Trinity Evidence All False

[easeltine (easeltine)]

"In the beginning was the Word the Word was with God and the Word was God."

To make the Word, Jesus Christ, not God is to make Him a god, and you are not saved.

You are not a monotheist, rather a polytheist, and believe in more than One God.

[easeltine (easeltine)]

Factual Verse:

"Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulders, and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, and the Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6

Squeakybro, you are beliving a different Jesus than the doctrines of the Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant Churches. You have believed in the teaching of the Jehovah Witnesses, The Way International, and the false teacher way back there Arius. One must believe that Jesus Christ is God or they have a different Jesus.

[easeltine (easeltine)]

Squeakybro,

"you said
." Isaiah 9:6

I said
I can see where you are deceived now. If you hold on to anything in the old testament. If you dont abide in the new testament of Christ you dont have Jesus or God."

Neither Christ, nor the Disciples ever told us to pitch out the words of the Old Testament.
Isaiah 9:6 is a messianic prophecy regarding the Lord Jesus Christ.
Jesus said, "I have not come to abolish the law but fulfill it."
To throw out the Old Testament gives a person an incorrect Jesus Christ and imperfect knowledge regarding the character of God.
Don't do it! I will not.

The Doctrine of Christ to a Trinitarian is that the Father is One with the Son, and I will abide in the Doctrine of Christ, for He is God.

John 1:1

You have the Scriptures well memorized from the JW or The Way International perspective. You may even be like the nice JW that came to my door a few months ago. We both just stood there each presenting different sides of the Scriptures regarding this issue.

Now, I know that the JW's don't throw out the O.T., and according to The Handbook of Today's Religions The Way International/Wierville doesn't throw out the O.T., and your theology doesn't sound like the past or present Worldwide Church of God. What church do you go to?

You are correct, this subject is an important theological point.

[paul_howey (paul_howey)]

This is a quote from squeakybro from another of his strings:

"I am a 58 year old man. And I went through the 3 years of the milk and the eleven years of the meat understanding. I came to the revelations of Jesus Christ that Paul spoke of. I have been receiving these revelation for 15 years and have received over 1500 of like revelations."

This is clear evidence that he is trying to make himself appear to be a Christian, while clearly he is not.

For starters:

He denies the the Deity of Jesus Christ.
He denies that Jesus is the Word of God.
He denies the Trinity.

(Also see his other strings)

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Who was the flesh that the Word became in John 1:14?
If you say He was not Jesus,you deny Him before men and He will deny you before the father.

Matthew 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Jesus Christ is Lord and God.

John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

You deny God.

Dave

</font>}

[yaakov (yaakov)]

squeakybro

<font color="0000ff">The bible itself denies the deity, when the word deity doesnt even show up in the bible.
I deny Jesus is the Word because He isnt.
The bible itself denies the trinity because that word doesnt show up anywhere in the Word of God.</font>

That’s interesting, squeakybro. My friend told me that there isn’t a single place in the Christian bible where the trinity is explicitly mentioned and there isn’t a single place in the Christian bible where jesus explicitly proclaims himself to be a god. Since these are so prevalent in Christian posts, I thought my friend was kidding me, but you are apparently confirming it.

[arron (arron)]

the BIBLE says that when john was baptising JESUS, THE VOICE(MEANING FATHER ) SPOKE FROM HEAVE, WHILE THE HOLY GHOST WAS COMEING DOWN AS A DOVE. ONE FOR THE FATHER, TOW FOR THE SON (IN THE WATER) THREE FOR THE HOLY GHOST, THREE THAT IS ... TRINITY... THREE... TRINITY.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
Since these are so prevalent in Christian posts, I thought my friend was kidding me, but you are apparently confirming it.

I said
Your friend is a true believer in the Word of God.

[arron (arron)]

hey squeakymouse... all three FATHER SON AND HOLY GHOST ARE GOD. there is not four of THEM.
the devilis the great dragon he is the serpent he is called the devil and satan there are not three of him only on and he is the devil

[osirus (osirus)]

Jesus Christ is the trinity

[turtle (turtle)]

Okay okay okay here we go again. Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one. The Father gave authority to the Son and the Holy Ghost. He also sent them both. Christ prayed the nite before he died and this is what He said.

And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
(John 17:11)

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.
(John 17:20-26)

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
(John 14:6-7)

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
(John 14:16-17)

It would do you all good to study book of John in the new testament. God is a plural term for Father, Son and Holy Ghost. If you use the term you are speaking of all three in the christian faith. The term god non capitalized would mean something else in a false religion.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
God is a plural term for Father, Son and Holy Ghost. If you use the term you are speaking of all three in the christian faith. The term god non capitalized would mean something else in a false religion.

I said
Then you say Jesus lied. No proof no evidence just your own opinion.

1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,
2 "as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.
3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
(NKJ)

[turtle (turtle)]

squeakybro ,
I am not going to repeat my post but read John 17 in its intirity if you got the time. It explains who Father, Christ and Holy Spirit is and the fact they are one.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

THE 'ARE ONE' DELUSION
WE ARE ONE WITH CHRIST AND GOD AND HOLY SPIRIT
IF JESUS IS GOD BECAUSE OF THE ONENESS-THEN WE ARE GOD. NOT SO!
John 10:30
30 "I and My Father are one."
(NKJ)
John 17:22
22 "And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one:
I Jn 5:7-8
7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
1 Cor 12:12-14
12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
14 For in fact the body is not one member but many.
1 Cor 10:16-17
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.
1 Cor 3:7-11
7 So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase.
8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one, and each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, you are God's building.
10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it.
11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Rom 12:5
5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another.
John 17:20-23
20 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word;
21 "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
22 "And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one:
23 "I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.
John 10:29-30
29 "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.
30 "I and My Father are one."
Eph 4:4-6
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling;
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
1 Cor 6:17
17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.
Matt 10:32-33
32 "Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven.
33 "But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.
1 Cor 11:1
1 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.
2 Cor 10:4-5
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds,
5 casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,
1 Cor 11:3
3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
Rom 16:25-27
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began
26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith--
27 to God, alone wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.
1 Cor 1:10
10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
Rom 12:16
16 Be of the same mind toward one another. Do not set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion.
Phil 3:16
16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us be of the same mind.
2 Cor 4:13-14
13 And since we have the same spirit of faith, according to what is written, "I believed and therefore I spoke," we also believe and therefore speak,
14 knowing that He who raised up the Lord Jesus will also raise us up with Jesus, and will present us with you.
(NKJ)
xxOneness is all about agreement. John 17-22 Jesus prayed that we may be one the same way that Jesus and God are one. Jesus submitted to every Word of God that shows His agreement. We are to submit to every Word of God to show our agreement.
Jesus prayed John 17-22 that we "are one" with Jesus and God the Father. And that doesnt make us God any more than it made Jesus God to be one with God.

[arron (arron)]

squeakymousse read YOUR post on the 10th. it says there are four... that is what i was speaking about. you said there were four not i.

[turtle (turtle)]

If i am not mistake squeakybro you believe that we are gods. And if this is what you believe I disagree. That is either new age, Pencostal oness, Jesus Only, or buddist. Now which are you so we can clear this up.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

arron the four was what you showed me.

turtle your wrong i dont believe that. I believe there is only one God the Father. Because that is what the Word says. That is what Jesus says. I dont add to or take away from the Word.

[turtle (turtle)]

You said God was four. So you need to explain squeakybro?

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

arron said
the BIBLE says that when john was baptising JESUS, THE VOICE(MEANING FATHER ) SPOKE FROM HEAVE, WHILE THE HOLY GHOST WAS COMEING DOWN AS A DOVE. ONE FOR THE FATHER, TOW FOR THE SON (IN THE WATER) THREE FOR THE HOLY GHOST, THREE THAT IS ... TRINITY... THREE... TRINITY.

I said
Father, Son, Holy Ghost that is three where is God? Add in God and you have four. That is where I got it. I didnt say I agree or disagree I was just wondering where was God.

[arron (arron)]

squeakymouse... no.. you reread your post on the tenth... YOU said there were four.. not me

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you listed three, what I was showing is if you add in God that would make four.

[arron (arron)]

then state what you said and quit accusing someone of saying what they did not say. there is a TRINITY. composed of THE FATHER THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST. that is the teaching of THE WORD OF GOD (written word, the BIBLE).

[godchild (godchild)]

That God is triune means primarily that he is three persons in the legal sense, that, three persons who share or own in common one substance or property; co-equal and co-eternal. The difference between created and uncreated substance is absolute. Thus if the Son is uncreated, his substance is not only "like" the Father's, it is the same as the Father's. The same divine, eternal, unchangeable essence, which is in an original way in the Father, is, from eternity, in a derived way, through generation, in the Son; just as the water of the fountain is in the stream, or the light of the sun is in the ray, and cannot be separated from it..this is the sense of the expression: "God of God, " "very God of very God." Christ, in His divine nature, is as fully consubstantial with the Father, as, in His human nature, He is with man....
--exerpts from God in Three persons by E. Calvin Beisner

[arron (arron)]

squeakymouse ... you are a GOD denying liar and a hypocrite

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Thats a very intellectual reply

[arron (arron)]

thank you..now take heed to it

[godchild (godchild)]

E. Calvin Beisner is not a prophet nor does he claim to be. He is a biblical scholar who has traced the formulation of the doctrine of the trinity and shared it in his book. This book shows that the New Testament does teach such a doctrine. For Peter to call Jesus "the son of the living God," almost certainly means that Peter thought of Jesus as having the same nature as God.
The Christian Church throughout history has found that in order to remain faithful to the teaching of the New Testament regarding the person and work of Christ, it had to affirm at least the following doctrines: (1) The doctrine of the Trinity--that in the nature of the one true God, there are three distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, each fully God, coequal and coeternal. (2) The doctrine of the incarnation--that the Son of God, the Word (John 1:1) became man (John 1:14; Rom. 1:3), uniting in the single person of the Son two distinct and complete natures, deity and humanity, (3) The sinless life of Christ--that he lived as the perfect man to fulfill God's plan for all humanity (Heb. 2:6-18; 4:14, 15); (4) The sacrificial death of Christ--to atone for the sins of all men (1 John 2:2; 1 Pet. 2:24; Matt. 20:28), and purchase the salvation of believers (Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 6:20). (5) The resurrection of Christ--that after his death, Christ rose bodily from the grave, showing his triumph over sin and death, as the firstfruit, and hence the promise, of resurrection to all who have faith in him (1 Cor. 15; Rom 6:3-11). (6) Salvation by grace through faith--that justification before God, and hence salvation from punishment and life with God, are available only as a gift from God through faith in Jesus Christ (John 14:6; 3:16; Acts 4:10-12; John 8:24).
Certain other doctrines, such as the virgin birth and those relative to the nature of man, heaven, and hell, and the inspiration and authority of the Bible, are related to these doctrines more or less directly. That of the virgin birth is essential as related to the sinlessness of Christ, granted the doctrine of original sin; that of the virgin birth is essential as related to the sinlessness of Christ, that of the creatureliness of man and his sinfulness are related to the work of Christ, in that man stands in need of salvation, and to the person of Christ, in that Christ alone among men is the Mediator between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5), as the unique Son of God incarnate.
Should we rather believe someone who calls him/herself squeaky? Your Bible quotations have nothing in comparison to the way you interpret them in your few words after numerous quotes from the Bible, which Christians possess already.

[jeff_p (jeff_p)]

Squeakybro-
You're adopting an odd brand of dualism- the common Western train of thought started by Plato that the human being is divided (intellect/soul and body).

This idea is not supported in scripture whatsoever. Even amongst most philosophical circles, critics over the generations have found common giant holes in this view.

Biblical thought always takes a wholistic view of a person; i.e. what effects the mind effects the emotions effects the spirit effects the body. We are a whole person.

This train of thought has perpetuated the myth that when we die, our spirits leave (or are liberated) from are bodies to float around as spirits in heaven. Scripture always supports a wholistic bodily resurrection when we die.

Scripture ALWAYS points to THE problem of sin. Our alienation, enslavement, problems, lack of fullfillment is always a by-product of human kind's problem - sin.

Sin has come like a meteor and its impact has left giant cracks in what God has created. Our emotional troubles, relational problems and uncontrollable thoughts and tendencies can always be traced back to our distorted thinking and actions caused by sin.

You may be pointing out that our affections when directed to the wrong things cause alienation from God and other people. This is true. But our affections or emotions are not the problem. Our affections and desires have become tainted and distorted by sin. Sin is and always has been THE problem.

But there's good news. Jesus came to deal with the problem that plagues every human soul and mind. He dealt with this sin problem by tearing up our debt with God. Everything that we owed God by our own self-centered independance of trying to do life without Him, Jesus tore up our bill and payed the price on the cross.

And now humanity can be brought back to wholeness again because of what God accomplished through His son here on earth. We now have power over sin with God's Spirit living in us and empowering us to live the life He initially had in mind before all of this brokenness and confusion entered into our lives. Good news! Good news!!

[jeff_p (jeff_p)]

This a great example of what I call 'grab-bag' preaching. Instead of approaching the text in context and creating an expository message, you are hand picking certain verses and tearing them out of the context the initial author had in mind, to support your OWN personal view and perspective.

Show me direct scriptural evidence that there is a noted dictinction between the spirit and the soul and each member is responsible for these particular different actions.

Scripture is founded in the principle that the will is controlled by the mind. And your decisions are formulated in the mind which enact the will of your spirit.

Now I do agree that angelic beings can impose certain ideas on the human psyche. But there's no way we can make any formulaic statements based on scripture that ALL ideas come from angels- a good guardian angel and the devil.

So what's with this inner-outer man you're talking about? Let's take a look.

Paul is using the word body ( sO'ma) metaphorically to refer to the whole person, a figure of speech called synecdochea part for a whole." This clearly seems to be the case in Romans 6:12-13, where Paul tells his readers, "do not let sin reign in your mortal body" and "do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin," but, on the contrary, "present yourselves to God." In these verses "yourselves" is equated with "body" (cf. Also Rom 12:1-2). Thus it is the person who indwells the body who is sinful, not the body itself. Whichever way we may view Paul's language, it is clear that the Bible does not teach that the body is inherently evil but that sin resides in man's immaterial being, not his physical; yet the body is where we commonly see the outworkings of sin....

As I've mentioned before, our problem is sin

Scripture defines the term "inner man" as being the spirit of a man. And further, it teaches that an alive and active and growing inner man is a man's born again spirit possessed only by an individual who is born again believer:

[Compare 2 Cor 4:16]:

"Therefore we [believers, v. 5] do not lose heart, but though our outer man [the sin nature] is decaying, yet our inner man [the born again spirit] is being renewed day by day."

[Compare Eph 3:16]:

"That He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man..."

[Compare Ro 7:14-25]:

(v. 22 cont.) "For I joyfully concur with the Law of God in the inner man..."

(v. 23) but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.

[The law of my mind ? the law of God which pervades Paul's born again spirit = his inner man, (cp. v. 25)]

(v. 24) "Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?"

[Although Paul is indicated here as a born again believer with an "inner man" he, like all believers who are still physically alive, possesses a mortal body which deteriorates daily. And pervading throughout the members of that body is the ever present, adversarial sin nature which obeys the law of sin and opposes the law of God which is within Paul's "inner man" - his born again spirit.

But Jesus Christ, Whom Paul has trusted in for eternal life, will eventually set Paul and all believers free from the wretchedness of their sin-contaminated, decaying fleshly bodies - providing them with new, immortal, perfect ones with righteous natures, (I Cor 15:50-54)]:

(v. 24 cont.) "Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?

["Who will set me free from the body of this death." ? Who will provide or how will I be "set free" from this body of mortal death so contaminated with the sin nature? And the answer comes in the next verse]:

(v. 25) Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin."

Notice again, that whenever this took place in Paul's life, we see that Paul had two warring natures: a sin nature and a born again, Holy Spirit indwelled "inner man" - an alive spirit which must be alive because it is serving the law of God. No unsaved individual can serve the law of God, (Ro 8:8). Compare Ro 8:10 which verifies that a believer still has a sin nature:

[Ro 8:10]:

"And if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, [sin singular ? sin nature] yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness."
Although the body of the believer is dead because of sin, i.e., destined to physically die yet the believer's spirit is alive:

"Yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness" ? Yet the spirit is alive because it is born again - because through faith alone in Christ alone one has had their spirit become alive, i.e., born again and has received the righteousness of Jesus Christ,

(ref. Ro 3:21-24).


I have sought to demonstrate that it is perfectly valid to speak of the believer as having two natures - old and new like you are stating - BUT ONLY as long as the term nature is understood to refer to a complex of attributes, a set of characteristics, or disposition. These natures are not substantive entities and do not act. But the believer himself can be viewed as acting from the perspective of his old or new nature, his disposition may be toward sin or holiness. While some two-nature advocates have used two-nature terminology to present a view of sanctification which is inherently defective, the fault lies with their deficient theology, not with two-nature terminology itself. Two-nature terminology combined with a proper understanding of regeneration and sanctification accurately represents the believer's struggle with sin as presented in Scripture.

(Message edited by Jeff_p on October 14, 2005)

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Did you even bother to read what you wrote??
[Although Paul is indicated here as a born again believer with an "inner man" he, like all believers who are still physically alive, possesses a mortal body which deteriorates daily. And pervading throughout the members of that body is the ever present, adversarial sin nature which obeys the law of sin and opposes the law of God which is within Paul's "inner man" - his born again spirit.

[jeff_p (jeff_p)]

Yeah, I sure do. What I wrote was asking you to back up these claims about affections, getting ALL ideas from angels and emotions being unclean spirits. And you seemingly can't do a great job at it.

You grab 12-13 different little texts from all over the New Testament that are addressing completely different issues (and ironically none of them even mention or talk about'affections' or 'angels') and then add a few little of your own sentences chuck full of New Age psycho-babble at the end which in theory are supposed to summarize all those numerous texts you simply copy and pasted. And as numerous people have pointed out, it doesn't add up.

I'd just like to see some direct evidence in scripture to back up your statements.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
jeff_p,
commendations brother,commendations.
A most exsellent articulation of divine truth.

Blessings to you,
Dave

</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said

You grab 12-13 different little texts from all over the New Testament that are addressing completely different issues (and ironically none of them even mention or talk about'affections' or 'angels'

I said
Do you have trouble focuseing on the topic?
I posted a revelation on affections. Are you just trying to run alittle camoflouge here? If you go to that revelations you will find all the verses you CANT SEE in this revelation.

[jeff_p (jeff_p)]

No, the problem is you have a difficult time focusing on any topic. When an author writes, he is writing with a particular message and intent that he wants to communicate to a specific audience in a particular setting/time period.

And because of that, you do not have the liberty to grab a dozen sentences from a dozen different places in scripture to back up some thesis of yours.

You do a very wreckless job of handling the word. And it's honestly very scary bro. Apostasy starts with hearers reading passages of scripture out of context and subsequently formulating ideas the intitial hearers of the word would have not arrived at.

By pulling these passages out of their intial context, you're then able to read things into the text that the author never intended to be communicated.

You're treading on thin ice.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
he is writing with a particular message and intent that he wants to communicate to a specific audience in a particular setting/time period.

I said
And this revelation is about the deception of the trinity.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Squeaky,
you're revealing something alright.
It's called "being decieved."

You should really consider what Jeff is telling you.It might save you from yourself.

Dave
</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

It seems you all are the ones having trouble focuseing on the subject.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Ge*1:26
¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Notice that God said "let US make man in OUR image.
"Us and our" have a meaning that is not singular.

Explain this away if you can.

Dave
</font>}}}}

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
"Anyway He must have changed His mind"

Scripture please.
</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

I gave you the scripture. God didnt create man in Our image in verse 26. He created man in His own image verse 27.
Gen 1:26-27
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
(NKJ)

[arron (arron)]

GOD was speaking, not to angels, but to THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST. that is who HE said IN OUR IMAGE.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
That's the truth Arron.

dave
</font>}

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
"Anyway He must have changed His mind"
----------
Here's an exsample of what you just accused Arron of.It's what you said and it is just speculation.Nothing in the scripture says this.

Go examine yourself.
</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Read it for yourself.
I gave you the scripture. God didnt create man in Our image in verse 26. He created man in His own image verse 27.
Gen 1:26-27
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
(NKJ)

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
You also said'"Anyway He must have changed His mind"
</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Let us make man in "Our Image" but what He finally did "His image" . Like it or not that is a change of mind.

[godchild (godchild)]

squeaky, I think what you must be confused by is the word 'our'. God was not speaking about you and I, he was speaking about Himself, the Son and the Holy Spirit. God never changes.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Now that is just rediculous. Even if He were speaking to Jesus and the Holy Spirit which He wasnt. He still changed His mind from Our to Own image.
What do you do just make this stuff up as you go.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
squeakybro,
I have three children.
My wife has three children.
We have three children.
The three children are ours.
The three children are my own.

Get it?

Dave
</font>}

[kingdavid (kingdavid)]

By reading all of your posts, I have to say that we all might want to admit that we, on our human level, cannot truely comprehend the true consciencness of God. Is God three persons totally seperate from each other (Father/Son/ Holy Spirit), or is God big enough to be the Father, with part of Himself made into flesh by His own doing (Jesus/Son), and also the Holy Spirit (which decended upon Christ at His Baptism, and remained after His ascension)? Or is it something which we cannot even comprehend fully at our level of spiritual development at this time?
Just as a college educated adult may have a clear understanding of mathmatics all the way through calculus for example, we can only expect our 5 year old child to be able to grasp simple arithmetic, Our Fathers level of consciencness may be beyond our level of understanding, only explainable through the verses we are given, but nowhere near the true understanding we desire.
I say, yes, God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but I certainly don't believe that any of us here can truely comprehend what that means on His level.

[gone_to_pa (gone_to_pa)]

HOW ABOUT THE SATANIC TRINITY? YOU KNOW THE DEVIL ALWAYS TRIES TO DUPLICATE TRUTH.

DEVIL= FATHER, YOU ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL
LUCIFER= SON, SON OF THE MORNING
SATAN=SPIRIT , AND THE UNCLEAN SPIRIT WENT OUT
Mk 5:13

COUNTERFEIT ALL COUNTERFEIT.
1 JOHN 5:7 " FOR THERE ARE THREE THAT BEAR RECORD IN HEAVEN, THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY GHOST: <u>AND THESE THREE ARE ONE</u>

SQEEK, DON'T BOTHER TO REPLY, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT YOU STUDY THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGES AS MUCH AS MY FRIENDS 2 YR OLD BOY IS A MERCEDES BENZ MECHANIC.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/biggrin.gif

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Spoken by Christ:
Revelation 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Who is God.
</font>}

[solidstand (solidstand)]

It is the standard procedure to place error in the midst of much quoted text.

The fact that the devil can quote the bible
gave Jesus no incentive to give credence to any of his quoting.

They who deny the trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ are heretics. Remember after the first and second admonition reject them.

Solid

[arron (arron)]

explain how and why at the baptisum of JESUS there were three. three not just one. there were three there... JESUS IN THE WATER, THE FATHER SPEAKING FROM HEAVEN THE HOLY GHOST COMING DOWN AS A DOVE. JESUS must have throwed HIS VOICE to be beard fom heaven as THE FATHER and must have hypmatise the people to be able to see THE HOLY GHOST as a DOVE.... no there were three

[angel_from_the_sun (angel_from_the_sun)]

I very much enjoy reading this thread. Our God is One God. How to understand the Trinity of the One God.

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are One God and one mind together. They can and do act independently, yet at all times are connected as the One in mind and in full agreement as the One together. Jesus Christ at all times while on earth was One with the Father and One with the Holy Ghost doing God's Will as the One God together.

For example: A man is a son to his parents, a husband to his wife, and a father to his children. He has three offices and identities but is one person and one mind. Hope this helps a bit in understanding the Trinity of the One God.
Angel from the sun

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
The fact that the devil can quote the bible
gave Jesus no incentive to give credence to any of his quoting.

They who deny the trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ are heretics. Remember after the first and second admonition reject them.

I said
You should check your facts. First of all the devil doesnt quote the new testament only the old testament. And the trinity isnt even in the Word of God so they are the hereticks adding things to the Word of God.
And I'm willing to bet you dont even know what deity means. Because if you did you would see that Jesus isnt God.
Deity-Divinity

I have seen these words used in so many different context, that I had to go to the library and look in the big dictionary. To try to find out why these people are using it the way they are. It amazed me. The carnal language is dangerous because it is satans play ground. Satan can use the carnal mind, change a few words, exaggerate anything there. But the spiritual mind which is only verses, he has no power. He can only try with a piece of a verse, and this is why I tell everybody. If you ever get a piece of a verse, go look it up for verification. But he(satan) will not use a whole verse because that is glorifiing Christ. And satan is anti-christ. Now when I speak of verses I'm speaking of new testament verses, because we know that he(satan) quotes old testament verses. And yes the Holy Spirit quotes old testament verses to. But Christ is the new testament. Anyway check out these deffinitions from the big dictionary at the library.

deity 1 a: often cap : divine nature or rank: the essintial nature of a god or of a supreme being: DIVINITY

di-vin-i-ty 1:the quality or state of being divine: nature or essence of God: GODHEAD (the divinity of Jesus) a celestial being inferior to the supreme God but superior to man<one>

Now it doesnt say that Jesus is God, what it says is He is second in command, it says Jesus is inferior to the supreme God but over every other creature in heaven and on earth.
I got my deffinitions from websters new world dictionary copyright 1993

[godchild (godchild)]

Who is the savior? Jesus Christ. Jude 24-25 Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, And to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy, to God our Savior, Who alone is wise, Be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and forever. Amen
Titus 2:11-15 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed, and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority, Let no one despise you.

[godchild (godchild)]

In the first place, Jesus was not created. Man was and is. God is not created. Jesus was with God from the beginning. Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let <u>us </u>make man in <u>our </u>image. He wasn't speaking to the angels, though they were with him. Angels are spirits. Jesus became man of flesh and bone in order to save us.
There was no unrighteousness in Him (John 7:18)
Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins (Matt. 9:2, Luke 7:47-50, Acts 5:31)
Was before Abraham (John 8:56)
Had glory with God in Heaven (John 17:5)
Made himself no reputation, took form of servant (Phil. 2:7)
The Son of man ascended up to where he was before (John 6:62)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In Him was Life, and the life was the Light of men.(John 1:--)
The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14)
Jesus Christ the same always (Heb. 13:8)
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in His son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. (1 John 5:20)
Angel Gabriel called Jesus "That Holy Thing....Son of God". (Luke 1:35)
All to stand before the judgment seat of Christ (Romans 14:10)
Jesus ordained by God to be judge of quick and dead (Acts 10:42)
Exalted by God to be a Prince and a Savior (Acts 5:31)
Called King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, who only hath immortality (1 Tim. 6:15)
On right hand of God, angels, authorities and powers made subject unto Him (1 Peter 1:22)
Love of Christ passeth ALL knowledge (Eph. 3:19)
Nothing shall separate us from the love of Christ (Romans 8:35)
Promises HIS presence to those who pray (Matt. 18:20)
Our sins forgiven for Jesus' sake (1 John 2:1-12)
41 miracles decribed in the Bible by Jesus
Conceived of Holy Ghost (Luke 3:23-38)
All angels of God worship Him (Hebrews 1:6)

There are more passages if that isn't enough for you. The two above should have been.

[gone_to_pa (gone_to_pa)]

SQUEWK,
LIKE ISAID THAT'S NOT LANGUAGE USED IN LAH LAH LAND, IT'S TRUTH. EVERYTHING THAT GOD HAS CREATED AS GOOD SATAN HAS A CONTERFEIT, SEE LITTLE BOY EVEN SATAN MASQUERADES AS AN ANGEL OF LIGHT.

GOD GIVE FAITH
SATAN GIVES FEAR
GOD GIVES LIGHT
SATAN GIVES DARKNESS
JESUS IS TRUTH
DEVIL IS A LIAR
GOD GAVE HIS SON JESUS
DEVIL GIVES US THE ANTICHRIST

IT'S REALY SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU STUDY INSTEAD OF RUNNING YOUR MOUTH. WHY DON'T YOU JUST SIT BACK, SHUT UP AND MAYBE YOU CAN LEARN SOME TRUTH IMNSTAED OF ALL THAT NEW AGE BULL YOUR TRYING TO PASS AS TRUTH. IT IS SO OBVIOUS TO THE REST OF US THAT YOU HAVE NEVER EVEN READ THE BIBLE. I'LL SELL YOU MY OLD KURAN CHEAP, NOT, I WOULD WANT TO DO THAT TO MY MUSLIM FRIENDS. NOW BE A GOOD LITTLE BOY SQUEEK AND SANTA CLAUS WILL BRING YOU A BIG FAT STUDY BIBLE. ASK SANTA FOR THE KJV HEBREW, GREEK, KEY WORD STUDY BIBLE FOR CHRISTMAS. OH, MY BAD, YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN CHRISTMAS. WELL THERE IS ALWAYS THE TOOTH FAIRY SONNY.

[fatherofaking (fatherofaking)]

hey sqbro,
you need help man. you have a demon in you. no sane man speaks the things you speak. your twisting the scriptures to the point of being unrecognizable. your own definitions contradict what you are saying.
Flesh does not mean skin.
when did anyone ever say that the holy spirit dwealt in jesus' skin? it was in his body. which your own dictionary states is a perfectly acceptable definition of the word for flesh. half truths and twisting of scripture are the work of demons.

[godchild (godchild)]

I believe in one God the Father Almighty; Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by Whom all things were made;...And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life; who prceedeth from the Father; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified.
(This is my belief in the Trinity.) We may break the doctrine down into four parts for study in the New Testament. (1) The first point in the doctrine is that of unity, that there is one and only one true God. (2) The second is that there is a person called The Father, who is also called God. (3) Third, there is a person called the Son, or Christ, who is called God. (4) Fourth, there is a person called the Holy Spirit who is called God. It need only be added that the first point is, as it were, an umbrella over the other three, so that we will not fall into the erroneous view of the three names standing merely for different relations of one person to the creation. That is, the three persons of the Trinity are really three person, and really one God.
The Apostle Paul specifically set about to answer the question whether there are more gods than one: "So then, about eating meat sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many 'gods' and many 'lords'), yet for us there is but one God, The Father,<u>from whom all things came and for whom we live;</u> and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, <u>through whom all things came and through whom we live"</u> (1 Cor. 8:4-6).
There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5).
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen (1 Timothy 1:17)
--From God in Three Persons

For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Squeaky,
you said the angels are not spirits.

God's Word says:Hebrews 1:13-14 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

They are spirits according to God's Word.
You do not reveal the Christ that the Bible shows us.
You reveal another gospel which is not the gospel that was delivered to us by God.

If you do not turn from your error,the scriptures say that God will reject you.
dave
</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
Squeaky,
you said the angels are not spirits.

I said
I apologize. I know that God made his angels into spirits. Angels dwell outside of us and spirits dwell inside of us. I just got in to big of a hurry.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
You have written way to much error to fall back on that exscuse.

I am glad that you now realiose that angels are ministering spirits.
It gives me hope for you that you might begin to realise who Jesus the Christ is.
dave
</font>}

[turtle (turtle)]

Dave I know this belongs on another thread but read Revalations 1:4 where it says the seven spirits. I have heard different interpetations on this verse would you agree or disagree that these seven spirits are angels. Or do they relate to the attributes of God? You last statement was a blessing to me.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
You have written way to much error to fall back on that exscuse.

I said
I dont mind admitting when I made a mistake. But looking back over the other stuff it seems to be the only one. Now dont get the big head as though you are always right. I can humble myself you should try it.

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
squeakybro,
I could not possably in all honesty ever say that I am right all the time.
I know better than that from experience.
Only the Lord is right "all" the time.

Romans 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Just because I'm saved by grace and washed by the shed blood of the risen Christ,doesn't mean in any way that,I am better than any other person alive as far as rightiousness is concerned.Rightiousness is imputed.
Romans 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
I could never attain,by any of my own works,the requirements to meet God's Holiness.
It is a gift that He alone has given.

That means to me that I cannot assume to be doing a better job of being a christian than any other believer in Christ,since it is His strength with which I can be made an overcomer.
Nothing I could do would be enough.

Jude 1:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy.

He must be allowed to reveal who He is through us in order for another to see Him.
We submit to the Word and walk in the Spirit by the strength that Jesus gives us.
Philippians 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.

Dave
</font>}

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Forgive yes,tolerate and ignore error,no.
There is a differance.

Dave
</font>}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

That is why I keep forgiving you. When you criticize the truth.

[arron (arron)]

PRAISE GOD FOR THE TRINITY... THE FATHER , THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST, PRAISED HIS NAME.

[arron (arron)]

PRAISE GOD FOR THE TRINITY... GOD THE FATHER ... GOD THE SON... GOD THE HOLY GHOST....

[david_munson (david_munson)]

<font color="000000"><font face="arial,helvetica"></font>
Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (accusing the Holy Spirits actions to be from satan) is the unforgivable sin.

Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

</font>}}}}

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Is that what you think blasphemy is????

[butch (butch)]

Don't be blashemous, people, the Trinity is sacred. First there is God, the Father, Lord, Poppa God, Daddy. He can create life out of dust and can transmute human ribs into females. He can create rain by shaking dust from His feet. He can create a universe and life-sustaining eco-system in seven days. He has the ability to be everywhere at once, and power to burn people in Hell. He can also morph, meld, into the Son and the Holy Ghost to form a single Entity. Of course, He is short tempered, cranky, jealous, sadistic, very judgemental and has a lousy aim.

Then there is the Son, Jesus, the Messiah, Christ, Baby Jesus, who can float on water and raise the dead. He has healing powers, can control demons, is able to live inside human hearts, can strike people deaf and dumb, can make booze out of water and can answer prayers when his Dad is too busy. Of course, Jesus doesn't answer simple questions directly, prefers to speak in parables. He's very pricky, jealous, has unkempt long hair and beard, and hangs out with shady characters.

Finally, there is the Holy Ghost. This is the flying side-kick, the Bird, the Holy Spirit. It is invisible, has shape-shifting abilities (can take on bird or fire form), can replicate itself and live inside any number of people for unlimited times without oxygen. Has no forgiveness for blasphemy, even if accidental.

