More Trinity stuff

[B. W.]

A person cannot declare that God is a singular one because to do so as you claim also makes God have only one attribute and no other on the grounds of the very rules of grammar you laid out! Yet the bible declares God is not a lump but has heart, soul, and mind - a Echad - a real Elohim!

You cannot have it both ways. Either God is a singular one or a unity that makes one-One. The way the anti-Trinity crowd portrays the oneness of God as only a singular one means that God can only be one of his attributes and possesses none else because God is one — singular number one. Your grammar will not allow for anything else.

Also reducing God to a singular One sets you up as the only purveyor of truth and the only ones who correctly knows what God is really like as you have reduced him to a simple state of being so easily understood and so easy to comprehend. However, this is violation of scripture as it is written:

Job 5:8-9, "As for me, I would seek God, and to God would I commit my cause, 9 who does great things and unsearchable, marvelous things without number.” ESV

Psalms 145:3, “Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised, and his greatness is unsearchable.” ESV

Job 11:7-8, “Are you able to take God's measure, to make discovery of the limits of the Ruler of all? 8 They are higher than heaven; what is there for you to do? - Deeper than the underworld, and outside your knowledge...” BBE

Romans 11:33, “O how deep is the wealth of the wisdom and knowledge of God! No one is able to make discovery of his decisions, and his ways may not be searched out.” BBE

Your doctrine, by flippant condescension, contains no mystery of God at all. The Lord is reduce to contorted twisting of proof text to reduce him to fit your hubris as you have fully searched him out and become God's counselor and personal instructor. You boldly poke fun of the Trinitarian doctrine by mocking us when we say that the Lord is mysterious, his ways are past finding out, His essence mysterious. We embrace the mystery of God and are thus at least scriptural in our stance. We declare nothing is impossible for God! Your doctrine does not - How — re-read your own comments.

Your doctrine declares that God is a one and falsely claims that the Trinity of God means that God divided himself and other such nonsense. For example, some of your crowd even argues - saying 'that since human beings cannot split their oneness, neither can God' and this is said with such mocking pomposity and smugness. Proving your hubris is showing — such contempt for the mystery of God! The very mystery that the scriptures proclaim exist!!!

The doctrine of the Trinity does not teach that God divided himself in any manner. On the contrary, it simply accepts what God says about himself as true that nothing is too difficult for him! We who believe in the Trinity do not under any pretense make ourselves out as God's counselors as you do. God does not need to confer with us before he does anything to make sure he is scriptural as your doctrine does.

God stretched forth his arm that saves, not detached it. Jesus commented often that the Father and Holy Spirit were in him in unity not division. You do not know the real Messiah as the Messiah — God manifest in human form — a servant — a man united with God and God with man. Also, Your doctrine as well as yourself cannot comprehend God's essences as he is — a unity of one and that Jesus came forth from that one and was with God for he is God and existed eternally as he is God as described as the arm/hand of the Lord. You see Jesus beginning in a manger, we see the servant of God beginning in Mary — a great mystery indeed! But why waste time casting pearls before swine?

Isa 40:5-13, “And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together, for the mouth of the LORD has spoken." 6 A voice says, "Cry!" And I said, "What shall I cry?" All flesh is grass, and all its beauty is like the flower of the field. 7 The grass withers, the flower fades when the breath of the LORD blows on it; surely the people are grass. 8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. 9 Get you up to a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good news; lift up your voice with strength, O Jerusalem, herald of good news; lift it up, fear not; say to the cities of Judah, "Behold your God!" 10 Behold, the Lord GOD comes with might and his arm rules for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him. 11 He will tend his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young. 12 Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand and marked off the heavens with a span, enclosed the dust of the earth in a measure and weighed the mountains in scales and the hills in a balance? 13 Who has measured the Spirit of the LORD, or what man shows him his counsel?” ESV

Isaiah 53:1, “Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?” ESV

Isaiah 63:12, “who caused his glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses, who divided the waters before them to make for himself an everlasting name…” ESV

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

Isaiah 59:16, “He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no one to intercede; then his own arm brought him salvation, and his righteousness upheld him.” ESV

God has his essence, nature, attributes which combine to make God one. God has a heart, a soul, a mind, He is Spirit — this the bible plainly writes and makes known. These make three yet are still one. “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory,” 1 Timothy 3:16 —ESV

We make no excuses and attempt to explain away this mystery as you do by cheapening the word of God by declaring the bible does not mean what is written because of this and that reason. We instead embrace the mystery — you do not. We stand on scripture — you do not. Our doctrine leads to the one God who saves — yours lead to another Jesus, not the one the bible proclaims. But why waste time casting pearls before swine?

