Your Views on The Trinity
- Thread starter Cyrus
- Start date
civic
Well-known member
Unless he has a different definition than the accepted orthodox definition.
7xLightray
Member
I Repeatedly texted this thought over, and over again "Jesus shows He cannot be the only true God that sent, for Jesus said He did not send Himself, or come of His own accord."
And it's not clear!? It's not clear that I do not believe in the Trinity, Here is just one post..
And it's not clear!? It's not clear that I do not believe in the Trinity, Here is just one post..
Post #20..
"I believe "Trinity" is in the Bible; Truly, a Trinitarian does not know who they worship, but that's for the book of Revelation.
No one in 2,000 years has be able to solve this riddle of the Trinity. In fact, it is in one of their own documents (The Athanasian Creed) as to why they can't say 3 Gods, or 3 Lords, because they are "forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords." They recognize the problem, but that's the only reason given, you are forbidden. Trinitarians follow that to the T. And yet, Trinitarians accuse Oneness of being illogical for their doctrine of the Father and Son being the same person. That's a thief, stealing Justice from one another.
Following the doctrines of the forefathers who turned quickly.
Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me, then up rises the beast. That happened a long, long, time ago. If you wish to understand these things, I can explain. [No one cared to ask]
If one wishes to come to the truth to overcome the world, one will have to come to this doctrine (else one does not have God, and still in one's sins); To overcome, one needs to believe Jesus is God's son, only literal son, which the Trinity; Oneness; Unitarian; J.W.; and like such, deny, deny a true father and son!"
Post #20 came before the conversation below took place (and so did posts #16; #28; #36; #40; #85; #86, to name only a few, for there were many more)..
--------------------------------
Post #186, 7xLightray said:
Facts/truth are backed up by scripture, not opinions.
I haven't seen a single scripture come out of you, yet. Which is what I require for facts/truth.
So. I'll wait until the bread comes, or at least bread crumbs.
Post #189, Bob Carabbio said:
You claim to have read the bible, and saw no evidence of the "trinity". Discussion with you, then, is useless.
Post #192, 7xLightray said:
I never claimed I saw no evidence of the Trinity in the Bible. Definitely never claimed that!
In fact, I believe Trinity is in the Bible, and was prophesied about, and proves God is master of all.
Post #211, Bob Carabbio said:
SO then we agree God is ONE - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Whatever that means.
Post #214, 7xLightray said:
You're just being manipulative, you know I am not saying I agreeing with the Trinity; that could not have come across any clearer.
What you don't know, is what I am saying, so it would seem.
Post #217, Bob Carabbio said:
You said: "I believe Trinity is in the Bible, and was prophesied about, and proves God is master of all." Seems pretty clear that you're a "trinitarian".
Post #219, 7xLightray said:
Only if you put on blinders, and ignore every single other thing I said!
And when one refuses to receive parts of what another says, then one will misunderstand, and misquote, what the other is saying. This is your sin. Knowingly refusing to understand another.
Post #223, Bob Carabbio said:
Chuckle!!! Word games.
Post #241, Bob Carabbio said:
disingenuous. YOU SAID "THE TRINITY IS IN THE BIBLE"
Case closed.;
------------------
Looks to me someone is no paying close attention to what I text.
I do not believe the Bible teaches God is a Trinity (or Oneness, or J.W., or Unitarian, and like such), yet, I believe the Trinity is in the Bible.
So, I obviously, must mean something other than believing in the Trinity. I thought that would be more than obviously clear, if one read my posts.
7xLightray
Member
Trinity = 3 person in one God. The 3-in-1 God.
Orthodox, or not it's still a contradiction. That's why there are all these videos trying to explain the contradiction, with no success. That's why one creed say we are forbidden to say that there are 3 God's, or 3 Lords. The doctrine itself is a contradiction. It's like I'm saying, the sun is round, and you are saying, no it's square, one of those statements are not based in reality. Can you guess which one?
This is what your doctrine says, "There are not 3 Gods,
But reality says that is impossible..
Three persons judging, whether they all be in one body, or not, whether they all agree, or not, are still three judges judging!
civic
Well-known member
Christ is both Divine and human and you are not. Scripture is crystal clear He is both God and man even though you cannot understand this truth. Just because you cannot explain the miraculous God does not make the Trinity and 2 natures in Christ untrue.
You cannot explain how God created this universe from nothing- ex nihilo but it’s a fact from scripture. God spoke it into existence from nothing. Miracles are unexplainable just like God.
hope this helps !!!
7xLightray
Member
I do understand it, that's why I reject the Trinity's version. Truly, truly, you are the one that does not understand.
Is anyone ever going to truly represent what I say?