So don't be doing any of that blaspheming folks, the invisible Ghost is watching you.

[godchild (godchild)]

anoy, why is it here you preach ONE God, yet on the 'speaking in tongues' thread, you say we must receive another baptism after receiving the baptism of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? You contradict yourself, as all tongue speakers do.

[turtle (turtle)]

Godchild please stop categorizing all tongue speakers has being the same because they are not. Would you like me to caterogize all xmormons as being the same?

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

Does anyone know the difference between milk tongues and meat tongues?

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
GOD A SPIRIT HAVE BLOOD NO JESUS BLOOD
IS THE BLOOD OF GOD WHY JESUS IS GOD.


I said
That is an oxymoron.

[arron (arron)]

PREAISE GOD FOR THE TRINITY... GOD THE FATHER GOD THE SON GOD THE HOLY GHOST... PRAISE HIM FOREVER

[arron (arron)]

these three are one... THE FATHER THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST. it is plain in the WORD OF GOD

[arron (arron)]

we are saints. nowhere does it say or teach that we are gods or become gods. there is one place that says he called us gods. but that means we belong to GOD not we are gods. do not even say to me your bible denying doctrines

[arron (arron)]

oh and by the way squeakybro maybe that is what is wrong with you you need some OIL of THE HOLY SPIRIT and then you want be squeaking so much

[arron (arron)]

JESUS IS GOD. we are not.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

If you look in verse 3 you will see that Jesus said the Father is the only true God.
Are you calling Jesus a liar??????????

[godchild (godchild)]

squeaky, He's not calling Jesus a liar. Read Revelation 22:12-13 And behold, I am coming quickly, and <u>My</u> reward is with Me, to give to everyone according to his work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.
In Genesis 1:26-27 Then God said, "Let <u>us</u> make man in <u>our</u> image, according to our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
'Let Us make' is emphatic. It emphasizes the majesty of the speaker. Furthermore, the use of a plural for God allows for the later revelation of the Trinity (see 11:7; Matt. 28:19). The Us cannot refer to the angels because we are created in God's image alone. Jesus said, "And lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." These words demonstrate that Jesus is the true Immanuel, "God with us" (see 1:23; Heb. 13:5; Rev. 21:3).
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

[squeakybro (squeakybro)]

you said
In Genesis 1:26-27 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image,

I said
Even though the old testament is obsolete did you read verse 27. God didnt make man in the "Let us" He made man in His own image.

[godchild (godchild)]

You said the 'old testament' is obsolete? Are you saying the Old Testament is out of date, no longer of any use?

So what do you think when the Old Testament says; in the image of God He created 'him'; male and female He created 'them'? Did God change His mind then also?

What about you? Are you spirit, soul, and body; or are you just, say for example: body? Does your body commune with the Holy Spirit? That can't be because the New Testament says we must worship in spirit and truth (Our spirit with His Spirit). Does your body have personality or is it your soul? The New Testament says the soul, not the body, is your inward personality or essence. Finally, the New testament identifies the body; your physical being, as being separate from your soul or spirit. So the question is, are you One or Three in one? Does your body need your soul, and does your body need your spirit?

Jesus isn't just a man or another God. There are no other gods. Just One. Jesus said "I and my Father are One." If you don't believe this, you are no different than the pagans who worship many gods or idols.

[godchild (godchild)]

The New Covenant is in fact a fulfillment of the spiritual redemption promised in the Abrahmic and Davidic Covenants. (Matt. 26:26-29; Luke 22:20). God's Word is now written on our minds and hearts and not on stone. Believers will have a personal relationship with God. No longer will the Pharisees and scribes have to teach the intricate law to the people. God will forgive the sins of believers. Animals will no longer have to be sacrificed for the atonement of sin.

Do you know how to have a real, open conversation, or do you always prefer one liners?

[easeltine (easeltine)]

Arron and Godchild,

Solid spoke the truth above:

"They who deny the trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ are heretics. Remember after the first and second admonition reject them."


Don't do this forever with this person, he is not able to even hear you.

[godchild (godchild)]

easeltine, It is for others who may be 'listening' that I continue to write.

[easeltine (easeltine)]

"They who deny the trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ are heretics. Remember after the first and second admonition reject them."

You said,

"Dont go posting something like that. As if it is some kind of scripture, it isnt. The word trinity doesnt even show up in the Word of God. Deity doesnt even show up in the Word of God. Go read the revelation at the top is shows percisely that the trinity is a delusion.
The only real trinity in the Word of God of three in one is here. Try telling people the truth."

I say,

I know you are wrong:

You have rejected the Scriptural meaning of the US and OUR of Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7.
You have rejected the Scriptural meaning of JESUS BEING THE MIGHTY GOD AND ALMIGHTY FATHER of Isaiah 9:6 tied into Isaiah 44:6.
You have rejected the Scripural meaning of John 1, especially vs. 1 and vs. 14 that says that THE WORD BECAME FLESH.
You have rejected the Scriptural meaning of
John 14:5-14 where JESUS SAYS THAT IF YOU HAVE SEEN HIM YOU HAVE SEEN THE FATHER.
You have rejected the name of Jesus who is God Almighty, the NAME THAT IS ABOVE ALL NAMES, the NAME that all must bow to and confess in Phil. 2:9,10.
You have rejected the Scriptural meaning of the FIRST and the LAST of Revelation 1:17 tied into Isaiah 44:6.
You have rejected the fact that the WORD THAT BECAME FLESH, JESUS CHRIST, CREATED ALL THINGS, clearly stated in John 1 and Colossians 1.
You have rejected the three in heaven that bear witness of 1 John 5:7, and the clear trinitarian idea of Matthew relating to baptism.
You have rejected all other verses that have been clearly expressed to you by Christians, those that believe that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh above.

The point Solid and I are making is clearly expressed to all Christians, those that believe that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh by the following verses:

Titus 3:10,11
10 Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition , 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.
NKJV

[easeltine (easeltine)]

Now, that is the second time that you have seemed to reject the Old Testament as the Word of God. You seem to use the Old Testament with other posterd, however, whenever I quote from the Old Testament you reject the Words.
There are Christians that also reject the Old Testament, (Disciples of Christ).

Do you reject all the Old Testament as the Word of God and presently useful for doctrine?

[lazarus (lazarus)]

Squeaky,

You are the heckler. Going from Christian site to Christian site posting heretical teachings, causing arguments, and disrupting Christian fellowship.

There are many sites that deny the deity of Christ. Why don't you go to them and spread your heresies where they will be received. Stop spamming this and many other Christian boards with messages that attack God.

[easeltine (easeltine)]

"Jesus wants everyone who is going to be a christian to understand that the new covenant(testament) is just that new. That you cant go back and keep any part of the old testament that Jesus hasnt brought over to the new testament. Jesus new what to bring over man doesnt. But the old testament has to be obsolete to you in order for you to get the fullness of the new testament. 11John 1-9 is very specific if you dont abide(live) in the new testament you dont have the real God. There IS a veil over the old testament that remains to THIS day.
If Jesus were in the old testament this verse could only be meant for God and the angels.
John 10:8-9
8 "All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.
9 "I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture."

I find your Scriptures supporting your idea to throw away all of the Old Testament illogical. Christ and the Disciples continued to quote and use the Old Testament while Christ was on earth and after He was ascended into heaven.

I am in disagreement with you on the following points of theology:

1. That the Word became Jesus Christ, not just as you say that the Word came into the man Jesus Christ and that he remained a man. This heresy is exactly what a Bishop Paul in Syria believed in 260 AD and was excommunicated for this heresy. This also led to the heretic Arius believing in his positions, and this led to the Nicene Creed in 325 AD that states that Jesus Christ is "...One subtance of the Father. There are many words of Bishop Alexander, Anthony, Bishop Athanasius of this time period that refute your doctrine.

2. God's Word in the Old Testament is still applicable for us today, eventhough we live in the New Covenant. The truths of the Old Testament regarding God are still the truth.

[easeltine (easeltine)]

The Doctrine of the Incarnation
12/05

Incarnation – 1. Endowment with a human body; appearance in human form. 2. The taking on of human form and nature of Jesus conceived of as the Son of God. Webster’s Dictionary

Incarnation “— that act of grace whereby Christ took our human nature into union with his Divine Person, became man. Christ is both God and man. Human attributes and actions are predicated of him, and he of whom they are predicated is God. A Divine Person was united to a human nature (Acts 20:28; Rom 8:32; 1 Cor 2:8; Heb 2:11-14; 1 Tim 3:16; Gal 4:4, etc.). The union is hypostatical, i.e., is personal; the two natures are not mixed or confounded, and it is perpetual.” from Easton's Bible Dictionary, PC Study Bible

Athanasian Creed

“Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.
God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.
Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.
One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.
For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ…”
From Creeds of the Church PC Study Bible

“It knew Christ Himself as the Coming One and indeed it especially speaks concerning Him in Psalms 44: Your throne, O God, is forever and ever: The scepter of Your Kingdom is a scepter of righteousness. You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity. Therefore God, Your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond Your fellows. And lest someone suppose that He comes only in semblance, it makes clear that this same One will become man and that this is He through whom all things were made, as it says in Psalm 86: Mother of Sion shall say, a man and a man was begotten in her, and the Most High himself formed her. This is tantamount to saying, And the Word was God, and all things were made through Him, and the Word became flesh. On this account also, since it knows that this was from a virgin, the Psalter was not silent, but immediately gives some clear expression in Psalm 44: Hear, O daughter and see, and incline your ear; forget also your people and your father’s house, because the King has desired your beauty. Again, this is like that which is said by Gabriel, “Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you! For indeed, having stated that He is Christ, soon thereafter it became known the human birth from the virgin in saying, “Hear, O, daughter. Take note that Gabriel calls Mary by name, since He is dissimilar to her in terms of origination, but David the Psalmist properly as daughter, because she happened to be from his seed.”

Athanasius Around 320 AD

Please read the assignment and then answer the following questions.

1. In your own words explain what is meant by the Incarnation. Please use at least 1 Scripture.












2. Explain why the Incarnation has something to do with the true idea of Christmas. What does Christmas mean to you?

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

godchild
why do you believe in the Pagan Catholic Trinity??? dose the word God teach you this or did man, did God himself in his word tell you he was the first person in the godhead? Did Christ himself tell you in his word that he was the second person in the godhead??? Is it written anywhere in the 27 books of the NT that the Holy spirit is the third person in the godhead??? or that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three separate persons at all. This is a Catholic Doctrine. Not a Biblical one. did you know that 1 john 5:7 was added to the bible by the Catholic church? do you realize that no one was every baptized Mat 28:19 before 325 AD, have you ever wondered why?????? just asking! it makes me nuts to see people defend something they can not prove with Pure scripture!!!
Truth

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

well then truth....get ready for the ride! Your gonna go bonkers around here....

Too many followers of the traditions of Man and not the Word of God!

Peace
c

ready, set, go!

[bear (bear)]

The word trinity is not found in the text, but it is a word that means three in unity.

I believe that the Father Son and HS are three seperate individuals; not "Jesus only" as the heretical oneness doctrine teaches.

I also believe that there is a level of equality, and subordination, which the scripture supports.

[easeltine (easeltine)]

Truthfinder,

Can you see that Godchild's last entry on this thread was 3 1/2 months ago?
You ask the following:
"dose the word God"

Yes, the Word of God teaches us the doctrine of the Trinity.

"God himself in his word"

Yes, God Himself in His Word teaches us the doctrine of the Trinity.

"...he was the first person in the godhead?"

Yes, God the Father is a Person in the Godhead.

"Did Christ himself tell you in his word that he was the second person in the godhead???"

Yes, Christ Himself is a Person in the Godhead.

"Holy spirit is the third person in the godhead???"

Yes, the Holy Spirit is a Person in the Godhead.

"...or that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three separate persons at all"

In the Baptism of Jesus the Father speaks to the Son, and the Holy Spirit descends upon the Son. The Son talks to the Father throughout the 27 Book of the N.T. The Father wasn't a schizo, He was talking to the Word, the Son, in Gen. 1:26 and all the way throughout Scripture.

"...did you know that 1 john 5:7 was added to the bible by the Catholic church?"
Probably true, added to the Textus Receptus in the 3rd revision by Erasmus, although the meaning fits in the context given. It was in the Catholic version before the Textus Receptus.

Matt. 28:19 is part of Scripture, get over it.

There are so many Scriptures already given in this thread that it is truly amazing to see people so blinded!

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

easeltine
{"They who deny the trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ are heretics. Remember after the first and second admonition reject them."} This is great coming from an Apostate! Then i guess that Christ himself and his Apostles were HERETICS. Becouse they never ever taught or claimed that the godhead was split up into three Separate Persons in first,second and third order!!! Nor did they teach or claim that {God was the First Person in the godhead!!!} or that Christ was the second person on the godhead, or that the Holy Spirit was the Third Person in the godhead. in the word of God, CAN YOU READ?????? Show me {Word for Word} Sound Biblical Doctrine!!! Where Christ or his Apostles themselfs taught this unbiblical,Apostate Catholic damnable doctrine from hell in the Word of God, Word for Word. Without adding one word to it or taking one word away from it,or twisting the scripture to make it say what you want it to say Point Blank, becouse thats what you Apostates do best!!! and i dont want to hear your so called interpretation of scripture! 11 PETER 2:1 TELLS US, NO PROPHECY OF THE SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY {PRIVATE INTERPRETION} CAN YOU READ ??? What i just quoted to you was {SOUND BIBLICAL DOCTRINE} WORD FOR WORD, Please do the same if you can or {}GET OVER IT}
Truth

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

Please AGAIN!!!
Show me or produce at least one single scripture Word for Word, Sound Biblical Doctrine, as it is writtien, where God or anyone for that matter says or teaches that{GOD IS THE FIRST PERSON OF THE GODHEAD}!!! or where Christ or the Apostles say or teach that {CHRIST IS THE SECOND PERSON OF THE GOD HEAD} or where anyone in the Bible says or teaches that {THE HOLY SPIRIT IS THE THIRD PERSON IN THE GODHEAD!!!} Produce for me one single scripture in the 27 books of the NT that teaches {GOD THE FATHER GOD THE SON GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT} and it must line up WORD for WORD. Produce for me one single scripture in the 27 books of the NT where {ANYONE AT ALL} was EVER Baptized any other way than ACTS 2:38 in the NT, or Produce for me one single scripture where {ANYONE AT ALL} was EVER Baptized in a Trinitarian Baptiamal Furmula, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Mat 28:19 in the NT!!! you teach and defend this unbiblical Apostate Catholic Damnable Doctrine from Hell, YOU MUST be able to stand up against me with ONE SINGLE BIBLICAL SCRIPTURE. If you can produce ONE SINGLE SCRIPTURE to back up your teaching on anything above i will cut up my License to Preach and send it to you in the mail, just send me your address to Pastor Johnny j Christen jr of The Straight and Narrow Gate Apostolic Ministries INC, or my email is {yahshua2005@yahoo.com} If you can,t than Please Shout up and GET OVER IT!!!
Truth

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

well then truth....get ready for the ride! Your gonna go bonkers around here....

Too many followers of the traditions of Man and not the Word of God!

Peace
c

ready, set, go!}
WOW Brother you sure said a mouth full their! Trinitarians have no idea that their Bowing down to the Catholic Church and the POPE, with this unbiblical Doctrine, and that the Catholic Church is an EVIL SUNGOD WORSHIPING CULT FROM HELL, Anyone who was Baptized In a Trinitarian Baptimul Furmula Mat 28:19, was Baptized onto the Catholic Chruch and NOT ONTO CHRIST!!! and Must be Baptized OVER ACTS 2:38, or they will wind up in the Lake of Fire, and i am not quoting some UPC ONENESS DOCTRINE, we must teach and Practice only what was taught and Practiced by Christ and the Apostles themselfs, GAL 1:8-9 anyway i have to go home now, ill be back in two days. God Bless
Truth

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

So, was Jesus 'God' before His 'Annointing' infront of the followers of John the Baptizer?

I believe so.

Is God able to BE more than ONE at a time?

I believe so.

Is the Comforter, the Holy Spirit?

I believe so.


God-the Father, creator

Christ-God manifest as man

the Holy Spirit-God's power! (that's how I teach my 6 year old)

The bible teaches only ONE God!
God is God and is able to do what He wants, including becomming both Father and Son at the same time! That's how I see it.

Peace
c

[bear (bear)]

The Father and Jesus are not the same person; the scripture does not teach this.

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

Your right {bear} the scripture no where teaches us this Pagan Catholic Doctrine, This is what the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD was all about!!! to make {Jesus} a man made Catholic name which = {IHS} a SUNGOD Deity used by the Catholic Church, to be {One Substance} With God, This is where the Doctrine MARY THE MOTHER OF GOD CAME FROM!!! Before this Christ was the Messiah, a {MAN} that was the Son of God, Not God the son!!! Trinitarians don,t even realize that the Holy Spirit was not even added to the Godhead intel 381 AD at the Council of Constantinople, it took 381 years for this Apostate Doctrine from Hell to fully come into the so called church! but today Apostate Christians not only except it but also defend it!
Truth

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

There is only one God, correct?

And Jesus IS God, correct?
The scriptures proclaim His daity many times, correct?

Therefore, if there is only one God...and Jesus is God....He is able to be both Father Creator and Son of Man at the same time.....

I am left to believe that there is only ONE God, not three.

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

{So, was Jesus 'God' before His 'Annointing' infront of the followers of John the Baptizer?}

The Father entered Christ at Baptism when he was 30 years old, and stayed in him for 3 and a half years and LEFT or came back out of him on the Cross or Tree!!! This is what the Bible teaches and nothing more, Christ was not God before or after his Baptism by john nor did he claim to be. {"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." 2Corinthians 5:19}
This is sound biblical doctrine that dose not say in anyway that {God Was Christ} or that {Christ was God} it says {God was in Christ} big difference! 1 tim 3:16 tells us God was Manifested in the Flesh, {and he was!} he was in the flesh of Christ doing the WORKS that Christ could not do of himself as a man, Christ said I speak not of myself: But the Father that dwelleth in me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; {that they may be one even as we are one} You see you and i become one even as Christ and his father became one!!! {through the Spirit} But that dose not make us God dose it? This is how Christ said I and my Father are one! it dose not mean that Christ was or is God. Don,t read something into it that is not their! Please let me ask you a SERIOUS question Brother ok, You asked {Is God able to BE more than ONE at a time?} then you ancered {i believe so} it dosent matter what you or i believe. what matters is what the Word of God Teaches word for word right Brother do you agree? ok dose the Bible teach us that God was more than one at the same time, Word for Word anywhere in any scripture Brother?
{Christ-God manifest as man} Dose the Bible teach us in scripture Word for Word that {Christ-God manifest as man???} No brother it can nowhere be found!
{The bible teaches only ONE God!
God is God and is able to do what He wants, including becomming both Father and Son at the same time! That's how I see it.}

Dose the Bible teach us Word for Word in sound Bibical doctrine that {God is God and is able to do what He wants, and indeed did become both Father and Son at the same time!} I Don,t think so Brother, it can not be find anywhere in scripture! i ask these questions out of love please don,t take it any other way!
Truth

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

Hey there truth....
I will not take it any other way...We are brothers.

I had prayed about this and meditated on this subject of who was Jesus.....

Since I believe in ALL the Word...

I know that God and Christ are ONE for when you've seen the Son, you've seen the Father.

I know that no one in history (of the Word) is at the Thrown of God but God.
I also know that Jesus is at the Thrown.

I know that Jesus was and is the Living Word and was here before anything else, infact ALL creation was made throught the Word. And the Word was made flesh.

I know that God is the Alpha and the Omega, and I know that Jesus is also the Alpha and the Omega.

Not one thing in all of creation was made without Jesus, and God is the Creator.

This prooves to me that Jesus is God, always was, and was not a mere man that was annointed by God to do His will, but God Himself...incarnate...


For God said, Let us(elohiem-God and the angels) make man in our own image...

and that included Himself....

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

{Mathew 28:19 Fraud Exposed} ezekiel Please look this up ok, Mathew 28:19 Fraud Exposed
Matthew 28:19. Absolute proof Matthew 28:19 has been corrupted by trinitarians. Trinitarians have sinned against Jesus Christ. For putting words in the Bible HE NEVER SAID Baptizing them in them in the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the Holy Gost. has been added by the Catholic Church, this explains Eph 4:5 and also why no one was ever baptized Mat 28:19!!! 1 John 5:7 was also added to proclaim this Catholic Trinity Doctrine and only God knows just how much more was added or twisted in our so called Bibles today!!! as i said First Day dose not belong, JESUS doses not belong! and much much more.
truth

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

I hear what your saying Brother, and many scriptures seem to say just that, believe me i was in the Ministry of the UPC for 11 long years, and No one teaches that Christ was God more than them!!! but now i see it so differently, God Bless you Bro
Truth

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

truth....

even if what you say is correct about the addition of Scripture, this doesn't refute the statements that I made above. All of the above quotes are from many different places in the bible, including both the old on new test.'s and I still hold strong to the belief of Jesus as God. Whether Christ is called the Servant, the Savior, the Messiah, the Annointed, a God, Lord, Yeshewa(Yashua), Melchezadok, or a marriot of other names.

He is still God and that belief is Firm and unbending. To know the Son is to know the Father. And knowing the Son is the way to becomming acceptable to our Father Creator! And that is the only way to the foreverafter. Through the blood of Christ, who is God!

Peace
c

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

John's whole gospel was brought forth in such a way as to present this truth to the world...many did not understand this nor accept it!

Peace
c

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

I understand what your saying and its hard to come against, But if Christ was indeed God when walked the face of the earth 2000 years, and he was tempted 40 days in the wilderness,than just what kind of exzampel would that be to us, Ofcouse he would have passed all the test, {HE WAS GOD} that wouldent be fair to us would it? and that would mean they pounched God in the face, Riped out Gods beard, Spite in Gods face, Wiped God 40 times-1, put a crown of thornes on Gods head, Nailed God to a Tree, pearced God in the side,that would mean they KILLED GOD!!! Truth

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

{King James Version Bible Translation Errors - at BibleStudy.org} You got to check this out, please check out, Col 2:16 also!!

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

OK I get your point.

I study with the Strong's Exh. Conc.
I study with the Bullinger's Companion KJV 1611 Bible.

I FULLY understand that there are some mis translations as well as mis transliterations in the english, as well as in each other language the bible has been translated into.

I dive into the Word of God daily in a search for truth and, His Word properly explained, has never failed me.
I enjoy going back to the original languages...greek, hebrew and the aramaic dialects.

This is, for me, the only way to STUDY properly.
On this point we agree.

I believe that God is going to HAVE to destroy some of His children, those who follow Satan at the end of the Millenium. God has already passed sentence on Satan-Lucifer-the Devil, and WILL destroy him from within and turn him into ashes forever.

God is our Father and this must be more difficult to do than any of us could ever imagine. But this will indeed take place.

They killed HIM, and HE can now destroy them.
They showed their true selves, and deserve everything that they are going to receive.
This is of course figurative for all those who follow evil insetead of Good and is for God Himself to deside at the White Thrown Judgement.

So, yes I believe that Jesus was always fully God and man at the same time. Everything that was recorded in the Gospels was to teach the Christians of the future. This is why Christ would do certain things in public.

There is only ONE GOD and Christ teaches us, as our example, of how to pray, live in the Spirit, to do good deeds, and the truths behind the bible messages themselves. The parables were not for all to understand and this is true even to this day.

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

truth.....
we are brothers believeing in the message of Christ...that He died-crucified for our sins and was buried and on the third day, rose again-defeating death, becoming our passover, sin - forgiving lamb, by God's Grace....and sits at the thrown of God

I would say to you the following

God is the Creator
God is the Word
Jesus is the Word
Melchezakok is Jesus
Melchezadok was before Abraham was
Jesus was before Abraham was
Jesus is the Word

"When ye have seen the Son, ye have seen the Father." The book of John will help you understand the other Books, and see the three offices of the Godhead in them. There is only one God, but He does have the three offices, and the book of John presents the office of Jesus, the Son of the Living God, while at the same time presenting Him as God.

<font color="ff0000">John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

</font><font color="000000">Jesus Christ is the Living Word. This earth age of flesh man, just like the earth age that was before this, shall pass away, but God Word shall never change. Jesus is the same today as He was in that first earth age, and tomorrow and into the eternity He will remain the same.

Peace
chttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif</font>

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

Your good people man,
God Bless you
Truth

[bear (bear)]

Ezekiel,

Wjile it is true that ther is only one God, not three, and that the text does refer to him as Gos from time to time, there is not any evidence that Jesus is the Father and the HS.

[bear (bear)]

Sorry,

"while" and "God"

My children, bless them, have spilt some sticky substance on the keyboard. We are working to get it off.

[ezekiel_37 (ezekiel_37)]

Hi bear....

Peace to you

Your comment leaves me to ask you if you believe that the Holy Spirit is God?

I refer to the Holy Spirit as the Power of God. That's how I rationalize this.

Jesus is God
The Holy Spirit is God
YHVH (I Am That I Am)is God
There is only one God

So, I cannot see this any other way.....for now!

[shammah (shammah)]

Truthfinder,

Can I recommend a very old book to you. It's called Against Praxeas, and it was written by Tertullian around AD 200. It's on the trinity, and what he says is what you'll find through all the early church writings.

I'll give you a summation of what he teaches as soon as I have time, and then you'll find it easier to read as you read it.

It can be read on the internet at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf03-43.htm#P10374_2906966. Look at especially chapters 5 and forward and chapters 12 and forward. Tertullian is sarcastic and rude, but generally his theology, for that time period, is impeccable.

[thekingsent1_again (thekingsent1_again)]

How is it that we will have 100 "Christians" and every single person will have a diffrent truth?
Something is wrong....
Really wrong!
But how is this so?
How can we have a 100 "Christians" that are serving the same God, yet have 100 diffrent truths about the same worship?
How?

[arron (arron)]

i fully believe in the trinity. THE FATHER THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST. ALL THREE ARE DISTINCT FROM THE OTHER.

[bear (bear)]

Ezekiel 37

Yes, I believe that the Holy Spirit is God.

I believe in the perfect unity of the Father Son and Holy Spirit. I believe that there is one God, but I have difficulty with the oneness theory.

- Who did Jesus pray to in the Garden, himself?
- When Jesus was a baby on earth, who was in charge?
- When Jesus said that when he returns to heaven that he will pray to the Father to send another comforter, what was he talking about:

Was he going back to to the Father (himself) and then pray to himself to send another comforter, the Holy Spirit (himself)?

I do not believe in three God's, but one. Yet I also believe that the scriptures teaches the individuality of all three.

[truthfinder (truthfinder)]

I hear you Bro, I deny both the Trinty and the UPC Oneness theory, Their is only one God YHWH or YHVH and his one son Yahshua or Yehshua whom he sent into the world to die in our place!
Truth

[shammah]

kingsent,

>>Something is wrong....
Really wrong!
But how is this so?
How can we have a 100 "Christians" that are serving the same God, yet have 100 diffrent truths about the same worship?
How?<<

Thank God someone is recognizing this. Y'shua said that the world would know we are his disciples by our love for one another (not by our love for the lost, but by our love for one another). He prayed to the Father that his disciples would be one and thus the world would know the Father sent him.

There's not much proof around that we're his disciples or that the Father sent the son, is there?

Obviously, arguing the Bible isn't going to solve that problem, because we've been trying that for 500 years, ever since the Reformation.

I have a couple suggestions that have worked pretty well, does anyone else?

[truthfinder]

Please look this in your surch,

{A Collection of Evidence Against the Traditional Wording of Matthew 28:19} God Bless
Truth

[truthfinder]

Bro ezeKiel

Please look this up in the surch and check it out ok!
{Doctrine Christ} God Bless
Truth

[arron]

THE TRINITY, even though the word trinity is not found it is implied. JESUS prqayed in the garden to HIS FATHER. JESUS SAID ALSO THAT HE WOULD SEND ANOTHER COMFORTER .. THE HOLY GHOST. that is THREE.

[easeltine]

Shammah recommended a book by Tertullian written around 200 A.D. The book I have that I would recommend is The Life of Antony and the Letter to Marcellinus by Athanasius written around 300 A.D.

It doesn't sound like you read any of my Posts above, but there were many Scriptures that I put down that shows the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity.

Just think about this logic from the Athanasian Creed for a moment:
If the Father is almighty, the Son is almighty, and the Holy Spirit is almighty, then by logical conclusion there are not three almighties, only one almighty based on the meaning of the word almighty.

If the Son is not almighty, then the Son has become a lesser god, and one ceases to believe in monotheism and now believes in polytheism. This is not Scripturally supportable see Isaiah 44:6.

If one believes that Jesus is a lesser god, then they cease to believe that Jesus is God almighty come in the flesh, or the Word come in the flesh. see John 1:14
They have now believed in a different Jesus then the Scripture talks about.
Since Jesus Christ is God almighty come in the flesh the only conclusion by logic is either the doctrine of the Trinity or Oneness doctrine.

[leftin1991]

Truthfinder, I'm with you guys! There are 10 major unnecessary, extrabiblical terms used to describe the Godhead that should be avoided:

1. 'Trinity'
2. 'three persons' ("person" is there once)
3. 'Eternal Son'
4. 'God the Son' ("Son of God" is there 40 times)
5. 'God the Holy Spirit'
6. 'co-equal'
7. 'co-existent'
8. 'co-eternal'
9. 'co-powerful'
10. 'modes'

If any of these terms are the foundation of our doctrine about God, then maybe we just need to go back to the Bible &amp; start all over again from scratch.

We need to speak of Bible things in Bible ways. Our theological terminology should be a bridge to the truth, &amp; not a barrier against it.

The Bible is sufficient in itself. Man-made, extrabiblical expressions lend themselves to error and doctrinal extremism, e.g., "being slain in the Spirit." Even if helpful (though generally not), and even if accurate (and almost always not) such verbiage should never be made into a test of orthodoxy.

[truthfinder]

easeltine
Christ nor his Apostles taught or explained the Trinity nor the UPC Oneness to us in scripture, but they did explain that their is One God the Father!!! 1 Cor 8:6, which backs up deut6:4 The Lord our God is One! Not God the Father, god the son and god the Holy Spirit, The Bible dose not teach this!!! but it does teach that God has a son, and 1 john 4:15 says Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God! we are no where told to confess that Jesus Christ is God, and to do so is adding to the word of God, Christ asked peter who do you say i am, and peter said you are the Christ the Son of the living God! and thats who he is according to the Bible, Christ means the anointed one right, so if Christ was God, that meads God would have had to been anointed , God can not be anointed, he is the one that does the anointing!!! both the trinity and the UPC Oneness doctrine are unbiblical, we must go by only what is written word for nothing more and nothing less!
Truth

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff">Hi Folks,

To float the idea that Matthew 28:19 is not scripture effectively attempts to make a laughingstock of the Bible. If it is not scripture, then no verse can be defended as the Word of God. The verse is in thousands of manuscripts in multiple languages (all Greek text lines, Old Latin, Vulgate, Aramaic, etc), and omitted in about one or two oddball manuscripts of no consequence.

And the verse is quoted again and again by early church writers (before Eusebius). If you don't believe it as scripture, you simply don't believe God. And the language of Eusebius is common language for all believers, we baptize in the name of the Lord, I use it myself frequently, as Matthew harmonizes beautifully with Acts.

And all this is true whether you are Oneness or Trinity or other.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic </font>

[easeltine]

Read John 1 again.
Realize that Romans 10:9 in the Greek is LORD God, the O.T. Jehovah.
Even the Pharisees disagreed with you, the reason they killed Jesus was for the reason that Jesus made Himself equal with God.
There are so many Scriptures on the Diety of Christ, and I have already given many, that I'm through here. Goodbye to this thread.

[truthfinder]

{Quote from easeltine}
Even the Pharisees disagreed with you, the reason they killed Jesus was for the reason that Jesus made Himself equal with God.
john 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying. For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and becouse that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Skip down to V36, Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; becouse I said, {I am the Son of God?} Question??? If Christ was God than did the Father sanctifie himself and send himself into the world? and dose God sit at his own right hand now and make intercession for us to himself? Where in this scripture do you see Jesus claiming to be God or Equal!
ReQuote from easetine
{the reason they killed Jesus was for the reason that Jesus made Himself equal with God.} Please show me one scripture where Christ Claims to be God or Equal with God, Word for Word, Christ said he could do nothing of himself, The Father was in Him doing all the work, We must confess thst Christ the anointed one is THE SON OF GOD!!! to confess that Christ is God is to confess another God!!! the bible says their is only one mediator between God and man the man Jesus Christ, So is God his own Mediator?????? the Bible says we must go through the son to get to the Father, so if Christ is God, then that means we have to go through God to get to God right?????? We can go on and on all day and night, But Christ Never ever claimed to be God, you claim this unscriptual Catholic doctrine not Christ!!! it is not written
Truth

[truthfinder]

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics :
As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: "The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition."

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28 :
"The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church."

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: "It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but...a later liturgical addition."

[truthfinder]

Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295 :
"The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263 :
"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015 :
"The Trinity.-...is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs,...The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c AD 180),...(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture..." "The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19...This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying. Finally, Eusebius's form of the (ancient) text ("in my name" rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit:..."

[truthfinder]

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge :
"Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61...Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula...is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas... the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed..." page 435.

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states :
"It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man- made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus,"..."

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says :
"Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus."

New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19 :
"Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity..."

[truthfinder]

James Moffett's New Testament Translation :
In a footnote on page 64 about Matthew 28:19 he makes this statement: "It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community, It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus, cf. Acts 1:5 +."

Tom Harpur :
Tom Harpur, former Religion Editor of the Toronto Star in his "For Christ's sake," page 103 informs us of these facts: "All but the most conservative scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command [Triune part of Matthew 28:19] was inserted later. The [Trinitarian] formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available [the rest of the New Testament] that the earliest Church did not baptize people using these words ("in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost") baptism was "into" or "in" the name of Jesus alone. Thus it is argued that the verse originally read "baptizing them in My Name" and then was expanded [changed] to work in the [later Catholic Trinitarian] dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake's commentary was first published: "The Church of the first days (AD 33) did not observe this world-wide (Trinitarian) commandment, even if they knew it. The command to baptize into the threefold [Trinity] name is a late doctrinal expansion."

