| Poster | Thread | Nile
Member
Joined: 2007/3/28
Posts: 403
Raleigh, NC
| | Re: | | Hey all,
Just wanted to say that I'm not ignoring everyone, but I'm very busy with school and work.
The only comment I'll make now is that a house of cards falls quite easily. And that both of my two best friends have rejected the trinity in as much time as me as well. One was extremely opposed to the idea, as is to be expected, but then, in his own words, "Everything just fell into place after the first or second article." This article on Colossians was one of those articles:
[url=http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5257/colossians.htm]http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5257/colossians.htm[/url]
Nile
_________________
Matthew Miskiewicz
|
|  2007/10/26 6:12 | Profile | whyme
Member
Joined: 2007/4/3
Posts: 293
| | Re: | | The issue of whether you view Jesus is God is a salvation experience. I'm sorry but to not warn someone who claims otherwise is not loving. To know Jesus and be known by Him is an intimate loving knowing. I doubt that I could say I was intimate with someone if they were God and I didn't know it, say it and worship them aright. If John in 1John says you discern the spirits by whether they acknowledge Jesus came in the flesh ( not just that He was flesh ) If Thomas said Jesus was the Christ and his God and Jesus didn't object, if the Jews killed Jesus because he claimed to be equal with God and Jesus didn't object then Jesus is either insane or God. I choose and worship and exalt the latter. Please Nile repent. |
| | 2007/10/26 8:55 | Profile | wildbranch
Member
Joined: 2005/7/20
Posts: 138
| | Re: | | MikeH - Greetings
The Trinity means three (3). Triad. Threesome. Not One (1).
ie. "Tritheism", opposed to "Monotheism"
|
| | 2007/10/26 9:34 | Profile |
| | Re:The thread title is an Oxymoron. | | 1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
2Co 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
2Co 11:4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a "falling away" [u]first[/u]
G646
αποστασία
apostasia
ap-os-tas-ee'-ah
Feminine of the same as G647; [u]defection from truth [/u](properly the state), (apostasy): - falling away, forsake.
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto Him, My Lord and my God.
|
| | 2007/10/26 11:52 | | Lkid
Member
Joined: 2007/7/6
Posts: 109
| | Re: | | Wildbranch, don't argue about semantics. I'm sure you are aware of what the Trinitarians believe. One, triune God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Arguing the word Trinity? You might as well go watch glue dry, it would be more worth your efforts.
On another note:
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron...
Amazing, within two verses it says in my bible that God Himself became flesh and that in the end times (now) many would fall away from this faith. And just to be clear: Who is manifest in the flesh, WHO? GOD!!
Sort of sounds like another verse: And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. And we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten. As in the Shekinah glory that Moses experienced. Men could not even look at Moses' face after he'd been in the very presence of the Lord. He had to wear a veil and we know that a veil is over the eyes of Isreal and apparrently over these men too as they cannot bear to look at the Glorious Son. Isreal told Moses, you talk to God, we can't bear His presence, we'll just obey. Is that not the situation here. Men, can you not bear the presence of God, but you say you are willing to obey. Isreal in the end departed from God and worshipped a golden calf while Moses was with God. If you don't believe Moses was in the presence of God Himself because the bible says that no man can see Him and live, remember that it also says in Deuteronomy 5
"The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire," showing clearly that the argument that it was merely an angel in the burning bush is totally false.
and again in Numbers 12
"And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, [I] the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, [and] will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses [is] not so, who [is] faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses? |
| | 2007/10/26 11:56 | Profile | Nile
Member
Joined: 2007/3/28
Posts: 403
Raleigh, NC
| | Re: | | Lkid:
Quote:
Have you joined a Christadelphian group?
No, I have not and do not plan to. They wouldn't let me anyway, I don't agree with them on the Atonement.
Quote:
Amazing, within two verses it says in my bible that God Himself became flesh and that in the end times (now) many would fall away from this faith. And just to be clear: Who is manifest in the flesh, WHO? GOD!!
Manifested = Revealed = Made Known = Communicated Visibily
Says nothing about Jesus being God.
Quote:
Third I doubt the idea that this was the result of Hellenistic thought. Surely this counterpoint of many levels of meaning, many levels of revelation, many levels of understanding is characteristic of Hebrew, not Hellenistic thought? Also, being comfortable with paradox - such as two apparently oppposing things both being true, is surely not characteristic of the neat Greek methods of reasoning?
