SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : godhead

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 Next Page )
PosterThread
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi BeenBlake,

Quote:
Up to this point, I had always thought that when the bible was said "we" or "us," the bible was speaking of God and the angels. Even after hearing your arguments, I still lean toward this interpretation as it makes more sense to me. However, I can't really get into all of it on this message board as to why.



Consider this passage:

And God prepareth the man [u]in His image; in the image of God[/u] He prepared him, a male and a female He prepared them.( Genesis 1:27 YLT)

This passage indicates that God created man in His image, not the image of angels. I would argue that God as a Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God created man as Spirit, Soul, and Body. Angels are ministering spirits only, but are known to have taken on a body. This is deep water, but I cannot see how God would have included angels in the 'Us' of the passages in question.

God also went down to 'see' the wickedness of Sodom and appeared to Abraham as Three men in the tent door. I believe this to be an Old Testament revelation of God also, but I will not press the matter here.

God Bless,

-Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/11/5 21:12Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi Beenblake,

Quote:
I believe Jesus is the Holy Spirit.



I'm sorry I was unable to truly follow what you meant in the post concerning 'persons', but I would like to look at the above sentence. Ron can treat the issue of persons quite well if he gets a chance.

Here we read:

"Howbeit when [u]he[/u], the Spirit of truth, is come, [u]he[/u] will guide you into all truth: for [u]he[/u] shall not speak of [u]himself[/u]; but whatsoever [u]he[/u] shall hear, that shall [u]he[/u] speak; and [u]he[/u] will show you things to come" (John 16:13).

If God did not exist as three persons this had been a terribly difficult passage to unravel. First, observe that the Holy Spirit is referred to using the the pronoun 'he', this denotes personhood as we would say. The Holy Spirit is not 'it' but 'he'. Notice also that when He comes [u]he[/u] shall not speak of [u]himself[/u]; but whatsoever [u]he[/u] shall hear, that shall [u]he[/u] speak. If Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit were one and the same person we essentially have Christ speaking to Himself. This is the same Holy Spirit that came 'upon' Christ (i.e. "the Spirit of the Lord God is upon me..., because He hath anointed me..."). Therefor Christ and the Holy Spirit are indeed the same in substance, but they are not the same person.

God BLess,

-Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/11/5 21:40Profile
beenblake
Member



Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA

 Re:

Dear Logic and RobertW,

Logic said:

Quote:
Jesus was not the Holy Spirit, He has the Holy Spirit as we have a spirit.




John 15:4-5 (KJ) "4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing."


Galatians 2:20 - (NLT)
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Who lives in us, the Holy Spirit or Jesus?

Jesus is the Holy Spirit. They are one and the same.

Robert said:
Quote:
The Holy Spirit is not 'it' but 'he'.



If the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit are one, then of course we would call the Holy Spirit "He." We say, "He" as a pronoun in reference to all three because they are one and the same.

If the Holy Spirit was called "she," then you would have caught my attention. For there is no way Jesus, a "he" could be the same as the Holy Spirit, a "she." However, that is not the case. Both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are a "he."

This only provides me with further evidence that the Holy Spirit is Jesus.

I can find no indication in the bible that the Holy Spirit is indeed an entirely seperate individual from Jesus. If they were, then I would have two Spirits living inside me. There is only one Spirit in me, it is the Spirit of God.

Jesus is alive on earth today because He lives in every believer as the Holy Spirit.

This is what I believe. You may believe differently.

In love,
Blake


_________________
Blake Kidney

 2005/11/6 23:58Profile
beenblake
Member



Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA

 Re:

Dear Robert,

Quote:
This passage indicates that God created man in His image, not the image of angels.



I can see your point. We weren't created in the image of angels.

Alas, the use of "us" in these scriptures do seem to provide a good argument for the trinity. However, I would not be so quick to jump to that conclusion. The use of "us" in reference to God has been used in only a few places. This makes me think there is another special purpose for this. If it were simply a matter of the trinity, then it would have been used through out scripture.

I am not sure the answer to this riddle, however, I do believe there is a specific reason as to why God chose to use "us" in those particular scriptures and not in others.

Thank you though for pointing that out to me about the angels. That does make sense to me.

That is what these debates are for, though, testing.

In love,
Blake


_________________
Blake Kidney

 2005/11/7 0:04Profile
beenblake
Member



Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA

 Re:

Dear Robert,

Quote:
I'm sorry I was unable to truly follow what you meant in the post concerning 'persons',



I am sorry, I was a little distracted by other things. I will try to explain this a little better.