The Bible Commentary 1919 page 723 :
Dr. Peake makes it clear that: "The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion. Instead of the words baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost we should probably read simply-"into My Name."

Theology of the New Testament :
By R. Bultmann, 1951, page 133 under Kerygma of the Hellenistic Church and the Sacraments. The historical fact that the verse Matthew 28:19 was altered is openly confesses to very plainly. "As to the rite of baptism, it was normally consummated as a bath in which the one receiving baptism completely submerged, and if possible in flowing water as the allusions of Acts 8:36, Heb. 10:22, Barn. 11:11 permit us to gather, and as Did. 7:1-3 specifically says. According to the last passage, [the apocryphal Catholic Didache] suffices in case of the need if water is three times poured [false Catholic sprinkling doctrine] on the head. The one baptizing names over the one being baptized the name of the Lord Jesus Christ," later expanded [changed] to the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit."

[truthfinder]

Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church :
By Dr. Stuart G. Hall 1992, pages 20 and 21. Professor Stuart G. Hall was the former Chair of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London England. Dr. Hall makes the factual statement that Catholic Trinitarian Baptism was not the original form of Christian Baptism, rather the original was Jesus name baptism. "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," although those words were not used, as they later are, as a formula. Not all baptisms fitted this rule." Dr Hall further, states: "More common and perhaps more ancient was the simple, "In the name of the Lord Jesus or, Jesus Christ." This practice was known among Marcionites and Orthodox; it is certainly the subject of controversy in Rome and Africa about 254, as the anonymous tract De rebaptismate ("On rebaptism") shows."

The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5 :
The Lord's Command To Baptize An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo page 27. "The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord." Also we find. "Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded his disciples to baptize in the trine form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer trine formula was a later development."

[truthfinder]

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger :
He makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19. "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome." The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather as the evidence proves a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts.

"The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius:

Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsover I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus.

[truthfinder]

Your unbiblical Catholic doctrine of the Trinity can not be proven! it was not taught by Christ or any of the Apostles in the First century. what can be proven is that the Trinity is nothing more than a Catholic doctrine that was formulated and developed by man,and took 381 years to finish this lie from hell and force it on the Church at large, The only reason you believe it at all is becouse your bowing down to the GREAT WHORE the CATHOLIC CHURCH and her daughters the Protestants!!! Truth

[easeltine]

"Please show me one scripture where Christ Claims to be God or Equal with God..."

I will just give Scriptures, though books by people like Josh McDowell or R.A. Torrey contain very persuasive theological ideas on these matters.

Genesis 1:1 - "In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth."
John 1:1-3 - "In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD. He was in the beginning with God. All things were MADE THROUGH HIM, AND WITHOUT HIM NOTHING WAS MADE THAT WAS MADE."
John 1:14 - "And The Word BECAME FLESH and dwelt amount us, and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."
Colossians 1:16,17 - "For By HIM ALL THINGS WERE CREATED that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible, and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were CREATED THROUGH HIM AND FOR HIM."

* The Word, GOD, created all things, the Word God became Jesus Christ, all things were created for the Word God, Jesus Christ. There is only ONE Creator God, He who was with God, the Word, and He who the Word became, and that was Jesus Christ.

Genesis 1:26, 11:7 - US and Our

* The Word, GOD, the Father and He who became Jesus is together in Genesis.

Isaiah 44:6, 45:5 - Scripture teaches that there is no other GOD, but GOD, yet the Word, God, became Jesus Christ.

Isaiah 9:6 - "...the mighty GOD, the everlasting Father..."

This is talking about Jesus Christ.

John 8:58 - "Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." Compare Exodus 3:13,14, Deut. 32:39, Isaiah 43:12 also John 8:24, 13:19, 18:5 Only God is I AM, therefore Jesus is calling Himself God.

John 14:7-11 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him...He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?"

Compare the First and Last of Isaiah 44:6 to the following Words of Jesus stating that He is the First and the Last - Revelation 1:17, 2:8, and 22:13 - If God is the only First and Last according to several passages in Isaiah then Jesus is declaring Himself God.

These are some fairly plain Scriptures where Jesus is claiming to be God.

Thomas stated in John 20 that Jesus was, "My Lord and My God." Thomas gave the correct answer that we need to give to Jesus when we see Him - My Lord and My God. Who is the name above all names? The name is Jesus Christ for He is the name above all names, and God is the name above all names.

Erich

[shammah]

>>Shammah recommended a book by Tertullian written around 200 A.D. The book I have that I would recommend is The Life of Antony and the Letter to Marcellinus by Athanasius written around 300 A.D.<<

Athanasius is later than that (350 or so), and his writings give no witness whatsoever to early Christian teaching, because his writings all belong to the period after the Council of Nicea when "Christians" were literally killing each other over the doctrine of the Trinity.

Tertullian's writings, on the other hand, are from a time when everyone said the same thing about the relationship between the Father and the Son.

[shammah]

I should clarify what I meant by Tertullian being from a time when "everyone said the same thing about the relationship between the Father and the Son."

The writing I recommended was "Against Praxeas," so obviously Praxeas wasn't saying the same thing as Tertullian. And in it Tertullian said that a lot of the common people had problems understanding how there could be one God, but also a Son of God who is divine. Therefore, a lot of them held to modalism, the belief that the Father and Son are the same person.

However, anywhere that you find writings from church leaders before Nicea (AD 325), they are very consistent on the subject of the Trinity. And those church leaders say their doctrine was handed down from the apostles and preserved in the churches by the elders.

So, first, a quick summation of that doctrine. There is one God, and that one God has a Son who is divine. There was a time when the Son was not separate from the Father. He was literally the Logos--the thought, reason, mind, or word--of the Father and was in the Father. Then, before time began, the Father "emitted" the Son. The Son was not created. He was already in the Father, but he came out of the Father in eternity past when this happened.

Again, I'm telling you what is taught in all the many writings of the Church before Nicea. This is said over and over again, and it's unanimous among the church fathers.

When they said, "There is one God," they meant the Father, not three persons. They believed in "One God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ his Son." That shouldn't be arguable, because both 1 Cor 8:6 and the Nicene Creed, repeated in churches to this day, both use EXACTLY that wording.

Now, a bit of history as to why it changed in the next post.

[shammah]

The belief in the church that there was one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, stayed the same all the way until Nicea in AD 325. Nicea confirmed what had been taught for 300 years, and it used the wording I just gave in its Creed.

The whole story about Nicea has been twisted so that almost no one knows it. It is true that Arius, an elder from Alexandria, was the one with the heresy at Nicea. He said that the Son was created by the Father from nothing. Alexander, his bishop. was horrified. The belief of the Church was that the Son was formed from the substance (whatever "divine stuff" God is made of) of the Father, not from nothing. The Son is literally the Word of God, that was inside of God, but then was emitted in eternity past. God did not create him from nothing the way he created everything else.

You don't have to wonder if I'm telling the truth about what the controversy was at Nicea. The creed had a couple "anathemas" at the end that specifically anathematized those who held to the Arian heresy, which was that the Son was created from nothing and that before he was created/born he didn't exist. The church did believe he was created/born, but they believed he was created from the Father's substance, because he is the Word of the Father. The anathemas make this clear, and you can find them at the bottom of the page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed. They're crossed out on that page, but you can read them anyway.

Also, you'll notice the Nicene Creed emphasizes "one in substance with the Father." That was the point. The church didn't mind that Arius said Jesus was created. They minded that he said that Jesus was created from nothing. They believed he was created from the substance of God.

Ok, what happened after in next post.

[shammah]

After Nicea the problem wasn't solved. Arius was banished, but Constantine had presided at the council and emperors never stopped intervening in church affairs afterward. So, after Constantine died in 337 or 338, Arius returned and convinced Constantine's son that Arius was right. New bishops were appointed by the emperor who agreed with Arius, and the old bishops went to work on the emperor to get their positions back.

It went back and forth for years. The history is embarrassing. There was political intrigue, murders, intimidation, church burning, and even brawls in the street. It was awful.

During that time after Nicea, Athanasius became the champion of the anti-Arius side. It was Athanasius who came up with the completely unscriptural idea that the Son is equal to the Father, and eventually, at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, that idea prevailed and was made official church doctrine.

It wiped out all sorts of Scriptures that the church quoted regularly about Jesus before the controversy. The church used to agree with Jesus that the Father is greater than the Son (Jn 14:28). The churh used to think that Proverbs 8:22-31 was an obvious prophecy about Christ, and they all read it in the Septuagint, which says, "The LORD created me the beginning of his works." The church used to quote Ps 45:1 as "My heart emitted a good Word," and they used that as the Scripture describing the birth of the Son from out of the Father.

And of course, the church used to be able to believe Scriptures like "...that they may believe in you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent," and "There is but one God, the Father...and one Lord, Jesus Christ," which, of course, no orthodox Catholic or Protestant is allowed to believe. The one God has to be three persons, now, not one, the Father, as the Scriptures, the early church, and the Nicene Creed all teach.

That's the facts, from history, whether we like those facts or not.

[truthfinder]

WOW Very very good Brother, I agree 110% with your whole post!
It was Athanasius who came up with the completely unscriptural idea that the Son is equal to the Father, and eventually, at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, that idea prevailed and was made official church doctrine.}> I just want to add if i may that it was not intel the council of Constantinople in AD 381 also that they added the Holy Spirit to the Godhead, completing the unscriptural doctrine of the Catholic Holy Trinity! Brother what do you think about the Trinity Baptismal formula found the tail end of Matthew 28:19, added by the Catholic church or not? God Bless
Truth

[easeltine]

Athanasius lived 295-373. It is true that, "The Life of Antony", written by Athanasius was written around 350. The word "Trinity" is not found in the book. The following event is what I was referring to regarding Antony:

"Then, summoned both by the bishops and all the brothers, he came down from the mountain, and entering into Alexandria, he publicly renounced the Arians, saying that theirs was the last heresy and the forerunner of the Antichrist. He taught the people that the Son of God is not a creature, and that he did not come into existence from nonbeing, but rather that he is eternal Word and Wisdom from the essence of the Father. "So," he asserted, "it is sacrilegious to say 'there was when he was not' for the Word coexisted with the Father always. Therefore you are to have no fellowship with the most ungodly Arians, for there is no fellowship of light with darkness. You are God-fearing Christians, but they, in saying that the Son and Word of God the Father is a creature, differ in no way from the pagans, who serve the creature rather than the Creator. Be assured that the whole creation itself is angered at them, because they number among the creatures the Creator and Lord of all, in whom all things were made."

This entire thread started out with the person declaring that Jesus Christ was not Divine nor Diety. The fact remains that if Jesus Christ is not Divine or Diety for the person then the person cannot be saved.

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff">Shammah,

A technical note on that anathama, attributed to Nicea. It appears to actually be Cyril to Nestorius at the Coucil of Epheseus a century later (431 AD). I put a note into the Wikipedia discussion.

Do you have a direct reference/link to the Nicean Creed with the anathamas that you can reference ?

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic
</font>

[schmuel]

<font color="aa00aa">Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: </font>

<font color="0000ff">Truthfinder, if you are unable to separate out the discussion of the textual evidence and authority of the verse from your concern about exegesis, of course there is little point in dialog.

Ironically, I find this verse as one of the strongest verses in scripture declaring the authority of the name of Jesus Christ (in harmony with the Acts verses) and is not a 'formula' or have anything to do with 'Trinity', three coequal, coeternal, consubstantial persons in the Godhead. So I partially agree with your exegesis.

However, you seem to be very confused about the textual evidences (that occurs from the horribly skewered and misleading Ploughman materials).

If the truth and authority and preservation of scripture concerns you, we could discuss the actual verse evidences here, or on WhichVersion on Yahoogroups (an excellent forum for such discussions and evidences).

However, if you cannot take off your glasses and separate textual evidences from exegesis, then let it pass.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic </font>

[shammah]

Schmuel: Yes, I can reference it. The text is included in Eusebius' letter to the church at Caesarea, written immediately after the Council, and the letter is preserved by Sozomon in his Ecclesiastical History (I:8), which was written about AD 375.

The anathemas are not questioned, which is why I was so surprised that they were difficult to find on the internet.

The revision you mentioned that is attributable to Cyril is not the anathemas. It is the revision used at the Council of Constantinople that is expanded a bit and has a few words left out. The Catholic Encyclopedia gives Cyril's lifespan as 315-386. (All of this at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11049a.htm).

One of the books of the Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers is also only on the seven councils, and it preserves all the canons of the Council of Nicea as well as the original text with the anathemas.

Easeltine's quote has one of the anathemas in it, and that quote has sound early church doctrine in it throughout that paragraph. I had heard that Athanasius was orthodox at first, and that he hadn't written the Athanasian creed, which is even later than Athanasius.

[shammah]

TF,

>>I just want to add if i may that it was not until the council of Constantinople in AD 381 also that they added the Holy Spirit to the Godhead, completing the unscriptural doctrine of the Catholic Holy Trinity!<<

Well, this isn't true. Baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is mentioned at least as early as Justin Martyr in his apology (ch. 61) in AD 150. Irenaeus quotes Matt 28:19 with the trinitarian formula in Against Heresies III:17:1, around AD 185.

The Didache also says to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and it is probably dated earlier than Justin Martyr, though it's content makes me believe it can't be much earlier. It can't be later, either, though.

It is very hard to determine, at least for me, the role that the early Christians assigned to the Holy Spirit. I tend not to think of the Spirit as a distinct "person," but as the actual Spirit of the Father and the Son, the way that I or you have a spirit, but perhaps I'm wrong.

>>Brother what do you think about the Trinity Baptismal formula found the tail end of Matthew 28:19, added by the Catholic church or not?<<

I do agree that the formula "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" seems unusual at the end of Matthew, but the practice of baptism with these words is very, very early; too early for the Roman Catholics to have added it.

The original Council of Nicea included the one line, "We believe in the Holy Spirit." It didn't expand on that.

[easeltine]

"I had heard that Athanasius was orthodox at first, and that he hadn't written the Athanasian creed, which is even later than Athanasius."

Some books that I have read claim that Ambrose may have written the Athanasian Creed and named it after Athanasius. Ambrose became Bishop in 380 AD, after the death of Athanasius. The book claimed that the Athanasian Creed is more intellectualized on this topic then Athanasius would have been. I cannot remember the book I read that in, though the Athanasian Creed is written after Athanasius.

The following quotes by Athanasius would seem to indicate that he would have agreed with the doctrine of the Trinity.

Athanasius on Order in Creation

"When we see the creation, we conceive of God as the Creator of it; so when we see that nothing is without order therein, but that all things move and continue with order and providence, we infer a Word of God who is over all and governs all."

Athanasius on Jesus as Man

"When the Word became man, He did not cease to be God; nor because He is God does He avoid what is human. Far from it. Rather, the all-Holy Word of God bore our ignorance so that He might bestow on us the knowledge of the Father."

Athanasius on Our Destiny - Oh, this is like the Word/Faith people ideas. Rather interesting comment, I would like to see this one in full context. Hank H. of CRI would run away with this little snip.

"[God] was made man that we might be made God."

The doctrine of the Trinity makes sense for me, though the real issue is, "Who do you say that I Am?" Peter said, "The Christ, the Son of the living God." Thomas said, "My LORD and my God!" Romans 10:9 says, "That if you shall confess with your mouth the LORD Jesus Christ, (Jehovah God of the O.T.), and believe in your heart that God, (Destroy this temple and in 3 days I will raise it up...the temple of His body), has raised Him from the dead you shall be saved."

The point that I am have been trying to focus on is that the original person that began this thead made the specific point that Jesus Christ is not Diety and also not Divine. The point he made is exactly the heresy of Arius.

If you Jesus Only/Oneness people decide to rebel against the teaching that you have been taught do not make Jesus just a normal man, or a separate lesser god. Do not do what William Branham did, who before his death actually rejected Oneness doctrine and seemed to believe in the theology of Arius. Hopefully, the Lord took him home?

Erich

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff"> Hi Shammah,

I'll go over this with you more a bit later. Its quite fascinating.
However a quick factual note.

Cyril of Alexandria
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04592b.htm

was the one who used those exact Wikipedia words to Nestorius at the Coucil of Epheseus(431 AD).

The earlier dates you give are for Cyril of Jerusalem.

Roger Pearse does the best general overview of Nicea errors.
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/nicaea.html
The Council of Nicaea and the Bible

Most of that has to do with a different issue, the canon and text of the Bible, however Roger helps to unravel any Nicea issues.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic</font>

[shammah]

Well, Roger may help to unravel some Nicea issues, but he doesn't address the text of Nicea. I don't want to lose the things I said earlier about what the real issue was at Nicea, because that's accurate.

To Easeltine:

>>The following quotes by Athanasius would seem to indicate that he would have agreed with the doctrine of the Trinity.<<

The question is, which doctrine of the Trinity; the Nicene and earlier doctrine or the one held to now? Each quote you gave would apply to both.

>>The point that I am have been trying to focus on is that the original person that began this thead made the specific point that Jesus Christ is not Diety and also not Divine. The point he made is exactly the heresy of Arius.<<

That is a good enough point to focus on, and the Scriptures do teach that Y'shua is divine. However, what he said is NOT exactly the heresy of Arius, which was much more specific.

