The Trinity doctrine

[Kevin H]

14 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

On my website, there is a verse by verse review of the entire New Testament, looking at every verse where Jesus mentioned His Father, or prayed to His Father. 

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/44f-Part 6 TR-NT.pdf

Not once does Christ address another divine being. 

That is a straw man argument. The role of the Holy Spirit is to work with our subjective. In our addresses to the objective revelations of God we are addressing the objective revelations of God. For Jesus that only choice is to pray to the Father. For Jesus to pray to the Holy Spirit would show Jesus being confused not understanding the roles and purposes of the trinity. They each have their job. You are disrespecting their different roles.

[Ulunruh]

14 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

This is just a review of Matthew.  Where does the weight of the evidence fall????  One Being who manifests in three ways?  Three separate divine Beings?  Or God our Father and Christ His Son?

The evidence is ONE Godhead with three Divine Beings, each with different responsibilities in a common unity of purpose

The issue with the "review" that seeks to deny this, is not taking into account the condescension of Christ in order to save humanity.
Christ left His place in heaven to stand in Adam's place as the head of the human race.

He became OUR BROTHER.

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. 

Adam lost the inheritance when he sold out to Satan, Christ came as a human to take Adam's place and regain the lost inheritance for the human race.   He is our brother, becoming our brother to reconcile us to God the Father. 
To do this Christ, who was in the form of God, thought it not important to cling to equality with God, made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.(Phil. 2:6-8) He placed Himself entirely under the will of the Father.  It was His humanity that Satan unsuccessfully plagued with temptations, not His divinity.  His divinity was and is  in perfect unity with God the Father.  As a human being Christ was limited in knowledge and sought knowledge from His Father, but that doesn't mean He did not have that knowledge prior to the incarnation, or after the ascension.

When people see those texts as somehow proving that Christ was not fully God, they will never understand the scoop of what salvation cost the Godhead.

 

The Holy Spirit was present guiding in Christ's life while He was here on earth.

Matt. 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 

The Holy Spirit's responsibility in the Godhead is to guide and enable people in their walk with God, not to draw attention to Himself.
 

  

[Gregory Matthews]

8th Day Priest said below:

1)  Whether or not you "do Christmas" is and should be, an individual choice.

2)  Yes, there is no Biblical teaching that tells us to "do Christmas."

3)  The Christmas of today can not be simplified by saying that it is pagan in origin.  Perhaps one might identify some elements that appear to  have an ancient pagan relationship.  But, those may also have a non-pagan relationship.  Certainly our Christmas of today has non-pagan aspects, commercial aspects and even perhaps Christian relationships. 

4)  The legend of Santa Claus has over the years collected much that is simply fairy tale.  But, it is grounded, not in paganism, but in the real life of a monk who lived in the 280s and provided aid to the poor.  For more on this see:  http://www.history.com/topics/christmas/santa-claus

5)  I am little concerned with claimed pagan relationships with what we do today.  Christians today generally either worship on a day dedicated to the god Saturn or to the Sun god.  As an actual fact, every day in the year is dedicated to the birthday of probably almost 1,000,000 pagan gods, in one religion (Hinduism) alone.  That does not account for other religions.

NOTE:  Most years consist of 365 days.   There are  360,000,000 Hindu gods and godesses each of which have a day in the year that is  celebrated as their birthday.  While the individual days of the year are not exactly equal as to the number of gods/godesses that count them as their birth day there is no day in the typical year that is not celebrated as a birthday of a god/goddess.

 

Quote

I don't DO Christ-mass.  It's origin is pagan.  It was NOT instituted by God. 

[Kevin H]

12 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I don't DO Christ-mass.  It's origin is pagan.  It was NOT instituted by God. 

Christ was most probably born at the Feast of Tabernacles.  Joseph with Mary traveled to Jerusalem for the FEAST.  (The Romans were smart.  They timed the tax to coincide with the feast.)  Joseph had many relatives at Bethlehem - his ancestral home.  The would NOT need an "inn".  But there was no separate place prepared for Mary, to complete the period of separation following childbirth.  She would be unclean for a period of time.  THAT is why she was given the stable with lots of clean straw.  Such was common among the poor of that time period. 

But have a blessed Thanksgiving.  That one I can support.  I'm for thanking God - any time.