Philologos showed that the doctrine of the "Trinity" was established in order to syphon out error about God. The doctrine of the trinity came about because there were so many false ideas about God. This means the trinity is not based upon truth, rather it was developed to combat all the false ideas about Christ. As showed, there are four specifics things they were trying to establish in the trinity.

The ultimate problem they were facing is this: Jesus is God and Jesus is man. How is it possible for Jesus to be God and man at the same time?

This defies human logic and reasoning. Jesus cannot be both God and man at the same time. Jesus died and was resurrected. If Jesus is God, then He could not be a man with all of man's limitations such as death. And if Jesus did not really die, then our sin are not really forgiven.

So, Jesus was a man. However, if Jesus was a man, then how could He be God? Jesus was resurrected? What man can resurrect Himself?

And so, the solution to this little dilemma was to develop the trinity. If Jesus is seperate from the father and the father is seperate from Jesus, if they are seperate persons, then all the conditions in the above could be met.

The doctrine of the trinity has seperated God into three persons. The question is, what is a person?

A person is an individual. A person is autonomous. A person is a human.

I am seperate from you. I have my own thoughts, my own will, my own actions, and my own life. Even though we are brothers in Christ, we are still seperate beings. You are not held accountable for what I do. You don't take credit for what I do. We share a union of love in Christ, however, we are still seperate.

A husband and wife are better examples. When the two marry, they become one. They are united in love. However, even though they are one, they are still two persons. They are two individuals with distinct characteristics, traits, and functions. Even more important, they are autonomous beings. While they share everything, they are seperate. They are a collective or a group or a nation. They are divisible. When they have children, they become parents. They are not 2 parents in one parent. They are two persons in one parent-head. And often times, parents disagree.

In my mind, God cannot be three autonomous beings. If you say this, then you are saying that there are three Gods. By saying "GodHead", you are saying that God is a council with three members. These three members are unified. Therefore, they make up a tri-unity.

God the father is one God. God the son is one God. God the Holy Spirit is one God. Three Gods unified to make one. This is the trinity.

This presents many theological problems in my mind. I cannot go through every one, as it would result in a book. Here is one.

Let us say this is all true. There is a trinity with three seperate Gods who are united in love, hence, there are three persons. Of the three Gods, one was chosen to save humanity. One was chosen to be our judge. One was chosen to be our King. One was chosen to be revealed to us.

Of the three Gods, Christ is the only one who lived as a man.

Christ is our judge. Why would we appeal to anyone else? Christ is our Savior. Why would we call out to anyone else? Christ is our King. Why would we worship anyone else? Christ lived as a man. How can we know anyone else?

Christ is the only one who is personal. He is the only one of the three that lived as a person. Of the three, Jesus Christ is the only person I know.

I cannot accept that God is three persons because I know God. We have a relationship together. We talk and speak. God is very much one person.

The trinity is man's attempt to make God logical and reasonable. Everything God does and creates is logical and reasonable. However, God Himself is love. And love, from my experience, doesn't always make sense. For instance: Why does God love me?

This doesn't make sense. How can God love me like He does? Why does He love me?

The only answer I can think of is: Because He is God. And yet, this answers so much. How could God die for us? Because He is God. How could God exist as Jesus and the Father at the same time? Because He is God.

God did not reveal Himself to me as the trinity. He revealed Himself to me as Christ. The trinity is dogma established by man in an attempt to explain God. And so, I am having a great deal of difficulty accepting the trinity.

I have been praying heavily about this and I trust that Jesus will lead me.

I am glad that we have had this debate as I have learned much.

In love,
Blake


_________________
Blake Kidney

 2005/11/7 2:07Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
I have to confess that the algebraic analogy, which I have seen used by other theologians, in light of the quote, takes away from our Holy Triune God. I am also very disappointed that this whole explanation has no Scripture quotations at all. How are we “establishing and proving” God without His Word in the center of the discussion. A debate on the “incomprehensible” Godhead is questionable in the first place.

I think you are mistaking the purpose of the 'algebra'. It is not to describe God but to illustrate the workings of a logical thought process. Trinity does not 'describe' God.

As regards not having the 'word of God' at the centre, I suggest you go back to the beginning of this thread. This whole thread was intended as an exposition of scripture.
Quote:
I still maintain that nowhere in the entire Bible are we told to worship the Holy Spirit. This was not taught by Jesus, Paul, or anyone else. I DON’T SAY HERE THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT GOD, all I say is that we are NOT told to worship Him. We are also not told to pray to Him. This is where the whole debate and conclusions about our God in the Trinity debate go astray.

