SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Trinity Questions

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 Next Page )
PosterThread
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

John Wesley on Psalm 22:1

My God - Who art my friend and father, though now thou frownest upon me. The repetition denotes, the depth of his distress, which made him cry so earnestly. Forsaken - Withdrawn the light of thy countenance, the supports and comforts of thy spirit, and filled me with the terrors of thy wrath: this was in part verified in David, [u]but much more fully in Christ.[/u] Roaring - My out-cries forced from me, by my miseries.


On Matthew 27:46;


About the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice - Our Lord's great agony probably continued these three whole hours, at the conclusion of which be thus cried out, while he suffered from God himself what was unutterable. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? - Our Lord hereby at once expresses his trust in God, and a most distressing sense of his letting loose the powers of darkness upon him, [u]withdrawing the comfortable discoveries of his presence, and filling his soul with a terrible sense of the wrath due to the sins which he was bearing.[/u] (see Psalms 22:1.)


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2006/12/15 8:38Profile
beenblake
Member



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

 Re:

Quote:
More speculation. You obviously know better than Christ what was happening! He thought he had been forsaken, but you know better!?!



Ron, I am sorry if I have upset you. I do not mean to cause contention. I was fearful of even typing anything at all because I feared it would come to this.

I will admit that I could be wrong. Who am I? I have written what I felt was divine inspiration from the Holy Spirit. But I am not perfect. I have been wrong before.

I hope, however, that you realize I could say the same above quote to you. How do you know what really happened spiritually on the cross? The cry of Jesus was not a factual statement. It was a plea. This plea could have very well been the cry of His soul in conflict with His Spirit. Due to His suffering, He may have felt forsaken when in reality, He was not. What are we to say concerning Gethsemane? It is obvious the soul of Christ was resisting the cross. Was He separated from the Father then as well?

Someone could argue, "Well Christ must have been separated from the Father, because He bore all sin. He became sin, and so, He had to be separated. This is the only way we could be redeemed, by the exchange of our sin for His life."

Someone else could argue, "Christ did not literally become sin. He did not become sin itself, rather He bore the offense of sin. Christ was not separated from the Father for if He was then He could not have been raised. He would have been filled with sin and doomed to Hell without hope. Rather, Christ paid the debt of sin. However, since Christ was sinless, death could not hold Him."

And what are we to say about this scripture:

John 2:19-21 (NKJ)
19 Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." 20 Then the Jews said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?" 21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

Did Christ raise Himself as it says, "I will raise it up?" How is it that Christ was able to raise Himself?

And what about this scripture:

Mark 14:58 (NKJ)
"We heard Him say, 'I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.'"

If by the temple, Christ was referring to His body, what are we to say about this passage? Was the body of Christ man made, and when resurrected, made by God?

Would this not coincide with this verse:

John 3:6 (NKJ)
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

Could it be that Christ was born to both a virgin and the Holy Spirit? Could it be that Christ was both born of the Spirit and born of the flesh (whereas we are only born of the flesh until we are born again)? Could He have been both a root and descendant of David as it says in Revelation 22:16? Could Christ have been both God and Man, both the Son of God and the Son of Man?

This coincides with the testimony I gave in the beginning. I did not want to post it because I knew it would not be well received. However, it explains in full how God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

It could very well that this entire debate is foolishness. I do not know. Is not Christ most important in all this? If we believe in Him is not the Father glorified?

Your posts end with a statement that say, "I know in part." I would have to agree. We all know in part.

I think in this we have become obsessed with answers of God rather than Christ Himself. Should we not accept that we know in part? This is humility. We just don't know.

And yet here we are seeking answers for questions we don't know, and debating as if we do know.

Sure, there are many theories and doctrines, but how do we know if one person's interpretation is right or not? Have we not all sinned?

The righteous will walk by faith. Let us believe in Jesus. We don't understand all the mysteries of God and we will not until Christ returns. We know in part. What part do we know? If we have been saved, we know Christ. Let us share Christ and leave the rest to Him.

With love,
Blake


_________________
Blake Kidney

 2006/12/15 12:11Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Sean's original quote: "These are just a few questions. I hope this turns into a good discussion. Please don't go and quote John 1:1 or some other verse to prove the Trinity. I know there are many. I am looking for explanations to verses that I don't understand how they fit into the Trinity Doctrine. I don't like the idea of just telling people "it's a mystery but you have to believe it"".



Quote:
Blake's: It could very well that this entire debate is foolishness. I do not know. Is not Christ most important in all this? If we believe in Him is not the Father glorified?




There is an occassion in the Old Testament when Sampson's parents asked an angel his name, to which he replied, [i]Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?[/i] The word here for secret is [i]pilly[/i] and it means [u]incomprehensible[/u]. The angel said to them that his name was beyond their comprehension. Can we get our head around that? He would have maybe told his name, but why bother because they would not have comprehended it anyway. Maybe he did not want to give rise to speculations and attempts at the unfathomable? So he kept it to himself.

for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world, by the things made being understood, are plainly seen, both His eternal power and Godhead -- to their being inexcusable; (Romans 1:20)

What do we find in the creation apart from its awesome wonder and majesty? We find a simple revelation. All of the tangible universe boils down to three things:

Space, Matter, Time (This is a trinity)

Space consists of Length X Width X height (this is a trinity)

Length is not width. Width is not height. Height is not length. But they are all [u]space[/u].