Here is an example:
---
The New American Bible has this to say about the word "logos" in a footnote:
"May denote an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word, speech, or message."
In Greek, the word "logos" according to Vines Expository Dictionary means:
Logos - The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea.
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
This unfortunately is not what it meant to Greek philosophy. In Greek philosophies such as Stoicism, and Neo-Platonism, "logos" was considered divine. To a Stoic, logos means "the divine principle of life." This is basically a definition of God. In Gnosticism "Logos" was the actual name of one of the intermediary gods.
Someone educated in one of these philosophies would interpret John 1: 1 in the following manner.
"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God." Verse 14. "The divine principle of life became flesh."
Now you have God in heaven and in the flesh at the same time. The explanation came in the form of a dual natured Messiah who is fully God and fully man at all times (This definition of Jesus is in the Creed of Chalcedon which is the Trinitarian creed of all Trinitarian denominations). Thus the trinity.
---
From: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5257/Beginning.htm
Quote:
I'm open to correction on this point, because of not having much knowledge of Hellenistic thought, but it doesn't sound Hellenistic to me! Please explain why you think it is...
It's just plain straight up Gnostic. Jesus [i]couldn't[/i] just be a man, for men have bodies and their bodies are evil. So Jesus must have really been a spirit inhabiting a man's body. Or maybe Jesus was really God, but pretended to be a man (the trinity). Maybe Jesus was somehow God and man at the same time...hm, that's totally contradictory, but at least we have an excuse for why we're not holy like Jesus - we're not God!
Aha! That proves Jesus is God!
Except...
In the OT, King David was worshiped in the same sentence as God.
In the OT, the people are commanded to worship the king.
Jesus says in Revelation that WE will be worshiped
Not to mention the fact that "worship" has more definitions than the trinitarians would like you to believe. From Blue Letter Bible:
John 9:38
[i]And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.[/i]
he worshipped:
1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
2) among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
a) used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
1) to the Jewish high priests
2) to God
3) to Christ
4) to heavenly beings
5) to demons
Quote:
He uses titles that are only used by God. For example, the First and the Last, Alpha and Omega, in Revelation (quoting Isaiah 44:6 and 48:12, which are - especially the first - clearly God Himself speaking).
""Alpha and Omega", "the beginning and the end", and "the first and the last", appear to mean essentially the same thing. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament says that the meaning is simply that God begins and ends all things. All three phrases are used together in Rev 22:13.
However, it is poor logic to suggest that when the same words are spoken in different places, by two different identities, those two MUST therefore be the same person! Nevertheless, that is what some theologians do with the three Bible verses which are the subject of this paper!"
http://home.pacific.net.au/~amaxwell/bdigest/bd90bbs.htm
Quote:
he Bible says that Jesus (temporarily) laid down such things as omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience
If you believe that, guess what - you do not believe in the trinity!!!
---
Some people will try to answer some of these questions by saying, "Jesus emptied himself." This shows how little people understand their own creed. This is called the "kenotic doctrine" and people try to use it in defense of the trinity. But it is in total contradiction to the Chalcedon Creed. The Kenotic Doctrine says that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. You cannot say that you believe in the trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the kenotic doctrine, then you have already rejected the trinity. You cannot be both.
In 1951, in celebration of the 1500th birthday of the Chalcedon Creed, Pope Pius the 12th wrote the following:
Encyclical of Pope Pius the 12th on the Council of Chalcedon September 8, 1951
(paragraph 29).
There is another enemy of the faith of Chalcedon, widely diffused outside the fold of the Catholic religion. This is an opinion for which a rashly and falsely understood sentence of St. Pauls Epistle to the Philippians (2:7), supplies a basis and a shape. This is called the kenotic doctrine, and according to it, they imagine that the divinity was taken away from the Word in Christ. It is a wicked invention, equally to be condemned with the Docetism opposed to it. It reduces the whole mystery of the Incarnation and Redemption to empty the bloodless imaginations.
---
From: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5257/4holyspi1.htm
Quote:
His pre-existence is undoubted (read Proverbs 8 for example, Isaiah 48:16, John 1:1-4 and John 8:58, which has already been quoted)
To sum it up:
---
Within the Christian tradition, the New Testament has long been read through the prism of the later conciliar creeds... Speaking of Jesus as the Son of God had a very different connotation in the first century from that which it has had ever since the Council of Nicea (325 AD). Talk of his preexistence ought probably in most, perhaps in all, cases to be understood, on the analogy of the pre-existence of the Torah, to indicate the eternal divine purpose being achieved through him, rather than pre-existence of a fully personal kind.
