Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Jesus quoted the Old Testament prophets all the time, but I'm not quite sure how that ties in to this discussion.
-
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!
The Trinity
- Thread starter Atruthseeker
- Start date
Says who? How else do you propose that Jesus only did that which he saw his Father do? His Father was the Savior of the previous creation. Jesus was the Savior of this creation and becomes the Father of the new creation. You speak as if there was and only ever shall be a single creation. Not so.
Muffled
Jesus in me
You are in error on this. The consciousness of the physical mind dies with the body. It is called brain death.
There is no evidence to suggest that God ever dies spiritually.
Just because He can cause a spiritual body ie resurrected body to die, doesn't mean that He is obligated to do so. However theoreticaly there is no particular need for Him to retain that body forever. However death of a spiritual body is not a spirtual death.
I don't see how this question relates.
I don't see any dichotomy. Perhaps you could explain with references.
I have seen no evidence for this. Theoretically it makes sense that the Paraclete no longer has to operate because there is no knowledge of sin.
This is a bizarre view. What evidence do you have for it?
This appears to be pure fantasy and certainly does not proceed from the scripture listed.
I wasn't talking about the consciousness of the physical mind.
You don't consider His law requiring such sufficient evidence? What else does it mean to descend below all things? What else does it mean when it says God suffers all of the same infirmities and problems as man? What else do you think Jesus meant when he said he only did that which he saw his own Father do before him?
You aren't making much sense here. You are talking about things that I don't think you really understand. Tell me precisely in practical terms what a spiritually resurrected body is and what spiritual death is and then perhaps what you are saying will make sense.
There has to be an advent of God where He condescends and goes below all things. He must accomplish this before He can ascend above all things. I'm pointing out that the advent where this is accomplished is the advent of the Holy Ghost. God dies both physically and spiritually but is redeemed. Upon His redemption, He ascends above all things. If it didn't relate to the subject at hand, the trinity, I wouldn't have said it. Three distinct advents of God are required to redeem His people. He must overcome physical death, which requires the advent of the Son. He must overcome spiritual death, which requires the advent of the Holy Ghost. He must reign victoriously, which requires the advent of the Father.
Look at the very heart and center of the Law in Leviticus chapter 16. There are three distinct animals that are designated for the people. There are two goats and a ram. The first goat is slain, which accords to physical death. The ram is burned, which accords to spiritual death. The second goat escapes alive into the wilderness. These animals each represent an advent of the godhead performing three essential functions that required a separate advent.
As I showed elsewhere in this thread, of each of these three distinct advents, only one contiguous lifespan is utilized. Jesus from birth to about 12 or 13 and then a brief ministry in his 30's as the Son. The one like unto Moses from about age 40 to his death who obtains victory as the Father. The Holy Ghost being that which remains, which was from about 13 or 14 to about 39 with some chunks missing, like being locked up in prison or whatever, to accommodate the ministry of Jesus. Thus, you have three distinct personages accommodating one divine lifespan.
So how else does the Christ figure come holding the keys of death and the keys of hell? (keys of the bottomless pit per Rev 20:1,14) He obtained the keys by suffering them and overcoming them. Without personal first-hand experience with them, how do you propose His judgment about who goes there as just?
Read Isaiah 44:6 which says Israel's King, who also carries the divine title LORD, falls and is in a state requiring redemption. LORD of hosts, His redeemer, performs His redemption. This is Adam, who was given dominion over all things in the exact image and likeness of God, but who transgressed and fell, thus becoming the Holy Ghost. Why else would He be called a ghost if He didn't become disembodied, i.e. dead? And, obviously, the implication of this passage is that these two personages would be unified into the personage of the Almighty God, the Father, to stand at the head of a new creation They/He would establish in victory by way of the power they obtain from their experience and by way of satisfying the law on both the physical plane and the spiritual plane, to make Israel worthy to be received as a bride on both levels again. The husband must die to release the bride from their old covenant. Thus, the main thing the Father does is establish a new covenant relationship with the gathered and redeemed hosts of scattered Israel.
I don't hear you offering any scriptural rebuttal. Rather than being fantasy, this is explaining things using the themes and patterns in the Bible and showing how they are carried out here in plain and practical terms that anyone can understand, provided they put aside their fantasies they have absorbed from the precepts of men.
When you can explain to me exactly how Adam lived almost a thousand years and who and what Adam was exactly, in plain and practical terms that cannot be refuted or shown to be speculation, then perhaps you can establish yourself as an authority whose opinion matters.
Sum1sGruj
Active Member
I believe the Trinity to be more a namesake than anything else. As for any literal composition, God is God.
