The Trinity?

[Ted Oplinger]

If he had the truth of the matter of the trinity he could have proved it in one page, but his endless programing proves he is way off. A whiz at SNLP. When any one goes way up and around robin hoods barn to tell or prove something, best just walk away.

You see just a few verses proves the opposite!

You see Yahweh the Father was in Jesus Christ reconciling the world unto Himself and that didn't happen until Bethlehem.

Before that there was no other God formed created or born. Besides the Redeemer had to be a man as he had to overcome as one of us and from where we are. Not as God!

Battle on, but you need to know your Redeemer is the Father in Jesus Christ Born of woman.

Emmanuel, means God with us, Yahweh the Father is the one and only God surely you must

concede.

Then you must remember a time comes when Yahweh our Father is all in all again! 2 Cor 15:24-28

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

Right on cue, Gibs. You have just demonstrated you don't know a thing about what true investigation on EITHER side of the issue would be.

It wasn't for nothing I declared back in the very beginning of this thread your thesis and exegesis are lacking and incomplete. Keep to your talking points - otherwise you might stray and actually learn something...

Blessings,

[Gibs]

Ted, Give me scripture if you really care to have me learn different. I do the same for you.

I am a learner at the feet of Jesus and His Word, the one and only Sure teacher of the Truth that we are sure of.

Sticks and stones may break my bones but the words of men touch me not.

My Heavenly Father gave of Himself and His Wonderful Son to become not only my Redeemer but for every last one who will come.

Yahweh in Jesus Christ is He!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Ted Oplinger]

Ted, Give me scripture if you really care to have me learn different. I do the same for you.

I am a learner at the feet of Jesus and His Word, the one and only Sure teacher of the Truth that we are sure of.

Sticks and stones may break my bones but the words of men touch me not.

My Heavenly Father gave of Himself and His Wonderful Son to become not only my Redeemer but for every last one who will come.

Yahweh in Jesus Christ is He!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

While I do not question your place as one whom Christ has given all to ransom, I do call question with how you have shown a marked proclivity to question that same place for anyone who disagrees with you. Such is not the Spirit of Christ.

With respect to giving you a Scripture - I, and many others, have done just that. I have also given you the history of the early church's stand on the issues. Yet, it comes across clearly from your posts you that other poster's perspectives just do not matter to you. You see no benefit to your knowing what your theology's history is, nor is there a desire to understand the premises upon which your argument has been built - these by your own confession.

I, and others, have read what you have posted in support of your own position. When we have called into question the very context issues you raise, you have never addressed them soundly and rationally - it was back to previous talking points. All that appears to matter to you on this issue is your own sense of correctness.

You are one of 3 posters here attempting to "prove" a non-Trinitarian position - and only 1 has made this attempt to do so in a logical and Christ-like manner. You are not him.

You claim to "sit at the feet of Jesus and learn" - yet you have demonstrated you care far more for being doctrinaire than interested how those doctrines affect peoples' hearts.

With such, all I can say further is for you to continue sticking to your hardened position, lest you might see it broken down, built upon false premises. I remain convinced on this issue you are wielding a sword in such a manner you do not have God's permission to.

Blessings,

[Gibs]

I've read all the comebacks on this to me and to a couple more who are not trinitarians and very little scripture has been given by any that are trinitarians.

The preponderance of scripture is that there is but one God and there is none other.

Some want to make out He made Himself into 3 persons, another 2 perssons would add to 3 Gods.

No there is no scripture to that effect. Jesus cleared that all up for us with His statement,

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

So the Holy Spirit is what our Father is, "He is a Spirit"!

Yes we very well know that Jeusus Christ of whom the Father came in was another person, a man, the son of Mary and the Son of God.

The Deity in Him was the Father in Him in fullness, fully God in a body of man prepared Him.

Substantiation,

Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Yes He sure was Emmanuel, God the Father with us!

2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

There is but ONE GOD to be in Him! Yahweh The King of Israel!

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Christ in you the hope of glory includes our Father.

If any want I can post all the scripture that I have used and there is more to show there is no trinity. Some have posted good ones I hadn't used.

1Jo 4:5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.

[John317]

...Yes He sure was Emmanuel, God the Father with us!

Gibs, the Bible doesn't teach that Christ is "God-the-Father-With-Us." God the Father didn't come here and die for our sins. It was the eternal, infinite, pre-existent Word of God who came. He is the perfect representation of the Father's essence but He is not one and the same Person as the Father. The Father and Christ are two distinct, separate Persons.

John 1: 1 clearly shows that the Word and God the Father are both fully God, and they have been in close, intimate relationship with one another from all eternity. That's also the message of Micah 5: 2; Hebrews 1: 2,3; and Col. 1: 17.