Matter consists of Solid, Liquid, Gas (This is a trinity)

Solids are not liguids. Liquids are not gasses. Gasses are not solids. But they are all [u]matter[/u].

Time consists of past, present, future. (This is a trinity)

Past is not present. Present is not future. Future is not the past. But they are all [u]time[/u]

From this illustration we can apprehend how it is possible that God is a Trinity logically. Notice I did not say we can [i]comprehend[/i] the Trinity, but what we can understand is that it is not only possible, but it is the format God has chosen to pattern this world after Himself. God could have created the world with four dimensions of space, four states of matter, and four deminsions of time- but He did not. He chose to make things in the form of a trinity.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2006/12/15 14:15Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
The cry of Jesus was not a factual statement. It was a plea.



There is a hermeneutical principal that states [i]if the plain sense makes good sense seek no other sense[/i]. When the verbs, prepositions, adverbs, conjunctions and nouns cease to be such, language is nonsense. There is no reason to believe from the text that the words of our Lord are meant to be taken any other way than they were written. [i]Why[/i] is a word that denotes a question and requests an answer. When Peter asked Ananias and Sapphira, "Why has Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost?" it was a statement and a question at the same time. The fact in the case is that Satan had filled their heart. We assume this from the question itself. Why did he do it? They gave no answer. Our Lord said "Why hast thou forsaken me?" Whether it be a statement or a question we cannot skirt the difficulty by blurring the meaning and plain sense of the language. This was not a parable and it was not to be meant as a metaphor. It was a 'plain sense' statement in the form of a question infused with the facts of the case.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2006/12/15 14:24Profile
philologos
Member



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

 Re:

Quote:
Ron, I am sorry if I have upset you. I do not mean to cause contention. I was fearful of even typing anything at all because I feared it would come to this.


You have not upset me, but thanks all the same. I was simply trying to show you the enormity of the step you are taking when you call into question Christ's self-conscious states.

Quote:
The cry of Jesus was not a factual statement. It was a plea. This plea could have very well been the cry of His soul in conflict with His Spirit. Due to His suffering, He may have felt forsaken when in reality, He was not. What are we to say concerning Gethsemane? It is obvious the soul of Christ was resisting the cross. Was He separated from the Father then as well?


Nor was it a plea? He asked for nothing. It was a question whose answer lies in the same Psalm where David quoted it.
[color=0000ff]“But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.”
(Psa 22:3 KJVS)[/color]

The self-consciousness of Christ in this passage is truly amazing. [color=0000ff]“But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.” (Psa 22:6 KJVS)[/color] This is He whom angels worshipped who has become 'no man'. HIs agony is displayed in every verse of the first half of this psalm. You may now understand my horror at any questioning that he was mistaken.

Quote:
Someone else could argue, "Christ did not literally become sin. He did not become sin itself, rather He bore the offense of sin. Christ was not separated from the Father for if He was then He could not have been raised. He would have been filled with sin and doomed to Hell without hope. Rather, Christ paid the debt of sin. However, since Christ was sinless, death could not hold Him."


How can anyone suggest that he was not 'forsaken' in the light of his self-conscious expression of abandonment?


Quote:
Mark 14:58 (NKJ)
"We heard Him say, 'I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.'"

If by the temple, Christ was referring to His body, what are we to say about this passage? Was the body of Christ man made, and when resurrected, made by God?


I am quite unable to follow your reasoning here. The reference is to a misquotation; [color=0000ff]““We heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.’ ”” (Mark 14:58 NKJV) [/color] They had not heard him say that. What they had heard was [color=0000ff]“Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”
But He was speaking of the temple of His body.” (John 2:19-21 NKJV)[/color] He did not refer to 'another' body although we may legitimately see a reference to the church here.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/12/15 14:29Profile
beenblake
Member



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

 Re:

Well Ron and Robert, I still stand by what I said. Christ was not forsaken on the cross. The doctrine of the Trinity is false. I have made my case.

As I said, it could be that I am wrong. However, I will continue to teach this until Christ changes me. I follow Him.

Though we disagree, I love you both just the same. And I do hope the best for you, deeply and sincerely. This truth cannot be expressed over a forum adequately. I beginning to see why preaching is best done in person.

And though we do disagree, I believe we are on the same side. We have a common enemy. May we stay united as one in Christ, so as to stand strong against our enemy.

In love,
Blake












_________________
Blake Kidney

 2006/12/15 20:52Profile
beenblake
Member



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

 Re:

Quote:
How can anyone suggest that he was not 'forsaken' in the light of his self-conscious expression of abandonment?