Jesus could not have been part of God in any literal sense because He is tempted by the Adversary (what would be the point?) and does not refer to himself as God, but rather adheres to God's will for him.
I know this a scriptural debate, so I will say this:
There are indications in the bible that bring on ideas of God being 'split'. I have never looked specifically for these verses, but one naturally comes to mind as I had mentioned it in another thread.
-And God said, "Let us make man in our image"-
This could indicate something, but I personally believe He was speaking in light of His angels.
A Trinity just doesn't seem necessary to me, but I haven't looked up on it specifically either scripture-wise.
Jesus could not have been part of God in any literal sense because He is tempted by the Adversary (what would be the point?) and does not refer to himself as God, but rather adheres to God's will for him.
I know this a scriptural debate, so I will say this:
There are indications in the bible that bring on ideas of God being 'split'. I have never looked specifically for these verses, but one naturally comes to mind as I had mentioned it in another thread.
-And God said, "Let us make man in our image"-
This could indicate something, but I personally believe He was speaking in light of His angels.
A Trinity just doesn't seem necessary to me, but I haven't looked up on it specifically either scripture-wise.
Last edited:
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Satan tries to tempt Christ in hopes that He will give in to the temptation, thereby proving that He is not divine. The fact that he attempts to do so doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
He doesn't refer to Himself as God, but the Father does at one point address him as "God" (I'd have to look up the specific scripture) and He does not deny that He is God when Thomas refers to Him by this title. He also says that He has power to resurrect Himself, which would not have been the case had He not been divine. I would agree, though, that He was (and still is) subordinate to His Father with respect to His position within the Godhead. (I use the word "Godhead" because I reject the doctrine of the Trinity as defined in the 4th and 5th century creeds. I believe that the Father and Son are "one" in will and purpose, but not in substance.)
I believe God the Father was speaking to His Son, the pre-mortal Jesus Christ. That's why He used the pronouns "us" and "our."
Muffled
Jesus in me
It is more than a namesake. It is the manner in which God reveals Himself. In the OT, God reveals Himself through prophets. In Jesus, God reveals Himself directly. In the Paraclete, God reveals himself to anyone willing to receive Him.
God is not partitioned. God is perceived differently in Jesus but the reality remains one God. Jesus did equate Himself God. Satan see incarnation as an opportunity, since it gives people so much grief.
This is speculation. Norse myths say that humans were created by the gods from the earth. God says He had a hand in that also but that does not necessarily have to mean directly. (The Norse myths don't admit to humanity claiming that their origin is extra-terrestrial.)
If you were speaking of necessary as in an essence of God, I would agree. However it appears that God viewed it as necessary for His plan of salvation.
Muffled
Jesus in me
There is no evidence for this. A pre-mortal Jesus is the Father. There is no such thing as a separate spirit. Eph 4:4 "one Spirit." Also the Spirit that is in Jesus is the Father also John 10:30 "I and the Father are one."
Muffled
Jesus in me
De 6:4 Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah:
Therefore there is no union of three. Each member of the Trinity is God. When God says He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, There is no need for a union of each person's God because it is the same God.
Ex 3:15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
I have no qualms with this passage.
What do you mean? There is one Jehovah. That's wonderful. You need to take into consideration Isaiah 44:6 where Jehovah is referred to in company with another spoken of as LORD King of Israel, who needs to be redeemed. And, how do you explain how those two are alluded to as manifesting together as the one Almighty God? Two merge together to become One.
Just as Isaiah 44:6 points out. Each cycle of creation (a distinct period referred to as 'forever', which means forever unto the end of the age) has three distinct advents of God in the flesh. In the beginning is the advent of the Father. Then His Son comes next. Then comes Adam at the end (which is also the beginning of the new creation cycle) who is made King, but who falls and needs to be redeemed. What happens? The Son and Adam, now the Holy Ghost, enter into union together and in Adam's redeemed state returns as the Father, in union with the Son, to stand at the head of an entirely new Creation. This cycle repeats over and over. According to my reckoning, this occurs at least every (approx) 6 thousand years. Thus, we should find much in our ancient history about other former Saviors, Kings, etc. What do we find? We find plenty of such myths, etc.
I didn't ever say Abraham, Isaac and Jacob each had separate Gods that needed to be combined. Why put such words in my mouth?
And, you need to bear in mind, the implication here in saying 'forever' means 'unto the end of the age'.
