The Trinity

[sojourner]

John 14:14 "Whatever you ask in my name I will do it"

How could anyone but God make a promise like that ?

I say "consider it done" all the time.

 

[allright]

I say "consider it done" all the time.

I expect unbelievers to mock Jesus promises, but not people who say their
a Christian

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I expect unbelievers to mock Jesus promises, but not people who say their
a Christian

Have you gotten everything you've prayed for?

 

[sojourner]

I expect unbelievers to mock Jesus promises, but not people who say their
a Christian

Who's "mocking?" There's no mock -- no mock!

The question was asked whether a human being could make promises. I'm human -- I make promises all the time.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Not yet but a whole lot of it

So you've healed the sick with a touch? Moved mountains into the sea with a command? You have brought people back from the dead? Healed the crippled?

You're adding to the promise. Jesus said if you have faith as a mustard seed you can lift mountains, he says all that you ask of me will be given, ask and you shall receive. As such all of your prayers should have been answered as you asked them. A father does not give a child a serpet when they ask for fish. God would not either. So all your prayers must have been answered exactly how you wanted them.

 

[allright]

Who's "mocking?" There's no mock -- no mock!

The question was asked whether a human being could make promises. I'm human -- I make promises all the time.

My mistake, I apologise

 

[allright]

So you've healed the sick with a touch? Moved mountains into the sea with a command? You have brought people back from the dead? Healed the crippled?

You're adding to the promise. Jesus said if you have faith as a mustard seed you can lift mountains, he says all that you ask of me will be given, ask and you shall receive. As such all of your prayers should have been answered as you asked them. A father does not give a child a serpet when they ask for fish. God would not either. So all your prayers must have been answered exactly how you wanted them.

Even Jesus had a prayer that wasnt granted because it was God's plan for him to die on the cross

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Your ignorance of meaning of the Bible is exceeded only by your anger at God
Even Jesus had a prayer that wasnt granted because it was God's plan for him to die on the cross

I have no anger at God. I believe God will do what God chooses.

However you put up a promise made that all will be given to those who ask. The bible further says that just like a father god will give you what you ask. It further says ask and you will be given. I have made no attempt to call you ignorant.

I merely ask have you been given all. If not, then you must not have faith even the size of a mustard seed.

 

[Shermana]

John 14:14 "Whatever you ask in my name I will do it"

How could anyone but God make a promise like that ?

Why not a High Angel with authority to do so?

 

[allright]

Why not a High Angel with authority to do so?

Where does God ever say you should pray to an Angel or pray to anyone but himself.

Thats what Satan was after and look where it got him

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

Considering the Messiah is based on Jewish concepts, Jewish standards (of the time) would in fact be very relevant to accepting the validity of this doctrine that was "developed" centuries after the actual event. Early Jewish Christians seem to have not believed in such a concept.

Ok, the Messiah is based on Jewish concepts, and the Trinity doctrine is based on Christian concepts.

What if I told you that Jews would be possibly, potentially more apt to considering Jesus as the prophecied Messiah if Christians stopped pushing the Trinity?

I remember you, Shermana. Let me ask you something in regards to the Trinity. From a biblical perspective, Jesus never sinned. Now, did Jesus never sin because it was impossible for him to sin, or did he never sin because he had the discipline to not sin, despite it being possible for him to do so.

Which do you think is it? Now watch this....hehehehe

 

[Shermana]

Ok, the Messiah is based on Jewish concepts, and the Trinity doctrine is based on Christian concepts.

By "Christian" concepts, you mean post late-2nd century developments that were totally detached from the early Jewish Messiah concepts.

I remember you, Shermana. Let me ask you something in regards to the Trinity. From a biblical perspective, Jesus never sinned. Now, did Jesus never sin because it was impossible for him to sin, or did he never sin because he had the discipline to not sin, despite it being possible for him to do so.




Which do you think is it? Now watch this....hehehehe

The Discipline. Being the incarnation of the Highest of the Created Beings, he probably had a lot more Spiritual development than even Abraham and John the Baptist.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

By "Christian" concepts, you mean post late-2nd century developments that were totally detached from the early Jewish Messiah concepts.

Um, Sherm...the books of the bible were written pre 2nd century. Which means that the concept of the Trinity existed prior to that. Maybe it wasn't until that time period that people began to put 2 and 2 together....which is not surprisingly considering the fact that God has a history of giving people revelations some many years down the line. That can be argued, but the concept was in the bible from the moment the words were written.

The Discipline. Being the incarnation of the Highest of the Created Beings, he probably had a lot more Spiritual development than even Abraham and John the Baptist.

Ok, so if John the Baptist lived a sinless life, his death could have been sufficient enough to redeem's man relationship with God? Is that what you are saying?

 

[Shermana]

Um, Sherm...the books of the bible were written pre 2nd century. Which means that the concept of the Trinity existed prior to that. Maybe it wasn't until that time period that people began to put 2 and 2 together....which is not surprisingly considering the fact that God has a history of giving people revelations some many years down the line. That can be argued, but the concept was in the bible from the moment the words were written.

Ummm, the Trinity doesn't actually exist in the books of the Bible except in Trinitarian-land interpretation and grammatical distortion, as I've demonstrated in my exchanges with you in the past. The concept was not in the Bible whatsoever. Arianism was the idea to have 2 and 2 put together. IF you want to argue that God Himself has a god, and is still God but another "person" (Whatever "person" may mean, we have yet to ever get an actual concrete meaning that actually substantiates Trinitarian dogma in a way which is supported by the text), that's not in the text. The idea of the Logos being the Firstborn Created Being, that's in the text. If I need to run the merry go round with all the alleged "Trinity proof texts", let me know. I'll be happy to show you where they are in error.

Ok, so if John the Baptist lived a sinless life, his death could have been sufficient enough to redeem's man relationship with God? Is that what you are saying?

Very Possibly. It's not exactly very clear cut what the whole Human Guilt Offering concept entails.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

Ummm, the Trinity doesn't actually exist in the books of the Bible except in Trinitarian-land interpretation and grammatical distortion, as I've demonstrated in my exchanges with you in the past.

In our past exchanges you basically made it seem as if all bible translators conspired to get the Trinity doctrine in the bible, which I don't for one minute believe.

The concept was not in the Bible whatsoever.

I believe it was. I challenge you to name one attribute that the Father has, that the Son doesn't have (we can deal with the Holy Spirit later). By attribute, I mean the four "omini's"....omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, and omnipresence.

Arianism was the idea to have 2 and 2 put together.

No they didn't. I can read John 1:1-14 and determine the Deity of Jesus just by reading that scripture alone, let alone the countless other scriptures. But of course there are biblical conspiracy theorists such as yourself that has to go out your way to change the meaning of the text by either adding or omitting words.

IF you want to argue that God Himself has a god, and is still God but another "person" (Whatever "person" may mean, we have yet to ever get an actual concrete meaning that actually substantiates Trinitarian dogma in a way which is supported by the text), that's not in the text.

There isn't one attribute that the Father has that the Son doesn't have, meaning at one point or another, Jesus is said to have the same attributes. This would not be the case if Jesus didn't share the nature of Deity.

The idea of the Logos being the Firstborn Created Being, that's in the text. If I need to run the merry go round with all the alleged "Trinity proof texts", let me know. I'll be happy to show you where they are in error.

Let the games begin.

Very Possibly. It's not exactly very clear cut what the whole Human Guilt Offering concept entails.

So you think it is very possible that someone (besides Jesus) can live on this earth for 33+ years and not commit one sin?? So someone can live a perfect life?? Before we get in to the "Trinity proof texts" it is very important that we discuss this.

 

[Shermana]

In our past exchanges you basically made it seem as if all bible translators conspired to get the Trinity doctrine in the bible, which I don't for one minute believe.

Okay, if you don't want to believe that the Catholic and Orthodox and Anglican and whatnot Churches conspired to cement the Trinity doctrine and altered verses like 1 John 5:7 and 1 Timothy 3:16, you are more than welcome to live in denial.

I believe it was. I challenge you to name one attribute that the Father has, that the Son doesn't have (we can deal with the Holy Spirit later). By attribute, I mean the four "omini's"....omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, and omnipresence.

Jesus didn't know "the day or the hour". Likewise, he still needed to receive "revelation" from the Father in Revelation. Case closed.

No they didn't. I can read John 1:1-14 and determine the Deity of Jesus just by reading that scripture alone, let alone the countless other scriptures. But of course there are biblical conspiracy theorists such as yourself that has to go out your way to change the meaning of the text by either adding or omitting words.

Apparently all the non-Trinitarian scholars who agree that the Anarthrous Theos should read 'a god" are Biblical conspiracy theorists. Apparently they are all adding and omitting words because they are just so scared of the TRUE translations. They are so dastardly and have it against Christianity that they want to omit and add words that couldn't possibly be there, because they are conspiracy theorists. And the "Countless other scriptures" you're reading I'm pretty sure outright ignoring or dismissing things like the idea of God having a god, or referring to the Father as "greater" than Him, or where it says that "Wisdom" incarnated (the Logos) was the First Created being, and all that. So I can just as easily say that the scriptures alone confirm the Arian view. Not just as easily, far more easily. Your view involves some very convoluted reasoning that was enforced by the edge of the sword to those who denied it.

I just love when people try to write off those who call out an organized attempt to distort things as "Conspiracy theorist". I think that's pretty much all your argument is capable of. So there's no conspiracies whatsoever among Trinitarians. Things like Colwell's rule that are blindly accepted by nearly all Trinitarians and rejected by nearly all secular Greek scholars have nothing to do with a "Conspiracy", got it. I see.

Anything that says the Orthodox Church is united in organized lies and deception is Church conspiracy theory and can't possibly be right just because of that.

But of course, you wouldn't be a Conspiracy Theorist for thinking the JWs would write it as "a god" in the NWT like several secular Greek scholars do, right?

I'm guessing you believe the official government version of 9/11 too?

