1robin
Christian/Baptist
The doctrine of the trinity (which I neither support nor deny) says that Jesus is one of three separate persons that make up one being. You contention is correct but does not effect the doctrine.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did Jesus say he was God???
- Thread starter Muffled
- Start date
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
It does effect it...The "Holy Spirit" and "God" are not classified as (Persons) anywhere in the OT. The concept of "God" as a "person" is solely a creation from the minds of Christians/Pagans. The doctrine has no merit considering it is not the the teaching expressed in the Torah nor was it something Yeshua taught.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
As I said I do not have a dog in this race but to suggest Jesus was not a person is bizarre. The holy spirit is a bit less obvious but since the bible makes it clear the spirit can make it's own decisions, act on it's own, speak for it's self then it has the characteristics of independant person hood. A biblical definition of person hood I remember is:
1. A mind - able to think and act upon their thinking
2. their own will - self identity
3. and emotions - able to react cognitively
Shermana
Heretic
Where is the Biblical definition of 'person" defined as such biblically? Why would a being have multiple different minds? No such philosophical concept of a being having multiple minds exists anywhere until the 3rd-4th century when the concept is invented to suit the Syncretic doctrines. If there is an independent "personhood" then that "person" would be its own separate being. If those aren't the definitions of separate beings altogether, what is? It's not bizarre whatsoever to suggest that Jesus is a person, but it's bizarre to redefine the term "person" to mean something other than a "Separate being with a separate mind" or a "component of a being made up of other persons", but it's been done that way as a tradition for centuries now.
Your definintion may be supported by certain Church Father writings, but it is not "Biblical" in any way whatsoever. The idea of a Divine being with multiple minds divided among those minds is very Polytheistic. The only reason to assume there is a concept of "Personhood" is due to late era Christian Greek philospohers, the concept is wholly invented, is not "Biblical" and has no clear cut definition to begin with, as the word "person" isn't exactly defined even in Church Father writings. At best you have Athanasius attempting to define the "Unity" in his own Wordplay.
Your definintion may be supported by certain Church Father writings, but it is not "Biblical" in any way whatsoever. The idea of a Divine being with multiple minds divided among those minds is very Polytheistic. The only reason to assume there is a concept of "Personhood" is due to late era Christian Greek philospohers, the concept is wholly invented, is not "Biblical" and has no clear cut definition to begin with, as the word "person" isn't exactly defined even in Church Father writings. At best you have Athanasius attempting to define the "Unity" in his own Wordplay.
Last edited:
1robin
Christian/Baptist
As I find this issue almost devoid of relevance and do not have a position myself I am getting bored. It would require more time than I wish to devote to establish this as a certainty. That is probably why it has been fought over for 2000 years. I just don't find it that meaningful. If Jesus WAS God we must accept him as savior and be born again to get to heaven. If Jesus was NOT God we must accept him as savior and be born again to get to heaven. I will leave it to others who can justify the time they spend more than I can. Good info though. If someone could say why do you find this so vital?
Shermana
Heretic
It's extremely meaningful and could be of relevance to the modern day. If the Trinity was decisively proven wrong on a large-scale it would mean the collapse of organized "Christiandom". It would also put various doctrines and interpretations of other issues in the text into serious question.
Anyone who is dissatisfied with the organized "Christian" establishment can help unwind it by making knowledge of its falsehoods known.
Anyone who is dissatisfied with the organized "Christian" establishment can help unwind it by making knowledge of its falsehoods known.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
You have said that this was not even a dominant Christian doctrine so how can it jepordize Christianity. The default position is Jesus was endowed with the necessary power, authority, and title by God to accomplish what he did and I do not see if that was true how it changes core doctrine.
Shermana
Heretic
The closest thing I remember saying is that it was not established until the 2nd century. Other than that, it is a binding doctrine that all Organized orthodox Christiandom in the West adheres to as a central doctrine. Orthodox-Christianity is the dominant "Christianity".
"Organized" Christianity. Imagine if 100 million Protestants in America all learned that the Trinity doctrine is totally false and based on lies and interpolations and misinterpretations, what would happen to organized Christianity in the West? Would all the Churches simply adapt to what was now the trend to deny the Trinity? (This includes the 20-million Oneness Pentacostals with their Modalism).