I just wanted to comment on this one thing because it relates to my life personally in my current struggles. Since I have been saved, I have had moments like this of Christ on the cross where I have felt abandoned. There have been moments where I have suffered and I have cried "My god, why have you forsaken me?" The words were not exactly the same, but the connotation is. Though I had not experienced separation and knew God had not left me, I felt abandoned. Haven't you ever experienced this? Haven't you ever cried out, "Where are you God? Why have you left me here?"

To be Christian is to suffer as Christ did. We live in the Devil's domain. And as such, we will face moments like this where our soul feels forsaken. But does that mean God has abandoned us?

When we think of it like this, the verse in Isaiah makes sense. In Isaiah 49: 14-15(NIV), it says, " But Zion said, 'The Lord has forsaken me, the Lord has forgotten me.' 'Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!'"

Christ was a man with a soul of flesh. He was tempted just as we are tempted. Is it not possible that Christ felt abandoned in His soul, though He knew the Father had not left Him?

I don't need to hear your answer. I leave this question with you.

For me personally, this moment really shows Christ's humanity. In those moments when I am facing immense trials and tribulations, I can trust that God will not abandon me. He did not forsake His own son on the cross. So long as I am in Christ, I will not be forgotten. I have hope in Christ. He is my Savior.

I have nothing more to say.

In love and In Christ,
Blake


_________________
Blake Kidney

 2006/12/15 23:09Profile









 Re:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

so now his becoming Sin was followed by utter separation from His Father in The Death.

That is incompatible with the Trinity Doctrine. God is One Being made up of three persons. Without One of them you do not have God because God is one made up of Three.



This is the doctrine of Hank Hanegraaff. In his zeal to prove the faith teachers as heretics he has taken up a position that would render:



Hi Robert,

I'm not sure you are understanding what I was saying. I agree that Christ was forsaken on the Cross like Jesus says He was. What I am saying is that this TRUTH - that Jesus was forsaken - is not compatible with the "doctrine of the Trinity". Or maybe I just don't see it. Can you explain how part of God being forsaken by the rest of God still leaves God intact as the Trinity Doctrine states He is?

 2006/12/16 0:48
BeYeDoers
Member



Joined: 2005/11/17
Posts: 370
Bloomington, IN

 Re:

sscott, I am going to reiterate something Ron said earlier. Jesus being forsaken is NOT "part" of God being forsaken by another "part" of God. The way you state it, you are correct that it is not compatible with that doctrine as you state it. BUT that is not the Trinity doctrine. God is not "made up" of anything. He is not Father + Son + Holy Spirit. He is not a sum of parts. The way you seem to understand the Trinity is somewhat like the way the JWs and oneness people do (please note that I am NOT calling you either one of these). They see the Trinity as being Tritheism. But the two are RADICALLY different. I think this all stems back to the fact that you do not understand what the Trinity doctrine actually says, and also you misunderstand the Hypostatic Union. Like Ron said earlier, we have to START with taking God at His word in how He reveals Himself in scripture and be content with that. We know that Father is God and Son is God (refuting Arianism) and Holy Spirit is God, but we also know that there is only ONE GOD (refuting tritheism). We know that all three exist "simultaneously" and "individually" if you will (refuting modalism). We know that Jesus is man. And we know that Jesus CLEARLY understood Himself as being forsaken (Psalm 22 is David looking at Christ, not the other way around). We have to start with accepting all that as being 100% true. When we start debating these doctrines, we must all have that as our base. Jesus cry on the cross is not contrary to the aforementioned truths. It can't be. They are all true. Now, starting with that foundation, we try to come to a fuller comprehension of God so we can glory in Him even more, hence things like the Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed, and what Ron and Robert have done an excellent job of here in this discussion.

Have you read Tozer's [i]Knowledge of the Holy[/i]? He does a magnificent job of showing the unity and consistency of God, without confusing all the truths we know about Him in a way that makes Him "made up of" anything. I reccommend reading it and also reading Abraham's encounter with YHWH in Genesis 18 in the King James Version paying specific attention to the transitions between singular (I/Thee/Thou) and plural (Ye/You). I believe this passage alone sought with much prayer may help you understand God's nature (as attempted to be explained by Trinitarian theology) much better.

Grace to you,
denver


_________________
Denver McDaniel

 2006/12/16 10:44Profile
philologos
Member



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

 Re:

Quote:
Since I have been saved, I have had moments like this of Christ on the cross...


NO, you haven't, no one has. This was the pain of his sin-bearing and sin-becoming. No one has ever experienced anything like this who was not 'with God' and 'was God'. It would be torture beyond thinking for an angel to be separated from God, for the Son to be separated from the Father is truly ineffable.

Christ did not cry out 'where are you?' he cried 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'. There are only two possible explanations to this. Either Christ was mistaken or you are mistaken.

You will not find it hard to guess who I think was mistaken. If this does not fit into your theory it is time to change your theory or do not pretend to being a bible-believer.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/12/16 14:04Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy