14 Dec 09
LOL G75 You should know better by now. This will go around & around. The Christian Church has for the most part believed in the trinity for at least 2000 years now. Honestly though I think it is just something for to argue about. The abstaining from blood or certain foods or any of this has the appearance of looking holy but has no real basis in reality. The reality is in Christ these other things will parish! This is what the scriptures say. Let no man be your judge in regard to these things for they are a mere shadow. If these things could make a man holy than the law would have sufficed for us. However the law was a school master to teach us about grace.
Manny
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
14 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75[b]We attack those verses because these are the only few verses that Trinitarians use to try and prove this belief with but for some reason ignor all the other 99% of the Bible and all the historicle proof that the trinity was never taught by Jesus or any Christians or in the Bible and that it has pagan origins.[/b]
We attack those verses because these are the only few verses that Trinitarians use to try and prove this belief with but for some reason ignor all the other 99% of the Bible and all the historicle proof that the trinity was never taught by Jesus or any Christians or in the Bible and that it has pagan origins.
If for no other reason the origins should t ...[text shortened]... entations of the trinity in there art work and such. Does this not mean a thing to you guys?????
Well, the bible is not a list of dogmatic statements. It is a collection of books, stories, poems and pastoral letters. It contains many moral commandments and prohibitions and exhortations, but little theological exposition. We rarely ever encounter any doctrinal formulae. So why should we expect an explicit statement of the Trinity? The best we can do is infer from the Scriptures and interpret in the light of the early church theologians who were close to its composition. Anyway, John 1 is very compelling evidence for the Trinity. It says that the Word was with God (as if separate) and at the same time God and that it became incarnate. This is very close to the Trinitarian formula.
Anyway, the supposed pagan origin is a complete myth. As I explained previously, while there are examples of threesomes, there are no other trinities -- that is, three persons of one nature.
14 Dec 09
Originally posted by menace71It's not fair manny that you make statements like only God can do miracles, then I call you out on that with examples of others that did then that were obviously not God, and now you don't respond. Not cool.... You guys do this way to much.
LOL G75 You should know better by now. This will go around & around. The Christian Church has for the most part believed in the trinity for at least 2000 years now. Honestly though I think it is just something for to argue about. The abstaining from blood or certain foods or any of this has the appearance of looking holy but has no real basis in reality. T ...[text shortened]... d have sufficed for us. However the law was a school master to teach us about grace.
Manny
14 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by menace71What foods do we not eat? Where do you get these things? You know Manny I respect you and yout opinions. But you really shouldn't spout off about things with religions that you really don't have the facts correct. It kinda makes you look bad and I think your smarter then that...
LOL G75 You should know better by now. This will go around & around. The Christian Church has for the most part believed in the trinity for at least 2000 years now. Honestly though I think it is just something for to argue about. The abstaining from blood or certain foods or any of this has the appearance of looking holy but has no real basis in reality. T ...[text shortened]... d have sufficed for us. However the law was a school master to teach us about grace.
Manny
14 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75===============================
So Jesus was "mixed or mingeled" after he was resurrected? So he wasn't part of God before he was born as a human? I thought you all said he's always been 1 of 3 from all of eternity?
Story keeps changing guys...
So Jesus was "mixed or mingeled" after he was resurrected? So he wasn't part of God before he was born as a human? I thought you all said he's always been 1 of 3 from all of eternity?
Story keeps changing guys...
====================================
You complain about Trinitarian multi gods when you yourself have two Gods - classic Polytheism.
I understand perfectly your concern in the paragraph above. And briefly without quoting a lot of passages I will explain. This is a matter of Christ resurrection being His designation as the Firstborn Son of God:
" ... His Son, who came out of the seed of David according to the flesh, Who was designated the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness out of the resurrection of the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord." (Rom. 1:4)
We all know that when Jesus was conceived and baptized it was pronounced that He was the Son of God. However, Paul here points not to incarnation but resurrection as the time that Jesus was designated the Son of God. He means He was designated the Firstborn Son of God.
The Apostle Peter also points to the resurrection day as the day God begot His Son.
"That God has fully fulfilled this promise of the promise to us their children in raising up Jesus, as it is also written in teh second Psalm, You are My Son; this day have I begotten You." (Acts 13:33)
Both Peter and Paul point to the day of resurrection - "this day [the day of resurrection] I have begotten You" as the day Christ was begotten or designated the Son of God.