When Jesus returns in glory, He returns as the advent of the Father on Day 1 of a new cycle of creation that is currently in the works. He shall redeem Israel's King who came not long prior but who was rejected by the world and who fell into transgression and was martyred. Thus, these two individuals each have their 'second coming' manifested as the Father. And, because they come on Day 1 of the new creation, they are standing in the 'world to come'. Thus, when Jesus said "My Kingdom is not of this world', what He was saying is that His Kingdom would not be established in power and victory until it was in the 'world to come'.
....and that 'world to come' is in the promise of 2nd Peter 3v13 that there will be a new heavens and a new earth where righteousness will dwell.
So, as in Noah's day the earth was made new by getting rid of wickedness
[2nd Peter 3v5], the heavens and earth of 'now' [2nd Peter 3v7] will also be cleansed of wickedness.
-Psalm 92v7; Proverbs 2vs20-22; 10v30; Isaiah 11v4; Rev 19vs11,15
So, as in Noah's day the earth was made new by getting rid of wickedness
[2nd Peter 3v5], the heavens and earth of 'now' [2nd Peter 3v7] will also be cleansed of wickedness.
-Psalm 92v7; Proverbs 2vs20-22; 10v30; Isaiah 11v4; Rev 19vs11,15
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Evidence? What the hell are you talking about? I see it one way; you see it another way. What makes your opinion any more verifiable as evidence than mine?
But just to make sure I'm correctly understanding you, are you actually saying that God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ are the same individual?
Sum1sGruj
Active Member
I'm sure I've posted on this thread a while back, but I'll get more in depth with my take on the Trinity.
I believe the Trinity is more or less a namesake. My idea has always been one God, where the Trinity is just a way of explaining the working parts of God through how we perceive Him through life.
The Bible, Jesus, and Him.
When Jesus said "I and the Father are One", I think he was simply referring to wisdom. He says he is commanded by the Father. You have to compare and contrast here, folks.
I believe the Trinity is more or less a namesake. My idea has always been one God, where the Trinity is just a way of explaining the working parts of God through how we perceive Him through life.
The Bible, Jesus, and Him.
When Jesus said "I and the Father are One", I think he was simply referring to wisdom. He says he is commanded by the Father. You have to compare and contrast here, folks.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Okay, so it sounds like you are saying that the Father and the Son are "one" in some way, but in substance or essence. In other words, they are also distinct from each other but have a united in some way other than physical being. Would that be correct?
Sum1sGruj
Active Member
Well, being that he is the son of God and endowed with His wisdom, I guess you could say that.
But if He was God in any sense other than being His son, the Adversary would have never even bothered to tempt him,, because he would be tempting God- which would be a complete waste of time.
My take has always been this in a nutshell: Jesus is the King, charged by God to decide the fate of all through His will and passion.
What I've considered the most powerful aspect of it is that he is most deserving. He took our sins and payed for them, as any righteous king would do for their kingdom.
Last edited:
Sum1sGruj
Active Member
I'd have to disagree with this. While I thoroughly do not believe in an actual Trinity as acclaimed by many Christians, I can see why it would become a consensus. There are many instances in the Bible, not foreign religion, that implies a possibility.
It's not Christians who denied the continuing evolution of the religion_
At least in my opinion. Let's not forget the fact that many Jews themselves had a hand in Christianity starting.
The NT, after all, is very very Jewish despite Jewish rejection.
Last edited:
Muffled
Jesus in me
Evidence? What the hell are you talking about? I see it one way; you see it another way. What makes your opinion any more verifiable as evidence than mine?
But just to make sure I'm correctly understanding you, are you actually saying that God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ are the same individual?
You say you see something different, then say what that something is that you are seeing. Otherwise if I can't see it, then it is a figment of your imagination. I showed you a verse that says there is one Spirit. Did you see it, ignore it, or discount it because you don't believe it?
Yes, that is what one God means. However this one God is capable of representing Himself in many ways. He is also capable of inhabitating a body in the same way that a human spirit inhabits a body. Since He is omnipresent, He is also everywhere else at the same time without any division in consciousness. The mind of the body has its own consciousness which the spirit can replace or augment as it sees fit.
Muffled
Jesus in me
This does not preclude Jesus from being the same person as the Father since the Father has always desired to be King.
The adversary thinks that presence in the flesh would cause God to be weak and therefore vulnerable. God displayed strength to endure the worst that humans have to endure at the hands of the enemy.
Muffled
Jesus in me
There is only one person in this passage, Jehovah, King, and Redeemer of Israel.
There is not a separate person for each name and title.
This is not in the text. I would like to see you work hard at wresting it from the text.
I know. I was only giving an example.
This is pure fantasy.