Hands up who believes in the Trinity!

[ThisShouldMakeSense]

Quite right. All are fully God, separately and together. As for ThisShouldMakeSense's question, the three don't make one person - we believe in one God in three Hypostases (Persons is the slightly dodgy English translation), not one Person, God, who is made up of three Persons (the individual Hypostases). It's amazing how many people criticise the Trinity without actually understanding what the doctrine says (and this is very different to fully grasping what it means, which as I've said before is beyond created minds' abilities).

James

i asked that question as a way of clarifying a point i thought someone else was making. i just wanted to know what exactly they meant. by the way, on your last sentence, and it's been brought out by some one else too, the creeds of the councils have done much to distance people from Bible and the true God, and who he is. it has confussed and pushed people away by misrepresenting him. It's a known historical fact that the councils such as the one at nicea, which started this whole thing off, was headed by a pagan sun worshipper. interestingly, none of the bishops of the time promoted the trinity. and you know the futher development of the teaching over the years.
Paul hit the nail on the head here: 2 Timothy 4: 3,4

'The time will come when people will not listen to the truth. They will look for teachers who will tell them only what they want to hear.
'They will not listen to the truth. Instead, they will listen to stories made up by men.

 

[Mister Emu]

Paul hit the nail on the head here: 2 Timothy 4: 3,4

'The time will come when people will not listen to the truth. They will look for teachers who will tell them only what they want to hear.
'They will not listen to the truth. Instead, they will listen to stories made up by men.

How true he was. Paul taught the trinity, though he may not have called it that.

interestingly, none of the bishops of the time promoted the trinity. and you know the futher development of the teaching over the years.

Evidence?

It's a known historical fact that the councils such as the one at nicea, which started this whole thing off, was headed by a pagan sun worshipper.

The emperor did not control what happened during the councils.

 

[James the Persian]

i asked that question as a way of clarifying a point i thought someone else was making. i just wanted to know what exactly they meant. by the way, on your last sentence, and it's been brought out by some one else too, the creeds of the councils have done much to distance people from Bible and the true God, and who he is. it has confussed and pushed people away by misrepresenting him. It's a known historical fact that the councils such as the one at nicea, which started this whole thing off, was headed by a pagan sun worshipper. interestingly, none of the bishops of the time promoted the trinity. and you know the futher development of the teaching over the years.
Paul hit the nail on the head here: 2 Timothy 4: 3,4

'The time will come when people will not listen to the truth. They will look for teachers who will tell them only what they want to hear.
'They will not listen to the truth. Instead, they will listen to stories made up by men.

Sorry but your 'known historical facts' are actually Protestant opinion passed off as fact. How can you say none of the bishops supported the Trinity at Nicea when the overwhelming majority voted that Arius be anathematised? That just makes no sense at all. Your reiteration of the pagan sun worshipper corrupting the Church argument is likewise nonsense. Firstly, whether or not Constantine was still a follower of Sol Invictus at this point is pretty much irrelevant as he presided over but did not alter the doctrine of the Council. If you believe that bishops who had just come through the last great persecution and a huge number of whom bore scars and terrible disfigurements because they wouldn't bow to Diocletian and forsake the faith would have allowed Constantine to persuade them to give up all they believed in with kind words then I'm afraid that you appear to have no understanding of the historical realities of Nicea.

In any case, Constantine almost certainly was a Christian at this time in belief even if he remained unbaptised. It was quite common for people to put off baptism until late in life at the time, particularly rulers, because it was seen as the only sure way to wash away sin and not be put in a position to forsake the faith they had found. I wouldn't condone this attitude but it was common then and remained so for a considerable time afterwards. Usually when someone like myself points this out to an anti-Catholic (meaning universal not Roman church in this instance) Protestant, they come up with the hoary old chestnut that Constantine was baptised on his deathbed against his will. Nothing could be further from the truth and I have no idea where this ahistorical garbage is dredged up from. In actual fact he had planned to be baptised in the Holy Land quite some time prior but ill health came on him and he had no choice but to forsake the Holy Land trip and was baptised shortly before death in Constantinople.

