Author Topic: The doctrine of the Trinity  (Read 33407 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 197
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #45 on: August 19, 2014, 12:52:04 am »

This question was put to you by Phat.

If Jesus is "a god", he is a god nonetheless. The means there are two gods, this is polytheism.

 How then do we reconcile what John is saying with the rest of Scripture?


You danced around giving an answer. I would like to ask you two questions they are very simple, do you believe there's more than one god? Revelation 7 tells us that the 144,000 of your little flock will have no Gentiles in it, do you believe that?

You know Alexander when I read your post it is very evident that you can only hope for salvation coming from your own actions, in other words salvation by works. On a personal note, those affected you attended Oxford make you feel proud or maybe make you feel that this gives you some authority?

Please give me direct answers to my two questions, no need for scriptures, Just answer them or face annihilation from the forum.  ;)

Admin Dude



JB Horn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #46 on: August 19, 2014, 01:06:55 am »
Och.

Alexander Winslow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #47 on: August 20, 2014, 05:58:03 pm »
Hello Admin Dude,

Thank you for your comments of which I am pleased to answer.

To answer your first point on Jesus being a God, this is confirmed in Isaiah 9:6, 7 which identifies him in prophecy as a 'Mighty God' and the Prince of Peace. The Bible also Identifies Jehovah as 'Almighty God' which puts him in a superior position to everything else. Also we need to take into consideration 2 Corinthians 4:4 which identifies Satan as the 'god' of this world. So in effect, the Bible identifies three Gods each of unequal status, but with Jehovah as the Almighty which means without equal!

Now as for you second comment, you seem to have misread  my words concerning not 'my' 'little flock' but Jesus' little flock, which is actually comprised of both Jew and Gentile as confirmed in John 10:16 "I have other sheep [Gentiles] not of this fold [Jews], these also I must bring; and they shall become on flock [144,000] and one shepherd.

Notice that they 'become' one shepherd and not 'under' one shepherd,  this is because they will rule and shepherd the nations during the thousand year reign of the Christ as confirmed in Revelation 20:6.

On your third, you again have misread my words, in fact the Good News of the Kingdom is the resurrection and a second chance for all as stated by the Apostle Paul: "We entertain the hope that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous." (Acts 24:15)

This is a more substantial hope than that given by the churches of Christendom, because here we have Almighty God in his loving kindness; having provided Christ Jesus the liberator from Adamic death, giving the whole of the human race the hope by way of the resurrection to attain human perfection as first intended, during the thousand year reign and then having reached this status at the end of this period Revelation 20:7-10 shows how everything has come full circle and Satan is let loose for a short period to once more attempt to deceive the nations as he did with Adam and Eve in Eden.

It also shows that many whose number is countless like the grains of sand on the sea shore, will still follow Satan and as this is on their own cognizance; they are annihilated by the 'second death'. (Revelation 21:8)

Those who remain faithful which will also be countless, will gain everlasting life in perfection on earth in a global Edenic Paradise.

This is what was foretold by Jesus in his parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25:31-46.

What I have given you here, is what all the churches of Christendom should be teaching instead of their own man-made doctrines.

On your personal note, the only reason for my mentioning the Oxford Course is to bring to one's attention that this was a completely non-denominational course free from the doctrines of the churches, we were taught 'clean' scripture only.

Alexander


 










'little flock' but Jesus' littlr flock which actually is comprised of both Jew and Gentile. Thi is cobfirmed in John 10:16 which states







admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 197
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #48 on: August 21, 2014, 12:36:18 am »
Thank you Alexander Winslow for answering my questions.

To answer your first point on Jesus being a God, this is confirmed in Isaiah 9:6, 7 which identifies him in prophecy as a 'Mighty God' and the Prince of Peace. The Bible also Identifies Jehovah as 'Almighty God' which puts him in a superior position to everything else. Also we need to take into consideration 2 Corinthians 4:4 which identifies Satan as the 'god' of this world. So in effect, the Bible identifies three Gods each of unequal status, but with Jehovah as the Almighty which means without equal!

So that the readers understand you believe in polytheism. Of course you, not being a JW, are going to tell me that you only pay homage to Christ but do not worship Him, that is balderdash and you know it.

Now as for you second comment, you seem to have misread  my words concerning not 'my' 'little flock' but Jesus' little flock, which is actually comprised of both Jew and Gentile as confirmed in John 10:16 "I have other sheep [Gentiles] not of this fold [Jews], these also I must bring; and they shall become on flock [144,000] and one shepherd.

But this is not what the Scriptures say, the verses you do not referre to the 144,000.

Rev 7  NWT
1 Then I saw, and look! the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who have his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads.