I know that it is tradition to say that Christmas had a pagan origin, that tradition is based on out of date information. Granted what appears to be the true origin of December 25 as being the birth of Jesus is at least as bad. The evidence is that December 25 was seen as the birth of Jesus was believed by at least a fair number of Christians at least 100 years prior to when the tradition says it came into the church; and that there was a tradition that lead to that date 200 years earlier than we were supposed to have gotten the  date from the Pagans. The evidence s that it came from intertestamental Jewish traditions about the birth of Isaac and when the Christians  and Jews separated into two different religions some church leaders latched on to the tradition on the birth of Isaac and applied it to Jesus to make Isaac a type who was met by the antitype of Jesus and thus one up the Jews.

Some scholars are also saying that the Pagans may have taken December 25 from the Christians. That the Christians had December 25 first, and when Christianity became popular the pagans too their various celebrations from approximately that time of year and consolidated them on the day Christians had for 100 to 200 years seen as the birthday of Jesus.

On the other hand the feasts in the Bible such as Yom Kippur, Passover, first fruits etc. were based on the agricultural cycle of the land where the Canaanites and Israelites lived. The Canaanites, who were pagans, celebrated these feasts not only long before Moses but long before Abraham. So if you want to throw out celebrations because they were pagan in origin you have to start with the Bible.

The Bible also shows a tolerance for some new celebrations such as Purim and it was not until the New Testament that Hanukkah became a Biblical holiday and Jesus added an additional deamination  to it by tying it to the raising of Lazarus and thus families uniting and celebrating being with our loved ones and hope for those who lost loved ones.

[phkrause]

Great posts Chilco! I posted a series of talks by pastor Asscherick that basically agree with how your saying it, or your pretty much agreeing with him. I did notice that no one obviously watched them, because I didn't see any comments. He does a great job of explaining the the Godhead and how they work as one and there individual work. Again thanks for your comments.

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, chilco said:

Biblical evidence that the Holy Spirit is a separate being within the Godhead, not just some powerful essence flowing out from God.

John 14-16 speaks of the Holy Spirit.   Jesus prays to the Father to send ANOTHER comforter.   What does "another" signify?  Even though the Greek word for "SPIRIT" is a "neuter" gender, (IT) Jesus  uses the masculine pronouns (HE, HIS) to replace the neuter form the word spirit usually carries(John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13) even though syntactical that was inconsistent.

Jesus didn't use the masculine pronouns.  The translators did. 

In the Greek, there are two words, which both mean ANOTHER.  The word "allos" means ANOTHER just like the first one - like another dime.  The other word (Heteros #2087) means another that is different from the first one:   eg -  another city .    The word used in John 14:16 is "allos".  Jesus was saying that His Father would give them "another me". 

This FITS with 1 Corinthians 15:45.  "And so it is written, "'The first man Adam became a living being,' the last Adam became a life-giving spirit."

Jesus BECAME the spirit with us.  His power to be omnipresent was returned to Him by His Father.  That is why He could say, "I will not leave you" and "I am with you".  And He prayed to His Father, "You in me and I in them".  And Paul wrote, "Christ IN me, the hope of glory". 

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, chilco said:

The Holy Spirit was present guiding in Christ's life while He was here on earth.

Matt. 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.  

Who did Jesus say was with Him?  Did He say, "The Holy Spirit is always with me" ?  No.

 John 16:32 "Indeed the hour is coming, yes, has now come, that you will be scattered, each to his own, and will leave Me alone. And yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me."

John 10:38 "but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."

John 8:29 "And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him."

No mention of pleasing the Spirit. 

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, Kevin H said:

That is a straw man argument. The role of the Holy Spirit is to work with our subjective. In our addresses to the objective revelations of God we are addressing the objective revelations of God. For Jesus that only choice is to pray to the Father. For Jesus to pray to the Holy Spirit would show Jesus being confused not understanding the roles and purposes of the trinity. They each have their job. You are disrespecting their different roles.

Inappropriate comment.

[8thdaypriest]

10 hours ago, chilco said:

Romans 8:26 "The Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

Jesus is the one and ONLY MEDIATOR between God and mankind.  Jesus is the ONLY one to intercede on our behalf.

The comforter with us - IS Jesus.   

[8thdaypriest]

11 hours ago, chilco said:

Did Christ begin His existence at conception?    I don't think we believe that.  So  then  the above argument really is irrelevant.     What happened at the incarnation is a mystery we don't understand -- how did the eternal Creator of the universe became an embryo in the womb of a woman?      It wasn't a matter of the beginning of a living being as in the natural conception process.  We aren't dealing with who "conceived" Christ -- because Christ pre-existed -- 

Phil.  2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 
 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 
 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 

 

The Son of God, called Michael, was begotten from God the Father, BEFORE anything was created. 

He was "in the form of God" and "the express image of God" BECAUSE He was begotten from God. 

Jesus Himself said, "I came forth from God - and - have come into the world." (John 16:28)

John 16:27 "for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God."

So He was begotten BEFORE He incarnated. 

As to the length of His existence,  if Levi paid tithes because he was "in the loins of Abraham" then the Son of God existed from all eternity BECAUSE He was "in the loins" (as it were) of God His Father. 

Jesus called His Father - His God.  There is no verse where He ever called the Holy Spirit, His God.

John 20:17 "Jesus said to her, 'Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them,`I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.'"   [So - my "God" IS the Father.]

Revelation 3:12 "If you conquer, I will make you a pillar in the temple of my God; you will never go out of it. I will write on you the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem that comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name."

The Father's name is written on the foreheads of the 144,000 who stand on Mount Zion.  (Rev. 14:1)  NOT the names of the Trinity. 

Revelation 1:6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father".

[8thdaypriest]

36 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Jesus didn't use the masculine pronouns.  The translators did. 

In the Greek, there are two words, which both mean ANOTHER.  The word "allos" means ANOTHER just like the first one - like another dime.  The other word (Heteros #2087) means another that is different from the first one:   eg -  another city .    The word used in John 14:16 is "allos".  Jesus was saying that His Father would give them "another me". 

This FITS with 1 Corinthians 15:45.  "And so it is written, "'The first man Adam became a living being,' the last Adam became a life-giving spirit."

Jesus BECAME the spirit with us.  His power to be omnipresent was returned to Him by His Father.  That is why He could say, "I will not leave you" and "I am with you".  And He prayed to His Father, "You in me and I in them".  And Paul wrote, "Christ IN me, the hope of glory". 

John 14:28 "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."

In context Jesus has just talked about the other comforter, that He would send to them, FROM the Father.  When I read Christ's words, I take them to mean that HE was "coming back" to His disciples - as the Spirit presence.

[8thdaypriest]

Whom did Jesus say he loved?

John 14:31  [Jesus speaking]  "that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father gave Me commandment, so I do." 

Jesus never said that He loved the Holy Spirit. 

[JoeMo]

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 9:29 AM, The Wanderer said:

Whenever someone goes ant-trinity crazy on me, I tend to gravitate to the following text:

Quote

Joh 15:1  I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
Joh 15:2  Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
Joh 15:3  Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
Joh 15:4  Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
Joh 15:5  I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
Joh 15:6  If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
Joh 15:7  If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
Joh 15:8  Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.
Joh 15:9  As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love

.

How do any of these verses explicitly point to a separate being called the Holy Spirit?

 

[JoeMo]

9 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:"  (John 15:26).

So it appears to me that the Comforter comes from the Father through Jesus.  He is the Spirit of Truth (Didn't Jesus say He was the Truth?).  Sorry - don't see no 3rd Person here.

But you can see One if you want to.  When we get to the kingdom, Jesus will explain it all anyways!

[Ron Amnsn]

9 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

People who try to "disprove" The Trinity doctrine have to remember to read a little further to see what the verse/s are really saying. In this case; everyone who read this did not bother to read a little further to get the full sense of the text at hand:

I accept your admission that the original passage you provided didn't support your view of the trinity doctrine.  I do not accept the false accusation that those who disagree with your traditions have not bothered to read further.

The Greek text of the verse you quoted above (John 15:26) does not actually contain the personal pronoun "he" that might indicate that the Spirit of Truth is a personal being.  The Greek word that the translators have rendered as "he" is ekeinos, which means "that one" or "that thing".

[Ron Amnsn]

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

How can some non personal force provide "Comforter?"  That doesn't make sense

Why would the spirit of YHWH be considered a "non-personal force".  We're talking about a personal feature of God the Father.  Do you consider the hand of YHWH or the breath of YHWH or the voice of YHWH or the face of YHWH to be impersonal features of God?  Why would His own spirit be less personal than His other features?