I did not say, Jesus is not both Divine and human. Though, I am not saying Jesus is the "Person" God either, but in the form of God He existed, that became flesh, the body. His person grew up as all man do, but His body is from God, not made of the earth, Jesus is not an earthly man, but a heavenly man, a spiritual man. We are earthly men, made of the earth. Son of Joe means the son is equal to Joe, because the son existed in Joe who is human. This fact makes Jesus equal to God, because He is God's only literal son! Jn 5:18 This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.Is anyone ever going to truly represent what I say?
Are you hearing, the Jews rejected the literal son of God!! They hated the thought of it!! They wanted to put His lights out for that!!
(do you know anyone like that?)
They also had their own doctrines that they could not back up with scripture.
(do you know anyone like that?)
They also had their own doctrines that they could not back up with scripture.
This is what makes it untrue..
Rom 1:20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
And Jn 17:3 the 3-in-1 verse; this is a glaring verse 1 Tim 5:21, calling on the higher powers, and skips right by the Holy Spirit, but includes the Angels?? And staying within this understanding Prov. 8:8-9.
And Jn 17:3 the 3-in-1 verse; this is a glaring verse 1 Tim 5:21, calling on the higher powers, and skips right by the Holy Spirit, but includes the Angels?? And staying within this understanding Prov. 8:8-9.
These you are ignoring, else we would have had rebuttal from you with verses to back you up. I don't see any! So, who is trying to pull who?
No one, to this day, has been able to explain the miraculous Trinity God.
What makes the Trinity's version of the 2 natures in Christ untrue, are verses like Jn 1:14 and 6:51. "the word became flesh," and "I am the living bread..from heaven..and the bread is my flesh."
What verses do you use to clearly show your version?
You not being able to explain how God created either, does make my version (which I can read with actual text in Bible, and you can't, else you would have put up scripture to back up your words by now), any less true, either. But God gave us this verse to go by Rom. 1:20, that we may know Him through creation, orderly creation. There is no excuse!
Philosophy, all I am reading is philosophy. Got any bread?
7xLightray
Member
How did the scribe understand "Deut 6.4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One [echad]."
Mar 12:32 And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one [G1520 Singular, Masculine], and there is no other besides him [G846 Personal pronoun, Singular, Masculine].
The scribe understood it as being one single Person!
No unity in that!
All you presented was philosophy,
it could be this way.
But what is written?
Mar 12:32 And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one [G1520 Singular, Masculine], and there is no other besides him [G846 Personal pronoun, Singular, Masculine].
The scribe understood it as being one single Person!
No unity in that!
All you presented was philosophy,
it could be this way.
But what is written?
101G
Well-known member
GINOLJC, to all.
you might want to copy and keep this for later examination. first, not 101G's own words, but God own words. Genesis 1:1 " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." here God is in plural form. but what identifies God as ONE person here is the term "beginning" so let's look at both terms.
God: H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
Root(s): H433
Examine Definition #1. (literally) supreme ones. notice the "s" at the end of ones. plural right. but the billion-dollar question is this, "how as ones?" the answer is in the definition itself. [plural of H433] BINGO, there is the answer laying in plain sight for all to see. by the way, 101G is using the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments. now, knowing that H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m is plural, but the plural of, of, of, H433. there is the answer. H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m is the plural of H433. and please note, NOT "from" H433. understand? if H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m is "from" H433 one will have not only two persons but also two God. BUT, if H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m is "OF" H433, then it's the same one person "SHARED EQUALLY" . and here is the mechanic of that plurality in "EQUAL SHARE". the EQUAL SHARE understanding lay in the term of the Hebrew word, H259 ECHAD. let's see it in scripture and come back to Genesis 1:1 for the full understanding. Deuteronomy 6:4 " Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" note "ONE" this is the ECHAD of God in plurality. this term describes the EQUAL SHARE of God as ONE PERSON. again, using the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments. H259,
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258
Note, this word "ECHAD" is an Adjective and not a NOUN. so ECHAD is not describing a person, but the attribute of a NOUN, which here is a person, "THE LORD" who is GOD. now what is this attribute of the LORD here who is GOD? answer definition #2. for many chose definition #1. which is an ERROR, because a unity is the state of being united or joined as a whole. well if God is unity before he became a Whole then you have two Gods. because a unity consists of two entities in NATURE, because the scripture states, LORD who is God. so that would be two LORD before the beginning, and that's two God, to be a UNITY or UNIFY. so that's polythetic in ..... NATURE. on the other hand, definition #2. clearly define God as a plurality of ONE PERSON. and here's why. as an Ordinal SHARE of himself, he in the beginning is ONE as Deuteronomy 6:4 stated as Genesis 1:26 & 27 also clearly states. and this is confirmed in Genesis 1:1 as in the term "beginning also states. let's now go back to genesis 1:1.
