Trinity Stuff

[Guest]

I think not chris, You know that most scholars without acceptance say the trinity was not known by the Apostles, right?
You have not studied anything chris, as soon as it went opposite of your belief you shut off.
By unraveling in John do you mean the part were he tells is talking to God about 'that they me be in me like I am in you' thing?
Or maybe in
John 5:43
43I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. 44How can you believe if you accept praise from one another, yet make no effort to obtain the praise that comes from the only God[d]?
That part?
Or this:

19Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does.

How about
John 6
27Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval."

John 7
16Jesus answered, "My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me. 17If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. 18He who speaks on his own does so to gain honor for himself, but he who works for the honor of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him.

John 14
6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." 10Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.

I then I think you read the next part but then quit reading but:

20On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him."

John 17
3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

11I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name—the name you gave me—so that they may be one as we are one.
21that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. 26I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."

John 20
31But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Isn't that something? the farther we get into John the more clear it is that Jesus is Not God. Very plain to me.

First, Jesus Follower/Looker you shouldn't make claims to which you have no clue. I also wasn't talking about chapter 14, but VERSE 14.

"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. "

I don't want to make boastful claims here, but I have spent many hours studying this issue with JW, with Unitarians and its history in the early church. Don't waste your time cutting and pasting with me, I've seen it, and don’t talk down to me like I don’t know better, I do.

[Guest]

OK, chris if you want to be addicted to the doctrine of the trinity, it is AOK with me. You Understand then that verse 14 in my, our understanding means that God's plan and purpose came to full completion with the person of his messiah, Jesus. Who was the perfect reflection of what Yahweh intended man to be. And the light shined in the darkness and the darkness did not overcome it. That he depending totally On God defeated the darkness in open warfare.
Jw's and Unitarians? you make me laugh, Biblical Unitarians and Jw's have nothing in common, beside the fact that they do not believe Jesus to be the almighty God incarnate, and their logic is fuzzy as the Ladder Day Saints. The Jw's have more regulations than Mormons, and as many as Orthodox Christianity, So now I know you are ignoring the evidence we present. It is your choice. By the way you said you were going to get back to me a couple of Months ago on this, was that your Orthodox deception?
When did you study with them? For how long? Where? These Biblical Unitarians I mean. I think you may be talking about Unitarian Universalists.
One last thing, you can sure talk down to me though, eh? Amen!

[Guest]

I am not going to go back and forth with you and turn this forum into THC and you need not concern yourself with my studies. I have friends of all denominations.

I maintained a respectable and open minded debate with you regarding this subject, and I never made any personal attacks towards you or anyone with an opposing view. Like I said several months ago to several posters, the Trinity issue is not an issue that is as cut and dry when looking at the original language. That is exactly why I started the thread concerning opposing views. I never and did not talk down to you. The only addiction I am bound by is the truth and this was what I attempting to and continue to reach. I think you are a dedicated Christian, but you never offered any of your own thinking. I was debating with a web site. I read your reasons for doing so in another thread and I understand, not everyone has the ability to articulate their ideas into words. I have written half of part 2, but have not resumed and posted it, well, have you been over there lately?


Why do they translate theos as God and then again as divine in the same sentence, it’s the same word? They have twisted this verse to conform to their teaching. If you accept Jesus was divine, yet not God then you are following more than one God.

[Guest]

I may be alone in this (I think not) But I know a heretic when I see one and the one who calls himself jesusfollower is a heretic and I will have nothing more to do with this person.

[Guest]

Well chris the word, the plan, purpose is divine, I do not see your point. Am I wrong when we say study, it means to read all information relating to the subject? By your constant complaints about cut and paste, it is obvious you don't want to understand. They explain the position from scripture much more accurately than I could. I'm sure in debate circles this has a name, to make the one objecting look to be right by ignoring good info.
So Allyn said it all, I am a heretic, he probably does not even know that most of the things he believes were considered heretical at one time because it is determined by the Orthodoxy of the time, meaning majority.

Here is the deal chris, to study this subject is the need to read all that pertains to it, Racoivian Catechism(1400'), The True Believers Defense, Against Charges Preferred By Trinitarians, By Charles Morgridge, Minister of the first Christian Church in New-Bedford(Boston 1837) The Doctrine Of The Trinity Christianities Self Inflicted Wound(Anthony F. Buzzard, MA(Oxon) MA TH., Charles F Hunting, When Jesus Became God(Richard E Rubenstein, 1999) And it is all pulled together in One God & One Lord( Greaser, Lynn, Schoenheit).

Now for further understanding:
Pros, then, contains both the necessarily corresponding ideas of intimacy and independence, because a separation is required between two things in order for them to come together in intimacy. If they are already “one in essence,” as traditional Christian teaching asserts, then the need for, and value of, intimacy is virtually eliminated. The single Greek preposition pros marvelously encapsulates a precise thumbnail description of the essence of the Gospel of John, which revolves around the themes of the intimate yet independent and subordinate relationship of the Son to the Father. It is evident that one thing cannot be “with” another thing and be identical to it at the same time. Even Trinitarian scholars recognize this:

John always perceives a distinction between the divinity of the pre-existent Son and that of the Father. If he states “the Word is God,” he still speaks of the Word being directed toward God (pros ton theon). [21]

Logically, nothing can be both “identical to” and “with” anything else. Thus, the sense in which “the word” was “God” is limited by this statement that it was also “with God,” and points to a meaning closer to “represents,” “manifests,” or “reveals.” Hence, the Word was “divine” because it represented and manifested God. In the same way, Jesus, “the Word in the flesh,” represented and manifested God, and, in that limited way, was “divine.”