I can show you Patristic quotes teaching the Trinity well prior to Nicea and I can show you Trinitarian passages in Scripture, but you won't accept those because you'd rather put your neo-Arian and Pneumatomachist philosophy ahead of the revelation of God given the Church. I do have to wonder, though, how you can base your philosophy on Scripture at all if you think the Church Apostasized at Nicea. You wouldn't even have a New Testament canon at all if it weren't for the post-Nicene Church.

James

 

[Scuba Pete]

You know TSMS,

that scripture has been used so many times in such an un-Christian way that it appalls me. If you don't want to discuss the issue, then just stop. Constantly playing that trump card can only be seen as self serving. Jesus NEVER SAID that they will know you are my disciples by your beliefs in the Trinity or not. However Paul did say:

I Thessalonians 5:14 And we urge you, brothers, warn those who are idle, encourage the timid, help the weak, be patient with everyone. 15 Make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always try to be kind to each other and to everyone else. NIV

 

[Mister Emu]

Thank you James,

I just want to note, that not all Protestants think that way .

 

[ThisShouldMakeSense]

Ok, ok, i can see this going on till armageddon. i'm not convinced and neither are you. i guess it'll all come out in the wash. i still have more questions etc, etc, and it can and will go on and on. so, if anyone wants to continue, go for it. i may even chip in now and then...
1 Timothy 6:3-5

 

[James the Persian]

Thank you James,

I just want to note, that not all Protestants think that way .

Yes, I'm aware of that. Far from all Protestants subscribe to the universal apostacy idea (the Lutheran Church I grew up in does not, for instance), but of those people who do subscribe to it, they are invariably either Protestants or members ofa less mainstream sect such as the LDS. How anyone who accepts the Scriptures can accept that idea at all, given Christ's promise to the Church, is beyond me, but evidently they do. I should probably have been a little more careful in my phrasing as I wasn't intending to tar all Protestants with the same brush but I was perhaps made a little hasty by my urge to respond forcefully to that piece of ahistorical, anti-Constantine (who is considered a saint in both east and west, for goodness sake) drivel being raised yet again. I apologise if anyone misconstrued my comments as condemnatory of all Protestants rather than just the small extremist fringe they were aimed at.

James

 

[glasgowchick]

So how is he the same person then?!?!!?[/QUOTE

Try to think of who Jesus was before he came to Earth..Go Back to the beguining Gen 1:1 In the beguining GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE Earth...So in the beguining GOD CREATED......Next we see that the earth was formless and Empty, and darkness covered the deep waters And the Spirit of God was hoovering over the surface of the waters..All this was in the beguining...

Notice it says Gods Spirit... Not Gods Active force......Were on earth did that translation come from...Think about it, then tell me can an active force speak, teach, comfort ect ect..

John futher explains That the Word was with God...

All three took part and were involved with Creation..

Take the word trinity out of the way and you will still have all three....

Because someone didn't understand this concept, The Scriptures have been change to fit thier theolgy..You understand there is One God, but you are willing to accept that Jesus is created Angel yet you call him " a god" with a small "g"...So if he is any kind of God, he must be a true god or a false god, if he is a true god then you believe in two Gods...If you deny that Jesus is a false god then that leaves no other option that Jesus is the true God.

See now that I-I Am he AND THEIR ARE NO OTHER gods TOGETHER WITH ME Duet 32:39 Do you not believe God when he says there is no other Gods together with Him. if not why not...thanks

 

[Ronald]

Ronald,

Just call me stupid.

I tend to believe the scriptures and am not sure why you insist on pushing this "divine revelation". Why is the Hebrew of any consequence here? I can't even find "divine" or "divinity" in the NIV.

Philippians 2:6 By nature, Jesus is GOD.