BEGINNING: H7225 רֵאשִׁית re'shiyth (ray-sheeth') n-f.
1. the first, in place, time, order or rank.
2. (specifically) a firstfruit.
[from the same as H7218]
KJV: beginning, chief(-est), first(-fruits, part, time), principal thing.
Root(s): H7218
BINGO, definition#1. the first, in place, time, order or rank. and this First in time, is the ORDINAL FIRST, who in rank is the "LORD", just as Deuteronomy 6:4 states. God in place, the beginning is the FIRST, and his Order in the beginning is the "ORDINAL FIRST", with the RANK of "LORD". his title is "FATHER" because he is CREATOR and MAKER of ALL THINGS. and in this ECHAD to come in TIME, meaning in the END of time, as the Ordinal Last. rank "Lord", Title SON, who REDEEM and SAVE ...... ALL THINGS he CREATED and MADE, John 1:3.
now scripture to witness this mechanic of operation, Philippians 2:6 " Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" here "form" is the Greek word,
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313
Note definition #2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature. and the NATURE of God is Spirit. per John 4:24a. now the billion dollar question, "WHAT KIND OF NATURE THAT THE Lord JESUS HAS "WITH" GOD?" answer in the root of G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n. the above definition it states, [perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)] now G3313.
G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).
2. a part.
3. (as an adverb) partly, in part.
note definition #1. the term "portion" which is another word for SHARE", and Philippians 2:6 states, " Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" WITH God? yes EQUAL "with" , not "to" which indicate a separate person and God. which again is Polytheism. but the verse say "WITH". now lets get the complete understanding from the OT. Isaiah 41:4 " Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." here it seem that the LORD, who is God is "WITH" the Last another person, separate and distinct? well let's see. Isaiah 48:12 " Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." BINGO, for ALSO means, "in addition; too". meaning the same one PERSON. God is the First and the Last, just as stated in Revelation, and in John 17:3 " And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." he who was sent is the ORDINAL "LAST" God EQUALLY SHARED in Numan Flesh as a MAN his OWN IMAGE, according to Genesis 1:26 that was to come. for "WITH" certify why God is a plurality "of" (Genesis 1:1 the term God), his OWN-SELF. and he said it clearly in Isaiah 63:5 " And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me." his "own arm" is him in the ECHAD, or the EQUAL SHARE of himself in flesh, to come" that's who was sent.... the Last Adam, or God manifested in flesh.
do you grasp the understanding of the ECHAD Now?
101G
7xLightray
Member
I am not reading all that again.
Not until you tell me with few words, in your own words
>*"first"*<
what you mean.Then you can give me this word that is plural of 433 (well actually, save you fingers, I don't really need it, already have many posts of it).
Otherwise, if you can't tell me in your own few words, then I don't believe you truly understand what you believe.
101G
Well-known member
First in ordinal designation, and Last in ordinal designation. just as "beginning" states in Genesis 1:1I am not reading all that again.
Not until you tell me with few words, in your own words
ONE: H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258
101G
Bob Carabbio
Well-known member
Of that I'm sure. PERSONALLY, I don't really bother with the "Orthodox definition" (since it's only "Theology". But that god identifies three "Persons" of Himself is Biblical, and consequently true at the elementary level, I'll ask for details later - if I even have to.
7xLightray
Member
Waiting!
You did not explain yourself!
What does this mean to you "First in ordinal designation" I have no idea. You did not explain yourself.
I don't think you understand what you believe.
Believe
Active member
I understand and believe this:
The clearest reference to Jesus’ deity in the New Testament comes at the opening of John’s gospel. It reads, “In the beginning was the Word [that is, the Logos], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). In that first sentence, we see the mystery of the Trinity, because the Logos is said to have been with God from the beginning.
There are different terms in the Greek language that can be translated by the English word with, but the word that is used here suggests the closest possible relationship, virtually a face-to-face relationship. Nevertheless, John makes a distinction between the Logos and God. God and the Logos are together, but they are not the same.
Then John declares that the Logos not only was with God, He was God. So in one sense, the Word must be distinguished from God, and in another sense, the Word must be identified with God.
R. C. Sproul, What Is the Trinity?
The clearest reference to Jesus’ deity in the New Testament comes at the opening of John’s gospel. It reads, “In the beginning was the Word [that is, the Logos], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). In that first sentence, we see the mystery of the Trinity, because the Logos is said to have been with God from the beginning.
There are different terms in the Greek language that can be translated by the English word with, but the word that is used here suggests the closest possible relationship, virtually a face-to-face relationship. Nevertheless, John makes a distinction between the Logos and God. God and the Logos are together, but they are not the same.
Then John declares that the Logos not only was with God, He was God. So in one sense, the Word must be distinguished from God, and in another sense, the Word must be identified with God.