Although many use the phrase (“the Word was with God”) to attempt to establish the doctrine of the pre-existence of Christ, this idea is based upon a supposed identity between “the Word” and Jesus Christ. The argument goes: “The Word was with God in the beginning, and Jesus was the Word, therefore Jesus was there in the beginning.” The assumption that “the word” is the man, Jesus, is reflected in the fact that Bible translators assign the masculine gender to the pronouns referring to Word. The pronouns related to logos often get translated “he” when in fact the Greek word logos, though masculine in gender, is intrinsically neither male nor female. [22] In 1525, the pronoun associated with logos was translated “it” and not “he” by William Tyndale, who provided the translation that formed the basis for the KJV. Although approximately 90 percent of Tyndale’s work was preserved in the KJV, his use of the neuter for logos was changed to “he.” The Wycliffe translation of 1380, the Cranmer Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1557 also translated the pronoun associated with logos as “it.”

But even if the pronoun associated with logos could legitimately be translated “he,” this could be readily explained by the use of personification, and does not necessitate a literal person called “the logos.” As we have already seen, the use of personification of logos puts the logos concept squarely in what is called the wisdom literature of Judaism, wherein personification of concepts is a common figure. Dunn comments on the use of personification in the prologue of John, wherein the usage of logos moves from “impersonal personification to actual person,” namely Jesus:

Good Day, Mr Allyn.

[Guest]

Jesusfollower,

Unless I missed it, you have never explaind why the apostles would be horrified that anyone might worship them but they would see nothing wrong in worshipping Jesus. I would really, really, REALLY, like to hear from you on your own words, otherwise I, like Allyn, am through.

It is nice to discuss things here, just as we would among friends or people we meet that have similar interests. However, if I ask someone their opinion about, say, President Bush's immigration policy, I expect them to say something other than to hand me a book or the editorial page from the paper and tell me to read it. Even an "I don't know" is more courteous than that. Likewise, it is most helpful to have a real dialogue here.

Blessings, Homer

[Guest]

OK, Homer I'll say it again, which I have many times and also must repeat myself with you guy's because you are not paying attention, friend. God exalted him to Lord
Acts 2
36"Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
God has made him worthy to be worshiped. Reading about Joseph and the Pharaoh in Genesis may help you to understand this relationship, Joseph had the signet ring, rode in the second chariot and the people Bowed down to him. In throne only was he subordinate to Pharaoh, Did Pharaoh know who was Pharaoh? did Joseph know who was Pharaoh? did the people know who was Pharaoh? Yes, yes and again yes.
Every thing comes from God through Jesus to us and everything go's from us through Jesus to God. Hallelujah

[Guest]

And your continual battering about referring you to works on the subject shows you have made up your mind on this and are sure of your position. So you do not even want to consider the scholarly work done on this. So you can slip me up by misunderstanding or an incomplete rendering by me on a doctrine that was put in place 2000 yrs ago and when many great Christians did not accept it, they stared killing them and burning their books. Then free reign was given to the "Orthodox" But God has always had a remnant seed. Racovian Catechism is one of these works which was thought to be completely wiped out and they went into Poland and destroyed the learning center there and burned it to the ground. Is that what Jesus taught? If they don't believe me kill them and burn them to the ground. I think not( sounds like Islam) and that should give you a clue to how dangerous it is to the devil for Christians to know the identity of Jesus. That is how I see it.

[Guest]

Seems this guy only removed by a generation or two by the Apostles understood the way it is translated. I can cut and paste too.

Tertullian
“And we, in like manner, hold that the Word, and Reason, and Power, by which we have said God made all, have spirit as their proper and essential substratum, in which the Word has inbeing to give forth utterances, and reason abides to dispose and arrange, and power is over all to execute. We have been taught that He proceeds forth from God, and in that procession He is generated; so that He is the Son of God, and is called God from unity of substance with God.”
“or God, too, is a Spirit. Even when the ray is shot from the sun, it is still part of the parent mass; the sun will still be in the ray, because it is a ray of the sun--there is no division of substance, but merely an extension. Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled. The material matrix remains entire and unimpaired, though you derive from it any number of shoots possessed of its qualities; so, too, that which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one.”
“His way also, as He is Spirit of Spirit and God of God, He is made a second in manner of existence--in position, not in nature; and He did not withdraw from the original source, but went forth. This ray of God, then, as it was always foretold in ancient times, descending into a certain virgin, and made flesh in her womb, is in His birth God and man united. The flesh formed by the Spirit is nourished, grows up to manhood, speaks, teaches, works, and is the Christ.”

Colossians 2:9-12
9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority.

Again, I am not going to debate with a web-site. We both have our minds made up, I have given the other arguments an open attempt and they do not mesh in my opinion. I will leave it here JF.

[Guest]

And your continual battering about referring you to works on the subject shows you have made up your mind on this and are sure of your position. So you do not even want to consider the scholarly work done on this. So you can slip me up by misunderstanding or an incomplete rendering by me on a doctrine that was put in place 2000 yrs ago and when many great Christians did not accept it, they stared killing them and burning their books. Then free reign was given to the "Orthodox" But God has always had a remnant seed. Racovian Catechism is one of these works which was thought to be completely wiped out and they went into Poland and destroyed the learning center there and burned it to the ground. Is that what Jesus taught? If they don't believe me kill them and burn them to the ground. I think not( sounds like Islam) and that should give you a clue to how dangerous it is to the devil for Christians to know the identity of Jesus. That is how I see it.

This is a fallacious statement. People were not killed because of the Trinity. The church became wrapped up into a violent and bloody struggle for power that had existed in Rome long before it became Christian.