Do you understand ? He was incarnated the Only begotten Son of God. He was resurrected the Firstborn Son of God. "This day" in Psalm 2 and in Acts 13:33 is the day of RESURRECTION. And Romans 1 says Christ was designated the Son in power at the resurrection of the dead.
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is taught in the Bible as a BIRTH as if the coming into the world of a new being. Yes in incarnation God became a man. But it is in resurrection that that human part was uplifted, sanctified, glorified and made the Firstborn Son of God.
I admit that it is not an easy matter to grasp. But think about it. In eternity past God had only divinity. In incarnation He clothed Himself in human nature. Then in resurrection that human part was uplifted and deified. Let's coin a new word to discribe this. The man Jesus of Nazareth was Godnized. He took BACK to the eternal throne this uplifted and glorified human nature for EVER and EVER.
He was God with divinity only in eternity past. He clothed Himself in human nature. He died a redemptive death. He rose and uplifted, sanctified, and glorified that human part that He took on that for eternity He would be the Firstborn Son of God a man in deified glory.
Still confused? Remember His transfiguration? For a brief moment that divinity which was concealed in the shell of His humanity shone out. It is as if He kind of "unzipped" Himself or allowed the glory of His divinity to shine though.
He told His disciples to tell no one of the vision until after the resurrection. That is because in resurrection it was not longer a matter of a temporary shining through. His divine being fully saturated that human part that He gained in incarnation to designate Him the Firstborn Son of God.
It is a matter of how Christ returned to the eternal throne with that new humanity which He had taken on Himself. He went back forever a deified man. He remains a universalized and deified Man for eternity. And He is leading many sons into glory as the Firstborn Son of God.
Do not scoff. Study the matter. In incarnation God brought God into man. In resurrection He brought man into God.
What is the difference between Christ as the Only Begotten Son of God and Christ as the Firstborn Son of God ?
It was in resurrection that He said "Go and tell my brothers ..." . Before that time His most intimate term in the gospel of John for His disciples was that they were His friends. In His resurrection they became His brothers. He became the Firstborn Son who will lead many sons into the expression of the Divine Being mingled with humanity.
14 Dec 09
Originally posted by galveston75That's an interesting statement coming from you Galvo.
What foods do we not eat? Where do you get these things? You know Manny I respect you and yout opinions. But you really shouldn't spout off about things with religions that you really don't have the facts correct. It kinda makes you look bad and I think your smarter then that...
I'm going to change one word in the sentence and see if you get the irony.
But you really shouldn't spout off about things with science that you really don't have the facts correct.
14 Dec 09
Originally posted by Proper KnobI never said I had all the facts as some there say, did I?
That's an interesting statement coming from you Galvo.
I'm going to change one word in the sentence and see if you get the irony.
But you really shouldn't spout off about things with [b]science that you really don't have the facts correct.[/b]
14 Dec 09
Originally posted by jaywillWhat does "Firstborn" mean? Keep it simple please..
[b]===============================
So Jesus was "mixed or mingeled" after he was resurrected? So he wasn't part of God before he was born as a human? I thought you all said he's always been 1 of 3 from all of eternity?
Story keeps changing guys...
====================================
You complain about Trinitarian multi gods when you ...[text shortened]... l lead many sons into the expression of the Divine Being mingled with humanity.[/b]
14 Dec 09
Originally posted by galveston75======================
What does "Firstborn" mean? Keep it simple please..
What does "Firstborn" mean? Keep it simple please..
========================
In the contexts of Acts 13:33, Psalm 2, Hebrews 1:6; and Romans 1:4; Romans 8:29 it should be easy enough to understand.
"Many brothers" helps to understand "Firstborn" should mean there:
" ... conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the Firstborn among MANY BROTHERS." (Rom. 8:29 my emphasis)
The significance of the resurrection includes that He not only brought A man into God, but that He brought MAN into God.
Do you understand me? The real meaning of His resurrection is not that He ALONE is God-man. It is that He is the FIRST among many brothers who are God-men.
" ... conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the Firstborn among MANY BROTHERS." (Rom. 8:29 my emphasis)
This is also seen in Him saying that He died to produce MANY grains like the original grain that died:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless the grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it abides alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit." (John 12:24)
The on unique grain was God-man. He is the object of our worship for He is God. But in death and resurrection He came to produce many grains - much fruit. That is the divine life concealed within Him must be released into many other grains. This is for the duplication of sons of God.