>>If you Jesus Only/Oneness people decide to rebel against the teaching that you have been taught do not make Jesus just a normal man, or a separate lesser god.<<

Not sure who you're talking to here.

I want to comment on your quote from Athanasius about the Word, which you called interesting and seemed to wonder about, because it's a very typical early Christian quote. I'll do that in the next post.

[shammah]

>>When the Word became man, He did not cease to be God; nor because He is God does He avoid what is human. Far from it. Rather, the all-Holy Word of God bore our ignorance so that He might bestow on us the knowledge of the Father<<

This is Easeltine's quote from Athanasius.

The emphasis on Christ as the Word was great in the early church, and they took it very literally. If Athanasius is speaking from the same mindset as earlier writers, then the picture he has would be as follows.

In the beginning, God was alone (this is a quote from Tertullian's Against Praxeas), but not really alone, because his Word was already inside of him. In some way that we cannot understand, God birthed his own Word as a being separate from himself. The Word was separate only in the sense of person, as the substance of God cannot be divided from itself.

Later, the Word would come to earth as Jesus Christ, becoming man, but not ceasing to be divine as well.

This picture is important, because it allows us to understand Biblical and early church terminology, where the one God is repeatedly stated to be the Father, but yet the Son is also called God regularly.

This led to the charge by Jews that the early church believed in two Gods. Justin and Tertullian had interesting responses to that. Both of them said, of course we do. Justin said there was a begotten and an unbegotten God taught in the Scriptures, one the Son and one the Father. Tertullian basically said, "Can't you count? Of course, there's two. Read John 1:1. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. One, the God the Word was with, and Two, the Word. Of course, there's two."

Tertullian's explanation of all this was: If you see a sunbeam, you say, "Look, there's the sun." Since the sunbeam has the nature of the sun, it is rightly called the sun. However, if we talk about the sun and sunbeam together, we immediately stop calling the sunbeam the sun, and we speak of the sun and the sunbeam. So, if we talk about the Word, being divine, the name God is rightly applied to him. However, if we speak of God and his Word, then we use the name of God only for God himself, not his Word.

That may seem like heresy to modern believers, but I'm afraid it is not only what the early church believed, it is taught quite clearly in the Nicene Creed, and such usage is obvious in Scripture as well.

[pro610]

I thought this was worth posting.
ON THE TRINITY.

FRAGMENT FROM THE DISCOURSE.

GREGORY THAUMATURGUS(217Ad died 270-75), Bishop of Neo-Caesarea in Pontus, near successor of the apostles, in his discourse on the Trinity, speaks thus: - I see in all three essentials--substance, genus, name. We speak of man, servant, curator (curatorem),--man, by reason of substance; servant, by reason of genus or condition; curator, by reason of denomination. We speak also of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: these, however, are not names which have only supervened at some after period, but they are subsistences. Again, the denomination of man is not in actual fact a denomination, but a substance common to men, and is the denomination proper to all men. Moreover, names are such as these,--Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob: these, I say, are names. But the Divine Persons are names indeed: and the names are still the persons; and the persons then signify that which is and subsists,--which is the essence of God. The name also of the nature signifies subsistence; as if we should speak of the man. All (the persons) are one nature, one essence, one will, and are called the Holy Trinity; and these also are haines subsistent, one nature in three persons, and one genus. But the person of the Son is composite in its oneness (unita est), being one made up of two, that is, of divinity and humanity together, which two constitute one. Yet the divinity does not consequently receive any increment, but the Trinity remains as it was. Nor does anything new befall the persons even or the names, but these are eternal and without time. No one, however, was sufficient to know these until the Son being made flesh manifested them, saying: "Father, I have manifested Thy name to men; glorify Thou me also, that they may know me as Thy Son." And on the mount the Father spake, and said, "This is my beloved Son." And the same sent His Holy Spirit at the Jordan. And thus it was declared to us that there is an Eternal Trinity in equal honour. Besides, the generation of the Son by the Father is incomprehensible and ineffable; and because it is spiritual, its investigation becomes impracticable: for a spiritual object can neither be understood nor traced by a corporeal object, for that is far removed from human nature. We men know indeed the generation proper to us, as also that of other objects; but a spiritual matter is above human condition, neither can it in any manner be understood by the minds of men. Spiritual substance can neither perish nor be dissolved; ours, however, as is easy to understand, perishes and is dissolved. How, indeed, could it be possible for man, who is limited on six sides--by east, west, south, north, deep, and sky--understand a matter which is above the skies, which is beneath the deeps, which stretches beyond the north and south, and which is present in every place, and fills all vacuity? But if, indeed, we are able to scrutinize spiritual substance, its excellence truly would be undone. Let us consider what is done in our body; and, furthermore, let us see whether it is in our power to ascertain in what manner thoughts are born of the heart, and words of the tongue, and the like.
The rest of this....
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0606.htm

Church Fathers
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/

[easeltine]

From the above quotation:

"All (the persons) are one nature, one essence, one will, and are called the Holy Trinity; and these also are haines subsistent, one nature in three persons, and one genus."
"...And thus it was declared to us that there is an Eternal Trinity in equal honour. Besides, the generation of the Son by the Father is incomprehensible and ineffable..."

Incomprehensible is a word used in the Athanasian Creed as well. The reason I believe in the Trinity, is that this is the most logical way for me to understand the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as God. To say that there is more then ONE God violates many, many O.T. Scriptures.

Isaiah 44:6 very clearly states, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and His redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside Me there is no God."

To say that there is two completely separate Gods violates O.T. Scripture, and makes one a god. The logic expressed in the Athanasian Creed that there cannot be three Almighty Gods seems clear to me. This would essentially be Arianism, Jehovah Witness, and The Way International doctrine. How could one be saved by making Jesus Christ a god? They cannot if one makes Jesus a god!

To say that it is ONE God in three different modes, no Father, no Son, no Holy Spirit that they are all the same, misses the distinct differences of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. That would be Sabellian's, or Oneness doctrine that Truthfinder used to believe in. To me one could be saved with this doctrine, it would be incorrect and be missing the big picture, but they would believe that Jesus Christ is God Almighty.

I'm certainly not in the position to say that Tertullian was a heretic. I'm just reading the ideas that Shammah is writing about and my mind cannot fully comprehend the ideas expressed with Isaiah 44:6 and Isaiah 45:5.

Steven, perhaps you could share some comments on this subject?

[easeltine]

Isaiah 44:6 very clearly states, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and His redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside Me there is no God."

Just one other comment. It would seem to me to be correct to say that the LORD the King of Israel is the Father and that His redeemer the LORD of hosts is the Son. It would also seem that the first and the last is taking together and that this is a reference to Jesus Christ the First and the Last of the Book of Revelation.

[pro610]

The Trinity. It is the most difficult of doctrines of Christianity. Yet, from the Trinity springs the rest of our beliefs and mysteries of our faith. God is mystery. Our understanding of Him will never be complete. However, that doesn't mean we cannot know something about God, who reveals Himself to us gradually. He first tells us His name "I am who am". From it, we know that HE is the source of all being. He IS! Through Christ, we learn that God is a communion of persons. We are called to share in that union - the most fundamental of revelations given to us. From this, we realize our purpose in life, our goal. And from this, we can direct our lives to better serving our purpose, to come into union with our God.

So what is the life of God? God is three persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - in one nature. Three "who's", each possessing fully the One divine "what". They do NOT share the divine nature. Thus, when we say God the Son comes to us in Holy Communion, we also imply that the Father and the Spirit are there as well. All three persons are active together, yet distinct. The difference between the three persons is their origin.

God the Father is the uncreated Creator. Within the Divine Procession, He is called Father because He is not produced or generated. The Father generates or begats the Son. What is important to realize is that there was never a time when God the Son did not exist. The Father thinks of Himself in His divine Mind and produces the Son, a perfect image of the Father in every way. The Son is called the Thought or Wisdom of the Father. The Father and Son love each other so greatly that they generate or produce the Holy Spirit. Again, there was never a time when God the Spirit did not exist. He is the Will of the Father and the Son. The Will follows Knowledge, which produces Love. This Love is the fruit of the Divine Procession. And we are called to share in this Love called God.

The Blessed Trinity is a mystery. Our knowledge of it is similar to staring into the sun, the knowledge blinding us so much that we see very little. Yet, we can see faint images of it in our lives today. For example, a Christian marriage is a union of love between two persons - which can even produce a third person (a baby). Naturally, this is a dim view of God, but in its most loving moments, we glimpse the Trinity and can see faintly what God calls us to in life after death.

[shammah]

Easeltine,

A couple comments that may help:

Gregory Thaumaturga is pre-Nicene, a genius, and a peaceful and godly man. While he would be influenced by a growing focus on doctrine and words, I nonetheless would be frightened ever to contradict a man like him.

However, he didn't say that the Trinity was incomprehensible. He said that the generation of the Son was incomprehensible, something I also said.

Per Isaiah 44:6, Justin gives a long response to this, because the Jew, Trypho, that he is having the dialogue with brings it up. Justin's answer seemed like a real copout to me. It would take a lot of trouble to find the reference right now.

My answer, however, is that there is one God, the Father, and that is what Isaiah 44:6 is referencing. The fact that the Father has a Son, though it can be found pretty clearly in the OT (Gen 19:24; Zech 2:8-11; Prov 30:5 or 6, etc.), is not a revelation that was given to the Jews. As Tertullian said, when referencing the sun and the beam from the sun, you apply the name sun to the one sun only, not to the sunbeam. Even so there is One God and his Son, who is the divine Word of God.

The rather mystic description that pro610 gives in the third paragraph sounds like it came right out of early church writings.

The thing I would put forth is this. The Scripture clearly refers to the Father as the one God, and the Son as being with him. This is just terminology, but it seems like pretty important terminology to me. Most of the modern churches have this wrong, and it means that people today could be branded heretics for simply repeating John 17:3 or 1 Cor 8:6.

The early church adds to what Scripture teaches by explaining that the Son was generated by the Father in eternity past from out of himself, and that they share the same substance. This addition was later set down in the Nicene Creed.

Finally, the arguments of the next century led to the councils declaring that the Son is equal to the Father and made the one God to reference all three persons, which are not additions to Scripture, but changes which are against Scripture.

I think I'm not being dishonest to say that those last three paragraphs are historically factual, not just a doctrinal belief, and they are what I would want to add to this discussion on the Trinity.

[easeltine]

I have never met Christians that know their history as the last several posters have, it's truly interesting for me to read the posts that have been presented. It challenges me to review the historical aspects of the Trinity and match the concepts with Scripture.

The online Catholic encyclopedia, New Advent that Pro610 mentioned is quite amazing, my wife and I have been looking at it for a couple years now. She is looking at St. Columba on the site and has an idea of writing a screenplay about him. As Protestants we have really been surprised at the Scriptural emphasis of the Roman Catholic Church regarding their doctrines. My wife especially, since at the age of 12 years old she started going to a Baptist Church without any of her family being Christian, she would go with friends of the family. From 12-19 she was in the Baptist Church and they are not "Catholic friendly."

Thank you for your explanations.

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff">Hi Easeltine,

Good questions. I do believe that the early church lost a simple view of the glory and majesty of the Messiah, his identification as Jehovah manifest in the flesh. (1 Timothy 3:16). There is a book that I hope to read soon "God Crucified" by Richard Bauckham, that discusses the Messiahology of the early church in century one (he may be a Trinitarian, but that is not the issue of the book). Remember that is the time of the excellent, straightforward and simple 'Apostles Creed'.

Over the years I have read a number of articles and books that discuss how the Greek concepts infiltrated into the church. Justin Martyr and Tertullian were a part of that, and Tert acknowledged that the masses were simply believing in one God, in a rather fascinating quote from "Adverseus Praxean". I would hesitate to call Tertullian a heretic, and he was far from anything like modern Trintitarianism anyway. Some are concerned of his later life changes (did he become Monatanist, and was that really basically charismatic?) however I do think he was on the wrong side of the battle with Praxeus.

And I do believe that led to the later formulations, including the inbetween Nicean Creed, and then the more gross and absurd creeds, like the Athanasian (which definitely did have anathemas attached).

I'll try to go back over the thread later and perhaps add more. I was concerned about the claim that the Nicean Creed per se had anathemas attached. There is little evidence for this. However that doesn't invalidate other critiques of Constantine, Eusebius, Nicea, and folks should be aware of what happenned while the 'church' became apostate governmental ecclesiastical. Maryology and 'three persons' and persecution of sabbath-keepers and much more was ready to role. Things really went downhill after 325 AD so that by 500-600 AD what was becoming the RCC was ascendant, and the Creeds had little to do with the Messiah of the Tanach.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic</font>

[fatherofaking]

given the discussion here, i thought i would pass on one of the links i use to study such things.

http://www.ccel.org/index/author-all.html

[easeltine]

Thank you Steven for you input and the post presented above looks like a great resource tool.

I can respect and understand that there may be different opinions regarding the Doctrine of God, and there are slight unorthodox viewpoints that one could believe in and still be saved. Though I react strongly against posts that reject the idea that Jesus is Diety, (Divine), though I respect that they are trying to use Scriptures to support their position. Also upsetting is the accusation that I am in league with the whore the Roman Catholic Church when the fact is that almost every Protestant denomination accepts the doctrine of the Trinity as Truth. Just to remind people I will state the Belief of Orhodox Christianity regarding the subject of the Doctrine of God. Handbook of Today's Religions, Josh McDowell &amp; Don Stewart, 1983 by Campus Crusade for Christ.

The Doctrine of God

The Doctrine of God is the same in all three branches of Christianity, (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant). The Westminster Shorter Catechism (Question 6) reads, "There are three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory."

The Athanasian Creed elaborates on the doctrine of the Trinity:
"...we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance [Essence]. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, the Holy Ghost uncreate...The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal...So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God...the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped."

"...The Scriptures do not teach that there are three Gods; neither do they teach that God wears three different masks while acting out the drama of history. What the Bible does teach is stated in the doctrine of the Trinity as: there is one God who has revealed Himself in three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and these thre persons are one God.
Although this is difficult to comprehend, it is nevertheless what the Bible tells us, and is the closest the finite mind can come to explaining the infinite mystery of the infinite God, when considering the biblical statements about God's being.
* The authors then give the following Scriptures with statements supporting the Trinity - Deuteronomy 6:4, 1 Timothy 2:5, Isaiah 44:6, Genesis 1:26, Genesis 3:22, John 1:3, Colossians
1:15, Hebrews 1:2, Galatians 1:1, John 1:1, John 5:18, Acts 5:3,4,

[easeltine]

Josh McDowell &amp; Don Stewart's conclusion in Handbook of Today's Religions

The fact of the biblical teaching are these: There is one God. This one God has a plaural personality. This one God is called the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, all distinct personalities, all designated God. We are therefore led to the conclusion that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God, the doctrine of the Trinity.
Dr. John Montgomery offers this analogy to help us understand the doctrine better:
"The doctrine of the Trinity is not 'irrational'" what is irrational is to suppress the biblical evidence for Trinity in favor of unity, or the evidence for unity in favor of Trinity.
"Our data must take precedence over our models-or, stating it better, our models must sensitively reflect the full range of data.
"A close analogy to the theologian's procedure here lies in the work of the theoretical physicist: Subatomic light entities are found, on examination, to possess wave properties (W), particle properties (P), and quantum properties (h).
"Though these characteristics are in many respects incompatible (particles don't diffract, while waves do, etc.), physicists 'explain' or 'model' an electron as PWh. They have to do this in order to give proper weight to all the relevent data.
"Likewise the theologian who speaks of God as 'three in one'. Neither the scientist nor the theologian expects you to get a 'picture' by way of his model; the purpose of the model is to help you take into account all of the facts, instead of perverting reality through super-imposing an apparent 'consistency' on it.
"The choice is clear: either the Trinity or a 'God' who is only a pale imitation of the Lord of biblical and confessional Christianity" (How Do We Know There is a God, pp. 14, 15).
*
I strongly rebuke the ideas of the "Ultra-Fundamentalist, Dispensationalist" nuts that stand in front of Billy Graham Crusades, Promise Keepers, and Harvest Crusades. These nuts stand there and reject the doctrine of the Trinity, they call the early Church Fathers, "Liars", and the Creeds, "Catholic Lies", because these ideas originated from the Roman Catholic Church. They stand there and reject all Catholic Church history between the Apostolic Age and the Protestant Reformation. These nuts are upset because these three groups I mentioned allow Roman Catholics to the meetings. They seem to believe that one can never be saved because they are or were Roman Catholic, or Greek Orthodox for that matter. For these nuts, and any J.W.-type, I state that the evidence for the Doctrine of the Trinity, especially the Diety of Jesus Christ, LORD-YAHWEH-the Word God come in the flesh, is Scripturally supportable and you will never change my mind regarding His Diety. Like that Apostle, believing Thomas confessed, I also confess, and need to confess to all that, "Jesus Christ is my LORD and my God."
*
As I say that all of you please remember to pray for our Afgan brother that may be beheaded for his confession of faith. Now, there is a true believer!

Erich

[shammah]

>>I was concerned about the claim that the Nicean Creed per se had anathemas attached. There is little evidence for this.<<

This statement is a little strange, Schmuel. I mentioned already that Sozomen's history, AD 375, preserves a letter from Eusebius of Caesarea to the church of Caesarea that has the original anathemas attached. That's in Vol. 2 of the Nicene &amp; Post-Nicene Fathers.

Also vol. 24 of the same series is on the 7 councils, and it includes the creed and canon of Nicea. It includes the anathemas, of course, because they are not at question.

As I told you earlier, the page you referenced in the Catholic Encyclopedia mentions revisions that were added later by Cyril, not the anathemas. They are not historically questioned.

If you go to www.ccel.org/fathers (http://www.ccel.org/fathers), you can find the downloadable texts of the series I referenced.

[shammah]

First, let me add to my previous post this statement from Wikipedia:

"In addition, the Nicene version ended with an anathema that was deleted in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan version:"

That's from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed#The_original_Nicene_Creed_of_325. That page has the original creed. The parts bracketed or crossed out are what happened later at Constantinople. The words themselves are original from Nicea. As I said in the other post, the anathemas are not historically questioned.

Then, to easeltine:

>>There are Scriptures that indicate that the Son is subordinate to the Father and this is the part of the Athanasian Creed that is hard for people to accept?<<

For me, the issue is not what people will accept, but what represents the doctrine held prior to the Athanasian Creed.

There are repeated comments among the early Church writers that all the appearances of God in the Old Testament are actually appearances of the Word. The reason that they give, repeatedly, is that the Father cannot be confined to one place, but that the Son, being less than the Father, can be confined to a place.

John seems to agree with this, saying in John 12:38-41 that Isaiah saw the glory of Christ in Isaiah 6.

And of course, Jesus himself said that the Father was greater than he. This was in reference to no one being able to pluck the sheep from the Father's hand. That doesn't sound like a reference to being subordinate as a man. Further, Jesus also said that there are times that the Father knows about, but that he doesn't (Mark 13:32).

This was all normal thinking to the early church, and they are very consistent on the subject. They say this is the teaching the apostles handed down to them. I see no reason not to believe them. The alternative is to try to use Scripture to justify a doctrine that was unheard of until the middle of a heated controversy three centuries later.

[easeltine]

Shammah,

So, the technical point that is disagreed with the Roman Catholic Church on the idea of the Trinity is the Subordination of the Son to the Father.

R.A. Torrey sums up what you are saying,

"Jesus Christ is, and eternally shall be, subordinate to the Father. In God the Father we have the source of Deity; in Jesus Christ, Deity in its outflow...All the passages quoted have reference to the Incarnate CHRIST and not to the pre-existent Word."

Let me get this straight on the point being made.
The Word before the Incarnate Christ was co-equal with the Father, when the Word became the Incarnate Christ He became subordinate to the Father from Incarnation till eternity. The Catholic doctrine of the Trinity is different in that it states that the Incarnate Christ is subordinate to the Father only in His manhood, though the Word that is the Son is still co-equal and not subordinate to the Father.

Erich

[shammah]

Gosh, your wording threw me bad. You're going to have to help me out.

On your quote from R.A. Torrey, the first sentence is what I am saying. It agrees totally--eternally subordinate to the Father, and the Father is the source of Deity, while the Son is the outflow.

However, the 2nd sentence then says not eternally, but only while he was incarnate. Yes, that's what I'm disagreeing with, or at least saying the early church disagreed with.

Ok, wait...now I'm reading your last paragraph right, I think. No, I'm not saying that the Word before being incarnated was co-equal. I'm saying he never was co-equal. The Father was always God, and the Word was always the Word of God, and therefore in some way less than God, because God is more than just his Word.

In other words, I'm saying he was subordinate from the beginning. Like I said in an earlier post, the early church commonly taught that the appearances of God on the earth in the OT were always the Word, because God could not be confined to one place, being greater than the Word, who could be confined to one place.

Notice that in Proverbs 8:22 and forward that Wisdom is God's helper, never God's co-equal. Until the Arian controversy, everyone understood that passage as describing the Word, because it's an obvious reference to him. That passage clearly portrays him as subordinate from the beginning, even though he is one in will and nature, being of the divine substance.

Believe it or not, this is all not that big a deal to me as far as the correct doctrine. It's just that so many people use the Trinity as an issue of fellowship. I want to point out that in the 2nd century, it's modern believers who would have been the heretics, teaching an unknown doctrine of co-equalism. I agree with the early church on their view, but that's because they seem much more likely to have known than us. What I want, however, is that we quit making the Trinity a test of fellowship.

Oh, and one more point that I've said earlier. The NT and the early church both consistently refer to the Father as the one God and Y'shua as the Son of the one God, not two persons as the one God. That's terminology, but on this issue, it's important terminology.

I'd add that point to the eternal subordination of the Word.

[easeltine]

Shammah,

The Word was with God and the Word was God from the beginning. John 1:1
The First and the Last, (Jesus Christ), of Isaiah 44:6, is with God the Father and according to that passage and others in Isaiah, there is no other God. This is very clear from many passages of Old Testament Scriptures. There can never be a lesser god. To make Jesus Christ lesser then Diety, the only God, mades him "a god," prohibited by Old Testament thought, a point Yaakov would agree with me on.
The interpretation of Isaiah 9:6 to historic Christianity is that this is in reference to Jesus Christ, that the words of the passage are in reference to Him, and in that passage it calls Jesus Christ, "the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father."
According to Paul's Epistles, especially, Philippians 2, the Father has made the Son/Word co-equal due to the Son's eternal submission to the Father. The Father is the one who has now exalted the Son to be co-equal, who is in eternal will with His Father.
This, and other Scriptures is why I believe in the Athanasian Creed, and believe that Jesus Christ is co-equal to the Father God, not that He is not subordinate or submissive to the Father God, rather that the Father God has willed God the Son to be co-equal.

As far as Tertullian, he believed in the triad viewpoint of God, and I believe in the triangle viewpoint of God.

Erich

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff"> Hi Folks,

Shammah, we are going to have to skip the Wikipedia claim since it is undocumented. I put a note in to Wikipedia about the need for substantiation or correction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nicene_Creed#the_Catholic_and_apostolic_Churc h_anathematizes

And I did go through the CCEL Sozomen information on the web. Read it carefully. Found no text of a letter from Eusebius to the church of Caesarea.

This was the closest I could find to your claim of anathamas, perhaps you mixed this up with a letter and the supposed text of creedal anathemas ?

<font color="0077aa">http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-02/Npnf2-02-19.htm#P3125_1277828
Ecclesiastical History Book 1 Chapter 21

"they affirmed the Son to be consubstantial with the Father; and that those are to be excommunicated and voted aliens to the Catholic Church, who assert that there was a time in which the Son existed not, and before He was begotten He was not, and that He was made from what had no existence, and that He is of another hypostasis or substance from the Father, and that He is subject to change or mutation. This decision was sanctioned by Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia; by Theognis, bishop of Nicaea; by Maris, bishop of Chalcedon; by Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis; and by Secundus, bishop of Ptolemais in Libya."</font>

However, I have not found any version of the Creed itself that has anathemas, nor have I found that in Sozomen quoting Eusebius. Book 1 Chapter 8 &amp; 17 are quite interesting reading.

<font color="0077aa">"a letter from Eusebius of Caesarea to the church of Caesarea that has the original anathemas attached. That's in Vol. 2 of the Nicene &amp; Post-Nicene Fathers."</font>

So, is this text supposed to be on the web ? The Sozomen material looks complete in the link above.

<font color="0077aa">Also vol. 24 of the same series is on the 7 councils, and it includes the creed and canon of Nicea. It includes the anathemas, of course, because they are not at question.</font>

Could you find text of any of this ? If not on the web, and if you have a regular book reference, then simply name, edition and page number, and I will be happy to check in the library, or with my sources that have those books. I hope you can understand my befuddlement that such anathemas could be in hardcover editions yet completely unknown in editions of the Nicean Creed on the web. Especially when they are always included and visible in the Athanasian Creed.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic </font>

[pro610]

link
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/fathers/

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff">Hi Pro and all,

Yes, actually we do have the Eusebius letter. Apparently it comes from Athanasius, not Sozomen, and that could have caused some of the confusion.

It has some anathema mentions (although no specific text of anathemas). Here are the anathema extracts.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/Npnf2-04-20.htm#P2381_864013
Council of Nicaea
Letter of Eusebius of Coesarea to the people of his Diocese ....

"Believing each of these to be and to exist, the Father truly Father, and the Son truly Son, and the Holy Ghost truly Holy Ghost, as also our Lord, sending forth His disciples for the preaching, said, "Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Concerning Whom we confidently affirm that so we hold, and so we think, and so we have held aforetime, and we maintain this faith unto the death, anathematizing every godless heresy.
===
"And those who say, `Once He was not,' and `Before His generation He was not,' and `He came to be from nothing,' or those who pretend that the Son of God is `Of other subsistence or essence,' or `created' or `alterable,' or `mutable,' the Catholic Church anathematizes."
===
8. ... And as to the anathematism published by them at the end of the Faith, it did not pain us, because it forbade to use words not in Scripture, from which almost all the confusion and disorder of the Church have come. Since then no divinely inspired Scripture has used the phrases, "out of nothing," and "once He was not," and the rest which follow, there appeared no ground for using or teaching them; to which also we assented as a good decision, since it had not been our custom hitherto to use these terms.

9. Moreover to anathematize "Before His generation He was not," did not seem preposterous, in that it is confessed by all, that the Son of God was before the generation according to the flesh.
======================
SUMMARY SO FAR

So we end up with a small mention of the anathemas in the Sozomen work, and a much fuller mention with Athanasias publishing the Eusebius letter.

Nobody so far seems to have the creed with the anathamas attached, or the exact text of any of them, but they quite clearly existed. If there is a text, it would be very helpful to see.

======================
The help finding this came from Andrew Criddle after I posted on an apologetic-oriented forum where Roger and others post.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/religionandscience/message/1725

Shalom,
Steven Avery</font>

[shammah]

Schmuel,

>>And those who say, `Once He was not,' and `Before His generation He was not,' and `He came to be from nothing,' or those who pretend that the Son of God is `Of other subsistence or essence,' or `created' or `alterable,' or `mutable,' the Catholic Church anathematizes<<

You posted that from the letter. That's the whole thing. The anathemas are short.

I gave a link to the text in my March 27 post above. There it reads, "But as for those who say, There was when He was not, and Before being born He was not, and that He came into existence out of nothing or who assert that the Son of God is of a different hypostasis or substance, or is subject to alteration or change - those the Catholic and apostolic Church anathematizes."

I downloaded vol. 24 of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. On p. 35 of my Word document--I don't know what page that is in the original book--it gives the following sources for the text:

"Found in the Acts of the Ecumenical Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, in the Epistle of Eusebius of Cæsarea to his own Church, in the Epistle of St. Athanasius Ad Jovianum Imp., in the Ecclesiastical Histories of Theodoret and Socrates, and elsewhere."

It gives the anathemas as: "And whosoever shall say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, or that before he was begotten he was not, or that he was made of things that were not, or that he is of a different substance or essence [from the Father] or that he is a creature, or subject to change or conversion—all that so say, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes them."

Hope that helps.

[shammah]

Schmuel,

One other thing. I went to www.ccel.org/fathers (http://www.ccel.org/fathers), and instead of trying to read it on the site, I looked for places to download the volumes so I can read them. I own them, and I keep the Ante-Nicene Fathers plus Eusebius on my bookshelf, but the Post-Nicene set is put away, so I just use the copy on my computer.

To easeltine: I don't want to argue the doctrine with you; I'll leave your summation as is. I was just arguing what the early church believed.

[easeltine]

I never meet Christians that have the historical knowledge that I am seeing here on FACTNet regarding these subject matters. I do have a copy of The Creed with the anathemas written by the Letter of Eusebius Pamphilus to the Church of Cesarea in an added Chapter to one of my Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History book by Baker Book House 1987.

THE CREED

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things, visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance of the Father; God of God, light of light, true God of true God; begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father, by whom all things were made, both in heaven and earth; who for us men, and for our salvation, descended, was incarnate, and was made man, and suffered, and rose again the third day: he ascended into heaven, and shall come to judge the living and the dead: And in the Holy Spirit. BUT THE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF GOD ANATHEMATIZES THOSE WHO AFFIRM THAT THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE SON WAS NOT, OR THAT HE WAS NOT BEFORE HE WAS BEGOTTEN, OR THAT HE WAS MADE OF THINGS NOT EXISTING: OR WHO SAY, THAT THE SON OF GOD WAS OF ANY OTHER SUBSTANCE OR ESSENCE, OR CREATED, OR LIABLE TO CHANGE OR CONVERSION.

Erich

[schmuel]

<font color="0000ff"> Yes there is variation in sources and text it seems, but the claim that there were anathamas at the end seems to be well-supported. I did a follow-up on Wikipedia. Thanks to Shammah, Andrew Criddle, Erich and others who helped unravel the mystery of the changing text.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic</font>}

[squeakybro]

How come everyone focuses on the early church or what some body else has said?????? Doesnt anyone just go look in the Word of God and then believe what they read.
It looks like everyone is more interrested in hearsay rather than what the Word says.

[squeakybro]

How come everyone focuses on the early church or what some body else has said?????? Doesnt anyone just go look in the Word of God and then believe what they read.
It looks like everyone is more interrested in hearsay rather than what the Word says.

[easeltine]

Oh...we forgot that you pitch out all the Old Testament as the Word of God. We do have some New Testament Scriptures that we have quoted above. Do you mean you are having trouble seeing those also? A Revelation 3:17,18 to you.

[easeltine]

The kid in the Doughnutman cd takes a ball and starts bouncing it and says around 10 times the following Scripture:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis 1:1

In Genesis 1:26, God said, "Let US make man..."

In Psalms 100:3, it declares God has made man.

In the entire Old Testament the truth is taught that there is NO OTHER GOD...see the Commandments Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 44:6 and other passages of Isaiah.

John 1/Colossians 1
Who made all things? The Word that became Jesus. John 1:14. It doesn't say that the Word went into Jesus, it says that THE WORD BECAME JESUS.
Who is the Word? God
How many Gods are there? Only One. How do we know? Scripture after Scripture says that there is only Ond God.
If you make Jesus Christ A LESSER GOD, and call Jesus who declared that He is the I AM, A LESSER GOD you have missed that Jesus Christ is God. Who raised His body or His temple? Jesus and God. If you regulate Him to a title as Son of God, and miss the fact that God the Father has raised God the Word, (that has become God the Son and Lord), Jesus to the Name above all Names you miss the concept that Jesus is God and One with God.

The truth must be that Jesus Christ is God, or one has reduced Jesus Christ to a LESSER GOD, and is practicing polytheism. This charge of Judaism to Christianity, (Christians worships a god), is true if one reduces Jesus Christ to just a God.

This is not Oneness doctrine that I am talking about, rather the doctrine of the Trinity. The evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity is not all false, it is Scripturally supportable, and has been foundational for every Christian Protestant denomination and Catholic Church in history. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity has been in the Christian Church since the beginning. The Protestants are presently forgetting their foundational roots, and are ignorantly throwing out all the Creeds of the early Church in the idea that they are part of Roman Catholicism and must be wrong. Those Protestants, and the cults, are wrong, they are in error! They do not know what they are doing!

Erich

[called]

A Quote of squeakybro
"How come everyone focuses on the early church or what some body else has said?????? Doesnt anyone just go look in the Word of God and then believe what they read.
It looks like everyone is more interrested in hearsay rather than what the Word says". {This is Priceless!} The Trinity was NOT TAUGHT to us by Christ nor the Apostles, it is a Doctrine of man that came into the church hundreds of years after the death of Christ! No matter how hard you try to get around it point blank easeltine, The Apostles were not trinitarians nor did they teach us to be Trinitarians, a Trinitarian is a person that gets Baptized in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Gost Matthew 28:19 which no one has ever done in the 27 books of the NT weather they were Jew or Gentile, so if you got Baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit easeltine you are now Baptized unto the Catholic church the Great Whore, and will burn with her in the lake of fire!!! EVERYONE in the NT Scriptures was Baptized in the name of the Lord Acts 2:38 weather Jew or Gentile without exception, but you my friend have to be differnt right?????? so fellow the Catholic church into hell if you want to, its your soul! but my question to you is WHY would you believe or Practice a Baptism that was NEVER EVER used in the Bible???????????? No Catholic or Trinitarian Protestant will ever enter the Kingdom of God they only have the Judgment and the lake of fire to look forword to!!!
Your practicing pure paganism, you might as well go all the way and fully worship the Sungods and throw a new born baby into a nice big tostie Fire! I mean if your going to Practice Paganism you might as well do it right dont you think???
Truth

[called]

The tail end of Matthew 28:19 was added to the Bible, Baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Gost, as was 1 John 5:7 the three witnesses to back up this unbiblical Catholic doctrine of the Trinity and the Three fold Baptism that was never used by the Apostles found in Mat 28:19!!! Mat 28:19 is called the {Tertullian Baptism!!!} WHY do they call it that may i ask???????????? Becouse it was never thought of or Practiced before Tertullian came along except by the Pagan religions and Sungod worshipping cults easeltine, Tertullian was a CATHOLIC and so were all the rest of the so called church fathers! The council of nicaea in 325 AD was a Catholic council easeltine, the 318 bishops that were forced to vote on this Trinity Doctrine were Catholics and constantine the head of this Pagan Catholic council was a pagan high priest that knew nothing of Christianity easeltine, he belonged to a Pagan Sungod worshipping cult, The Bible Clearly calls us to come out of the Catholic Church the Great Whore and all her man made Doctrines, Councils and Creeds!!! WHY do you follow her and her teachings and call yourself a Christian at the same time?????? the Catholic church has nothing what so ever to do with Christianity, A Christian is a follower of Christ who is the Word of God, a Christian is not the Follower of Catholic man made Doctrines, Councils and Creeds, if the Three fold Trinity Baptism found at the end of matthew 28:19 is in fact true than we have a much biger problem!!! that would mean that the Apostles Deliberately disobeyed the command of Christ and Baptized everyone wrong both Jew and Gentile in the NT Bible! Do you Truly think that is possiable easeltine???????????? are you saying that the Apostles Peter and Paul were False Prophets becouse they knew nothing of this Trinitarian Doctrine or Baptism, the so called church today says to deny the Trinity is Heretical and unchristian, was the Apostles Heretical and unchristian false prophets becouse they never preached,taught or practiced this unbiblical Catholic Doctrine from hell????? or could it be that your Apostate and Heretical in your Trinitarian Belief system??????????? Just stick with what was taught 2000 years ago by the Apostles themselfs and you,ll be fine!!!
Truth

[easeltine]

"Truth" http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/talker.gif

Listen here you Sabellian-rebellerhttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/lol.gif

You are not even sure what you believe in anymore!
The following is the point!
You don't even know if Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh anymore! You have been taught the Oneness doctrine that a person needs to be baptized in the name of Jesus-only to be saved, and yet now have reduced Jesus to just a god. You are in rebellion to your Oneness doctrine and now you believe that Jesus Christ is just a god, completely separate from the Father. You are on the same path that William Branham was on and I hope you don't hold to these ideas the rest of your life!