R. C. Sproul, What Is the Trinity?
101G
Well-known member
thanks for the reply. but what if "WITH" indicate the same one PERSON? let's examine this terminology from the bible point of view.
Example: Isaiah 41:4 " Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." from appearance it seems the first is "WITH" the Last as two separate persons..... correct? well let the bible finishing speaking.
Isaiah 44:6 " Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." Hmmmmmm..... the First is the Last too? yes, and here's why. Isaiah 48:12 " Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." BINGO. the First is the Last, because the term "ALSO" means, in addition; too: so the fist is in addition to or also is the Last. the same one person. just as in John 1:1 the word was "WITH" God, and "ALSO" God, John 1:1c just as you said, according to the scriptures. the bible do not lie. just as this one person who is the Word is the LORD without flesh, bone and blood. for he, "ONE" person made all things, per Isaiah 44:24. for he was "ALONE" and "BY HIMSELF".
101G.
101G
Well-known member
7xLightray
Member
I do not see the mystery of the Trinity in John 1:1. Though, I do see the mystery of Two in Jn 1:1.
I read about Two, the word (which we learn is Jesus Christ), and God (which we learn is the Father alone, clearly stated: Mark 12:29-30, 32; John 17:3). Many other persons are referred to as Gods/gods in scripture, but they are not the only true God Person.
In beginning was the word (God's spoken word), and the word was with God ("distinction"), and the word was God ("identified", for the word existed in the form of God).
Only if one wanted to see a Trinity, would they see a Trinity. And with that, one could see anything they wanted in Jn 1:1. Like, they could see J.W., or Mormon, even Oneness, or whatever one wanted to see, but the text reads about Two, the word and God, that are some how different, but yet the same! As a trinitarian I did imagine it in the "orthodox" way (3-in-1 God) and thought it was the best way to see it. But I chose to be honest with myself, and chose not to hold to contradictions.
What is written is that the Father is God alone, yet, some how Jesus is equal with God, but how? Trinity says Jesus is the only true God, but with contradictions (like: Mark 12:29-30, 32; John 17:3; 6:51). Christ's doctrine has no contradictions! And we need to remain in Christ's doctrine, or we do not have God. It's that important!
Choose your God, but I am sticking to what Christ taught, and He did not teach a Trinity (trinitarians even admit this themselves, saying, "Trinity was arrived at systematically"), He taught Father and Son.
Anyone that is still worshipping the Trinity, are still wallowing in their sins, and they know their sins. God is offering, in these days, repentance to any that are willing. To overcome the world one needs to believe Jesus is God's Son, God's literal son! This is one way of knowing if one is walking with God, or not. And you can know to, as the disciples warned!
I read about Two, the word (which we learn is Jesus Christ), and God (which we learn is the Father alone, clearly stated: Mark 12:29-30, 32; John 17:3). Many other persons are referred to as Gods/gods in scripture, but they are not the only true God Person.
In beginning was the word (God's spoken word), and the word was with God ("distinction"), and the word was God ("identified", for the word existed in the form of God).
Only if one wanted to see a Trinity, would they see a Trinity. And with that, one could see anything they wanted in Jn 1:1. Like, they could see J.W., or Mormon, even Oneness, or whatever one wanted to see, but the text reads about Two, the word and God, that are some how different, but yet the same! As a trinitarian I did imagine it in the "orthodox" way (3-in-1 God) and thought it was the best way to see it. But I chose to be honest with myself, and chose not to hold to contradictions.
What is written is that the Father is God alone, yet, some how Jesus is equal with God, but how? Trinity says Jesus is the only true God, but with contradictions (like: Mark 12:29-30, 32; John 17:3; 6:51). Christ's doctrine has no contradictions! And we need to remain in Christ's doctrine, or we do not have God. It's that important!
Choose your God, but I am sticking to what Christ taught, and He did not teach a Trinity (trinitarians even admit this themselves, saying, "Trinity was arrived at systematically"), He taught Father and Son.
Anyone that is still worshipping the Trinity, are still wallowing in their sins, and they know their sins. God is offering, in these days, repentance to any that are willing. To overcome the world one needs to believe Jesus is God's Son, God's literal son! This is one way of knowing if one is walking with God, or not. And you can know to, as the disciples warned!
7xLightray
Member
This you need not tell me.
For you need at least two persons. Reality, not delusion! And you only ever have one person, but even if you had two person, Jesus still cannot be the only true God that sent, because Jesus did not send. Whether they are first, or last, or both, they are still the same one person! And if one is not able to understand this, then they are truly open to any deception.
101G
Well-known member
101G
Well-known member
see post #259 above, it's one person in the ECHAD. which you have no clue. even the answer is clearly in the bible. just as it is only one person in Revelation 1:1 ..... (smile), oh this is just too easy.
101G.
Similar threads