As we have A Heart, A Soul, A Mind that makes up our human essence as one, then what image and likeness is this? Did not God make humanity in his image and likeness? Yes, God has — A Heart, A Soul, A Mind — his essence: Blessed trinity. We accept him as he his and wish him not to conform to our ideation but rather that we are instead transformed into his ideal — united to Love God with all our heart, soul, and mind, redeemed by his blood, bought, filled by his Spirit so we can learn to love God and thus be transformed.

I'll end with a mystery:

God's is one, yet three which make one, and if you cannot understand this, then try one essence in three Parts. But be forewarned, parts do not have personality. Each three Heart, Soul, Mind make one. Each has their own personality defined by function and each has their own multitude of individual attributes but are one essence. God is Spirit.

No one has seen God as he is in his essence. He reveals himself as he so wills and sent forth his son to reveal himself to all — a savior uniting man and God again. Great is this mystery.

Now with a warning:

Why do you both [Fortigrun. Pierac]continue to try to cheapen the mystery of Godliness? Only Hubris would explain this. I fear for your souls as you will be held to account for leading multitudes astray. Laugh all you want - God plays for keeps - this is not a game.

But why should you fear this Fortigrun? You do not believe in eternal perdition — only nothingness. Your doctrine has no fear of God — nothingness is nothing to fear. The Jesus you trust cannot save as he is not God who can!

Acts 4:11-12, “This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." ESV

Isaiah 45:21-24, “Give the word, put forward your cause, let us have a discussion together: who has given news of this in the past? Who made it clear in early times? Did not I, the Lord? And there is no God but me; a true God and a savior; there is no other. 22 Let your hearts be turned to me, so that you may have salvation, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is no other. 23 By myself have I taken an oath, a true word has gone from my mouth, and will not be changed, that to me every knee will be bent, and every tongue will give honor.” BBE

Fortigrun and Pierac, you both show great contempt for God's word in your attempts to explain away clear meanings of text.

Pierac — Only God can save — who than is Jesus?

You cannot keep twisting scriptures that do not agree with your pride. The bible speaks on its on. When it says - ? And there is no God but me; a true God and a savior; there is no other. 22 Let your hearts be turned to me, so that you may have salvation, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is no other - it leaves no doubt who Jesus is no matter what you otherwise claim.

James 5:19-20, “My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.” ESV
-
-
-

[Fortigurn]

Well BW that certainly constitutes spamming this thread, if anything does. You've done nothing but repeat what has already been addressed several times. I suggest you look at the results of this poll for a reality check.

[Fortigurn]

The use of the Hebrew word Elohim and Echad use in the Shema has been amply describe by the opponents of the Trinity as meaning that God is only a single entity and no other and that equates the God is One to mean that God is singular.

This brings on much confusion because the bible describes God as having a Heart, A Soul, A Mind, and that God is Spirit.

It doesn't bring on any confusion. Saying that God is one doesn't mean that He doesn't have more than one attribute or characteristic.

Which is it? According to Fortigrun and his cohorts, the anti-trinity crowd, God is singular. They point this out in their lengthy diatribes.

Yes, God is one. God is not 'three-in-one'. The Bible says 'God is one'. The trinitarian says 'God is three-in-one'. I'll go with the Bible.

Is God only all Heart? Is God only all Soul? Is God only all Mind? Is God only all Spirit?

Not at all. An orange is made up of different parts, but if you have one orange, that's all you have - one. Simple. Same with God. You're committing the same error you made earlier, by arguing that God is a composite being made up of different parts, none of which are the whole. That is in fact a denial of the trinitarian doctrine, which states otherwise.

