The Trinity

[kjw47]

Nope. The styles, language, theological intents, etc. denote that the apostles did not "write" -- or dictate -- the gospels.

I guess then you are calling God a liar--his word teaches he inspired the words. And besides that it has already been proven they did write those books.

 

[sojourner]

I guess then you are calling God a liar--his word teaches he inspired the words. And besides that it has already been proven they did write those books.

This makes no sense at all. The authorship ascriptions came much later in the life of anonymously-written texts. Even if God inspired the texts, themselves, God certainly didn't ascribe authorship to them.

Show me the proof! In what way has it "already been proven" that the apostles wrote them? Because the facts are these: The earliest textual copies are anonymous, and the authorship references did not appear until much, much later. So, show me your "proof!"

 

[kjw47]

This makes no sense at all. The authorship ascriptions came much later in the life of anonymously-written texts. Even if God inspired the texts, themselves, God certainly didn't ascribe authorship to them.

Show me the proof! In what way has it "already been proven" that the apostles wrote them? Because the facts are these: The earliest textual copies are anonymous, and the authorship references did not appear until much, much later. So, show me your "proof!"

The proof is in this manner--- one of them was a physician, and there are views a physician would only describe it in such a manner, etc for each of the 4 books.--- None of the original texts exist. That is how Catholicism could infiltrate false council teachings into the translation of Gods written word making many errors trying to have a trinity god, but facts of history and Jesus' own teachings prove a trinity false.

 

[sojourner]

The proof is in this manner--- one of them was a physician, and there are views a physician would only describe it in such a manner, etc for each of the 4 books.--- None of the original texts exist. That is how Catholicism could infiltrate false council teachings into the translation of Gods written word making many errors trying to have a trinity god, but facts of history and Jesus' own teachings prove a trinity false.

First of all, "physician" meant something entirely different in the ancient world than it means now.
Second, "Catholicism" as we now know it didn't exist until well after the great councils, and until well after the earliest texts we now have.
Third, you've been reading waaaaay too many conspiracy theories.

Sorry. Your "proof" not proven. At all.

 

[Muffled]

Pray tell; what did God "source?" My information comes from peer-reviewed scholarship. That information is better than "the church says so," because it's better informed and less biased.

Howeveer I am not the church. When I speak God speaks and knows everything.

 

[sojourner]

Howeveer I am not the church. When I speak God speaks and knows everything.

Oh, so now you're a God-sanctioned prophet.

I see. "I get to say whatever comes into my head and claim 'God told me to say this.'"


Nice.

 

[CG Didymus]

The proof is in this manner--- one of them was a physician, and there are views a physician would only describe it in such a manner, etc for each of the 4 books.--- None of the original texts exist. That is how Catholicism could infiltrate false council teachings into the translation of Gods written word making many errors trying to have a trinity god, but facts of history and Jesus' own teachings prove a trinity false.

Ironically, I was told to watch out for JW's, that they messed with the text to make it say what they wanted, along lots of miscalculated dates for Jesus' return. But, other than that, you guys are all right by me.

 

[kjw47]

Ironically, I was told to watch out for JW's, that they messed with the text to make it say what they wanted, along lots of miscalculated dates for Jesus' return. But, other than that, you guys are all right by me.

I believe,The JW,s are the only religion on the planet that teaches what Jesus taught. Like this most important of teachings---

Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his(Jehovah) righteousness, and all these other things will be added.

Jesus pointed all to his God and Father in everything.

 

[sojourner]

I believe,The JW,s are the only religion on the planet that teaches what Jesus taught. Like this most important of teachings---

Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his(Jehovah) righteousness, and all these other things will be added.

Jesus pointed all to his God and Father in everything.

Correction: JWs teach what you believe Jesus taught.

 

[kjw47]

Correction: JWs teach what you believe Jesus taught.

sermon on the mount-- in every translation on the planet earth. Matt 6:33

 

[sojourner]

sermon on the mount-- in every translation on the planet earth. Matt 6:33

What does the sermon on the mount have to do with my post? Or with the Trinity?

 

[CG Didymus]

I was wondering. Who believes God has a physical body? No one, right? God is spirit. But, Jesus had a body and still has a body, right? The "gloried" body ate food and was felt by Thomas and then ascended into heaven, right? So if Jesus is God, then God has a physical body? Somehow I'm thinking all the verses that make it sound like Jesus is God are metaphorical or hyperbole. Or, if you insist he's God then fine, whatever.

 

[Katzpur]

I was wondering. Who believes God has a physical body? No one, right?

Wrong. Close to 15 million Mormons do.

God is spirit.

Yes, He is. But what do you believe that actually means? In other words, how would you define "spirit"? I would define it as the source of life. So, God is not an inanimate object, but a cognizant being, and more than that, He is the source of all life. Whether He does or does not have a physical body has no bearing on the fact that He is spirit.

But, Jesus had a body and still has a body, right? The "gloried" body ate food and was felt by Thomas and then ascended into heaven, right? So if Jesus is God, then God has a physical body?

Well, you're right about that. As a matter of fact, every time I hear someone say that (1) God is spirit, and that (2) Jesus is God, I feel inclined to mention this contradiction. At any rate, why couldn't the Father and the Son both have physical bodies housing their respective spirits? Jesus Christ was said to be "the express image of His Father's person." How much clearer would it have to be for people to be willing to believe it?

