The Trinity

[Mark2020]

do your own work.

Not my work.
I'll remind you again:
Philosophic burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[outhouse]

doesnt apply because you want it to.

 

[icebuddy]

The reason why the Angel refused worship from John was because he said he was a prophet too, and they were thus of equal rank.

you just missed the whole point. Let me ask you a Question: Did John Worship Jesus? Please explain yourself if your answer is no.

Tom

 

[Shermana]

you just missed the whole point. Let me ask you a Question: Did John Worship Jesus? Please explain yourself if your answer is no.

Tom

It is you who missed the whole point. Do you realize why the Angel even said that he was a "prophet like you"? Jesus was in fact bowed down to. So was King David and so was the Angel in the Wilderness.

Why does one angel accept Worship but another refuse it?

 

[icebuddy]

thats not what this debate thread is about.
this is about the trinity and the real history behind it, you may choose to ignore.

Outhouse,
If there was no history, I would still come to the conclussion that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are our one God. Just as I believe man is made up of Body, Soul, And Spirit and yet one man, I also believe God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Tradition didnt teach this to me, the bible and Holy Spirit has.

Jhn 20:28 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
Jhn 20:29 Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed."

1Cr 10:1 ¶ Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
1Cr 10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
1Cr 10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
1Cr 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Outhouse,
Let me ask you a question: Who is this passage talking about?

Psa 102:25 "Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Psa 102:26 " [fn]Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed.
Psa 102:27 "But You are [fn]the same, And Your years will not come to an end.

Who do you believe this is?

Tom

 

[icebuddy]

It is you who missed the whole point

Lets say I did miss the point. Can you please answer my simple question: Did John Worship Jesus or Not? it looks like your answer is no by you saying "Jesus was bowed down to"

In Love,
Tom

 

[Shermana]

I answered that, and you refused to accept that King David and other angels were worshiped as well. Try again. I said he was "bowed down to" which is what Worship means,

Jesus was in fact bowed down to

so yes I answered your question, don't say I didn't when I did.

If your problem is that I didn't use the word "Worship" in that sentence, you prove my case about the word being generally misunderstood. So how did I not answer your question by saying he was in fact bowed down to. When you say "No", that means you completely ignored everything I said about the word worship meaning bow down to. If you have a different meaning of worship, we can't argue on the same level.

(PS Some of the verses where Jesus is bowed to such as in the ending of Luke are disputed by Westcott and Hort as Interpolations).

Does the angel of Numbers 22:31 reject Balaam's worship of him? No? Was he a bad angel?

Does Joshua worship the Angel in 5:14? Does the Angel reject it? No? Why not?

 

[Mark2020]

But who is Malach Adonai?

 

[icebuddy]

I answered that, and you refused to accept that King David and other angels were worshiped as well. Try again. I said he was "bowed down to" which is what Worship means,
so yes I answered your question, don't say I didn't when I did.

My sensor has dectected heat on this post... Anyways, Im not talking about King David, I was talking of John who knew how to correctly honor Jesus. You say John only bowed down to Jesus, and what I am trying to explain to you is that if John only bowed to Jesus and NOT worshipped him, then why would he try to worship a creation of Jesus, such as an angel. It doesnt make sense...

We are to Honor the Son as we Honor the Father. I honor them both with my worship. I dont understand how a person can Worship God and yet pay Jesus a little less type of Worship and read this next verse and be happy with themself.

Jhn 5:23 That all [men] should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Worship is a form of honor. You are not equaly honoring the Father and the Son is my whole point. We can argue about the word worship till we are blue in the face. I worship both Jesus and the Father with everything I have. Do you see a problem with under honoring Jesus? Im lifting Jesus up to the highest of the glory of God, not short of that.

In Love,
tom

PS - dont get upset, if you read my post I saw what you wrote, I was just making you define it better for me.

 

[Shermana]

Once again, bow down and worship are the same thing, if you refuse to accept this fact, there's no point in discussing. You skipped my questions about the other Angels being worshiped for good reason. I also mentioned that the Angel specifically told John that the reason he wouldn't accept Worship was because the Angel himself was a prophet as well and thus of the same rank as John, and there are ranks of angels. Such as Cherubim and Seraphim for example. Otherwise, the Angel of the Wilderness accepted worship from Moses. If you detect heat from a post it is probably frustration from the lack of traction.

 

[outhouse]

Outhouse,
If there was no history, I would still come to the conclussion that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are our one God.

i dont want to change your belief. Im not anti-theist either.

But there are facts that need to be addressed that do not include scripture.

the trinity is ALL dogma created by the early church fathers/bishops and a roman emporer.

This is a debate forum for the purpose of education. If you dont want a education on the subject, why participate?

 

[javajo]

Acts 20:28 (KJV) Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

God bought us with his own blood. Jesus is God, thus a member of the Trinity.

 

[Shermana]

As I said on the other thread, the "Tou" is often misinterpreted there. (There are two tous, which is often overlooked, possibly deliberately, on this verse). "Of through the blood of his own". It should read "Of the blood of his own". "Of his own" in this context means his begotten son.

http://concordances.org/greek/2398.htm

Definition: one's own, belonging to one, private, personal; one's own people, one's own family, home, property.

John 15:19

http://niv.scripturetext.com/john/15.htm

New International Version (©1984)
If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.

 

[javajo]

As I said on the other thread, the "Tou" is often misinterpreted there. (There are two tous, which is often overlooked, possibly deliberately, on this verse). "Of through the blood of his own". It should read "Of the blood of his own". "Of his own" in this context means his begotten son.

Strong's Greek: 2398. ????? (idios) -- one's own, distinct

Definition: one's own, belonging to one, private, personal; one's own people, one's own family, home, property.

John 15:19

http://niv.scripturetext.com/john/15.htm

Baloney.

 

[Mark2020]

Acts 20:28 (KJV) Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

God bought us with his own blood. Jesus is God, thus a member of the Trinity.

As I said on the other thread, ...

Good one javajo!

(Acts 20:28 [NIV]) Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.

(Acts 20:28 [TR]) προσεχετε ουν εαυτοις και παντι τω ποιμνιω εν ω υμας το πνευμα το αγιον εθετο επισκοπους ποιμαινειν την εκκλησιαν του θεου ην περιεποιησατο δια του ιδιου αιματος
του ιδιου αιματος: literally means " his own blood"

(Acts 20:28 [coptic]) ⲙⲁϩⲑⲏⲧⲉⲛ `ⲉⲣⲱⲧⲉⲛ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲓⲟϩⲓ ⲧⲏⲣϥ ⲉⲧⲁ ⲡⲓⲡ̅ⲛ̅ⲁ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ ⲭⲁ ⲑⲏⲛⲟⲩ `ⲛ`ⲉⲡⲓⲥⲕⲟⲡⲟⲥ `ⲛϧⲏⲧϥ `ⲉ`ⲁⲙⲟⲛⲓ `ⲛϯⲉⲕ`ⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓ`ⲁ `ⲛⲧⲉ ⲡ̅ϭ̅ⲥ ⲑⲏ ⲉⲧⲁϥ`ϫⲫⲟⲥ `ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉϥ`ⲥⲛⲟϥ `ⲙⲙⲓⲛ `ⲙⲙⲟϥ
'pef esnof emmin emmof' also means "his own blood".

(Acts 20:28 [Pe****ta]) ܐܙܕܗܪܘ ܗܟܝܠ ܒܢܦܫܟܘܢ ܘܒܟܠܗ ܡܪܥܝܬܐ ܗܝ ܕܐܩܝܡܟܘܢ ܒܗ ܪܘܚܐ ܕܩܘܕܫܐ ܐܦܤܩܘܦܐ ܕܬܪܥܘܢ ܠܥܕܬܗ ܕܐܠܗܐ ܗܝ ܕܩܢܗ ܒܕܡܗ ܀
ܒܕܡܗ : (with His blood) "from Paul Younan's interlinear"
Pe****ta's translation:
(Acts 20:28 [Etheridge]) Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to the whole flock over which the Spirit of Holiness hath constituted you the bishops; to pasture the church of the Meshiha which he hath purchased with his blood.

(Acts 20:28 [AraSVDV]) اِحْتَرِزُوا اِذًا لأَنْفُسِكُمْ وَلِجَمِيعِ الرَّعِيَّةِ الَّتِي أَقَامَكُمُ الرُّوحُ الْقُدُسُ فِيهَا أَسَاقِفَةً، لِتَرْعَوْا كَنِيسَةَ اللهِ الَّتِي اقْتَنَاهَا بِدَمِهِ.
بِدَمِهِ :"bedamehe" : "with his blood"

Even this:
(Acts 20:28 [WHNU]) προσεχετε εαυτοις και παντι τω ποιμνιω εν ω υμας το πνευμα το αγιον εθετο επισκοπους ποιμαινειν την εκκλησιαν του θεου ην περιεποιησατο δια του αιματος του ιδιου

The question is whether του ιδιου is adjective or possessive genitive.
Checking other similar locations:
(John 1:41 [WHNU]) ευρισκει ουτος πρωτον τον αδελφον τον ιδιον σιμωνα και λεγει αυτω ευρηκαμεν τον μεσσιαν ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον χριστος
"his own brother"
(John 5:43 [WHNU]) εγω εληλυθα εν τω ονοματι του πατρος μου και ου λαμβανετε με εαν αλλος ελθη εν τω ονοματι τω ιδιω εκεινον λημψεσθε
"his own name"
(Acts 1:25 [WHNU]) λαβειν τον τοπον της διακονιας ταυτης και αποστολης αφ ης παρεβη ιουδας πορευθηναι εις τον τοπον τον ιδιον
"his own place"

we can see that [article + noun1 + article + ἴδιος] always means "his own noun1", where [article + ἴδιος] always comes as an adjective and never as a possessive genitive.

So the meaning is "with his own blood. "

If he wanted to say "of his own son", it would have been easy to say "του ιδιου υιου"

It is worth mentioning that nowhere in the NT is "tou idiou" used as a substantive referring to Christ.