If the Shema is to be interpreted as Fortigrun stated before and as he is in agreement with the anti-trinity crowd, then God can only be singular and nothing more due to grammar construct; however, there is more to God than being classed as one Lump. If the grammar construct and word meanings of the shema are as Fortigrun believes then God is just one lump consisting either of heart, or soul, or mind, or spirit as He cannot be a unity in any degree - Elohim...Echad!!!

Not in the least. You're beating up a straw man, because we don't interpret the words here the way you say.

What is being stressed in the Shema is that God's Oneness does not mean singular of number but rather a United One United with all his many attributes that make Him a True One and not just a number.

Oh really? Where does it say that? Where does it say 'God is one, but not singular in number, rather a unified one of more than one, with all his many attributes that make him a true God and not just a number'? It doesn't say anything like that.

This was pointed out in last post written by me concerning how God's creation points out that One is made of many varied individual parts revealing the divine essence of God's divine nature.

No, your last post argued (wrongly), that God is made up of lots of different parts which make Him God. That is not the doctrine of the trinity, and it's certainly not true. Not only that, but there are no Bible passages which say that God is made up of lots of different parts which make Him God, as an orange is made up of different parts which make it an orange.

A non-Trinitarian Rabbi had this to say about the Word Elohim. This is quoted from web link list at end of this quote: "Rabbi Simeon ben Joachi, commenting on the word Elohim: “Come and see the mystery of the word Elohim; there are three degrees, and each degree by itself alone, and yet notwithstanding they are all one, and joined together in one, and are not divided from each other.” Clarke adds: “He must be strangely prejudiced indeed who cannot see that the doctrine of a Trinity, and of a Trinity in unity, is expressed in the above words.” Quoted From this web Link

That's a very bad quote for you to use, for several reasons. Firstly it's from the Jewish Zohar, a book of mysticism. So it has absolutely no theological weight whatsoever. Secondly because it speaks of 'three degrees', not three persons, and never says that God is three persons. Thirdly, it never even says that God is 'three degrees'. Fourthly, it doesn't even describe what these 'three degrees' are. Fifthly, it disagrees directly with your claim that God is a being made up of lots of different bits.

As for Echad See this Quote From web Link: “iv. The very first use of echad in the Bible is in Genesis 1:5: So the evening and the morning were the first day. Even here, we see a unity (one day) with the idea of plurality (made up of evening and morning). Genesis 2:24 uses echad in saying the two shall become one flesh. Again, the idea of a unity (one flesh), making a plurality (the two). In Exodus 26:6 and 11, the fifty gold clasps are used to hold the curtains together so the tent would be one (echad) - a unity (one) made up of a plurality (the many parts of the tabernacle). In Ezekiel 37:17 the Lord tells Ezekiel to join together two sticks (prophetically representing Ephraim and Judah) into one (echad), speaking again of a unity (one stick) made up of a plurality (the two sticks). There is no way that echad has the exclusive idea of an absolute singularity; the idea of One God in Three Persons fits just fine with the term echad.” End Quote

I'm sorry, but this has been debunked long ago. Since you're using Fruchtenbaum's specious arguments, go here to see them refuted. See also this post, and note what trinitarian apologist Gregory Boyd admits:

Even weaker is the argument that the Hebrew word for "one" (echad) used in the Shema ("Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord") refers to a united one, not an absolute one. Hence, some Trinitarians have argued, the Old Testament has a view of a united Godhead. It is, of course, true that the meaning of the word may in some contexts denote a unified plurality (e.g. Gen. 2:24, "they shall become one flesh").

But this really proves nothing. An examination of the Old Testament usage reveals that the word echad is as capable of various meanings as is our English word one. The context must determine whether a numerical or unified singularity is intended.

Boyd, Gregory (1995), Oneness Pentecostals and the Trinity

The rest of what you wrote is simply a repeat of what has already been answered. We are not telling God what He can or cannot do or be. We are simply quoting the Bible's own description of God, as written by Himself.

[YLTYLT]

Does it really matter when "before" was.

Of course it does. You read it as saying 'In heaven before he was born'.

Is he not referring to ascending to the Father in Heaven? If so, he was once there before. If he was there before did this happen during the Life of Jesus? Or did it happen before the birth of Jesus?

That's for you to tell me. Do make sure you provide plenty of Scriptural passages to support your interpretation.