Colossians 2:9 In Jesus the FULLNESS of God DWELLS in bodily form

God is pan-dimensional and Jesus is his physical incarnation. Just because you can't understand it does not make it true.

I'll let you say if you are stupid or not.
Let's put the word of God through a few more transcribers hands and see if we can get it it say just exactly what you want everyone to believe! LOL That is what is called by Yeshua "Precepts of man."
All I want to point out is that it is okay to believe in your precept of a triune God.
There is a penalty to pay if you are wrong! There is not one verse that says Jesus is God.
It does say Jesus is the "Word of God, Son of God, image of God, the first born of all creation and a myriad of other discriptions, but not one, I am your God!
Since it is not a requirement of God to believe in what man thinks is true, all I can see is the big warning against false teachings.
I have nothing to gain from the dogma, but much to lose. That being the case I will not teach anything that I can't point to in an acceptable Bible and say read it yourself, look up the words and when you have made YOUR decision, it is yours! Not mine! No coaxing, no arm twisting, no influencing just the Word of God.

Back to the word divine!
From the AV KJV, divine in the Older Testament is a no-no, don't divine, divine is bad!
Comes the same AV KJV NT and divine is the very God, the very best, super okay!
We all are aware of seeming contradictions in scriptures, well IMO this is not SEEMING Contradiction, but GLARING CONTRADICTION! all Manmade! I might add.
Divine strongs # 5172, 7080, 7981 Hebrew.
Divine strongs # 2999, 2304 Greek

 

[ThisShouldMakeSense]

So how is he the same person then?!?!!?[/QUOTE


...Notice it says Gods Spirit... Not Gods Active force......Were on earth did that translation come from...Think about it, then tell me can an active force speak, teach, comfort ect ect..

It's a pain that i can't spend more time on this site when i'd like to...but i will say this about the point i'm quoting you on. the bible also speaks of the spirit being poured out, and coming down as a dove...

 

[Scuba Pete]

Ronald,

why are you trying to debate a translation that is not contemorary English. I have no idea what the variants were BACK THEN when the KJV was translated. They use charity for love, thees and thous, and other conventions that were common back then, but are now completely antiquated. Might as well be discussing the Latin Vulgate.

As for the "false teachings", please refer to post #104.

You should read CS Lewis' treatise on Nature, natura and phusis. You will understand what the scripture means when it says that Jesus was by nature "God".

 

[Ronald]

Because Yeshua said the "Truth shall set you free.
"Isa 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
2Ti 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
What more can I say?

 

[glasgowchick]

It's a pain that i can't spend more time on this site when i'd like to...but i will say this about the point i'm quoting you on. the bible also speaks of the spirit being poured out, and coming down as a dove...

Ok don't answer the rest but thats ok....What does it mean to pour out? Have you heard the expression of someone thats really upset, it can be said " they poured their hearts out " did she relly pour her heart out ?..

Also to pour out can also mean [verb] Give tongue to--Articulate either verbally or with a cry or a shout or noise..POUR OUT --UTTER, EXPRESS

When was the Holy Spirit poured out ?

Acts 2:1 On the day of penticost All the believers were meeting together in one place 2 suddenly there was a sound from heaven like the roaring of a mighty windstorm and it filled the House where they were sitting 3 Then what looked like flames or tongues of fire appeared and settled on each of them. 4 And everyone present was filled with the Holy Spirit and began speaking in other languages.." AS THE HOLY SPIRIT GAVE THEM THIS ABILITY"

When the Holy Spirit was poured out, all it means is that the Holy Spirit gave them the ability to speak in other tongues..

 

[glasgowchick]

Because Yeshua said the "Truth shall set you free.
"Isa 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
2Ti 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
What more can I say?

Isa 5:20 Here is another thought on that Scripture taken from the New Living translation....When people see no distinction bwteen good and evil destruction soon follows. its easy for people to say no-one can decide for anyone else what is really right or wrong they may think getting drunk can't hurt them, extrmarital sex isn't really wrong or money doesnt control them but when they make excuses for their actions they break down the distiction between right and wrong if people do not take Gods word the bible as their standard soon all moral choices become fuzzy without God they are headed for a break down of much suffering.