 

[Pegg]

Good one javajo!

(Acts 20:28 [NIV]) Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.

(Acts 20:28 [TR]) προσεχετε ουν εαυτοις και παντι τω ποιμνιω εν ω υμας το πνευμα το αγιον εθετο επισκοπους ποιμαινειν την εκκλησιαν του θεου ην περιεποιησατο δια του ιδιου αιματος
του ιδιου αιματος: literally means " his own blood"
we can see that [article + noun1 + article + ἴδιος] always means "his own noun1", where [article + ἴδιος] always comes as an adjective and never as a possessive genitive.

So the meaning is "with his own blood. "

If he wanted to say "of his own son", it would have been easy to say "του ιδιου υιου"

It is worth mentioning that nowhere in the NT is "tou idiou" used as a substantive referring to Christ.

The Greek words τοῦ ἰδίου (tou i‧di′ou) follow the phrase “with the blood.” The entire expression could be translated “with the blood of his own.” A noun in the singular number would be understood after “his own,” most likely God’s closest relative, his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ. On this point J. H. Moulton in A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 1 (Prolegomena), 1930 ed., p. 90, says: “Before leaving ἴδιος [i′di‧os] something should be said about the use of ὁ ἴδιος [ho i′di‧os] without a noun expressed. This occurs in Jn 1:11 "He came to his own home, but his own people did not take him in"
John 13:1 "...Jesus, having loved his own that were in the world"
Ac 4:23 "After being released they went to their own people"
In the papyri we find the singular used thus as a term of endearment to near relations" So really, the verse is pointing to the fact that God used the blood of one of his own relations....not his own blood.

this is why some translators have rendered the verse as follows:
“with the blood of His own Son” 1903 The Holy Bible in Modern English, by
F. Fenton, London.

“through the death of his own Son” 1966 Today’s English Version, American Bible Society, New York.

 

[Mark2020]

The Greek words τοῦ ἰδίου (tou i‧di′ou) follow the phrase “with the blood.” The entire expression could be translated “with the blood of his own.” A noun in the singular number would be understood after “his own,” most likely God’s closest relative, his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ. On this point J. H. Moulton in A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 1 (Prolegomena), 1930 ed., p. 90, says: “Before leaving ἴδιος [i′di‧os] something should be said about the use of ὁ ἴδιος [ho i′di‧os] without a noun expressed. This occurs in Jn 1:11 "He came to his own home, but his own people did not take him in"
John 13:1 "...Jesus, having loved his own that were in the world"
Ac 4:23 "After being released they went to their own people"
In the papyri we find the singular used thus as a term of endearment to near relations" So really, the verse is pointing to the fact that God used the blood of one of his own relations....not his own blood.

this is why some translators have rendered the verse as follows:
“with the blood of His own Son” 1903 The Holy Bible in Modern English, by
F. Fenton, London.

“through the death of his own Son” 1966 Today’s English Version, American Bible Society, New York.

Yes, but I think I've given far more evidences than he did

First of all, the vast majority of translations render it "his own blood"
Acts 20:28 Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.
Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Second, as I said, nowhere in the NT is "tou idiou" (through all of its forms) used as a substantive referring to Christ.
Rather, "του ιδιου υιου" is used, as in Romans 8:32.
"His own Son" was used, but never has "his own" been used to refer to the Son.

Third, all the occurrences of this form in the NT:
[article + noun1 + article + ἴδιος], which is like "του αιματος του ιδιου", have του ιδιου as an adjective, and I mentioned them all in my previous post.

Which makes the more likely translation of "του αιματος του ιδιου": "his own blood"

By the way, if you quoted one more sentence, you'd find:
"I ventured to cite this as a possible encouragement to those (including B. Weiss) who would translate Ac 20:28 “the blood of one who was his own.”
But I think the evidences I gave are enough.

For more, you can check:
http://www.forananswer.org/Acts/Bowman_Acts20_28.htm
which even points to the early translations that I had quoted in my previous post, like the coptic and the pe****ta which support this one:

(Acts 20:28 [NIV]) Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.

 

[IsmailaGodHasHeard]

This is for Shermana: You are wrong. Acts 4:12 is a reference to Jesus, and even if it was not, how to you explain John 14:6?

 

[outhouse]

Acts 20:28 (KJV) Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

God bought us with his own blood. Jesus is God, thus a member of the Trinity.

god didnt buy anything. acts was written a long time after jesus had been dead

these words are from someone who never met, knew, talked to, or heard one word from jesus.

repeating dogma does not prove the trinity

 

[Shermana]

This is for Shermana: You are wrong. Acts 4:12 is a reference to Jesus, and even if it was not, how to you explain John 14:6?

Acts 4:12 is talking about G-d who gave Jesus as the only "name" in whom salvation is found, and the point was about the contextual difference of "CALLING" upon a name which is a recitation of Joel 2:32. Why don't you quote me so I can see what exactly I said you disagree with.

John 14:6 is easy to explain, Yashua is the gatekeeper. No one comes to the Father except through him, what's so hard to understand? Even a Trinitarian has to accept they are separate beings in that verse.