Here are many passages stating the Jesus had to come down from heaven.
First of course there is John 1:1-4. But I see that you have issues with these so I wont quote them. But here are others, and not all from John.....

John 6:41-42, 51 (ESV)
41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."
42 They said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, 'I have come down from heaven'?"
51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh."

John 13:3
Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going back to God,

If he is going back to God the Father, then at one point He was with Him.

John 3:13
No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.

The Son of Man descended from Heaven

Eph 4
7 But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift.
8 Therefore it says, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,and he gave gifts to men."
9( In saying, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth?
10He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)

from verse 7: Salvation is a gift of God: Christ's gift - Christ is God
I think verse 10 needs no explanation.

-----------------
And there is no indication from scripture that the Son of Man descended from heaven during His life on earth, or else then there would not have even been a need for His birth, so he must have descended to earth before his birth.

So, in some form, the Son of God did exist prior to the birth of Jesus. Can we at least agree on this much? Or is this something that your religion does believe?

[zoegirl]

Well BW that certainly constitutes spamming this thread, if anything does. You've done nothing but repeat what has already been addressed several times. I suggest you look at the results of this poll for a reality check.

As others have said concerning the question in the poll, it is quite a different matter to understand the trinity or know about it compared to rejecting it. Rejecting the trinity demands rejecting the deity of Christ. We believe, as PL mentioned, that this rejection means that you do not know Him. Those that simply don't understand or are unaware of the doctrine are not guilty of rejecting the deity of Christ.

[Pierac]

B.W. wrote: A person cannot declare that God is a singular one because to do so as you claim also makes God have only one attribute and no other on the grounds of the very rules of grammar you laid out! Yet the bible declares God is not a lump but has heart, soul, and mind - a Echad - a real Elohim!

A real Elohim? Are you alluding to Elohim being plural? Oh Please! Don't you have any Hebrew concepts from your studies or do you only study Greek?

Elohim has been a very confusing word for many people. The word elohim is used various ways in Scripture. It is not only used to describe the Almighty, but also individual pagan gods and even mighty human beings. Elohim may be translated as God, god, angels, judges, or even a human being who stands as God's representative or agent. For example, the sons of Heth address Abraham as "a mighty prince," the word for "mighty" being elohim (Genesis 23:6). Some translations have Abraham here being called "Prince of God." Take another instance. In Exodus 4, the Lord tells Moses that he "shall be as God" (elohim) to his brother Aaron. Moses will have God's words in his mouth, and will stand as God's representative before Aaron.

Here is a case where an individual human is called elohim. Again in Exodus 7:1, the Lord says to Moses, "See, I make you God [elohim] to Pharaoh." No one dares to suggest that there is a plurality of persons within Moses because he is called elohim, that is, God's representative. The pagan god Dagon is also called elohim in the Hebrew Bible. The Philistines lamented that the God of Israel was harshly treating "Dagon our God [elohim]" (1 Sam. 5:7). Dagon was a single pagan deity. The same holds true for the single pagan god called Chemosh: “Do you not possess what Chemosh your god [elohim] gives you to possess?" (Jud. 11:24). The same for the single deity called Baal.

The Hebrew language has many examples of words which are plural but whose meaning is singular. In Genesis 23, Abraham's wife Sarah dies. The Hebrew text says, "the lives [plural] of Sarah were 127 years" (v. 1). Even the plural verb that accompanies the pronoun does not mean Sarah lived multiple lives. The Hebrews never taught reincarnation or plurality of personhood. Another example of this kind of anomaly in the Hebrew language is found in Genesis 43. After Joseph wept to see his brothers, we read that Joseph "washed his faces" (plural). This is another instance where in the Hebrew language the plural noun functions as a singular noun with a singular meaning, unless, of course, Joseph was a multi-faced human being! The same occurs in Genesis 16:8 where Hagar flees from "the faces" (plural) of her mistress Sarah. These are "anomalies" of the Hebrew language that are clearly understood by Hebrew scholars who rightly translate to a singular form in English.

The better explanation is that the Hebrews used a form of speech called "the plural of majesty." Put simply this means that someone whose position was warrant of dignity was spoken in this way as giving a sign of honor. The plural acted as a means of intensification:
Elohim must rather be explained as an intensive plural, denoting greatness and majesty.