So from that I can see, That God is saying that It is wrong for people to say its ok for people to do all the things that is wrong in Gods eyes, so in turn they are doing what Isa 5:20 says....

 

[Scuba Pete]

Oh, you've said enough Ronald.

I think I will concentrate on loving and serving.

Matthew 25:31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

37 "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

40 "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44 "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45 "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' 46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." NIV

 

[jeffrey]

Because Yeshua said the "Truth shall set you free.
"Isa 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
2Ti 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
What more can I say?

Could it not also be considered that by trying to find evil where there is good, in which by attempting to mix apples with oranges,which you are doing with these verses, that by infact you yourself are doing what you are accusing others to be doing?

 

[glasgowchick]

Could it not also be considered that by trying to find evil where there is good, in which by attempting to mix apples with oranges,which you are doing with these verses, that by infact you yourself are doing what you are accusing others to be doing?

now that's a thought

 

[Katzpur]

I can't remember why i didn't finish that one. I probably got into another thread and forgot about it. But anyway. to your question. It's up to you mate. Like you know, i could go on till the cows come home. the thing is, both sides of the argument are convinced they are right and no matter how many scriptures we show each other, we wont back down. the difference i find, is that when i use some scriptures to dispute the trinity, they ussually ignore them and come up with another set of scrptures that they try to use, to prove the trinity. Like i said, we need to reason on the scriptures, as did Paul. Forget what we have been taught. Let's go back to the Bible. Look at context. Compare scriptures. Look at the original language. look at different translations to get a fuller meaning.
i aslo hear a lot from trinitarians that it isn't for us to understand...not in this life time etc. (which, makes sense if you're talking about the trinity...)Well, if God didn't want us to find out who he really is, then why bother coming to us in the first place with the bible? Jesus said that he has made His, that is God's name manifest. Now i ask you, what was that name? Who was his God? How can Jesus, if he is equal with the Father, ever have a God and be God at the same time?

Apparently I haven't been spreading enough karma around, because I wasn't allowed to give you any more right now. At any rate, I agree with almost everything you have said. I disagree on a couple of items, but for the most part, you have made some very good points. If someone who knew nothing whatsoever about the Christian concept of God were to read the Bible and then explain to someone else what he had learned about this Higher Power, you can be darned sure his explaination wouldn't even resemble the doctrine of the Trinity.

 

[Katzpur]

Kathryn, since this morning I have tried to get as much info on the Creeds as possible. The Apostles' Creed I say as part of the Rosary. As far as the Trinity goes, most of that came from my own studies. Reading both pro and con. The Trinity makes sense to me. I don't believe in multiple Gods. I don't believe the God I Worship is just the 'Western Marketing God'. One God. A part of him became 'flesh' to speak to man directly. Another thread talked about time. God knows what will happen because He's already been there. Another thing we connot fully grasp.

I really do admire your sincerity, and am not trying to put you on the spot. But if the Trinity makes so much sense to you, perhaps you could help me understand it too. Could we start with the question of God's essence? What do you believe God's essence is?

 

[Katzpur]

ya a clover. There are "three individual gods" (three indivudual leaves) "yet not three but one" (not three leaves, but one)

ARgh, so hard to explain, St. Patty, help me out here
The shamrock, which looks like clover, has three leaves on each stem. Saint Patrick told the people that the shamrock was like the idea of the Trinity – that in the one God there are three divine beings: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

I cut and pasted that from some site.

Hi, jimbob.

Now I'm getting confused. I've never heard the words "three individual gods" spoken by a Catholic before. I don't believe in the Trinity, but I do believe that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all divine and are, together, "God." That doesn't sound too far removed from what you've just said. So how come I'm always being accused of being polytheistic?

Kathryn