The Trinity The Touchstone of Truth

[Pancho Frijoles]

Why are you engaging in deception here? …you either ignorantly or intentionally…

What is your best guess?
Am I holding this position ignorantly or intentionally?
I hope you choose to believe I am holding this position in ignorance. There is hope for the ignorants within God’s love.
I think of myself as an ignorant.

 

[Peterlag]

Some thoughts on Thomas because he keeps being mentioned...

We have to remember that Thomas’ statement occurred in a moment of surprise and even perhaps shock. Thomas saw that what Jesus had said was true. The Father had worked in Jesus and raised him from the dead. Thomas, looking at the living Jesus, saw both Jesus and the God who raised him from the dead. It is also important to know that the early manuscripts of the Bible were written in all capital letters. That means that technically, both Elohim in Hebrew and Theosin Greek should always be translated “GOD,” in all capital letters. Since the biblical languages used the word “GOD” to refer to God, lesser divinities such as the Devil, angels, and demons, and also to rulers, judges, and people who represented God in some way, Bible readers are forced to use the context and scope of Scripture to determine whether the modern English translation should be “God,” “god,” or “gods.”

 

[dwight92070]

Yes, Pancho, I understand your point, but it's really a distinction without a difference, because even you recognize that God and the Father are One and the same.
I get what you're saying but, once again, John 1:1 shows us that God and Jesus are distinct - "the Word was with God" (hence your 200 verses) and yet they are both God - "the Word was God" (hence my verses).
But again, showing that God and Jesus are distinct is NOT the same as showing that they Jesus is not God, nor that they are two separate Beings.
Humanly speaking, which is the only way we can speak, the Trinity does not make sense. But it DOES present what we can glean from all of scripture, in my opinion.

I highly recommend the Bible teacher, Steve Gregg. He gave the following analogy:

A man from Colorado travels to the Pacific Ocean in California. He decides to bring a bucket of the ocean water back with him to Colorado. When he arrives, he asks a scientist friend of his to analyze his bucket of water, but doesn't tell him where he got it.
After a day or two, the scientist returns to his friend, carrying the bucket of water. "That's the ocean!" the scientist says, pointing to the water in the bucket.

Do you see the parallel? Jesus is like the water in the bucket, which came from the ocean, which is God. The water in the bucket is distinct from the Pacific ocean, that is they are separate, and yet the water in the bucket IS the ocean. Jesus said, "The Father is greater than I" (The Pacific Ocean is greater than the bucket of ocean water) but He also said, "I and the Father are One." (The water in the bucket and the ocean are one.)

Jesus said in John 16:27-28 "... for the Father Himself loves you; because you have loved Me and have believed that I came forth from the Father (the bucket of water came from the ocean). I came forth from the Father (the bucket of water came from the ocean) and have come into the world (that bucket of water came into the world); I am leaving the world again (that bucket of water left the world) and going to the Father. (that bucket of water is going back to the ocean).

 

[dwight92070]

What is your best guess?
Am I holding this position ignorantly or intentionally?
I hope you choose to believe I am holding this position in ignorance. There is hope for the ignorants within God’s love.
I think of myself as an ignorant.

I do choose to believe that and apart from God's grace, I too am ignorant. But do you agree that the words inserted by the author of Hebrews, changes the meaning entirely?

 

[Peterlag]

If the Apostle Thomas thought Jesus was God. Would he have not believed God could have gotten up from the dead?

 

[dwight92070]

He sure believed He was God when He appeared to Thomas, not only back from the dead, but still having holes in His hands and feet.
The issue was not that Thomas didn't believe that God COULD rise from the dead.
The issue was that he was unsure whether God ACTUALLY DID rise from the dead.
Remember there were several things that Jesus told His twelve apostles, that apparently God kept them from understanding, until after He was raised. In fact , one of them was the fact that He would rise from the dead. Mark 9:32 and Luke 9:45

 

[Peterlag]

He sure believed He was God when He appeared to Thomas, not only back from the dead, but still having holes in His hands and feet.
The issue was not that Thomas didn't believe that God COULD rise from the dead.
The issue was that he was unsure whether God ACTUALLY DID rise from the dead.
Remember there were several things that Jesus told His twelve apostles, that apparently God kept them from understanding, until after He was raised. In fact , one of them was the fact that He would rise from the dead. Mark 9:32 and Luke 9:45

We cannot approach the Bible with wisdom and “reason together” if we must invent and use non-biblical phrases to support our theology. The Bible calls Jesus the “Son” of God for the simple reason that he had a beginning. Jesus had been part of God’s plan since the foundation of the world, but he began his actual life when God “fathered” him and Mary conceived him in her womb. There are many verses where Jesus and God are portrayed as two separate beings and there are too many examples to list, but just to mention a few we can look at when Jesus told the rich young ruler that he was not good, but “God” was good. Also Jesus grew in favor with “God” and with men, and he told his disciples“ Believe in God; believe also in me."