[John317]

...The Deity in Him was the Father in Him in fullness, fully God in a body of man prepared Him.

The Father was not the Lamb of God, was He?

Wasn't it the Word of God who became the Lamb and died on the cross?

Notice that Rev 5: 13 speaks of two-- the Father and the Lamb-- who are sitting together on the throne in heaven. Doesn't that show that there are at least two distinct Persons who are Deity?

Therefore the Deity in Christ was/is not the Father in Him. Christ was/is Deity Himself.

When Scripture speaks of the Father being in Christ and of Christ being in the Father, do you believe it is implying that Christ Himself is not God in His own right?

[John317]

Yes - God IS love. Selfless agape love.

It is the root and motivation for everything God is, says, and does. It is a love that cannot be demonstrated and made manifest from a solitary being. It is that love which explains why both Father and Son are both YHWH Elohim, why they speak, act, and move as one.

It is that love which explains why the Father would GIVE His only-begotten Son to the human race - apparently losing Him forever...but receiving His Son back when the plan of salvation was brought to fruition, as Jesus brought back with Him an entire race that had to be joined back to YHWH Elohim to live.

...Stepping into the body prepared for Him, Christ laid everything aside - because His love for the Father and for man could do no less.

...It is a love mankind will spend eternity studying.

x100 Well said. It's worth posting and reading again.

[John317]

I've read all the comebacks on this to me and to a couple more who are not trinitarians and very little scripture has been given by any that are trinitarians.

Hundreds of Scriptural quotes-- more than sufficient-- will be found in previous posts.

[John317]

I would like to pose a few questions in regard to why a correct understanding of the Godhead/Trinity is essential to righteousness by faith.

Why is it important to realize who Christ is in order to fully appreciate what Christ did and is continuing to do for our salvation?

What is the effect if we believe either that Christ was created or that His life is derived and had a beginning?

And what is the effect if we realize that Christ has always been God/Deity in the highest sense?

[phkrause]

Talking about the Trinity, if you get 3ABN, if not just go to there website and click on live feed. Pr David Ascherick(sp) is speaking on this subject.

[Gibs]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

...The Deity in Him was the Father in Him in fullness, fully God in a body of man prepared Him.

The Father was not the Lamb of God, was He?

Wasn't it the Word of God who became the Lamb and died on the cross?

Notice that Rev 5: 13 speaks of two-- the Father and the Lamb-- who are sitting together on the throne in heaven. Doesn't that show that there are at least two distinct Persons who are Deity?

Therefore the Deity in Christ was/is not the Father in Him. Christ was/is Deity Himself.

When Scripture speaks of the Father being in Christ and of Christ being in the Father, do you believe it is implying that Christ Himself is not God in His own right?

Jesus Christ the man Yah dwelt in was the Lamb of God.

It was the Word, Thoughts of Yahweh that our Father sent forth long before Bethlehem and so was an extension of Himself.

No the Word did not die on the cross, the Word is Deity Himself and did not die, only the Man Jesus Christ died. It is impossible for God to die! The Word remained with Him in the grave and was the life in Him for Resurrection.

The only Deity is God you must keep in mind and a union of the Word of God and Jesus Christ and this union could not be made until the man Jesus Christ was born.

Yes Jesus the Lamb of God is in Heaven now with the Father in Heaven and is ministering as our High Priest now!

The investment of the Father in Jesus Christ will in time be returned to the Father so that cinches the fact the Deity in Jesus is the Father in Him.

Again read and understand 1 Cor 15:24-28, very profound understanding there. Now just,"Verse 28"

1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, "then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him" that put all things under him, "that God may be all in all".

So no Jesus was not another God in His own right!

If that were true, then Isaiah 43:10 is wrong,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Now notice who is your Saviour,

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Our Father came in Jesus Christ to be our Saviour!

Talk about condensation! Deity covered with the flesh of man with our fallen nature.

Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gail]

Talking about the Trinity, if you get 3ABN, if not just go to there website and click on live feed. Pr David Ascherick(sp) is speaking on this subject.

That whole series on the Holy Spirit is a good one

[phkrause]

That whole series on the Holy Spirit is a good one

Yes it was a great sermon. Wish I could get this for free. I used to be able to get 3abn when I had comcast, and used to be able to tape all the programs I liked. Now I can't get it anymore, only on the 3abn website. Thinking of getting Dish Network, but not sure if I want to switch at this point, because we're not sure how long we will be here.

[John317]

The investment of the Father in Jesus Christ will in time be returned to the Father so that cinches the fact the Deity in Jesus is the Father in Him.

Again read and understand 1 Cor 15:24-28, very profound understanding there. Now just,"Verse 28"

1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, "then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him" that put all things under him, "that God may be all in all".