Whenever the word elohim refers to the God of Israel the Septuagint uses the singular and not the plural. From Genesis 1:1 consistently right through, this holds true. The Hebrews who translated their own scriptures into Greek simply had no idea that their God could be more than one individual, or a multiple personal Being! This is true too when we come to the New Testament. The New Testament nowhere hints at a plurality in the meaning of elohim when it reproduces references to the One God as ho theos, the One God.

So what is your point with elohim?


Paul

[Pierac]

It appears that most here have a much better understanding of the Greek than they do the Hebrew. I will admit, I am in the infancy of both however, idioms and peculiarities are not that hard to understand.

In the English language, and certainly the way young people speak, we often hear about something that happened in the past as though it is happening in the present. For instance, a witness to a bank robbery might say, “And here I am standing in line minding my own business, when bursting through the door comes as a hooded bank robber. He tells us all to get on the floor. He waves his gun around and threatens us. Then he goes up to the teller and yells, 'Give me the money!'” We understand the events described occurred in the past, even though the narrative is in the present. Speaking of past events in the present is a peculiarity of the English language.

Most languages have peculiarities. The Hebrew mind and language has a peculiarity that English speakers are not accustomed to. They do the opposite of what I have just described. They often use the past tense or the present tense to speak of events yet future. The reason is that the Jews believed that whatever was determined in the mind of God existed before it came to be in history. God is the God who calls the things which do not exist as (already) existing (Rom. 4:17). God promised Abraham that He would give him the promised land and that he would be the father of many descendents. So sure is the fulfillment that sometimes the predictive language is in the past tense, as though it were already accomplished: “To your descendents I “have given” this land” (Gen 15:18). It came to be a common feature of Hebrew thinking that whatever God had decreed already preexisted (in plan and purpose) before it materialized on earth. “When the Jews wished to designate something as predestined, he spoke of it as already existing in heaven.

Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ “was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times” for our sakes who believe in God's word (1Pet. 1:20). This does not mean that Jesus personally preexisted his appearance on earth, because in the same chapter we find that Christians have also been in the “foreknowledge of God the Father” (1Pet. 1:2). The words “foreknowledge” and “foreknown,” noun and verb, are exactly alike. Peter uses precisely the same idea to refer to both Christians and Jesus. Christians do not preexisted heaven before our birth on earth nor did Jesus.

Similarly, the Bible speaks of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was crucified before the world began (Rev.13:8). Every Bible reader of course knows that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate in Palestine in the first century. But God ordained his crucifixion to happen before he even created the universe. Therefore, in God's mind, and in the Hebrew understanding, that which came to be had already been. The prophetic future was spoken of in the past tense. What God has decreed, He says is as good as done.

In John 17, Jesus prays just before his arrest in the garden, “I glorify You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given me to do. And now, glorify me together with Yourself, Father, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” (v.4-5) If ever there was a statement that proved the personal preexistence of Jesus with the Father in heaven before he came to earth, surely this is it. Once again, we must caution against haste, for “In Biblical ways of speaking and thinking one may 'have' something which is promised in God's plan before one actually has its.” We have already seen this principle in operation, where God's plan of promises are spoken in the “prophetic past tense.” God promised Abraham, “I have given you this land.” God says to Christians, “You are seated with Christ in the heavenlies; you are already glorified (Eph. 2:6; Rom.8:30). We have these things already in the plan and purpose of God -- even though we do not (yet) have them! Scripture tells us that we have eternal life as a present possession, even though clearly we await the day of our entrance into the life of the Age to come, whether by resurrection for those already dead, or the rapture of the living, when Christ returns. God calls the things that are not as though they already exist (Rom. 4:17). Clearly, in Hebrew thinking, the glory which Jesus had “with” God before the world was, it is the glory that it was present in God's mind and purpose from the beginning.

When we examine the rest of Jesus's prayer, it becomes quite clear that the glory Jesus claimed to have had “with the father before the world was” is a glory in prospect. Jesus is using the peculiar Hebrew way of thinking and speaking by which the past tense is employed to speak of the future. To confirm this all we need to do is follow Jesus' prayer through. Jesus speaks as though he has already accomplished his work: he says I have “accomplished a work which you have gave me to do” (v.4). Quite obviously he has not actually finish the work because his crucifixion has not yet happened, and his cry from the cross, “It is finished,” has not yet been uttered. Next, Jesus speaks as though the disciples have already fully glorified him (through their preaching ministry) even though the resurrection has not yet happened: he prays, “I have been glorified in them” (v.10). Jesus also says “I am no more in the world” (v.11) even though he clearly is still in the world. In his own mind, he is already, by faith in the father's promise, sitting in heaven having been resurrected. Jesus says he has already sent the disciples into the world to preach: he prays, “I have sent them into the world” (v.18), even though this did not fully happen until after the resurrection. Jesus prays for his disciples, and “for those also who[will] believed in me through their word” (v.20). That is, he prays for subsequent generations of Christians who will come to faith in Christ down the track. He prays that “the glory which You have given me I have given to them (v.22). He prays that all these believers “which you have given me” (the whole future community of faith) may behold my glory, which You have given me; for You did love [choose] me before the foundation of the world (v.24).

It should be obvious how this understanding of the Hebrew though process should assist you in your understanding of the scriptures.

[B. W.]

John 5:39, “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. 40 But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” NKJV

Now let's deal with your misleading statements regarding the history of the Doctrine of the Trinity. The doctrine of the Trinity goes further back in time than Pierac and Fortigrun will admit. That is, back to God himself, as he really is, he himself is the author of this Doctrine and it is revealed in Genesis throughout the Old Testament.

Luke:24:44-45, “Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.” NKJV

Jesus speaks of this in John 5:39 and Luke 24:44-45. He shows his people that the Torah and Prophets testify of Him. Yes, the Torah beginning in Genesis chapter one reveals the Triune nature of God. Yet, Fortigrun and Pierac cannot see at all and resort to cheapen the bible text to support their claims by method of excuses not to believe more than honest facts. I have given you the text already revealing Christ in the account of Creation regarding the use of the words Us and Our used when God speaks and Hebrews 1:1-4 verifies.

Jesus stated to the Pharisees, Scribes, and Sadducees of his day: “So the [leaders] said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" 58 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.” John 8:57-59- ESV

Jesus would not be speaking here as a Prophet as to do so would make Him a liar — Jesus knew no sin and did not lie — He was in Abrahams Day and in Moses day as He gave the Law, Hebrews 9:15-28! Fortigrun and Pierac your doctrine cheapens the text of John chapter 8 as well as Jesus' own words therein.

How?- by providing excuse after excuse as why any bible text cannot possibly mean what it plainly says all just to draw people to depend upon your personal prowess of manipulation of facts and not on Christ himself. Cults do this well: make people dependant upon them, their teachers, for the facts.

John 8:23, “He said to them, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins."

Jesus was from above, not of this world? Should he not have said, that he was from below as well as of this world, if he only was an anointed man without sin, thus could not lie, and therefore sent by God for a task that strips God of his own divinity and robs God of worship only due to God alone as your doctrine so teaches? Deuteronomy 5:7-9 as well as elsewhere in scripture proclaims a different message other than what your doctrine declares!

Fortigrun and Pierac when Jesus speaks of himself being sent, he is referring to himself in the role as the second person of the Godhead — the one that performs the will of God. Does the work — the Arm of the Lord! He is not referring to himself as being sent as an agent. Moses and Elijah never did the works as he, they were agents. Jesus had no sin and would not lie. He is from above -- not from below - as you preach.

If Jesus was just an anointed man and nothing more, then the religious leaders of Jesus' day would have never crucified Christ nor plotted to kill him. Fortigrun and Pierac, your doctrine still seeks the same ends. Nothing has changed.

Jesus was put to death for revealing God as He is - the Triune nature of God repeatedly. He was in trouble for doing this, not being anointed agent. If only an agent — then he lied when declaring he was from above - not of this world and was before Abraham as the I AM. What reason did the religious leaders have for putting Jesus to death on the cross? If your doctrine is true — the leaders would not have condemned Jesus to death but rather laughed him to scorn.

Matthew 26:63-66, “But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, "I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God." 64 Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven." 65 Then the high priest tore his robes and said, "He has uttered blasphemy. What further witnesses do we need? You have now heard his blasphemy. 66 What is your judgment?" They answered, "He deserves death." ESV

Jesus would have stated something else other than what he did if your doctrine was even remotely true. Jesus was not lying as he never sinned. Jesus was declaring he was God not an anointed man — not a prophet — not a human deliverer king. If Jesus would have stated that he was only an anointed man as you do — they would have let him go his way while they laughed — oh there goes another one of those! Instead, Jesus stood before them and admitted to being the Son of God and the Son of Man meaning that the Messiah was both God and Man as the mystery of the scriptures reveal.

Only God can forgive sins — who then can Jesus be but God manifest in the flesh to do a work that only God can do so that God remains true to His own words - the same he declared and promises that he will always keep and perform Isaiah 55:8-11?

When Jesus spoke in John 5:22, “The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son” and in John 8:16, “Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me.” ESV

Then Isaiah 33:22 declares: “For the LORD is our judge; the LORD is our lawgiver; the LORD is our king; he will save us.” ESV

Who is this man Jesus, John 8:40, that is from above and not below and was before Abraham as the I AM? He can be no other than God manifest in human form to do the work only God can do — For by Grace have ye been saved.

Notice, Jesus spoke like no other and this means he used no — “Thus sayeth The Lord's” to qualify if God's Spirit was using him in the role of an anointed agent in the scriptures I cited. He spoke in first person — not third as human agents do when moved by the Spirit and as the bible amply records.

Fortigrun and Pierac, you cannot keep twisting scriptures that do not agree with your pride. The bible speaks on it's own. When it says - "And there is no God but me; a true God and a savior; there is no other. 22 Let your hearts be turned to me, so that you may have salvation, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is no other," it leaves no doubt who Jesus is no matter what you otherwise claim.

The Messiah was God manifest in Human Form! Who has heard of such a thing? Who has believed what he has heard from us? To whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? [Isaiah 53:1]

A Mystery:

Genesis 3:21: “And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.” ESV

Now read the rest of Isaiah 53! The Mystery of Genesis 3:21 revealed! — The True Messiah!

Only the Lord can do such a thing — who then is Jesus?

Then Isaiah 33:22 declares: “For the LORD is our judge; the LORD is our lawgiver; the LORD is our king; he will save us.” ESV
-
-
-

[Fortigurn]

Well BW that certainly constitutes spamming this thread, if anything does. You've done nothing but repeat what has already been addressed several times. I suggest you look at the results of this poll for a reality check.

As others have said concerning the question in the poll, it is quite a different matter to understand the trinity or know about it compared to rejecting it. Rejecting the trinity demands rejecting the deity of Christ. We believe, as PL mentioned, that this rejection means that you do not know Him. Those that simply don't understand or are unaware of the doctrine are not guilty of rejecting the deity of Christ.

Now all we need is a list of passages from the Bible which say that salvation is dependent on accepting or rejecting the deity of Christ. Unfortunately there aren't any. We are told that 'this is eternal life, to know You, [the Father] the only true God [yes that's right, there's only one true God, the Father], and Jesus Christ whom you have sent' (John 17:3), but we are nowhere told that rejecting the deity of Christ 'means that you do not know Him'.

[Fortigurn]

Here are many passages stating the Jesus had to come down from heaven.

No, none of them say he had to come down from heaven.

First of course there is John 1:1-4. But I see that you have issues with these so I wont quote them. But here are others, and not all from John.....

As I've said before, Jesus is said to 'come down from heaven', just as the manna in the wildnerness is said to 'come down from heaven'. Now the manna in the wildnerness did not exist in heaven before it was on the ground, and it didn't float down from the sky, it formed on the ground. The same is true of Christ. He didn't exist in heaven before he was born, and he didn't float down from the sky, he was born on earth, which is where his existence began.

The reason why he is said to be 'from heaven', and to 'come down from heaven' is that his origin is heavenly, just like the manna (the manna was created by God and sent by Him, and so was Christ). The same goes for the new Jerusalem, which is said to 'come down from heaven'. There isn't a city up in heaven right now called' New Jerusalem', waiting to drift down from the skies, it's talking about God's Kingdom on earth, which is heavenly in its origin.