4  And I heard the number of those who were sealed, 144,000, sealed out of every tribe of the sons of Israel:

5  Out of the tribe of Judah 12,000 sealed;
out of the tribe of Reu′ben 12,000;
out of the tribe of Gad 12,000;
6  out of the tribe of Ash′er 12,000;
out of the tribe of Naph′ta·li 12,000;
out of the tribe of Ma·nas′seh 12,000;
7  out of the tribe of Sim′e·on 12,000;
out of the tribe of Le′vi 12,000;
out of the tribe of Is′sa·char 12,000;
8  out of the tribe of Zeb′u·lun 12,000;
out of the tribe of Joseph 12,000;
out of the tribe of Benjamin 12,000 sealed.


Rev 14
1 Then I saw, and look! the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who have his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads. 2  I heard a sound coming out of heaven like the sound of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder; and the sound that I heard was like singers who accompany themselves by playing on their harps. 3  And they are singing what seems to be a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders, and no one was able to master that song except the 144,000, who have been bought from the earth. 4  These are the ones who did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins. These are the ones who keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes. These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb, 5  and no deceit was found in their mouths; they are without blemish.

As the readers can see they are all Jews, male and unmarried.

On your third, you again have misread my words, in fact the Good News of the Kingdom is the resurrection and a second chance for all as stated by the Apostle Paul: "We entertain the hope that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous." (Acts 24:15)

We know that the OT jews believed in the reserection of the dead, some to everlasting life and some to some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake , some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Job 19:23 "Oh that my words were written! Oh that they were inscribed in a book! 24 "That with an iron stylus and lead They were engraved in the rock forever! 25 "As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth. 26 "Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God;

Thank you again Alexander Winslow I pray that you find the way.

Admin Dude

Like to add a few verses for thought.

Col. 3:24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance. It is the Lord Christ whom you serve.

Matt. 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.' "

John 8:50 "But I do not seek My glory; there is One who seeks and judges.

John 5:22"For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son,



« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 12:50:02 am by admin »

Hal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 657
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #49 on: August 21, 2014, 12:33:11 pm »
Hi
Admin

No doubt this is going to lead us to Michael archangel .  8)

Alexander Winslow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #50 on: August 21, 2014, 06:45:26 pm »
Hello Admin,

 Thank you for your reply of which it seems you are still misreading my words. It is the Bible itself which names the three Gods of unequal status, not me. One of which will cease to exist at the end of Christ's thousand year reign.

The 'key' to all of this is understanding the correct positions of both Almighty God and Christ Jesus in their capacity today as we move towards the end of this the last generation of this present word order.

Worship is given to both Christ Jesus and Almighty God in their individual positions as Christ prepares to take full command of the situation at the beginning of his thousand year reign.

We have to remember that he still remains the mediator between the whole of the human race and Almighty God, right up until the fulfillment of God's purpose for creation in Revelation 21:1-4.

A point to remember here, is that at the completion of everything, with creation then operating as first intended; Christ Jesus will hand over his kingdom to his God and Father. (1 Corinthians 15:24).

So even though today Christ Jesus reigns in the capacity of a Mighty God and Prince of Peace, (Isaiah 9:6) He is still subservient to Almighty God to whom everything belongs.

The next point is where understanding comes in, Jesus said "Have no fear little flock the kingdom of the heavens belongs to you." So immediately here, we have Jesus defining those of a specific group which will rule in the heavens with him.

This little flock of course comprises of both Jew and Gentile, in accordance with the prophecy in Daniel 9:27 whereby he was to keep the covenant with the Jews for one week of years; giving them first refusal for the 'heavenly' calling.

At the end of this short period, the offer then went out to the Gentiles, the 'other sheep' (John 10:16) confirmed by the baptism of the centurion Cornelius.

When we check the scriptures thoroughly, we confirm that this 'little flock' is the only group designated for immortality in the heavens.

Jesus' words confirm this when he said: "...the kingdom of heaven belongs to you." No one else. Therefore when we further examine the scriptures which you also have quoted concerning the the 144,000 in Revelation 7 and 14, the only group to which this can apply is the 'little flock' the Israel of God who make up the twelve heavenly tribes of which the natural nation of Israel foreshadowed before they were cast-off in 607 BCE.

This is why the Apostle Paul in recognizing this ongoing status said: "The Jerusalem today is in bondage [to corruption and death], but the Jerusalem above is free [from corruption and death] and she is our mother. (Galatians 4:25, 26)

Revelation 14  3  "And they are singing what seems to be a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders, and no one was able to master that song except the 144,000, who have been bought from the earth."