To receive Him is to be begotten again a son of God ready for the conformation process. The believers are not the obect of worship. Nor are they God from eternity past. But they are brought into the sonship of the many brothers of the Firstborn Son of God.
In a real sense the eternal purpose of God is to mass produce sons of God. And Christ is the Firstborn Son of God to be followed by "many brothers" into the expression of the Divine Being - God mingled with man.
This was His eternal purpose from Genesis. God created man and placed man before "the tree of life" that God could dispense His life and nature into man for the mingling of divinity and humanity.
Jesus Christ not only saves man but also brings man back to the eternal purpose of God - to dispense the divine life into man for the mingling and incorporation of the Eternal Uncreated Person with the created creature.
Receive Jesus and begin to be mingled with God.
14 Dec 09
Originally posted by jaywillWell I think your wrong on this as both Col 1:15 and Rev 3:14 are both very clear where it says he, Jesus, was the "Firstborn" of all creation. I know you guys sideskirt this all the time and I'm sure you will here too but this only means one thing and one thing only. Jesus was the first thing that God brought forth or created. And this was before anything else was ever created.
[b]======================
What does "Firstborn" mean? Keep it simple please..
========================
In the contexts of Acts 13:33, Psalm 2, Hebrews 1:6; and Romans 1:4; Romans 8:29 it should be easy enough to understand.
"Many brothers" helps to understand "Firstborn" should mean there:
" ... conforme ...[text shortened]... n with the created creature.
Receive Jesus and begin to be mingled with God.
Jesus had a beginning wether you'll ever admit it or not.
Firstborn means Firstborn.... He is not and has never been Almighty God himself.
14 Dec 09
Sorry....your right I think though it's your twisting of scriptures that angers me a bit.
Abstain from eating foods with blood that have been strangled not cooked properly.
Then the JW's make the leap oh that means I can't receive a blood transfusion. Two different things. I will acknowledge that others performed miracles that were just servants of God. You know Emanuel means God with us right? The name give to the Christ child. Why this name? You know the child was worshiped right? He was given gifts from Maji that came from the east. They were gifts fit for a King.
Manny
14 Dec 09
Actually G-75 I agree the word trinity is not used in the bible. The concept is inferred. It's like 1+1 will = what? 1+1=2 inferred. You are right the Jews did not believe in a trinity either. You see however the pluralistic nature of God even in the old testament. He is one God but for example in Genesis Let Us? and Our? I read somewhere that it's called a plural of majesty. Who then is God talking to?
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
Manny
14 Dec 09
2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75==============================
Well I think your wrong on this as both Col 1:15 and Rev 3:14 are both very clear where it says he, Jesus, was the "Firstborn" of all creation. I know you guys sideskirt this all the time and I'm sure you will here too but this only means one thing and one thing only. Jesus was the first thing that God brought forth or created. And this was before anythi it or not.
Firstborn means Firstborn.... He is not and has never been Almighty God himself.
Well I think your wrong on this as both Col 1:15 and Rev 3:14 are both very clear where it says he, Jesus, was the "Firstborn" of all creation. I know you guys sideskirt this all the time and I'm sure you will here too but this only means one thing and one thing only. Jesus was the first thing that God brought forth or created. And this was before anything else was ever created.
=======================================
I have an answer for you. I have an answer for Col. 1:15. I have an answer for Revelation 3:14.
But this time I am not giving you a doctrinal answer. This time I would ask you.
Did you ever tell Jesus that you loved Him ? Did you ever tell Jesus "Thanks Lord Jesus. You loved me and gave yourself for me" ?
Paul said "The Son of God, WHO LOVED ME ..."
John says "We love Him because He first loved us ..."
When did you ever tell Jesus whoever He is , that you LOVED Him? When did you ever thank Jesus that loved you and gave Himself for you?
Are you too afraid you may offend God by praying to Christ ?
You talk about the kingdom, the kingdom, the kingdom. Did you ever notice that it is "the kingdom of the Son of His LOVE?"
Do you love Jesus or are you too busy putting Jesus down so you can exalt the Old Testament Jehovah ?
Jesus said "If anyone LOVES Me he will keep My word ..." (John 14:23)
You're so busy fighting Jesus that you never told Him that you LOVED Him.
You don't need any more doctrinal answers. You need your heart softened to love the One who died for you.