[Ron Amnsn]

In our English Bibles, the Hebrew phrase "ruah YHWH" has usually been translated into English as "Spirit of the Lord".
But in Isaiah 40:7 the same phrase "ruah YHWH" is translated in many English versions as "breath of the Lord". 
In Isaiah 59:19 and Hosea 13:15 the same phrase "ruah YHWH" is translated in many English versions as "wind of the Lord".
Why is that?  Because the word ruah means breath or wind. 

Which passages of the Hebrew Scriptures would have shown the ancient readers that "ruah YHWH" should bring to mind the idea of an intelligent divine spirit that thinks separately from YHWH himself, instead of the using the more usual meaning of ruah to bring to mind the concept of the "breath of YHWH" wherever "ruah YHWH" appears throughout the Old Testament?  There may be some passages that clearly teach this concept.  I haven't seen them yet.

[JoeMo]

55 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

He did call The Holy Spirit.."another Comforter."  

I can't look it up now (I'm at work); but I seem to remember that there are two Greek words for "another".  One word means "one just like the first one (who is Jesus); and the other word means "one that is different from the first one".  If my memory serves me right, the "another" used in John 14:16 uses the former definition.

[8thdaypriest]

5 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Why would the spirit of YHWH be considered a "non-personal force".  We're talking about a personal feature of God the Father.  Do you consider the hand of YHWH or the breath of YHWH or the voice of YHWH or the face of YHWH to be impersonal features of God?  Why would His own spirit be less personal than His other features?

Well put.

[8thdaypriest]

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

When one chooses to editorialize. Biblical texts then it becomes easy to see the point of view you express. Its a good thing Jesus clears up the mystery in many ways. He did call The Holy Spirit.."another Comforter."   If you were able to use only Bible texts to explain your  answer rather than polished rationalizations it might be different.  When we look at Bible texts only...its impossible to miss how Jesus and the Father reflected on The Spirit by calling Him. ANOTHER Comforter...not a piece of one of them but ANOTHER one of them.

It is my understanding that mankind was cut off from God the Father, after the sin of Adam.  The Son of God became the ONE mediator BETWEEN God and mankind. 

When the Son of God incarnated, the connection between mankind and God the Father was restored.  The Spirit of God the Father then flooded the earth.  As Joel 2:28 prophesied:  "I will pour My Spirit on all flesh;"  Jesus Christ became the conduit for that outpouring. 

The OTHER or ANOTHER to Comfort us, is God our Father.  His spirit now comforts us.

[CoAspen]

One thing that is missing in all of this.....Why? Are? We? Concerned?

Is it about being right?

Is it about being more 'studious'?

Is it about unhappiness with church doctrine?

What is or is not at stake here....anything or nothing?

[Samie]

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

It is my understanding that mankind was cut off from God the Father, after the sin of Adam.  The Son of God became the ONE mediator BETWEEN God and mankind. 

When the Son of God incarnated, the connection between mankind and God the Father was restored.  ...

I believe the incarnation of Christ as the manifestation of the saving act of God that same day Adam fell into sin, when He implemented the plan of salvation He devised before the foundation of the world (2 Tim 1:8-10), by saving Adam through Christ (Acts 4:12) that same day and reinstated him to his pre-fall spiritual status, an act that cost the Father His only begotten Son - the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8)!  With Adam in Christ, all his descendants are born in Christ, instead of born in sin.

[phkrause]

3 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

Lol. Well why on earth did you even bother to do this drive-by post here that couldnt possibly contribute a single thing that would be worthwhile.

Wanderer, I think that CoAspen does make a good point!

[CoAspen]

Hmmmmm, so questions are not allowed? I have been following the topic but have yet to see a point as to why all of the argueing back and forth. Quite often topics are started w/o a premise.

So.......I repeat and wait for an answer...

"One thing that is missing in all of this.....Why? Are? We? Concerned?

Is it about being right?

Is it about being more 'studious'?

Is it about unhappiness with church doctrine?

What is or is not at stake here....anything or nothing?"

[CoAspen]

The original post was a statement by Gai,l but 11 pages later it seems we need some basic questions to be answered rather than just 'interpretations' of the same Bible verses by different people. 

Having a reason for discussion and having everyone on the same page is never 'worthless'. 

(40 years of wandering....)