Yes, here is the 'key' concerning their identification; "those who have been bought from the earth." This includes Peter, Paul, James, John and the rest of the twelve apostles from whom stems the twelve heavenly tribes all comprised of those anointed ones both Jew and Gentile of Christ's heavenly little flock.

Your comment on the resurrection, the Pharisees did not believe in the resurrection but the Sadducees did; Jesus however opened the 'way' for two separate resurrections. The first was the heavenly resurrection of his 'little flock' while the second was the general resurrection of all the rest of mankind.

Corrected Scripture: Revelation 20:4, 5 “…And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for a thousand years. This is the first resurrection. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the end of the thousand years.” [These are of the ‘second’ resurrection] NMTCS

The bottom line is that through his disobedience, Adam brought imperfection and death to the human race. God therefore in his loving kindness, because he must destroy anything which is imperfect; decided that as mankind is now imperfect through Adam and not through its own self; then by means of his appointed anointed-one Christ Jesus, Adamic death [death without a resurrection] would be cancelled and the 'way' opened to the general resurrection of all mankind and the opportunity of being brought up to human perfection so that when Satan is let loose this time, anyone who fails will do so on his own merit and not because of Adam's legacy.

This is the Bible in a nut-shell.

Alexander




















 







God

admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 197
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #51 on: August 21, 2014, 07:08:13 pm »
I'm sorry Mr. Winslow but did you mean to sign this "God" or was that a mistake?

AD

Alexander Winslow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #52 on: August 22, 2014, 04:43:21 pm »
Hello Administrator,

Sorry about that, that was not supposed to be on there, The word 'God 'must have filed its way down through while I was composing the post.

Alexander

admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 197
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #53 on: August 22, 2014, 04:51:45 pm »
Hello Administrator,

Sorry about that, that was not supposed to be on there, The word 'God 'must have filed its way down through while I was composing the post.

Alexander

I made a mistake once, back in 1946 when I was young. Or was it 1956  :-\

Alexander Winslow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #54 on: September 15, 2014, 05:10:11 pm »
Just a brief confirmation that the Word  which became flesh (John 1:14) is a god and not the Almighty God.

Ἐν     ἀρχῇ          ἦν     ὁ   λόγος,       καὶ   ὁ   λόγος       ἦν     πρὸς      τὸν     Θεόν,
In a   beginning  was  the Word,     and  the Word     was   with       the     God,

καὶ    θεὸς     ἦν     ὁ     λόγος.
and   a god  was  the  Word     (Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott - V20b Vat Ms 1209 – one of the oldest in existence) 

Alexander

Zant Law

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • ZLaw
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #55 on: September 16, 2014, 12:44:50 am »
Just a brief confirmation that the Word  which became flesh (John 1:14) is a god and not the Almighty God.

Ἐν     ἀρχῇ          ἦν     ὁ   λόγος,       καὶ   ὁ   λόγος       ἦν     πρὸς      τὸν     Θεόν,
In a   beginning  was  the Word,     and  the Word     was   with       the     God,

καὶ    θεὸς     ἦν     ὁ     λόγος.
and   a god  was  the  Word     (Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott - V20b Vat Ms 1209 – one of the oldest in existence) 

Alexander


Strong's   Transliteration   Greek   English   Morphology
1722 [e]   En                    Ἐν        In [the]     Prep
746 [e]   archē                  ἀρχῇ      beginning    N-DFS
1510 [e]   ēn                    ἦν         was           V-IIA-3S
3588 [e]   ho                    ὁ           the            Art-NMS
3056 [e]   Logos            Λόγος,    Word,      N-NMS
2532 [e]   kai                  καὶ            and            Conj
3588 [e]   ho                   ὁ           the           Art-NMS
3056 [e]   Logos          Λόγος           Word                N-NMS
1510 [e]   ēn                    ἦν            was            V-IIA-3S
4314 [e]   pros                  πρὸς         with             Prep
3588 [e]   ton                   τὸν            -            Art-AMS
2316 [e]   Theon           Θεόν,           God,              N-AMS
2532 [e]   kai                    καὶ            and              Conj
2316 [e]   Theos            Θεὸς            God             N-NMS
1510 [e]   ēn                    ἦν            was            V-IIA-3S
3588 [e]   ho                    ὁ             the            Art-NMS
3056 [e]   Logos         Λόγος.           Word.         N-NMS

En archí̱ í̱n o lógos kaí o lógos í̱n prós tón theón kaí theós í̱n o lógos


Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550)
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.  (Scrivener's Textus Receptus 1894)
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word


Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. (Greek Orthodox Church 1904)
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word

Fat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #56 on: September 20, 2014, 12:12:58 pm »
Just a brief confirmation that the Word  which became flesh (John 1:14) is a god and not the Almighty God.