In Oneness doctrine you have rejected the idea that Jesus is God Almighty.
In Trinitarian doctrine you have rejected the idea that Jesus is God Almighty.
The entire point of the Oneness doctrine and the Oneness in the doctrine of the Trinity is that Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh!
I have never been Catholic!
Let's try it again, it's the Donutman by the way, not the Doughnut man.
Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Who created the heavens and the earth?
Genesis 1:25 - Let US make man in OUR image...
Who is the US and OUR? The Father and the Word.
Who is God? John 1:1 - The Word.
What did the Word become? John 1:14 - The Word became Jesus Christ.
How many Gods are there? Only One - Isaiah 44:6 -
"I am the first and the last, (see Jesus speaking in Revelation), and beside me there is no God."
Now I would have thought that a person who once believed in the Oneness doctrine would catch the significance of the verse that is in Handel's Messiah - Isaiah 9:6 - "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, The Prince of Peace.

Erich

[called]

I believe that Yahshua the Messiah is the Son of the Living God and that God entered him when he was 30 years old at his baptism and Left him at the Cross or Tree and thats all i am told to confess according to the word of God!!! i deny the Trinity and the UPC oneness Doctrine and the Catholic god-man Name JESUS, i know what i believe and teach and thats where i stand unless God himself changes my heart!!! if you believe in the Trinity that means you were baptized Mat 28:19 and also means you were not Baptized unto Christ and do not have his name over your baptism, and you will die in your sins, EVERYTHING we do in word and deed must be done in the name of our Messiah and that includes baptism or were not coverd by his blood!!! thats my point here Erich, but no matter what i love you Brother God Bless
Truth

[ezekiel_37]

I call Yahshua-Jesus

I acnowlege the two names to the same being, God!

So, truth, although I know your heart is for God and His Word, I think that you err in making Judgemenet based on your interpretations.

Christ Messiah is Jesus to many people and this is just a title and nothing more.

To believe in Jesus is also to believe in Yahshua because they are the same being.

So, all that are baptized to His name, whether that be the greek name, the hebrew name, the frence name, the chineese name, the etheopian name, the ....you get my point, are done so believing the biblical view that the Messiah was born and died for our sins.

...they all mean Christ....even Jesus.
so, don't take that from folks...but share the truth of the pronunciaton of His hebrew name if you wish.


The people in these far off (to me) countries call messiah by many names, all implying the same being, Son of God, Yahshua.

Peace to you in Christ's name, which is many....

and He will have a new name ........

[ezekiel_37]

Let me put it another way truth, with an example...

you have worked for God now for how many years...

and although you take no credit for all your good work, you do so in the name of God, who you professed in the past as being called Yahweh.

Now, I know that you meant the Almighty Father, God of Abraham and Issac and Jacob, Creator of All,....but His name in the scriptures is never given as Yahewh...did you do all of your work in vain?

Does this mean that all that time you thought the correct way to address the Father was Yahweh...that now that you know that it is YHVH, all your past is in vain?

Not at all....we all grow in our understanding of truth and which areas are important and which are trivial...

This point of the Messiah's name and which name to be baptized under... is not productive for the Body even if you mean well.

there are much bigger fish to fry...
fish that can be delivered without total rejection.

all who call on His name in ANY language shall be saved!

Peace in Jesus Christ's Name

[godchild]

Erich, I am laughing so hard at your statement:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Truth"

Listen here you Sabellian-rebeller http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/rofl.gif

Now I've started coughing and can't stop. I wish you had said 'Sabellian-rebellion'. Can I borrow that?

Don't you guys recognise ol trentwoodard, john c p, eli and a various and sundry other alias's including 'pastor Johnnie from the Philippines? This guy is too much. But I do love a good laugh at the end of the day. Thanks, my brother! Really, really thank you, from the bottom of my feet to the tip of my head. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/rofl.gif

2 Corinthians 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

Paul's benediction invokes the blessing of the triune God: grace from the Lord Jesus Christ (vs.8-9), the love of God (vs.11), and the communion of the Holy Spirit. We need God's grace, God's love, and communion, not conflict.

[godchild]

And for ol skippy up there, take a break, will you! Put another log on the fire, cook me up some bacon and some beans. ....and sew my new blue jeans. Dum, da-dum, da-dum,dum de-dum-dum...Then come and tell me why you're leavin me! http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/rofl.gif

Oh, I like this one better: Sneaky snake goes a dancin, wigglin and ahissin, sneaky snake goes... They don't like ol sneaky snake, he's much too quick you see, he'll...in the grass real fast...and he'll tickle yur underneath.

-by Tom T. Hall (great music when you're trying to keep the kids entertained on a long drive.)
sssshhhhhh and the crowd roars!!!!!!

[easeltine]

Godchild,

Which one is Trentwood the Jew-hater? http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/uhoh.gif

I was going to use Sabellian-rebellion...but I liked the rebeller idea, I thought it sounded more cute. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/lol.gif

[godchild]

I have researched hundreds of names, reg#'s, and by comparison with the words (doctrines, beliefs, etc.) by certain people, have found that many have used different names to be acceptable in other areas of factnet.

Trentwoodard (a self-named pastor) from the "New Covenant Church of Yahweh" (a neo-nazi, anti-government, anti-jew, anti-black group whose webpage can be found under the same name, has used the following names on factnet (and probably more that I haven't found):
John Cody
John Cody Parker
Eli
sashamirage
Pastor johnnie from the philippines
trentwoodard
and more recently 'called'.

He has borrowed the name and address from a man in CA, and has even given this man's address and phone no. He has claimed to be from many different states, and I believe he is able to 'network' from likeminded people's computers, (posting from them).
I recently found a very important article (after my discoveries here) showing just how these groups are able to infiltrate numerous discussion boards by using these very same tactics. I have done searches with a certain name:
For example: I type in 'george' to search for postings from george. I find that search leads not to 'posts under george' but posts under other names. Is the search engine reliable. Ask factnet.
I have found names whose reg#s are shared by other names (posters). While some are explained by using library, college, MILITARY, roommates, etc., computers, many are not. How do I know this. Because when I punch in the names of some who say, have 300 previous posts, the search engine will only find one or two under this name.
DOES ANYONE HAVE A BETTER EXPLANATION? NO ONE SEEMS WILLING OR ABLE TO COME UP WITH ONE, NOT EVEN FACTNET!

One more thing. It is most common that those who are anti-Jew, anti-government, anti-black, neo-nazi are using this tactic the most. While it may not raise a 'flag' for others, it certainly does for me, and I can then see 'between the lines' of what they claim, such as love of God, love of man, love of others, etc.

[godchild]

Quite simply, if you go to the aryan, military, kkk, government threads on factnet, you will find the same people (under different names but with the same reg#)who post here claiming to be children of God, have posted there more often in times past. I know that we can be forgiven, but we must repent and make amends. This is not what I have seen. What I HAVE seen is them come to christian boards under false pretences.
My motto now (borrowed from Judge Marilyn Mileon) is "I would not believe a word they say if it came notorized!"

[godchild]

The fascinating thing about trentwoodard is he has admitted to being 'banned' from discussion boards, and has here used the excuse that somehow he just couldn't log in under his 'last' name, so he had to reregister under this new name. Where is it written that anyone when reregistering must use another name.

When I was in California for three weeks in January, my posts showed a different reg# while I was there because I was using a computer of a friend who lived there. For awhile that same number was on my posts until factnet changed it back to the one and only other reg.# on my posts in 1 year and 3+ months. Anyone is welcome to search my name here (godchild) and they will see I have never posted under another name. The clue is this: the first numbers in a reg. define which state a person is posting from. When I was in CA my reg name with a CA computer started with a 4. I live in So. Or. My posts before and now begin with 64. showing that I am from OR.

[godchild]

Let me say this. Though I do not in any way agree with ezekiel_37 as far as his beliefs in God, the Bible or any other of his doctrines, I find that he is one of the few in his group who has consistently uses the same name and the same reg.#.

[called]

godchild
your a very evil person, its like you curled out from under a rock or something! you bare false witness against your neibor, anyway i had it with you people your to much, yes my name is Pastor Johnny j Christen from the Philippines and the name of my Ministry is The Stright and Narrow Gate Apostolic Ministrirs INC and i know nothing of this {trentwoodard} your talking about, you need to learn to shout your mounth when you can not prove what you say, i wont post here on fact net anymore becouse you people never grow or except the scripture as they are written, your belief systems are all screwed up, but you worry about my spelling! You know NOTHING of me or about me godchild, i truly love God and every person on this earth no matter what color he or she is, my sons mother was Black and now she,s dead and my wife now is Asian and my childern are mixed you are very very Evil and your the one who truly needs help very badly! you think your a detective or something but your just another NUT!!! I hope you have Fire Proof underwear becouse your damm sure going to need them where your going!!! im finshed here, i give up!!! Later Pastor Johnny j Christen jr

[easeltine]

From Handbook of Today's Religion by McDowell/Stewart 1983 Campus Crusade for Christ
"There is One God" 1 Corinthians 8:6
GOD IS...YAHWEH IS JESUS...JESUS IS
Genesis 1:1 CREATOR John 1:1-3
Job 33:4 Colossians 1:12-17
Isaiah 40:28 Hebrews 1:8-12
***
Isaiah 41:4 FIRST &amp; LAST Revelation 1:17
Isaiah 44:6 Revelation 2:8
Isaiah 48:12 Revelation 22:13
***
Exodus 3:13,14 I AM John 8:24,25
Deuteronomy 32:39(EGO EIMI) John 13:19
Isaiah 43:10 John 18:5
***
Genesis 18:25 JUDGE 2 Timothy 4:1
Psalm 96:13 2 Corinthians 5:10
Joel 3:12 Romans 14:10-12
***
Psalm 47 KING Matthew 2:1-6
Isaiah 44:6-8 John 19:21
Jeremiah 10:10 1 Timothy 6:13-16
***
Psalm 27:1 LIGHT John 1:9
Isaiah 60:20 John 8:12
***
Psalm 106:21 SAVIOUR John 4:42
Isaiah 43:3,11 Acts 4:10-12
Isaiah 45:21-23 1 John 4:14
***
Psalm 23 SHEPHERD John 10:11
Psalm 100:3 Hebrews 13:20
Isaiah 40:11 1 Peter 5:4
***
The point is that Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh. The Word became Jesus.
John 1:14
The Bible clearly says, "For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel.."
2 Corinthians 11:4
One can have a different Jesus, a false Jesus, a demon called Jesus, not the correct Jesus and not be saved. The following Scriptures state what one must do to be saved:
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes on Him shall not perish but have everlasting life."
Romans 10:9 says, "...that if you confess with your mouth the LORD, (Yahweh), Jesus and believe in your heart that God, (Jesus raised His temple), has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved."
Ephesians 2:8,9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works lest anyone should boast." See also Revelation 3:20.
1 John 4:2,3 "By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ, (the Word, Yahweh), has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ, (the Word, Yahweh), has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world."
This Scripture is the reason Antony said what he said regarding the position of the Arianism.

[easeltine]

I AM
Exodus 3:14 - "And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"
John 8:57-58 - "Then the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM."
***
Only One God, the First and Last
Isaiah 44:6 - "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God."
Revelation - The Revelation of Jesus Christ
Revelation 1:7,8 - "Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, and they also who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so Amen. "I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the LORD, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." see vs. 11, vs. 17B, 18 -"Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. "I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and Death."
***
Who rose Jesus from the dead? Jesus and God
John 2:19-21 - Jesus answered and said to them, "Destoy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up...But He was speaking of the temple of His body."
Romans 10:9 - "That if thou shall confess with you mouth the LORD Jesus Christ and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead..."
***
The Word/God Jesus saw Nathaniel while he was under the fig tree, (probably praying to God).
John 2:48B - "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you."
***
Trinitarians believe that John 5:19-30 shows equality with God.
***
I and My Father are One
John 10:30/John 17:11
***
The Father is in Me and I am in the Father - For this the Jew were going to stone Him, because he was just a man, make Yourself God. see John 10:33
see John 10:38, John 14:10,11
***
Jesus says He is the Father - John 14:7-11
***
There are a couple Scriptures in John regarding the idea of the Father being the God of Jesus, and above Jesus, these Scriptures are answered by the Athanasian Creed with the explanation that Christ is inferior regarding his humanhood, equal regarding His Godhood.
***

[easeltine]

The doctrine of the Trinity, coined by Tertullian at the end of the 2nd Century is Scripturally supportable. I do not base my beliefs merely on the 2,000 year tradition of the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches, rather that the Creeds and the traditions of the traditional church is Scripturally supportable.
The problem in the modern liberal, new age, secular humanistic thought is that it rejects the inerrancy, and infallibility of Scripture. Get this - the Roman Catholic Church contains the core of Christianity not these groups. The reason they reject the Diety of Jesus Christ and the idea that Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh is due to the rejection of inerrancy of Scripture. The liberal Protestants, and all of these little sects that err regarding the Trinity have rejected inerrancy. Get this - the Roman Catholic Church has not rejected inerrancy of Scripture, rather these modern churches have. There are some of the Protestants that have rejected the doctrine of the Trinity and the Creeds simply because theses thoughts came from the Roman Catholic Church, and they reject all of Catholicism. They reject all history from 100 AD -1517 AD. They reject all the Roman Catholic Church Creeds and teachings of the early church fathers regarding the doctrine of the Trinity! They don't know what they are talking about! They don't understand that their founders of their particular Protestantism - Luther, Calvin, and Cranmer all wholeheartedly accepted the Creeds and teachings of the Catholic Church and early Church fathers regarding the idea of the Trinity due to their belief that it is Scripturally supportable. Calvin's city of Geneva, with Calvin's approval - he set-up the rules, even burned a guy like Squeakybro for believing the way Squeakybro believes! The Roman Catholic Church and all these early Protestant reformers were correct and all these other modern groups are wrong. They don't know the Scriptures, the teachings of the early church fathers, the Creeds, the teachings of the original founders of Protestantism, nor what the teachings of their own Protestant churches were until only recently when these modern ideas came about.
One needs to believe that:
JESUS CHRIST IS GOD ALMIGHTY COME IN THE FLESH, THE WORD GOD COME IN THE FLESH, YAHWEH GOD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT COME IN THE FLESH, the LORD, to be saved.
You can't be a Christian unless one does, and if one does not believe the Old Testament doctrine of God they chuck the entire Old Testament due to logic, (like Squeakybro above-he's logical in this regard), regarding the Old Testament doctrine of God.

[easeltine]

Clearly,
Salvation is not based on water baptism, be it infant or adult, be it sprinkling, pouring, or immersion, be it in the name of Jesus only, or the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Salavation is based on:
Romans 10:9 "That if thou shall confess with thy mouth the LORD, (YAHWEH of the Old Testament), and believe in your heart that God, (Jesus regarding His temple), has raised Him from the dead thou shall be saved."
John 3:16 - with the idea that the word "believe" in Greek has more to do with the idea of trusting, clinging, relying, obeying, then just a mental consent like the English use of the word.

[godchild]

Gee Johnnie, when you were speaking under the name of jcp/trent you just said you dated a black girl. You've really expanded that story. I could care less if you dated Mother Theresa or Mandela's ex. You are a sick person and need help. What you really need is a miracle.

[arron]

yes we must all trust in JESUS to save us and not water or good works. belive on in the LORD JESUS CHRIST AND thou shalt be saved.