---
From: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5257/natureof.htm
Quote:
And the Greek of John 1:1 makes it absolutely impossible to translate as anything other than "the word was God").
Biblical Unitarians agree: "the word was God."
Here is my paraphrase of John 1:1-4, which is true to the meaning of "logos" and the context as far as I can tell:
[i]God's wise plan has been since the beginning, and His wise plan was with Him, and His wise plan was of Him and His nature. God had His wise plan even in the beginning. All things were made through God's wise plan, and apart from His wise plan nothing was made that has been made. There was a means of life in His wise plan, and that means of life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, but the darkness did not comprehend it.[/i]
ginnyrose:
Quote:
And if Jesus was not God how can Isa. 43:11 be true: "I, even I, am the LORD; and beside, me there is no savior."
It can easily be true, it is not hard to see.
God is our savior in a different sense than Jesus is. Even the trinitarians will agree with this. God (that is, the Father) did not die for us, while Jesus did. God is our savior who saved us through His Son, thus it is right to call both God savior and Jesus savior.
To top it off, Jesus is not the only one in the Bible other than God to be called savior. Upon seeing this, it should become imedietly obvious that this argument falls apart.
------------
Well, this is a long post.
I will say, no one has brought anything up yet that I have not encountered in my study. I pray people to search these things out for themselves and see what the other side of the trinitarian arguments are. Give it a fair trial - see what BOTH sides of the arguments are. I highly suggest looking at the Biblical Unitarian arguments. Just check out a Biblical Unitarian website and search for a verse which you think undoubtedly PROVES that Jesus is God. I bet you'll be surprised.
Thanks to you how are willing to discuss,
Matt
_________________
Matthew Miskiewicz
|
| | 2007/10/26 21:10 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Col 2:4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.
Col 2:6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:
Col 2:7 Rooted and built up in him, and established in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power
Col 2:4 - from R.A. Torrey
"lest": Col_2:8, Col_2:18; Mat_24:4, Mat_24:24; Mar_13:22; Act_20:30; Rom_16:18, Rom_16:19; 2Co_11:3, 2Co_11:11-13; Gal_2:4; Eph_4:14, Eph_5:6; 2Th_2:9-11; 1Ti_4:1, 1Ti_4:2; 2Ti_2:16, 2Ti_3:13; Tit_1:10,Tit_1:11; 1Pe_2:1-3; 1Jo_2:18, 1Jo_2:26, 1Jo_4:1; 2Jo_1:7; Rev_12:9, Rev_13:8; Rev_20:3, Rev_20:8
If one denies the deity of Christ they are teaching an anti-Christ doctrine.
It would not be "too harsh" to say blasphemy is being pushed here now.
Gal 2:5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
I wish the Apostle Paul or John were here in the flesh - so you could see their response to this attempt to persuade The Church against her Christ. |
| | 2007/10/26 23:07 | | Lkid
Member
Joined: 2007/7/6
Posts: 109
| | Re: | | Actually manifest:
make manifest 19, appear 12, manifest 9, show 3, be manifest 2, show (one's) self 2, manifestly declare 1, manifest forth 1
or
1) to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown, to manifest, whether by words, or deeds, or in any other way
a) make actual and visible, realised
b) to make known by teaching
c) to become manifest, be made known
d) of a person
1) expose to view, make manifest, to show one's self, appear
e) to become known, to be plainly recognised, thoroughly understood
1) who and what one is
|
| | 2007/10/26 23:34 | Profile | Scribe75
Member
Joined: 2007/10/26
Posts: 13
Naperville Il
| | Re: | | Ah, the resurgence of the age-old arian heresy. :-? |
| | 2007/10/27 0:15 | Profile | 1another
Member
Joined: 2007/10/11
Posts: 15
| | Re: | | He_Reigns wrote
_____________________
If one denies the deity of Christ they are teaching an anti-Christ doctrine.
It would not be "too harsh" to say blasphemy is being pushed here now.
_________________________________
I agree completely with He_Reigns. Nile what you are pushing here is wrong. You truly are on dangerous ground, you need to repent. I am praying for you.
Praying for you
Beth |
| | 2007/10/27 0:16 | Profile |
|