I find it interesting that the Church Epistles were authored by both God and Christ and we see this in 1 Corinthians 1:3 that says “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” There's a lot of Scripture that shows Jesus to be separate and distinct from“God” which is what the people of the time believed and expected. The Trinitarian explanation of these verses is that Jesus is God and so“God” means “the Father” when Jesus speaks of himself and “God.” But the Bible never says that. It's only because Trinitarian doctrine asserts that Jesus is God that the assumption is made that “God” means “ the Father” when Jesus and God appear together.

 

[mikesw]

We cannot approach the Bible with wisdom and “reason together” if we must invent and use non-biblical phrases to support our theology. The Bible calls Jesus the “Son” of God for the simple reason that he had a beginning. Jesus had been part of God’s plan since the foundation of the world, but he began his actual life when God “fathered” him and Mary conceived him in her womb. There are many verses where Jesus and God are portrayed as two separate beings and there are too many examples to list, but just to mention a few we can look at when Jesus told the rich young ruler that he was not good, but “God” was good. Also Jesus grew in favor with “God” and with men, and he told his disciples“ Believe in God; believe also in me."

I find it interesting that the Church Epistles were authored by both God and Christ and we see this in 1 Corinthians 1:3 that says “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” There's a lot of Scripture that shows Jesus to be separate and distinct from“God” which is what the people of the time believed and expected. The Trinitarian explanation of these verses is that Jesus is God and so“God” means “the Father” when Jesus speaks of himself and “God.” But the Bible never says that. It's only because Trinitarian doctrine asserts that Jesus is God that the assumption is made that “God” means “ the Father” when Jesus and God appear together.

Finally at last, Peterlag's denial of the eternal divinity of Christ is brought to the forefront. He wishes to deny the many passages of Christ's equality with God even before his incarnation. Peterlag does this without sufficient argument against the passages about Christ coming from heaven to be among creation. Part of Peterlag's confusion is about Jesus being called God along with God the Father. For those who like to be informed by scripture, Christ Jesus is properly called God, as being part of the Trinity Godhead. However, Christ's incarnation provides a distinct identity of him as having been among humanity and now having a glorified body. Thus Paul refers to him by his title of Christ (Annointed one -- both as king and priest).
Arguments like Peterlag's were seemingly deficient 1600 years ago and the current argument demonstrates ways the arguments could be deficient despite all the effort of Peterlag to dismiss the passages speaking of Christ's eternal existence in the Godhead.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Yes, Pancho, I understand your point, but it's really a distinction without a difference, because even you recognize that God and the Father are One and the same.
I get what you're saying but, once again, John 1:1 shows us that God and Jesus are distinct - "the Word was with God" (hence your 200 verses) and yet they are both God - "the Word was God" (hence my verses).
But again, showing that God and Jesus are distinct is NOT the same as showing that they Jesus is not God, nor that they are two separate Beings.
Humanly speaking, which is the only way we can speak, the Trinity does not make sense. But it DOES present what we can glean from all of scripture, in my opinion.

I highly recommend the Bible teacher, Steve Gregg. He gave the following analogy:

A man from Colorado travels to the Pacific Ocean in California. He decides to bring a bucket of the ocean water back with him to Colorado. When he arrives, he asks a scientist friend of his to analyze his bucket of water, but doesn't tell him where he got it.
After a day or two, the scientist returns to his friend, carrying the bucket of water. "That's the ocean!" the scientist says, pointing to the water in the bucket.

Do you see the parallel? Jesus is like the water in the bucket, which came from the ocean, which is God. The water in the bucket is distinct from the Pacific ocean, that is they are separate, and yet the water in the bucket IS the ocean. Jesus said, "The Father is greater than I" (The Pacific Ocean is greater than the bucket of ocean water) but He also said, "I and the Father are One." (The water in the bucket and the ocean are one.)