I think this shows signs of having become an obsession for you. Nowhere in the Bible are we told not to worship the Holy Spirit. We are told to worship God, and from a Trinitarian standpoint that authenticates worship to Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

In heaven there is only worship recorded to the ONE on the throne and to the LAMB.
So you are saying it is OK to worship the Son but not to worship the Spirit? The point is that if the Son and the Spirit are 'God' in a different way to the way that the Father is 'God'. If the Son and the Spirit have 'less' (to quote another posting) anything than the Father we have introduced an inequality to the Godhead. It is this that the old Christian thinkers were trying to address.

The plain fact is that the name of Jehovah is the name of God, not the exclusive name of the Father, so all the injunctions of the Old Testament to 'worship' Jehovah-God and automatically injunctions to worship Father, Son and Spirit.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/7 3:52Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
As showed, there are four specifics things they were trying to establish in the trinity.

I will come back to this post but this statement is quite inaccurate. They were not trying to 'establish' any such thing in their doctrine of the Trinity but were trying, in their thinking, to 'protect' the revelation of the Godhead as they found it in scripture from various defective views. Trinitarian statements should be seen as defences of the revealed truth, not attempts to establish new ideas.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/7 3:57Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
Where I really struggle is with the words that Jesus spoke:

Luke 18:
16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

As a child I have a difficult time with some of the verb tenses, etc. As an adult I have no trouble at all following them. The Gospel was not meant to be that complicated according to Jesus.

You are confusing 'faith' with 'understanding'. In 'faith' we are to be children, in 'understanding' we are to be full grown adults.“Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be mature.” (1Cor. 14:20, NKJV)


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/7 4:01Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
By everything you said, the trinity is an attempt as a "best fit" in order to cover all the important bases.

All theology is 'best fit' but originally trinitarianism was an attempt to provide a 'reasoned' defence to the the simple statements that there is 'One God' and that it is revealed that the Father is God, and that the Son is God, and that the Spirit is God, without altering the original revelation that 'God is One'.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/7 4:05Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
The problem I have with the trinity is in the description of God as three "persons."

The real problem you have is with the definition of 'persons'; which definition are you using? that from an English dictionary or that from the history of theology?

Quote:
I cannot also accept that all of God is encompassed in just three. God is not a person. God is all persons.

Now what is this intended to mean? That God is the composite of every individual being? That all individual beings are manifestations of God?

The theological use of the word 'person' as a very specific theological history. The Father, the Word and the Spirit all reveal, individually, aspects of 'personhood'. To use the word 'person' of God is not to tie Him down to our human experience of 'personhood' but is fundamentally to say that God is 'at the least, a person'. He is not an influence or a power. He is person! He is conscious of Himself, as human persons are conscious of themselves. He is conscious of what is 'not' Himself. ie he distinguishes between 'Himself' and other 'selves' and other 'things'. He reveals 'person-al' activity; He can be loved, grieved. He reveals memory and power of individual choice. In all these aspects of God's nature we can get some idea of Him because, having been made in His image and likeness, we too experience these aspects of 'personhood'. That is not to say that His 'person-hood' is exactly the same as ours; He is God and we are men. Nevertheless in the way that we say God is a Father, we partly understand the word 'Father' due to our own experience of the word in a human context. It has been said that every positive statement about God has to have a corresponding negative statement. In other words we say 'God is a Father' BUT He is NOT the kind of Father that you have experienced in human terms. This has to do with the whole nature of the way in which words are used at different levels when used to describe God and used to describe created things.

So if we are using the word 'person' of God we are really just asking a series of questions.
Is He conscious of Himself as human persons are conscious of themselves?
Is He conscious of what is not Himself as human persons are?
Is He capable of memory and intention and choice, as human persons are capable of these things?
Can He respond to other 'persons' in love, anger, grief, sorrow'?
There are more questions that we could adduce, but I think we have enough to make the point. Is God in this sense a 'person'; not a human person, but a 'person' nevertheless? The answer to most Christians down the ages has been 'yes'.
But the discussion continues... is 'the Father' 'conscious of Himself' in His relations with 'the Word'? Is the Word conscious of Himself in His relations with the Father? etc. If there is separate 'consciousness' then there is separate personhood. In His incarnation 'the Word' could say 'I and my Father are one' but also "my Father works and I work"; at times He used the pronoun 'we'. "I and my Father" and "we" show separate consciousness of being, key elements of 'personhood'. Any 'conversation' between the Father and the Word is either consciousness of separate personhood or schizophrenia; I can't think of any other options. What we have said of the Word could similarly be asked of the relationship between the Word and the Spirit, and we could collect similar quotations to make the point.

For a comprehensive look at the issue of Trinity I would recommend [url=http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/trinity.html]The Holy Trinity[/url] It is a comprehensive site with lots of hyperlinks and anyone wanting to research the topic would do well to pay it a visit.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/7 5:19Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy