More Trinity stuff

[YLTYLT]

But the worst of what you say is that you make salvation a matter of a wage paid by Christ to God, whereas the apostles taught plainly that salvation is a free gift, not something purchased by a price.

Aside from the whole discussion on the trinity:

Acts 20:
27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Eph 1:
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Its seems these verses would indicate that something was purchased by the blood of God. It was the church that was purchased.

But you are correct that salvation is a free gift. Buy If I were to give you a gift, to you it would be free, but I would still have to go to the store to purchase it. So salvation is free to the person receiving salvation, but not to the Giver.


----------------------------
But back to the trinity:
Acts 20:28 shows us that the purchase price was the Blood of GOD: church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

According to these verses this would infer that Jesus is God, (unless of course it was not Jesus on the cross. )

[YLTYLT]

Fortigurn and Pierac,
I have a question for you both. Regardless of how you may believe we receive Grace, do you believe the salvation is by only by the Grace of God? And that the Grace that saves comes from God and only God?

[Fortigurn]

But the worst of what you say is that you make salvation a matter of a wage paid by Christ to God, whereas the apostles taught plainly that salvation is a free gift, not something purchased by a price.

Aside from the whole discussion on the trinity:

Acts 20:
27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Eph 1:
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Its seems these verses would indicate that something was purchased by the blood of God. It was the church that was purchased.

You seem to be suffering from a nasty case of KJV-itis. Let me help with a proper translation, the NET:

Acts 20:
27 For I did not hold back from announcing to you the whole purpose of God.
28 Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son.

God purchased us (not 'our salvation'), by the blood of His own son. Now in your view, Jesus purchased our salvation from God, with his own blood, but the Bible doesn't say that.

Now Ephesians:

Ephesians 1:
13 And when you heard the word of truth (the gospel of your salvation) - when you believed in Christ - you were marked with the seal of the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is the down payment of our inheritance, until the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of his glory.

Nothing there about our salvation being paid for by a wage from Christ to God.

But you are correct that salvation is a free gift. Buy If I were to give you a gift, to you it would be free, but I would still have to go to the store to purchase it. So salvation is free to the person receiving salvation, but not to the Giver.

This doesn't actually address my point. My point is that God is the one who 'owned' the salvation, and He has said that He gives it as a free gift. But in your view, God doesn't give it as a free gift. In fact God was refusing to give anyone salvation as a free gift, so Jesus had to come along and buy salvation from God, and give it to us. So the problem here is that in your view salvation had to be bought from the very person who claimed He was going to give it as a free gift.

But back to the trinity:
Acts 20:28 shows us that the purchase price was the Blood of GOD: church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Apart from the fact that this verse doesn't say what you thought it did, you don't honestly believe that God has blood do you? What else do you think He has, sweat?

[Fortigurn]

Fortigurn and Pierac,
I have a question for you both. Regardless of how you may believe we receive Grace, do you believe the salvation is by only by the Grace of God?

Certainly not. Salvation is by grace, through our faith ('it is by faith so that it may be by grace', Romans 4:16, 'by grace you are saved through faith', Ephesians 2:8). If it were only by the grace of God, then all would be saved.

And that the Grace that saves comes from God and only God?

What do you mean 'grace that saves'? Grace isn't a substance or power, it means being gracious to someone, treating them well even though they don't deserve to be treated well. In the case of God, it means forgiving us our sins freely, despite the fact that we commit them repeatedly. He does this because He knows we're fallible (Psalm 103:12-14), and He is prepared to overlook our sins on the basis that we try and serve Him even though we don't manage to do it perfectly. In the case of Christ, it means the grace he showed in loving us and willingly dying for us ( Ephesians 5:2). This is why Paul says that the grace of God came by the grace of Jesus ('how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiply to the many', Romans 5:15).

Note in that last verse (Romans 5:15), Paul distinguishes God from Jesus. He doesn't say 'God the Father', he says 'God'. He says 'the grace of God', and 'the grace of the one man Jesus Christ'. He does not do what a trinitarian would do, and say 'the grace of God the Father, and the grace of God the son'.

[YLTYLT]

Fortigurn and Pierac,
I have a question for you both. Regardless of how you may believe we receive Grace, do you believe the salvation is by only by the Grace of God?

Certainly not. Salvation is by grace, through our faith ('it is by faith so that it may be by grace', Romans 4:16, 'by grace you are saved through faith', Ephesians 2:8). If it were only by the grace of God, then all would be saved.

And that the Grace that saves comes from God and only God?

What do you mean 'grace that saves'? Grace isn't a substance or power, it means being gracious to someone, treating them well even though they don't deserve to be treated well. In the case of God, it means forgiving us our sins freely, despite the fact that we commit them repeatedly. He does this because He knows we're fallible (Psalm 103:12-14), and He is prepared to overlook our sins on the basis that we try and serve Him even though we don't manage to do it perfectly. In the case of Christ, it means the grace he showed in loving us and willingly dying for us ( Ephesians 5:2). This is why Paul says that the grace of God came by the grace of Jesus ('how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiply to the many', Romans 5:15).

Note in that last verse (Romans 5:15), Paul distinguishes God from Jesus. He doesn't say 'God the Father', he says 'God'. He says 'the grace of God', and 'the grace of the one man Jesus Christ'. He does not do what a trinitarian would do, and say 'the grace of God the Father, and the grace of God the son'.

Well if we are saved by Grace then it is His Grace that Saves. Correct? (now of course I do believe that we have access to this Grace through faith. But the faith is not what saves. It is only His Grace. That is why I said "Regardless of how you may believe we receive Grace...." I did not intend to get into that discussion of how we receive grace. I think we both agree that it is through faith.)
I just wanted to make sure that you understood that it was only God's grace and not anybody else's grace that saves us. Which it sounds like you do agree with that. Correct?

[Fortigurn]

Well if we are saved by Grace then it is His Grace that Saves. Correct?

Yes.

(now of course I do believe that we have access to this Grace through faith. But the faith is not what saves. It is only His Grace. That is why I said "Regardless of how you may believe we receive Grace...." I did not intend to get into that discussion of how we receive grace. I think we both agree that it is through faith.)

* YLTYLT: 'But the faith is not what saves. It is only His Grace'.

* Bible: 'it is by faith so that it may be by grace', Romans 4:16, 'by grace you are saved through faith', Ephesians 2:8

I'll go with the Bible thanks. Just as the Bible nowhere says we are saved by 'faith alone', so it nowhere says that we are saved by 'grace alone'.

I just wanted to make sure that you understood that it was only God's grace and not anybody else's grace that saves us. Which it sounds like you do agree with that. Correct?

I just want to make sure that I've already addressed not only your question, but also the argument you're leading up to ('God's grace saves, here's a passage which says that we're saved by Jesus' grace, therefore Jesus is God'). Please read my post. It shows very clearly that the grace of God came by the grace of Jesus. You can't say 'it was only God's grace and not anybody else's grace that saves us'.

[B. W.]

I agree with all that. I've made this point very clearly myself. The Bible says all things were created by one person, the Father.

Yet God said - let Us make... in Gen 1:26 and 3:22...has become one of Us...

He was not speaking to a Heavenly host ,nor angels, nor even an angel as an angel is not God and God is not an angel and cannot be classed as an 'Us' with God. What does the Bible declare? - "I alone are God and there are no others," Isaiah 45:5-6 declare! The text and ancient Hebrew is clear on this point.

God alone made heaven and earth all the universe and man: there was no high heavenly courtly host helping God out.

I agree. I've already said this. It seems you're not reading what I write.

You agree? and then write this below in response to my comment?:

There was no heavenly court or angels with him.

and you said, "Proof please."

Then why did you quote these in your exposé trying to prove the 'Us' in Genesis are angelic beings or a host? 1 Kings 22:19-22, Job 1:6-12; 2:1-6,Isaiah, 6:1-8, as sources for your doctrine if you really agree? I do read what you write but you do not understand what I write.

God the Father spoke to Son and Holy Spirit in the beginning and only He created man.

I believe that only the Father created man, but you haven't provided any evidence that the Father spoke to the Holy Spirit and the son.

There was no heavenly court or angels with him.

Proof please.

You still believe a heavenly host or some other creature was with God when he created the heavens and earth as well as man? That God was speaking to someone other than himself when he alone formed man? I bet you speak to yourself, yet, God cannot?

The context of the Genesis account itself refutes this ideology without taking any rabbit trials through 1 Kings, Job 1,2, and Isaiah 6 and bible as well as men's opinions which your doctrine takes in vain attempt to prove God had a heavenly court nearby, or at least friendly cherubim or seraphim nearby to confer with to explain away the 'Us' and 'Our' of Genesis.

The ways your doctrine presents its case reminds me of how the old TV show of Monty Python used to depict God on his heavenly throne: A host of cartoon characters in the form of infantile cherubim along side a medieval clad angelic host blowing trumpets announcing God is now entering the scene. There then God appears in the form of a human king sitting on a royal throne carrying a regal scepter. This heavenly host surrounds the throne all the while blowing trumpets, shouting, while cherubim shoot little arrows — then the Sun, moon and stars start doing jumping jacks.

The bible does not back up your doctrine — it refutes it in Genesis 1:2, “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering [brooding] over the face of the waters…” ESV

The Hebrew word translated hovering-brooding depicts isolation, like a lone Eagle soaring above, alone: It is written in Jeremiah 32:17.”'Ah, Lord GOD! It is you who have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and by your outstretched arm! Nothing is too hard for you…”ESV

Only God created and none else and Jesus and the Father are One just as Jesus said. Does your doctrine understand the metaphor for God's arm? From what you write - I think not.

Acts17:24-25, "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things;” NASB

God needs no one else to be an 'Us' in the Genesis account — the scriptures are extremely clear on this account as “He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things.”

The Lord was alone moving, hovering — brooding - over the face of the waters in silent contemplation, getting ready to implement his plans and purposes. This is what the force of the ancient Hebrew textual language pictures — not a Monty Python throng, not a weak God needing an friendly angel to confer with! Next, God then spoke and the rest is history recorded in Genesis.

God was not speaking to any other when referring to the 'Us' - 'Our' in Genesis, other than Himself, as He is, revealing something about His Divinity. Yet you cannot see this as you do not have the Spirit of God in you and are not his or you would hear his word and understand it. The bible tells us to confront error, and defend the faith, and expose darkness, shout warnings from the house tops so that we may save a soul from death. You take my sharp retorts as insults, but they are not intended as insults.

Further, The doctrine you espouse reminds me of this really silly analogy: The English language uses the numeral 1 to mean 1 item or thing. Also, the English language spells out the numeral 1 phonetically as One. There is the numeral 1 and you pronounce it One. One is made from three letters yet it is still means one. Three make one but each letter is only one letter. The English word for God also uses three letters.

Your doctrine only sees the numeral 1 and not what makes 1 a One. Your Doctrine should therefore spell One as O and leave out the rest of the letters. Silly metaphor isn't it? Yet, is this not what you are doing? 1 God? You are neglecting to see him as he chooses to reveal himself. As each individual letter used to spell the English word — One - has its own uses, form, attributes, and pronunciations. Likewise, so does One God: the undivided trinity — Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

This you refuse to see and only stare blindly at a single number 1 but not how God reveals him himself — in essence you miss the spelling of his many names. Do you really know why the doctrine of the Trinity was written and what its purpose was and still is? I do not think you do.

The entire text of the Genesis account refutes your claims. God formed — God placed — God said let us make man in our image and likeness. He was not talking to angelic host but to Himself as He is, and here, in the beginning, a picture emerges about God — He is like no other!

1 Corinthians 2: 10-16, “But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.13 These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For “who has known the mind of the LORD that he may instruct Him? ”But we have the mind of Christ.” NKJV
-
-
-

[Fortigurn]

He was not speaking to a Heavenly host ,nor angels, nor even an angel as an angel is not God and God is not an angel and cannot be classed as an 'Us' with God. What does the Bible declare? - "I alone are God and there are no others," Isaiah 45:5-6 declare! The text and ancient Hebrew is clear on this point.

The fact that God is not an angel does not mean He cannot speak to those who are not God and use the term 'us'. I've already shown you that He does this in other parts of the Bible.

Then why did you quote these in your exposé trying to prove the 'Us' in Genesis are angelic beings or a host? 1 Kings 22:19-22, Job 1:6-12; 2:1-6,Isaiah, 6:1-8, as sources for your doctrine if you really agree? I do read what you write but you do not understand what I write.

I do understand what you write. You still think I'm arguing that the angels created with the Father. I am not saying that.

You still believe a heavenly host or some other creature was with God when he created the heavens and earth as well as man? That God was speaking to someone other than himself when he alone formed man?

Yes.

I bet you speak to yourself, yet, God cannot?

Yes I do, and yes God can, but neither of us would refer to ourselves as 'us'.

The context of the Genesis account itself refutes this ideology without taking any rabbit trials through 1 Kings, Job 1,2, and Isaiah 6 and bible as well as men's opinions which your doctrine takes in vain attempt to prove God had a heavenly court nearby, or at least friendly cherubim or seraphim nearby to confer with to explain away the 'Us' and 'Our' of Genesis.

None of this deals with the Biblical argument I have made. You claimed that God would never refer to the heavenly court using the term 'us', and yet you've been provided with Biblical examples of exactly that.

[qoute]The Hebrew word translated hovering-brooding depicts isolation, like a lone Eagle soaring above, alone:[/quote]

No it doesn't, it just means 'hovering' or 'brooding'. That's all. And it's clear that God was not alone, since He spoke to others. You even claimed that the angels weren't there at creation, but Job states explicitly that they were. I gave you the reference.

Only God created and none else...

I agree. I've already agreed several times. Please read my post. The rest of what you wrote is simply a repeat of what you wrote earlier, with a few more insults.

[YLTYLT]

I just want to make sure that I've already addressed not only your question, but also the argument you're leading up to ('God's grace saves, here's a passage which says that we're saved by Jesus' grace, therefore Jesus is God'). Please read my post. It shows very clearly that the grace of God came by the grace of Jesus. You can't say 'it was only God's grace and not anybody else's grace that saves us'.

Did you mean to include a link?

So you agree that Grace came from both the Father and the Son. Correct?

And on another side question:

Just so I can understand your position better,
It seems that you do believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but you do not believe that scripture shows that the term "Son of God" is equivalent to being God. Am I stating your beliefs about this correctly?

[Fortigurn]

I just want to make sure that I've already addressed not only your question, but also the argument you're leading up to ('God's grace saves, here's a passage which says that we're saved by Jesus' grace, therefore Jesus is God'). Please read my post. It shows very clearly that the grace of God came by the grace of Jesus. You can't say 'it was only God's grace and not anybody else's grace that saves us'.

Did you mean to include a link?

No, I just wanted you to read my previous post.

So you agree that Grace came from both the Father and the Son. Correct?

It seems you're still not reading what I write. I said that grace came from the Father, grace came from the son, and grace continues to come from the Father. I explained why, how, in what context, and for what reason.

And on another side question:

Just so I can understand your position better,
It seems that you do believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but you do not believe that scripture shows that the term "Son of God" is equivalent to being God. Am I stating your beliefs about this correctly?

Of course I don't believe that 'son of God' means 'equivalent to being God'. Even Adam is called 'the son of God', and it's clear that he wasn't God. The 'son of David' wasn't 'David', it was Jesus. The 'son of Jesse' wasn't 'Jesse', it was David'. The 'son of YLTYLT' isn't 'YLTYLT', and the 'son of God' isn't 'God'.

[YLTYLT]

No, I just wanted you to read my previous post.

Could you somehow identify which post you are referring to? maybe which page it is on.....

It seems you're still not reading what I write. I said that grace came from the Father, grace came from the son, and grace continues to come from the Father. I explained why, how, in what context, and for what reason.

And on another side question:

Just so I can understand your position better,
It seems that you do believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but you do not believe that scripture shows that the term "Son of God" is equivalent to being God. Am I stating your beliefs about this correctly?

Of course I don't believe that 'son of God' means 'equivalent to being God'. Even Adam is called 'the son of God', and it's clear that he wasn't God. The 'son of David' wasn't 'David', it was Jesus. The 'son of Jesse' wasn't 'Jesse', it was David'. The 'son of YLTYLT' isn't 'YLTYLT', and the 'son of God' isn't 'God'.

Thank you, a simple "yes" would have sufficed though

[puritan lad]

The Trinity is a must. No one can completely comprehend it, but anyone who denies either Christ's Diety (Arianism) or His distinct personhood (modalism) does not know Christ.

"...unless you believe that I AM you will die in your sins." (John 8:24)

[YLTYLT]

Trust:

Ephesians 1
12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

To be saved we must trust Christ, but it also says we must trust God.
If Christ is a Man then we are trusting Man to save us. Should we trust both man and God? No, or else we might as well be trusting ourselves.

Grace:
We are saved by Grace through faith.
These verese show that Grace comes from Jesus and from God:

2 Corinthians 13:14
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.
Galatians 1:3
Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
Ephesians 1:2
Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
Philippians 1:2
Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

All Grace comes from God.

1 Peter 5:10
But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.

If Grace comes from Jesus and from God and all Grace come from God, then Jesus is God along with the Father.

Preexistence:

John 6:61
But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, "Do you take offense at this? 62Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

If Jesus was only a man, where did he ascend to that he was once there before?

And PL beat me to the punch for

John 8:24
I said, therefore, to you, that ye shall die in your sins, for if ye may not believe that I AM [he], ye shall die in your sins.' YLT

Fortigurn ,
I tried to find you post where you answered my question, but I do not see it.

[Fortigurn]

No, I just wanted you to read my previous post.

Could you somehow identify which post you are referring to? maybe which page it is on.....

Are you joking? I said 'I just wanted you to read my previous post'. That means the post I made earlier. I know you read it, because you even quoted it. How can you now claim that you can't see it?

Here is the post, here is your post quoting it, and here it is again:

Fortigurn and Pierac,
I have a question for you both. Regardless of how you may believe we receive Grace, do you believe the salvation is by only by the Grace of God?

Certainly not. Salvation is by grace, through our faith ('it is by faith so that it may be by grace', Romans 4:16, 'by grace you are saved through faith', Ephesians 2:8). If it were only by the grace of God, then all would be saved.

And that the Grace that saves comes from God and only God?

What do you mean 'grace that saves'? Grace isn't a substance or power, it means being gracious to someone, treating them well even though they don't deserve to be treated well. In the case of God, it means forgiving us our sins freely, despite the fact that we commit them repeatedly. He does this because He knows we're fallible (Psalm 103:12-14), and He is prepared to overlook our sins on the basis that we try and serve Him even though we don't manage to do it perfectly. In the case of Christ, it means the grace he showed in loving us and willingly dying for us ( Ephesians 5:2). This is why Paul says that the grace of God came by the grace of Jesus ('how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiply to the many', Romans 5:15).

Note in that last verse (Romans 5:15), Paul distinguishes God from Jesus. He doesn't say 'God the Father', he says 'God'. He says 'the grace of God', and 'the grace of the one man Jesus Christ'. He does not do what a trinitarian would do, and say 'the grace of God the Father, and the grace of God the son'.

[Fortigurn]

The Trinity is a must. No one can completely comprehend it, but anyone who denies either Christ's Diety (Arianism) or His distinct personhood (modalism) does not know Christ.

"...unless you believe that I AM you will die in your sins." (John 8:24)

Wow, a verse which says absolutely nothing about the trinity. And not only that, but from an incorrect translation. That's convincing.