirit in the sense taught by Trinitarians

    5) Jesus is our Mediator and Spokesman to the Invisible God, the Way, the Truth, the Life, the Resurrection, the Creator, the Everlasting Father, the Image of the Invisible God..........

    You get the picture. Jesus is really, really, vitally important....but not the Invisible God.

    PS Since it is impossible for the Invisible God to look upon sin, our prayers go to I-Am's head hauncho.....you guessed it, the Father.
     
  18. Juble

    Juble Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +0
    Thanks for all of your extra effort in reiterating this. Just needed to be clear.

    Now then, a couple of questions for you; Have you ever seen a spirit? Unless your answer is yes then pray tell why is not the Holy Spirit the invisible God?
    You clearly have either avoided rebutting my posts or you have not considered them at all. The Bible is very clear that there is only One God. If you say Jesus/Father is not God then you call the Bible or Word of God a liar and if you say that they are God but, not the invisible God then you're saying there is more than one God (three if I have followed you correctly) and that is calling God and His word a liar as well.

    Why have you not answered, with a post, the question I have repeatedly posed?
    John 1:1 is crystal, 'in your face', undisputable and absolute truth as is the entire Word of God. If one portion of the Word were not true than the entire Christian faith is in vain.
     
  19. destinata7

    destinata7 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Ratings:
    +2
    "Thanks for all of your extra effort in reiterating this. Just needed to be clear.

    Now then, a couple of questions for you; Have you ever seen a spirit? Unless your answer is yes then pray tell why is not the Holy Spirit the invisible God?"

    This is a really weak and inconclusive point and heres why:

    1) As pointed out elsewhere on this forum, not having seen something does not make it God.

    2) The Holy Spirit appeared at the babtism of Jesus as a dove....you of all people should know the scriptures I am referring to:

    Matthew 3:16
    And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

    Luke 3:22
    And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

    John 1:32
    And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.


    3) Even if something else was invisible, that does not stand to logic that that would make all things invisible the Invisible God.


    "You clearly have either avoided rebutting my posts or you have not considered them at all. The Bible is very clear that there is only One God. If you say Jesus/Father is not God then you call the Bible or Word of God a liar and if you say that they are God but, not the invisible God then you're saying there is more than one God (three if I have followed you correctly) and that is calling God and His word a liar as well."

    You're not paying close attention to my posts, that is why I have to repeat. Nonetheless, I will gladly repeat previous points for you when required:

    John 10:33-36
    The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. [34] Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? [35] If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; [36] Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

    This is a reference to the book of Psalms:

    Psalm 82:6
    I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

    What was the purpose of that quote of Jesus from John? Was He afraid of being stoned, so He intentionly misled those He was speaking to? Or was He rather alluding to a great revelation of who we are?

    The scribes decided when to capitalize or not, but this word "gods" is the same Hebrew word 'elohiym that was used in Genesis "God created the heaven and the earth". Check it out, it's the fourth word in the Bible. It seems pretty controversial that "ye are gods" does it not? It must have been important for Jesus Christ Himself to comment on it.

    The Trinitarian belief seems at first blush to cover many scriptures about God in the Bible. It doesn't answer all the scriptures however and you still end up with more than one God(call it three expressions of God if you will, but how can God be limited to only three expressions and then why could these expressions not be separate entities?). The revelation that is missing here is the "God-as-represented" revelation.

    When one of the great prophets said, "Thus saith God to you my people" did that make them literally God or rather a mouthpiece or representative of God. In the Bible, the messengers of God are often mistaken to be God the I-AM.

    For instance, does not a king such as Pharoah get credit for building the Pyramids, when he probably did not lift one finger to do the actual work? Yet historians say "Pharoah built the pyramids". Because his slaves were doing the work from his direct orders, the credit goes to him.

    Later on someone could say, "The slaves were all Pharoahs" because history says that Pharoah built the pyramids. This however, would be technically wrong. This is part of the revelation of God-as-represented, theres more but that will suffice for this explanation.


    "Why have you not answered with a post my question I have asked you repeatedly?
    John 1:1 is crystal, 'in your face', undisputable and absolute truth."

    Juble, I'm sure that you and many people on this forum are aware that there are two different words used in John 1:1 that are both interpreted as "God". Theon and Theos: One is plural, and one is singular. The debate over translating both words to a singular God has waged for many, many years. Why was it important to use two words for God in the same scripture? Because there were two "expressions" of God being mentioned here.

    The only difference between what we are contending about the expressions of God is that you say these two expressions are actually one entity and I say that they are two (or more) entities.

    The Invisible God did not physically create this world persay, but I-AM still gets the credit just as Pharoah. I-AM commanded it to be done. The Elohim did create this world, that is why Elohim is used in Genesis chapter one. God-as-represented can easily be confused, hence the many names of God and his representatives were mostly translated into God or Lord.

    This will eventually lead us to discuss the Tetragrammaton, which we will address in a future post.

    Anxiously awaiting your reply, Juble.....and anyone else.
     
  20. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    36,698
    Ratings:
    +10,019
    Religion:
    Judaism
    No, Elohim reflects the remnants of the Canaanite mythology and nascent Israelite henotheism.

    Good. The Shasu are an intriguing element in Israelite ethnogenesis.
     
Loading...