So no Jesus was not another God in His in His own right!

Jesus Christ and the Father are two distinct Persons but they are the same God. There is only one God, not two Gods or gods.

But 1 Cor 15: 24-28 is not teaching that Christ will one day no longer be Deity, or God.

It wasn't a temporary God who took on a human body; it was the eternal God who came here and lived among us as a man.

John 1: 1 and Hebrews 1: 2-3 make it clear that Christ has always been face to face with God the Father and that He Himself has always been of the same essence as the Father.

Rev. 21 and 22 make it plain that both the Father and the Lamb occupy the same throne throughout eternity. The same throne belongs equally to the Lamb as it does to the Father.

The fact that the Father put all things under the Son is not implying that the Father is superior to the Son or that the Father is more fully God than the Son is.

As the God-man, Jesus Christ's work in the plan of salvation has been to defeat and destroy Satan and all evil. Once this work has been completely accomplished, Christ will deliver a pure, sinless universe to the Father. The God-man will remain the God-man for all eternity.

As such, Christ will always be in subjection to the Father, not because Christ is inferior to the Father but because that was a part of New Covenant agreement. When the Father gave His only Son for the salvation of the world, it meant that the Son would no longer be in the form of God but would always be a member of the human family, One of us.

[Dr. Waite]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

The investment of the Father in Jesus Christ will in time be returned to the Father so that cinches the fact the Deity in Jesus is the Father in Him.

Again read and understand 1 Cor 15:24-28, very profound understanding there. Now just,"Verse 28"

1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, "then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him" that put all things under him, "that God may be all in all".

So no Jesus was not another God in His in His own right!

Jesus Christ and the Father are two distinct Persons but they are the same God. There is only one God, not two Gods or gods.

But 1 Cor 15: 24-28 is not teaching that Christ will one day no longer be Deity, or God.

It wasn't a temporary God who took on a human body; it was the eternal God who came here and lived among us as a man.

John 1: 1 and Hebrews 1: 2-3 make it clear that Christ has always been face to face with God the Father and that He Himself has always been of the same essence as the Father.

Rev. 21 and 22 make it plain that both the Father and the Lamb occupy the same throne throughout eternity. The same throne belongs equally to the Lamb as it does to the Father.

The fact that the Father put all things under the Son is not implying that the Father is superior to the Son or that the Father is more fully God than the Son is.

As the God-man, Jesus Christ's work in the plan of salvation has been to defeat and destroy Satan and all evil. Once this work has been completely accomplished, Christ will deliver a pure, sinless universe to the Father. The God-man will remain the God-man for all eternity.

As such, Christ will always be in subjection to the Father, not because Christ is inferior to the Father but because that was a part of New Covenant agreement. When the Father gave His only Son for the salvation of the world, it meant that the Son would no longer be in the form of God but would always be a member of the human family, One of us.

However, there is only one person who is the "only true God" and one person "Jesus Christ" who the "only true God" sent.

See John 17:3

[Guest]

However, there is only one person who is the "only true God" and one person "Jesus Christ" who the "only true God" sent.

See John 17:3

Also,

John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

Of course John317 will say this only applies to Jesus the Man. But the text doesn't say that. It simply says that this is the way it happened, not when it happened.

Put this with what Ellen White said about Jesus being the only begotten Son of God before the plan of salvation was even agreed upon, and it only makes sense that this happened somewhere in eternity past. Far outside of our comprehension.

___________________________________________________________

It was decreed in the councils of God that the only-begotten Son of God must leave His high command in heaven, and clothe His divinity with humanity, and come to the world. {4BC 1153.5}

Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came from the Father we could see His person. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with a loveliness which words cannot describe. He then made known to the angelic choir that a way of escape had been made for lost man; that He had been pleading with His Father, and had obtained permission to give His own life as a ransom for the race, to bear their sins, and take the sentence of death upon Himself, thus opening a way whereby they might, through the merits of His blood, find pardon for past transgressions, and by obedience be brought back to the garden from which they were driven. Then they could again have access to the glorious, immortal fruit of the tree of life to which they had now forfeited all right.

Then joy, inexpressible joy, filled heaven, and the heavenly choir sang a song of praise and adoration. They touched their harps and sang a note higher than they had done before, because of the great mercy and condescension of God in yielding up His dearly Beloved to die for a race of rebels. Then praise and adoration was poured forth for the self-denial and sacrifice of Jesus, in consenting to leave the bosom of His Father, and choosing a life of suffering and anguish, and an ignominious death, that He might give life to others.

Said the angel, "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no." It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His darling Son to die for them. {EW 126, 127}

Sorrow filled heaven as it was realized that man was lost and that the world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and that there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I then saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, "He is in close converse with His Father." The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. {EW 126}

[Gerr]

If Christ was a created being, He could NEVER have paid for the sins of the WHOLE world.

[Dr. Waite]

If Christ was a created being, He could NEVER have paid for the sins of the WHOLE world.

God's Messenger, Ellen White, has never said that Christ was a created being.

‘A complete offering has been made; for "God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son,"-- not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son begotten in the express image of the Father's person. . .’ (ST, May 30, 1895)

[Guest]

Yes, huge difference between created and begotten. The Son of God was not created.

[LoneRanger]

Yes, huge difference between created and begotten. The Son of God was not created.

So...Just what does "begotten" mean?

Webster's says:

1. to procreate or generate (offspring)

2. to cause

So did The Father procreate The Son? One God produced another God (or god)?

Either definition indicates that God the Father did something to cause God the Son to exist. Which means The Son is NOT from eternity, but is a created um..."caused" being.

Or is it being used in a different sense?

[LoneRanger]

[color:blue]If Christ was a created being, He could NEVER have paid for the sins of the WHOLE world.

WHY?

[o2bwise]

Hi LoneRanger,

Quote:

So did The Father procreate The Son? One God produced another God (or god)?

Well, just a couple additional truths.

1) The word begotten is used in direct connection to the word "son."

2) Romans 1 says even the Godhead can be understood thru the things that are made.

3) Virtually every son in this realm has been begotten in one of the two senses of the definition you provided (born, proceeding from).

Do ya think it's fair to reasonably tilt things in the direction of favoring the one of two definitions for begotten that embrace 1,2, and 3?

For my own sensibilities, I personally am unable to fathom a meaning that stands so unlike the meaning I naturally get when I attach the word begotten with the word "son."

Blessings,

Tony

[ClubV12]

When Uriah Smith wrestled with the concept of begotten, he was still called arian. Here we are thousands of posts later still wrestling with these concepts. I think we own Uriah an apology, I'm not sure we've gained an inch over the pioneers.

[o2bwise]

Hi John 317,

Quote:

What is the effect if we believe either that Christ was created or that His life is derived and had a beginning?

I think the main thing is to look at this from the perspective of one's comprehension of agape (divine love).

Now, I have a daughter. From the perspective of agape, should I give up my daughter to the travail that was Christ's, if someone complained because my daughter is in fact my daughter (rather than a coequal being who was given that role), I would question that person's sanity. I cannot fathom a legitimate critique that alleges the sacrifice is somehow diminished in any way because my daughter is younger than I.

My daughter as fully has my nature as I. The literal born Son of God had (I think He laid it aside forever at the incarnation, but that is another matter) the exact same nature as His Dad. And so His demonstration is synonymous with what His Father would have done had He been the One to come down.

But, when one understands agape, the following to me is critical.

I see two gifts. One, the gift of the Son in His condescension and travail. Two, the gift of the Father IN HIS GIVING. It is the Father who had to experiemce watching the suffering of His only begotten Son and for the sake of us who could not intervene and stop the madness.

From my understanding, if one understands agape, the gift wrapped up in the Father GIVING His Son even exceeds the gift wrapped up in what the Son did for us.

All you have to do is consider your own child and realize you would rather take on his or her sacrifice than have to sit back and witness it all.

Now, what of a tri-theism (or worse Trinitarian) concepts? They are one God. They are co-eternal. They choose roles. And the "One" who chose the role "Father" gives the "One" who chose the role "Son."

No, for me, it doesn't come remotely close.

Between trinitarianism or tri-theism or the truth that God truly, literally had and gave His Son?

From the perspective of love, it is a SLAM DUNK.

Ain't even close.

To which I would like to hearken back to two other concepts I have brought up.

One is the truth that to retain Trinity, HUNDREDS OF TEXTS must be wrested from their most apparent meaning. And I asked why. NOTE: To which my query HAS NOT RECEIVED A SINGLE RESPONSE FROM A TRINITARIAN - WOW!

The only thing I can come up with are 1)adherence to orthodoxy/an inability to traverse paradigms in thought or 2)somehow thinking Trinity espouses a greater comprehension of agape.

John317, have you ever bothered to comment on those posts of mine? If you would like, I would be glad to give you a pointer of their locations.

The other point is that...

Trinity is a violation of reason itself. Which causes me to wonder why anyone would align his beliefs with a belief that 1)violates reason, 2)violates a deeper comprehension of agape, and 3)violates Scripture.

Blessings,

Tony

[LoneRanger]

Do ya think it's fair to reasonably tilt things in the direction of favoring the one of two definitions for begotten that embrace 1,2, and 3?