Somehow I'm thinking all the verses that make it sound like Jesus is God are metaphorical or hyperbole. Or, if you insist he's God then fine, whatever.

Well, admittedly, looking at the relationship between the Father and the Son from a trinitarian perspective does raise a few impossible-to-answer questions.

 

[Shermana]

I was wondering. Who believes God has a physical body? No one, right? God is spirit. But, Jesus had a body and still has a body, right? The "gloried" body ate food and was felt by Thomas and then ascended into heaven, right? So if Jesus is God, then God has a physical body? Somehow I'm thinking all the verses that make it sound like Jesus is God are metaphorical or hyperbole. Or, if you insist he's God then fine, whatever.

I believe the ancient Israelites most definitely believed God had a body, and this didn't change until centuries afterward by the Rabbinicists.

The argument that God's physical attributes such as having literal hands and feet which are purely "metaphorical" in the Torah is a much later development, and in my opinion, a total revisionist attempt to interpolate later Theology which was not at all the standard at the time. This is one aspect I believe Mormons have 100% right.

(Note: This would further imply that Jesus was NOT God).

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I believe the ancient Israelites most definitely believed God had a body, and this didn't change until centuries afterward by the Rabbinicists.

The argument that God's physical attributes such as having literal hands and feet which are purely "metaphorical" in the Torah is a much later development, and in my opinion, a total revisionist attempt to interpolate later Theology which was not at all the standard at the time. This is one aspect I believe Mormons have 100% right.

(Note: This would further imply that Jesus was NOT God).

It would explain verses such as "they have ears but do not hear" when speaking of idols.

However what do you make of this wiki entry?

In the oldest biblical literature (12th–11th centuries BCE) Yahweh is a typical ancient Near Eastern "divine warrior" who leads the heavenly army against Israel's enemies; he and Israel are bound by a covenant (a feature unique in ancient Near Eastern religion) under which Yahweh will protect Israel, and Israel in turn will not worship other gods.[3] At a later period Yahweh functioned as the dynastic cult (the god of the royal house),[4] the royal courts promoting him as the supreme god over all others in the pantheon, notably Baal, El, and Asherah (the last of whom may have been his consort).[5] Over time Yahwism became increasingly intolerant of rivals, and the royal court and temple promoted Yahweh as God of the entire cosmos, possessing all the positive qualities previously attributed to the other gods and goddesses.[4][5] With the work of Second Isaiah (the theoretical author of the second part of the Book of Isaiah) towards the end of the Babylonian exile (6th century BCE), the very existence of foreign gods was denied, and Yahweh was proclaimed as the creator of the cosmos and true God of all the world.[5]

 

[CG Didymus]

Wrong. Close to 15 million Mormons do.

Yes, He is. But what do you believe that actually means? In other words, how would you define "spirit"? I would define it as the source of life...
...Well, admittedly, looking at the relationship between the Father and the Son from a trinitarian perspective does raise a few impossible-to-answer questions

I only know what I've been told. The Invisible God, The Great Spirit in the Sky etc. God is outside of time and space and is omnipresent. What I've felt as being God was dependent on what I believed at the time, but generally it was a all-loving spiritual presence. It felt good and it felt real, but who and what God is was defined different by each religion I tried. So for Mormons, what is Jesus doing? Is he floating around space in his glorified body waiting to return to Earth?

 

[CG Didymus]

I believe the ancient Israelites most definitely believed God had a body, and this didn't change until centuries afterward by the Rabbinicists.

The argument that God's physical attributes such as having literal hands and feet which are purely "metaphorical" in the Torah is a much later development, and in my opinion, a total revisionist attempt to interpolate later Theology which was not at all the standard at the time. This is one aspect I believe Mormons have 100% right.

(Note: This would further imply that Jesus was NOT God).

Then who is he and what is he? He's more than a prophet, but not quite God? Or, was there a lot of things attributed to him that made him God-like?

 

[Shermana]

Then who is he and what is he? He's more than a prophet, but not quite God? Or, was there a lot of things attributed to him that made him God-like?

In my interpretation and what I think the earliest Christians most likely believed, he was the incarnation of the First Created Celestial Being, Wisdom Incarnated. This would make him the Highest of the "Angels" (lesser "gods"), the Second in Command of the Heavens. See Philo's essay on the Logos.

Keep in mind that he does call himself a prophet.

 

[Katzpur]

So for Mormons, what is Jesus doing? Is he floating around space in his glorified body waiting to return to Earth?

I don't believe He's floating around anywhere. As we read in Acts, Stephen "...being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God." Stephen himself concurs, "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God." For starters, it would have been impossible for Stephen to denote any kind of a spatial relationship relationship between two individuals had one one them been invisible. As to what He's doing now, specifically, I suppose He would be "about His Father's business" as has been the case since the beginning.

 

[vtunie]

Faith, hope and charity; wisdom, love, and the word; father, son, holy ghost. Threes.

Wisdom. Life. God. Ones.

All the rest is theobabble if used not to love and unify but to condemn and disjoin.