Your Views on The Trinity

[Capbook]

the ... "ONLY" ... "TRUE" ... and ..... "LIVING", God who is the Father ... WHO SENT "HIS" ANGEL is "JESUS".

and get this Jesus is the "First" and the "Last"...... "the Lord God of the Holy Prophets".

101G

I hope I get your point based on your statement that “Jesus the first and the last” and is the Lord God of the Holy Prophets. Is that what you mean?

 

[TomL]

GINOLJC, to all.
correct, God made two or as the Greeks say, "ANOTHER", of himself. an "equal share" of oneself is the image. for woman came out of the man. because the plurality of H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') is an "ECHAD" of, of, of "ONE"

101G

Um The Greeks do not say he made Another of himself.

 

[mikesw]

It's not my fault you cannot understand what I wrote. What you are saying I did not respond to is there. Most of what I post is blind to you and I don't know why. You have eyes but see not.

The NASB reads “…looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” In the NIV84, we await the “glorious appearing” of God, while in the NASB we await the “appearing of the glory” of God our Savior (this is a use of “Savior” where the word is applied in the context to God, not Christ.) “we wait for the... appearing of our great God and Savior’s glory—Jesus Christ” where “Jesus Christ” is the “glory of God” not God himself.

To Paul, God is clearly someone different from Christ Jesus. Secondly, God is called “Savior” just three verses earlier in Titus 2:10 (also in Titus. 1:3; 3:4). So it would not be out of the ordinary for both “God” and “Savior” to refer to the Father. God’s Word also teaches that when Christ comes, he will come with his Father’s glory: “For the Son of Man is about to come... in the glory of his Father” (Matthew 16:27).

From Matt 16:27 with Phil 2:5-8, it then makes sense that what Christ Jesus emptied himself of was his glory of his divinity. I cannot say how this fits in wider Christology, but the concept has potential. The potential rewording of Titus 2:10 does not speak against the divinity of Christ. Nor is it a problem if Paul has distinguishing terms or names for God and Christ Jesus. The wording remains ambiguous and thus cannot be forced to a single direction.

Its purpose is not to expound the doctrine of the Trinity in any way, nor is there any reason to assume that Paul would be making a Trinitarian reference here. It makes perfect sense for Scripture to call Christ “the glory of God.”

I do not know who says this is a Trinitarian reference here. No one says there is an expression of the three persons of the Godhead here nor says Paul is clarifying the Trinitarian concept. Paul does not have to elaborate on all details of God in his letters. We just know that he basically would have addressed the divinity of Christ as the underlying key to understanding Gal 3:19-20, where a mediator is not possible between God the Father and God the Son since they are One.

 

[101G]

I hope I get your point based on your statement that “Jesus the first and the last” and is the Lord God of the Holy Prophets. Is that what you mean?

didn't stutter

101G.

 

[101G]

Um The Greeks do not say he made Another of himself.

know the difference between G243 ALLOS, and G2087 heteros. we suggest you use the Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words for a clear understanding.

101G.

 

[DavidTree]

From Matt 16:27 with Phil 2:5-8, it then makes sense that what Christ Jesus emptied himself of was his glory of his divinity. I cannot say how this fits in wider Christology, but the concept has potential. The potential rewording of Titus 2:10 does not speak against the divinity of Christ. Nor is it a problem if Paul has distinguishing terms or names for God and Christ Jesus. The wording remains ambiguous and thus cannot be forced to a single direction.

I do not know who says this is a Trinitarian reference here. No one says there is an expression of the three persons of the Godhead here nor says Paul is clarifying the Trinitarian concept. Paul does not have to elaborate on all details of God in his letters. We just know that he basically would have addressed the divinity of Christ as the underlying key to understanding Gal 3:19-20, where a mediator is not possible between God the Father and God the Son since they are One.

where a mediator is not possible between God the Father and God the Son since they are One.

Why do you assume this is "not possible"???

 

[mikesw]

Why do you assume this is "not possible"???

An analogy would be of a man coaching a soccer team and his son gets injured. The mom cannot sue her husband since she is just suing her own household and its finances.

The law involved a mediation between God and the Israel people. Moses mediated their misbehavior by giving the Law. If not an exact model of the situation, Paul still used it. With the promise to Abraham that also was a promise for sending Jesus and reconciling the world (Gal 3:16), Jesus is the recipient of the promise. He also is of the Godhead.
The basic idea in Gal 3:19-20 is that the promise from the Father to the Son involves two persons of the Godhead -- they are one, according to the Shema (Deut 6:4 and used in Gal 3:20). We are not expecting Moses or any other remedy as remotely possible in the promissory relationship between God and the Son.

Oops. I almost forgot to share the link to the broader explanation of Gal 3:19-20.
#Gal 3:19-20 Solved by the Shema in light of Christ's Divinity

 

[Capbook]

the ... "ONLY" ... "TRUE" ... and ..... "LIVING", God who is the Father ... WHO SENT "HIS" ANGEL is "JESUS".

and get this Jesus is the "First" and the "Last"...... "the Lord God of the Holy Prophets".