There isn't one attribute that the Father has that the Son doesn't have, meaning at one point or another, Jesus is said to have the same attributes. This would not be the case if Jesus didn't share the nature of Deity.

Already covered that, Jesus doesn't know things the Father knows. So fail on that one. Besides, the "nature of "deity" " can also apply to Angels, who are also "deities". Angels are called gods, remember?

Let the games begin.

Okay. I'll be happy to go over each one of them for the 1000th time on this forum or so.

So you think it is very possible that someone (besides Jesus) can live on this earth for 33+ years and not commit one sin?? So someone can live a perfect life?? Before we get in to the "Trinity proof texts" it is very important that we discuss this.

What's so impossible about it?

New International Version (©2011)
In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil.

5In the time of Herod king of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron. 6Both of them were righteous in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commands and decrees blamelessly

So yeah, unless you can prove that "blameless" entails that they had in fact sinned somewhere, it looks like there's been some "blameless" people before Jesus.

 

[NoraSariah]

God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are separate.

Luke 23:46

And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Matthew 27:46

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Matthew 26:39

And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

 

[sojourner]

God exists outside of time and space. Without those constraints being in place, it's certainly possible for God to be three distinct Persons, one of which became Incarnate for 33 years. Within the constraints of time and space, the Trinity isn't possible. It has to be an either/or proposition. but outside those constraints?

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

Jesus didn't know "the day or the hour". Likewise, he still needed to receive "revelation" from the Father in Revelation. Case closed.

John 21:17, apparently, Jesus does know all things. Second, what if I was to give you a scripture which suggest that Jesus knows something that the Father doesn't know....Revelations 19:12, only Jesus knows the name written on him, Father excluded.

Either we should accept the fact that both the Father and the Son knows all things, or the bible contradicts itself.

Case open.

Apparently all the non-Trinitarian scholars who agree that the Anarthrous Theos should read 'a god" are Biblical conspiracy theorists. Apparently they are all adding and omitting words because they are just so scared of the TRUE translations.

Are you a Greek or Hebrew linguistic scholar? How would you know what is being translated properly? How do you know what is the TRUE translation?

And the "Countless other scriptures" you're reading I'm pretty sure outright ignoring or dismissing things like the idea of God having a god

There are reasons Trinitarians can give that will adequately explain why we believe such.

I just love when people try to write off those who call out an organized attempt to distort things as "Conspiracy theorist". I think that's pretty much all your argument is capable of. So there's no conspiracies whatsoever among Trinitarians. Things like Colwell's rule that are blindly accepted by nearly all Trinitarians and rejected by nearly all secular Greek scholars have nothing to do with a "Conspiracy", got it. I see.

Biblegateway.com has dozens of translations in different languages and everything. During our last encounter you basically told me that every single translation was translated by Trinitarian conspirators. You said it, not me.

But of course, you wouldn't be a Conspiracy Theorist for thinking the JWs would write it as "a god" in the NWT like several secular Greek scholars do, right?

It isn't just about how JWs render certain verses, it is their overrall THEOLOGY that troubles me.

I'm guessing you believe the official government version of 9/11 too?

No, I watch to much Jesse Ventura to believe that.

Already covered that, Jesus doesn't know things the Father knows.

And I gave you a scripture that states that Jesus does know all things, and there are reasons given that state why those two scriptures differentiate. I also gave you a scripture which imply that Jesus knows at least one thing that the Father doesn't know.

So fail on that one. Besides, the "nature of "deity" " can also apply to Angels, who are also "deities". Angels are called gods, remember?

So what is Jesus? Is he an angel?

Okay. I'll be happy to go over each one of them for the 1000th time on this forum or so.

I am a different breed.

What's so impossible about it?

Who but God can live the perfect life, not making one single mistake?? While you ponder with that question, Romans 3:23 states "we all sin and fall short of the glory of God." No one can live a perfect life, not even Jesus if he were just a "mere man" with the capability to commit sin.

So yeah, unless you can prove that "blameless" entails that they had in fact sinned somewhere, it looks like there's been some "blameless" people before Jesus.

I am talking in terms of absolute MORAL PERFECTION. Not some people that did a good job obeying laws and decrees.

Matthew 11:11, Jesus said "I tell you the truth: among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist..."

So if John was perfect, why couldn't his death be sufficient enough for eternal salvation?

 

[CG Didymus]

So if John was perfect, why couldn't his death be sufficient enough for eternal salvation?

How do you explain pre-Jesus people being "saved." I know some Christians say that had faith in the coming Messiah, but then what about the time prior to there being a concept of a Messiah? And, the strange thing about the trinity is the Holy Spirit? God, the Father, is spirit. Why does he need a separate but equal Holy Spirit? He is already omni-present isn't he? And, then Jesus? He has a body, a resurrected, glorified body, but it is still a body. And, it is the Bible that says God is a spirit. For the early Christians, the trinity was a good answer but not the only answer. What if Shermana is right? After all, the dominant church in Rome kind of did force their doctrines on the people. What if the Roman Church was wrong? According to most Protestants, they've been wrong on other doctrines. Why not on this?