Ἐν     ἀρχῇ          ἦν     ὁ   λόγος,       καὶ   ὁ   λόγος       ἦν     πρὸς      τὸν     Θεόν,
In a   beginning  was  the Word,     and  the Word     was   with       the     God,

καὶ    θεὸς     ἦν     ὁ     λόγος.
and   a god  was  the  Word     (Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott - V20b Vat Ms 1209 – one of the oldest in existence) 

Alexander
From Roberts word pictures



In the beginning (en arch). Arch is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew be reshith in Genesis 1:1 . But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. Was (hn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in verse John 1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Genesis 8:58 "before Abraham came (genesqai) I am" (eimi, timeless existence). The Word (o logo). Logo is from legw, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logo is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatiko logo for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Proverbs 8:23 . Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logo, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logo is applied to Christ only in John 1:1 John 1:14 ; Revelation 19:13 ; 1 John 1:1 "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in Hebrews 4:12 . But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul ( 2 Corinthians 8:9 ; Philippians 2:6 ; Colossians 1:17 ) and in Hebrews 1:2 and in John 17:5 . This term suits John's purpose better than sopia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (sarx egeneto, verse John 14 ) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. With God (pro ton qeon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pro with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1 John 2:1 we have a like use of pro: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (paraklhton ecomen pro ton patera). See proswpon pro proswpon (face to face, 1 Corinthians 13:12 ), a triple use of pro. There is a papyrus example of pro in this sense to gnwston th pro allhlou sunhqeia, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pro here and in Mark 6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koin, not old Attic. In John 17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom. And the Word was God (kai qeo hn o logo). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying o qeo hn o logo. That would mean that all of God was expressed in o logo and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (o logo) and the predicate without it (qeo) just as in John 4:24 pneuma o qeo can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." So in 1 John 4:16 o qeo agaph estin can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar_, pp. 767f. So in John 1:14 o Logo sarx egeneto, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.

Alexander Winslow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #57 on: September 29, 2014, 05:21:43 pm »
Hello Fat,

I cannot believe that you have stated this. All things in creation are founded on balance, not equality. If anything at all was equal to God, he would immediately cease to be Almighty God which in itself means without 'equal'. So the title of Almighty God informs us that even the conception of such a thing as a Trinity is nul and void!

When the question came up as to whom Jesus was while on earth, he asked his apostles: "Who do you say I am?" To which Simon Peter replied: "You are the Christ the Son of God." [Not God the Son] Whereby Jesus replied: "Well done Simon, because not man but my Father who is still in heaven who has revealed this to you." (Matthew 16:16, 17)

Well there we are, his Father who was still in heaven; so Jesus was not God incarnate after all.

All we have to do is read the scriptures and understand the sense in which they are written and all is revealed!

Alexander







Fat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #58 on: September 29, 2014, 05:57:29 pm »
Hello Alex

"Who do you say I am?" To which Simon Peter replied: "You are the Christ the Son of God." [Not God the Son] Whereby Jesus replied: "Well done Simon, because not man but my Father who is still in heaven who has revealed this to you." (Matthew 16:16, 17)

Can't believe you added to the scriptures to try and make a point.


I'll tell you the same thing I told Kimberley,

You have put limitations on our Lord, as if He is incapable of being in two places at one or that He can not take up a human form and and experience humility. You don't believe that He can be in two or three forms at one time. My God has no limitations. The only thing my God can not do is violate His own nature, for instance He can not lie.

I bet you have no problem with God being a burning bush or even asked yourself in what form was God when He came to Abraham (Gen 18) and eat and even bargained with him over the fate of Sodom.

Hebrews 2:9 But we do see Jesus- made lower than the angels for a short time so that by God's grace He might taste death for everyone-crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death.

Quote from: Alex
Well there we are, his Father who was still in heaven; so Jesus was not God incarnate after all.

I see, your Almighty God can not be in two places at once, now I understand.

JesusIsTheChrist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: The doctrine of the Trinity
« Reply #59 on: December 01, 2014, 08:34:01 am »
There are 3 Persons in the Godhead.
God the Father is not the Son.
They are 1 minded, 1 of spirit. - John 17.
Gen 19:24  Then the LORD (Jesus) rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD (the Father) out of heaven.
The greatest of God’s revelation to man is the Father – Son relationship, that there are 3 Persons in the Godhead and how They function as a unity.  They who know God not in truth, show that they do not have the Spirit of God.  For the Holy Spirit has come  to lead us in all truth – John16:13.