101G

It appears stuttering as there are many ellipses.
Good, we are one on Jesus as the “first and the last.”

 

[Peterlag]

1. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever name the doctrine of the Trinity?
Don’t tell us what later church councils said. Where did Jesus teach it? Where did the apostles explain it?

2. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever describe God as “three persons in one essence”?
Give chapter and verse—no creeds, no analogies, no philosophy. Just show us where they said it.

3. If God is truly three coequal persons, why did Jesus say “the Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), and “I can do nothing of Myself” (John 5:30)?
Was Jesus lying? Or are you forcing theology into the text?

4. If the Holy Spirit is a third coequal divine person, why does Jesus say the Father will send the Spirit in His name after He prays (John 14:16, 26)?
If the Spirit is fully God, why does He need to be sent? And why does Jesus have to ask?

5. If Jesus is coequal with the Father, why is He called “a man approved by God” (Acts 2:22), and why does Paul say “God has made this Jesus both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36)?
Are you claiming Jesus was “made Lord” in appearance only? Was His humanity just a shell?

 

[mikesw]

1. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever name the doctrine of the Trinity?
Don’t tell us what later church councils said. Where did Jesus teach it? Where did the apostles explain it?

2. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever describe God as “three persons in one essence”?
Give chapter and verse—no creeds, no analogies, no philosophy. Just show us where they said it.

3. If God is truly three coequal persons, why did Jesus say “the Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), and “I can do nothing of Myself” (John 5:30)?
Was Jesus lying? Or are you forcing theology into the text?

4. If the Holy Spirit is a third coequal divine person, why does Jesus say the Father will send the Spirit in His name after He prays (John 14:16, 26)?
If the Spirit is fully God, why does He need to be sent? And why does Jesus have to ask?

5. If Jesus is coequal with the Father, why is He called “a man approved by God” (Acts 2:22), and why does Paul say “God has made this Jesus both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36)?
Are you claiming Jesus was “made Lord” in appearance only? Was His humanity just a shell?

Indeed this is a fine example of a hyper-literalist post where the essence of Christ is rejected because the interpreter thinks that scripture cannot be integrated and summarized beyond the surface content of scripture. Worse yet, much of the scripture content and mysteries have to be rejected because they are outside of the hyper-literalist reading. The Arianist tool is to deny, deny, deny. Facts are not important. Their arguments do not have to be convincing, only repeated.

I have given Peterlag credit for a few passages he mentions that may show ambiguity instead of a direct statement of the divinity of Christ. So, it is not like I reject stuff just because of his mistaken understanding of the broad picture.

 

[Capbook]

1. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever name the doctrine of the Trinity?
Don’t tell us what later church councils said. Where did Jesus teach it? Where did the apostles explain it?

2. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever describe God as “three persons in one essence”?
Give chapter and verse—no creeds, no analogies, no philosophy. Just show us where they said it.

3. If God is truly three coequal persons, why did Jesus say “the Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), and “I can do nothing of Myself” (John 5:30)?
Was Jesus lying? Or are you forcing theology into the text?

4. If the Holy Spirit is a third coequal divine person, why does Jesus say the Father will send the Spirit in His name after He prays (John 14:16, 26)?
If the Spirit is fully God, why does He need to be sent? And why does Jesus have to ask?

5. If Jesus is coequal with the Father, why is He called “a man approved by God” (Acts 2:22), and why does Paul say “God has made this Jesus both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36)?
Are you claiming Jesus was “made Lord” in appearance only? Was His humanity just a shell?

1. If you can show a verse that the apostles also named the Bible as the Scriptures.
Concept of Trinity mentioned in Matt 28:19.
2. Acts 17:29, Rom 1:20, Col 2:9 and Acts 5:3-4. They are one in the nature of God in three distinct persons.
3. All the Father had are mine. (John 16:15) That's equality. Father is greater than Jesus is what is called "relational subordination".
4. The Father also sent Jesus. They three have different roles in saving mankind but that does not mean they are not one in the nature of God.
5. That is when Jesus in human nature. Is Jesus words wrong in John 16:15?

 

[TomL]

know the difference between G243 ALLOS, and G2087 heteros. we suggest you use the Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words for a clear understanding.

101G.

That is not a statement from the Greeks saying

He made other copies of himself

Will you provide proof for that claim?

BTW Vines does not support your view

Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes “another of the same sort

W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996), 29.

Not the same one.

Hello

 

[101G]

An analogy would be of a man coaching a soccer team and his son gets injured. The mom cannot sue her husband since she is just suing her own household and its finances.

The law involved a mediation between God and the Israel people. Moses mediated their misbehavior by giving the Law. If not an exact model of the situation, Paul still used it. With the promise to Abraham that also was a promise for sending Jesus and reconciling the world (Gal 3:16), Jesus is the recipient of the promise. He also is of the Godhead.
The basic idea in Gal 3:19-20 is that the promise from the Father to the Son involves two persons of the Godhead -- they are one, according to the Shema (Deut 6:4 and used in Gal 3:20). We are not expecting Moses or any other remedy as remotely possible in the promissory relationship between God and the Son.