Jesus said in John 16:27-28 "... for the Father Himself loves you; because you have loved Me and have believed that I came forth from the Father (the bucket of water came from the ocean). I came forth from the Father (the bucket of water came from the ocean) and have come into the world (that bucket of water came into the world); I am leaving the world again (that bucket of water left the world) and going to the Father. (that bucket of water is going back to the ocean).

I’m reading you, my friend.
I also see your point and appreciate that you can also see mine. I’m taking a break, having worked hard last week. But hopefully will reasume our conversation on Monday

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I do choose to believe that and apart from God's grace, I too am ignorant. But do you agree that the words inserted by the author of Hebrews, changes the meaning entirely?

Since the author of Hebrews is writing for the Hebrews, he is quoting the Tanakh, and I don't find in the Tanakh any evidence that God would worship the Messiah as God. We have no historical evidence that Hebrews, either at the time of Jesus or at the time the epistle was written, considered that God would worship the Messiah as God.
Besides, the author addressing the Hebrews, let us know in several other places that Jesus is not God. For example, the author presents Jesus as a High Priest, a Mediator before God. A high priest or Mediator could never be God in Hebrew's mind.

Then, how the author of the epistle could contradict himself?

That's why I believe that when the author states: "But to the Son He says..." he is directing us to the portion of the text in which God has anointed the Messiah, since the very meaning of Messiah is anointed.

Besides, please notice that the Messiah is placed at the level of other beings called "your companions". The author calls God "your God" (the God of Jesus). This goes in line with what we have been saying: that Jesus worships God, just as you and me. So Jesus can't be God by definition.


"therefore God, your God, anointed you
with the oil of gladness above your companions." (Psalm 45:7)

 

[Peterlag]

What Hebrew word did Thomas use? It was not YHWH, for "my YHWH" never appears in all of Scripture. The translators who translated the Gospels from Hebrew to Greek could not have been Jews for they made no difference in translating both YHWH and Elohim into "theos". Thomas obviously said "my Elohim" which means "my mighty one".

 

[dwight92070]

Since the author of Hebrews is writing for the Hebrews, he is quoting the Tanakh, and I don't find in the Tanakh any evidence that God would worship the Messiah as God. We have no historical evidence that Hebrews, either at the time of Jesus or at the time the epistle was written, considered that God would worship the Messiah as God.

[Dwight] Just because the Father calls the Son "God", that does not mean that He is worshiping Him. He is simply acknowledging the truth of who the Son is. Obviously, God is proud of His Son and He loves Him and He even seems to boast about Him - God says in at least two places in the New Testament that this is His beloved Son, in whom He is well-pleased. But none of that is worship on God's part. He does, however, command that the angels worship Him and that WE worship Him. Yet, ONLY GOD is to be worshiped.

[Dwight] "Exhibit O" God commands even the angels to worship His Son, and we too are commanded to worship Him Psalm 2:12. Yet from the beginning of Creation, ONLY GOD is to be worshiped. Therefore, Jesus is God.

Besides, the author addressing the Hebrews, let us know in several other places that Jesus is not God.

[Dwight] Really? Which verse is that that says Jesus is not God?

For example, the author presents Jesus as a High Priest, a Mediator before God. A high priest or Mediator could never be God in Hebrew's mind.

[Dwight] Isaiah 59:16 "And He saw that there was NO MAN, and was astonished that there was no one to intercede; THEN HIS OWN ARM BROUGHT SALVATION TO HIM, and HIS righteousness upheld Him."

[Dwight] God saw that we humans could not save ourselves, so He came to earth in the form of Jesus, to save us.
[Dwight] " ... God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself ..." 2 Corinthians 5:19

Then, how the author of the epistle could contradict himself?

[Dwight] There's no contradiction. God, in Christ, became His own mediator.

That's why I believe that when the author states: "But to the Son He says..." he is directing us to the portion of the text in which God has anointed the Messiah, since the very meaning of Messiah is anointed.

[Dwight] So if that were true, then you are conveniently skipping over all of Psalm 45, verse 6 and the first phrase of verse 7, which says:
6 -"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom." and 7 "You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;" (which is essentially the same as skipping over Hebrews 1:8 and the first phrase of verse 9) Sorry, but I can't let you ignore the part that you left out, which is the part where God calls His Son "GOD", both in Hebrews and in Psalms.

Besides, please notice that the Messiah is placed at the level of other beings called "your companions".

[Dwight] Once again, you LEFT OUT the KEY WORD that doesn't agree with your doctrine. The key word is "ABOVE". "Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness ABOVE Your companions." You disregard phrases, whole sentences, and words that don't fit into your doctrine. It appears to be a habit with you. We, in the body of Christ, are His companions, or as He put it, His brothers, His sisters, and His mother. He is ABOVE us, as far as God is above humans.

The author calls God "your God" (the God of Jesus). This goes in line with what we have been saying: that Jesus worships God, just as you and me. So Jesus can't be God by definition.

[Dwight] The Father - God - just called His Son "God" in Hebrews 1 verse 8, so how could anything in verse 9 about His anointing contradict that? It can't.
Also, we already know that Jesus has called the Father "My God" in John 20:17. Nothing new there. We have discussed that before. But since God called His Son "God", then your conclusion that Jesus can't be God goes DIRECTLY AGAINST the word of God Himself in Hebrews 1:8.


"therefore God, your God, anointed you
with the oil of gladness above your companions." (Psalm 45:7)

 

[dwight92070]

"Exhibit P" Jesus is not part of Creation. Revelation 5:13 does not include Him in "every created thing". In fact "every created thing" worships Him and God. Therefore the uncreated Jesus is God. He was created physically in Mary's womb, but His spirit is Eternal.

"Exhibit Q" Paul equates the Spirit of God with the Spirit of Christ in Romans 8:9 Therefore Jesus is God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

"Exhibit Q" Paul equates the Spirit of God with the Spirit of Christ in Romans 8:9 Therefore Jesus is God.

Hi dwight

The Spirit of God in Romans 8:9 does not refer to the Personhood or Being of God. It refers to the divine transformative power that make us live not according to the flesh but according to the life God's wants for us: the "life of the spirit".
The same applies to the spirit of Christ: following Christ is living in the life of the spirit, not the life of the flesh.
Paul is not talking about the Trinity, but of the life of the spirit vs the life of the flesh.

So, if you ask me "Do you have the spirit of Christ, Pancho?" I'm not going to interpret your question as asking if Yeshua of Nazareth is hosted in my house, but if I live according to Jesus' Gospel and example. Same if you ask me "Do you have the spirit of God, Pancho?" I will understand that you are asking if I love and obey God.


Please read the passage with me:

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace, for the carnal mind is hostile toward God, for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can it be,and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.​

​

You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. Now if any man does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. And if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is alive because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit that lives in you.​

​

Therefore, brothers, we are debtors not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if through the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.​

​

Indeed, in the same chapter, just few verses above (Rom 8:3), Paul says that God sent his Beloved Son. So, once again, for Paul, God and Jesus are two separate beings. God is the Sender. Jesus is who is sent. So Jesus is not God for Paul. ​

 

[Peterlag]

Hi dwight

The Spirit of God in Romans 8:9 does not refer to the Personhood or Being of God. It refers to the divine transformative power that make us live not according to the flesh but according to the life God's wants for us: the "life of the spirit".
The same applies to the spirit of Christ: following Christ is living in the life of the spirit, not the life of the flesh.
Paul is not talking about the Trinity, but of the life of the spirit vs the life of the flesh.

So, if you ask me "Do you have the spirit of Christ, Pancho?" I'm not going to interpret your question as asking if Yeshua of Nazareth is hosted in my house, but if I live according to Jesus' Gospel and example. Same if you ask me "Do you have the spirit of God, Pancho?" I will understand that you are asking if I love and obey God.


Please read the passage with me:

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace, for the carnal mind is hostile toward God, for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can it be,and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.​

​

You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. Now if any man does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. And if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is alive because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit that lives in you.​

​

Therefore, brothers, we are debtors not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if through the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.​

You will die because you only have flesh and no spirit because he's referring to those who are not yet born again. Just flesh. No spirit. He tells you that in the verse before. Just to make sure we are on the same page.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

"Exhibit P" Jesus is not part of Creation. Revelation 5:13 does not include Him in "every created thing". In fact "every created thing" worships Him and God. Therefore the uncreated Jesus is God. He was created physically in Mary's womb, but His spirit is Eternal.

In the vision, the 24 elders fall down before the Lamb, but they do not call the Lamb their God.
On the contrary, they thank the Lamb because He had redeemed them to God, and because The Lamb made them kings and priests unto their God.

So, the 24 elders have a God who is not the Lamb.

When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each one having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of saints. And they sang a new song, saying:​

​

“You are worthy to take the scroll,​

and to open its seals;​

for You were slain,​

and have redeemed us to God by Your blood​

out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,​

and have made us kings and priests unto our God;​

and we shall reign on the earth.”​

​

The power of the Lamb is something the Lamb deserves to receive, for what He has done. The power of God is something God has, because what He is. And He shares his power with anyone He pleases. ​

​

“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain,
to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength
and honor and glory and blessing!”