That's exactly what I believe, except I don't believe it was the Supreme Being giving it to Himself, it was His first Created being, the Prime, Prototype Soul, the Highest of the Angels. This is what I believe the Ancients believed about the "Logos" being the "Angel of God". It makes a great difference in things like the value of the Blood of the Savior as the prophecied Sacrificial Guilt Offering. It's not the Father who goes to shed Blood on Earth, that honor is bestowed to his son. Perhaps Isaac was a foreshadowing.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
I withdraw this as it would be hairy to persue.
I am a western orthodox Christian and I do not find it changes my beliefs at all. I can see how it might change some stuffy official doctrines or creeds but not what gets us into heaven.
You went off the cliff on this last part. I am not smart enough for your views.
waitasec
Veteran Member
did i miss something? where did Dirty Penguin suggest that in this post?
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
I never said or suggested he wasn't. What I'm saying is that the "holy spirit" and "God" are not referred to as (persons) anywhere in the OT nor do Jews believe such a thing. The concept of "God, holy spirit and Yeshua" being persons is solely from Christian/Pagans.
If this is the case then we're not talking about mere monotheism.
Muffled
Jesus in me
This is the promise of the Paraclete. There is one Spirit who comes to us, not three and Eph 4:4 backs that up.
This is evidence that Jesus and the Father are one Spirit and one God. There is no evidence to the contrary.
Muffled
Jesus in me
On the contrary. There is one spirit who is one person.
The Father, the Paraclete and Jesus are all the same Spirit so they are all the same person. Since all are persons, each is a person also but not different from each other.
I'm a bit confused, and I was confirmed a Catholic, and got the ashes and everthing, all for my Grandmother's sake.
But one thing I couldn't figure out.
Didn't God say that we couldn't see Him ? Why could we see Jesus, if indeed He was God, and all three persons were as one, why didn't they all go blind ?
I must have missed something in catechism classes.
It changed me into an Atheist, or agnostic, I'm not sure which way to go.
I'm 74 years old and still can't find an answer that makes sense.
I was confirmed in 1950 and that's a long time searching.
And there's a lot of posts in this thread, aren't there ?
~
`mud
But one thing I couldn't figure out.
Didn't God say that we couldn't see Him ? Why could we see Jesus, if indeed He was God, and all three persons were as one, why didn't they all go blind ?
I must have missed something in catechism classes.
It changed me into an Atheist, or agnostic, I'm not sure which way to go.
I'm 74 years old and still can't find an answer that makes sense.
I was confirmed in 1950 and that's a long time searching.
And there's a lot of posts in this thread, aren't there ?
~
`mud
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
We've established this already and have come to to the realization that this is what many (not all) Christians believe. This, however, is contrary to what Jews believed and it it contrary to what Yeshua taught. There is no place in the NT where Yeshua taught he and his god were one in the same. Same purpose...Yes...same person...No...:sad:
Spirits aren't classified as persons. Yeshua taught that.
Actually they're not. Yeshua taught he was separate from his god...before his god "sent" him, why he was here and after he ascended....we find the direct teaching from Yeshua expressing he was separate.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
Of course the Jews do not believe this or Jesus would not have been killed (or maybe he would I don't know). There are many obvious implications made from the bible even though the bible never states them in so many words. The bible does not say that Moses was a Homo Sapien but that is an obvious implication or conclusion. The person hood of Jesus and the Holy siprit are noty quite as obvious but no less implied. I included the biblical definitions that showed that.
We are not talking about an arbitrary definition of monotheism. However one being composed of three persons has been biblically defended as monotheism for over a thousand years.
John Boanerges
Preterist
Which is H2O...ice, water or water vapor?
Who actually created the world/universe? (John 1: 1-18)
Who actually created the world/universe? (John 1: 1-18)
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Yeshua never taught that he was "God"...and Yeshua's "death" was because the charge was that he "claimed" to be the (son of God), not "God" in carnate..... It was/is frowned upon in both the Jewish and Islamic culture (which are very very similar) to express being the son of "God".
There are no implications...only inferences by your interpertations as to what is written.
No, this is a strawman
Last edited:
1robin
Christian/Baptist
:help::cold: Take that. I will see your one run of the mill emoticon and raise you several explodaemoticons: :takeabow::takeabow:
This requires no meaningful contribution I can see the appeal it must have for your position. Of course I kid. I did find the post you addressed quite inconclusive as well.