Oops. I almost forgot to share the link to the broader explanation of Gal 3:19-20.
#Gal 3:19-20 Solved by the Shema in light of Christ's Divinity

GINOLJC, to all.
101G have read both of your posts, Good. but may 101G suggest something. what if God is the "EQUAL SHARE" of himself in flesh as Mediator. would not that satisfy the problem of ONE mediator between God and man? and also satisfy the problem of Deut 6:4 as "ONE?".

just consider it. also see Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

101G.

 

[101G]

It appears stuttering as there are many ellipses.
Good, we are one on Jesus as the “first and the last.”

Good to hear that then we must be Good on the bible FACT that JESUS is the "LORD" who is the First and the Last. scripture, 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."

101G.

 

[mikesw]

GINOLJC, to all.
101G have read both of your posts, Good. but may 101G suggest something. what if God is the "EQUAL SHARE" of himself in flesh as Mediator. would not that satisfy the problem of ONE mediator between God and man? and also satisfy the problem of Deut 6:4 as "ONE?".

just consider it. also see Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

101G.

i might have responded, but I have no idea what you are saying.

 

[101G]

i might have responded, but I have no idea what you are saying.

read my post to J,

• #734

and post 736 afterward.

'101G.

 

[DavidTree]

An analogy would be of a man coaching a soccer team and his son gets injured. The mom cannot sue her husband since she is just suing her own household and its finances.

The law involved a mediation between God and the Israel people. Moses mediated their misbehavior by giving the Law. If not an exact model of the situation, Paul still used it. With the promise to Abraham that also was a promise for sending Jesus and reconciling the world (Gal 3:16), Jesus is the recipient of the promise. He also is of the Godhead.
The basic idea in Gal 3:19-20 is that the promise from the Father to the Son involves two persons of the Godhead -- they are one, according to the Shema (Deut 6:4 and used in Gal 3:20). We are not expecting Moses or any other remedy as remotely possible in the promissory relationship between God and the Son.

Oops. I almost forgot to share the link to the broader explanation of Gal 3:19-20.
#Gal 3:19-20 Solved by the Shema in light of Christ's Divinity

Thank you for the info.

Please review the Book of Hebrews.

But now Jesus, our High Priest, has been given a ministry that is far superior to the old priesthood, for He is the one who mediates for us a far better covenant with God, based on better promises.

"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

 

[101G]

Thank you for the info.

Please review the Book of Hebrews.

But now Jesus, our High Priest, has been given a ministry that is far superior to the old priesthood, for He is the one who mediates for us a far better covenant with God, based on better promises.

"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

Correct, the Lord Jesus is Mediator, meaning he's our "advocate", or "INTERCESSOR", the Holy Spirit. for .... 1 John 2:1 "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:"

advocate: G3875 παράκλητος parakletos (pa-ra'-klee-tos) n.
1. (properly) one called near (to give help).
2. an intercessor (one who entreats of behalf of another).
3. a comforter.
[(not given)]
KJV: advocate, comforter
Root(s): G3844, G2822

yes, the Lord Jesus is "COMFORTER", the Holy Spirit. who intercede on or behalf. especially prayer. Romans 8:26 "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." Romans 8:27 "And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God."

101G

 

[mikesw]

Thank you for the info.

Please review the Book of Hebrews.

But now Jesus, our High Priest, has been given a ministry that is far superior to the old priesthood, for He is the one who mediates for us a far better covenant with God, based on better promises.

"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

I do not reject mediation between man and God through Jesus. What Paul does say is that there is no possible issue to mediate between God and Jesus within the promise from God to Jesus. The characteristic of the Hebrews passage is that the action of Jesus on behalf of man is in the forefront there. It expresses what Jesus was sent to do. But in Gal 3, the focus is on the promise to Jesus (given in parallel with Abraham) to be the one through whom reconciliation is achieved. The point in Gal 3 is that the promise to Jesus could not have additional requirements of the law added to it. In parallel, the message to the Galatians is that the Mosaic law does not become a requirement upon people reconciled to God through this promise.

 

[DavidTree]

Correct, the Lord Jesus is Mediator, meaning he's our "advocate", or "INTERCESSOR", the Holy Spirit. for .... 1 John 2:1 "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:"

advocate: G3875 παράκλητος parakletos (pa-ra'-klee-tos) n.
1. (properly) one called near (to give help).
2. an intercessor (one who entreats of behalf of another).
3. a comforter.
[(not given)]
KJV: advocate, comforter
Root(s): G3844, G2822

yes, the Lord Jesus is "COMFORTER", the Holy Spirit. who intercede on or behalf. especially prayer. Romans 8:26 "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." Romans 8:27 "And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God."

101G

You believe the Lord Jesus is also the Holy Spirit???