 

[dwight92070]

Hi dwight

The Spirit of God in Romans 8:9 does not refer to the Personhood or Being of God. It refers to the divine transformative power that make us live not according to the flesh but according to the life God's wants for us: the "life of the spirit".
The same applies to the spirit of Christ: following Christ is living in the life of the spirit, not the life of the flesh.
Paul is not talking about the Trinity, but of the life of the spirit vs the life of the flesh.

[Dwight] You are blatantly wrong. There is absolutlely NO indication that Paul is NOT referring to the "Personhood or the Being of God's Spirit" and the "Personhood or the Being" of the Spirit of Christ. Paul is telling us that they are equal because Jesus is God.

[Dwight] As I said early on in this thread, Paul uses "God" and "Christ" or "Jesus", interchangeably, and here is a perfect example. But instead of accepting the scripture at face value, you have to "explain" what it "really" is saying - when in fact you are squeezing the TRUTH right out of it. The Holy Spirit IS a person. Paul shows us here that sometimes He is called the Spirit of God and sometimes the Spirit of Christ.

Indeed, in the same chapter, just few verses above (Rom 8:3), Paul says that God sent his Beloved Son. So, once again, for Paul, God and Jesus are two separate beings. God is the Sender. Jesus is who is sent. So Jesus is not God for Paul. ​

[Dwight] No, NOT separate - distinct, but not different beings.

 

[synergy]

What Hebrew word did Thomas use? It was not YHWH, for "my YHWH" never appears in all of Scripture. The translators who translated the Gospels from Hebrew to Greek could not have been Jews for they made no difference in translating both YHWH and Elohim into "theos". Thomas obviously said "my Elohim" which means "my mighty one".

What word did Apostle John use to record Thomas' words? He used "Θεός" (Theos), not Elohim. Why do you even bring up the word "Elohim" You've been exposed as someone who thinks he knows better than what Apostle John actually wrote in the NT. That's the definition of a heretic. Are you going to run away again and keep hiding? I wouldn't be surprised at all if you keep running away from the truth as you always do.

Run Peterlag Run!

 

[dwight92070]

In the vision, the 24 elders fall down before the Lamb, but they do not call the Lamb their God.
On the contrary, they thank the Lamb because He had redeemed them to God, and because The Lamb made them kings and priests unto their God.

So, the 24 elders have a God who is not the Lamb.

When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each one having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of saints. And they sang a new song, saying:​

​

“You are worthy to take the scroll,​

and to open its seals;​

for You were slain,​

and have redeemed us to God by Your blood​

out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,​

and have made us kings and priests unto our God;​

and we shall reign on the earth.”​

​

The power of the Lamb is something the Lamb deserves to receive, for what He has done. The power of God is something God has, because what He is. And He shares his power with anyone He pleases. ​

​

“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain,
to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength
and honor and glory and blessing!”

You make some good points, but you ignore my point, that Revelation 5:13 makes it clear that the Lamb, Jesus, is an uncreated Being. If that's not true, then He would be worshiping the Father right along with all the rest of Creation - because it says "every created thing". So if Jesus was not created, we only have one other option - He is the Creator.

 

[mikesw]

Hi dwight

The Spirit of God in Romans 8:9 does not refer to the Personhood or Being of God. It refers to the divine transformative power that make us live not according to the flesh but according to the life God's wants for us: the "life of the spirit".
The same applies to the spirit of Christ: following Christ is living in the life of the spirit, not the life of the flesh.
Paul is not talking about the Trinity, but of the life of the spirit vs the life of the flesh.

So, if you ask me "Do you have the spirit of Christ, Pancho?" I'm not going to interpret your question as asking if Yeshua of Nazareth is hosted in my house, but if I live according to Jesus' Gospel and example. Same if you ask me "Do you have the spirit of God, Pancho?" I will understand that you are asking if I love and obey God.

You have not provided an alternate sense of what the spirit is. Essentially then you have not made an argument here. We see in verse 2 that the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made the Christian from the law of sin and death. That change cannot happen by people simply being influenced by the example of Christ's life. This is a situation where something outside of the person has changed them and set them free. How can this be other than the Spirit who is God?
All you seem to offer are proof texts that you think could make people deny the testimony of scripture.