By the way, the Ephesians 4 quote wasn't a good one to use:

Eph 4
7 But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift.
8 Therefore it says, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,and he gave gifts to men."
9( In saying, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth?
10He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)

This is talking about Christ's death and burial, not Christ coming down from heaven.

from verse 7: Salvation is a gift of God: Christ's gift - Christ is God

Fallacy of the undistributed middle. You keep doing this. The only case you're making is that there is one God who is one person - Jesus. That is not the trinity. In this case 'Christ's gift' doesn't even refer to salvation (it's talking about the Holy Spirit gifts, look at verses 11-12).

So, in some form, the Son of God did exist prior to the birth of Jesus. Can we at least agree on this much? Or is this something that your religion does believe?

No, I don't believe that for a moment. We are nowhere told that the son of God existed prior to the birth of Jesus (you seem to be splitting Jesus up into two different people here). We are told that he was and is a human being, not an immortal spirit being who 'incarnated' into an embryo and pretended to be a human, walking around in a 'man suit' for 33 and a half years before the 'man suit' broke and he had to go back to the mothership. Jesus isn't a space alien.

[Fortigurn]

BW, you keep reposting arguments which have been answered many times before, and you never actually address the responses. You also continue to fill your posts with completely unsubstantiated assertions. You say things like 'Yes, the Torah beginning in Genesis chapter one reveals the Triune nature of God', but you can't provide any examples of this. You can't even find a single passage which says that God is 'three in one', whereas we can find plenty which say that God is one.

If you want to continue this discussion properly, I suggest you get out your Bible and read it, and you actually start addressing what other people write instead of simply posting boilerplate.

[zoegirl]

Well BW that certainly constitutes spamming this thread, if anything does. You've done nothing but repeat what has already been addressed several times. I suggest you look at the results of this poll for a reality check.

As others have said concerning the question in the poll, it is quite a different matter to understand the trinity or know about it compared to rejecting it. Rejecting the trinity demands rejecting the deity of Christ. We believe, as PL mentioned, that this rejection means that you do not know Him. Those that simply don't understand or are unaware of the doctrine are not guilty of rejecting the deity of Christ.

Now all we need is a list of passages from the Bible which say that salvation is dependent on accepting or rejecting the deity of Christ. Unfortunately there aren't any. We are told that 'this is eternal life, to know You, [the Father] the only true God [yes that's right, there's only one true God, the Father], and Jesus Christ whom you have sent' (John 17:3), but we are nowhere told that rejecting the deity of Christ 'means that you do not know Him'.

My point is that you seem to be giving the results of this poll more weight that they should. YOu pointed out to BW that a look at the poll would be a realityh check as if to say "everybody else gets it, why don't you?" As even Jac brought up, he originally brought up the question to address the subtlety of outright denial of Christ's deity as opposed to the trinity or understanding of the trinity.

We really need to change the question and I would predict you would see quite a different result.

As with most poll questions, how the question is asked and what is excluded in the question can be just as iportant.

[Fortigurn]

My point is that you seem to be giving the results of this poll more weight that they should.

I don't think so.

YOu pointed out to BW that a look at the poll would be a realityh check as if to say "everybody else gets it, why don't you?"

That's pretty much right, except that I know why he doesn't get it. But while everyone else is trying to prove Christ's deity, he's still stuck trying to prove the trinity. That's off topic for this thread, and since most people here don't believe it's necessary to believe in the trinity then he's on a hiding to nothing.

As even Jac brought up, he originally brought up the question to address the subtlety of outright denial of Christ's deity as opposed to the trinity or understanding of the trinity.

Yes, I'm aware of that.

We really need to change the question and I would predict you would see quite a different result.

I'm sure you would. But none of this change the fact that there hasn't been a single verse quoted yet which says that outright denial of Christ's deity has anything to do with our salvation, one way or another.

[B. W.]

BW, you keep reposting arguments which have been answered many times before, and you never actually address the responses. You also continue to fill your posts with completely unsubstantiated assertions. You say things like 'Yes, the Torah beginning in Genesis chapter one reveals the Triune nature of God', but you can't provide any examples of this. You can't even find a single passage which says that God is 'three in one', whereas we can find plenty which say that God is one.

If you want to continue this discussion properly, I suggest you get out your Bible and read it, and you actually start addressing what other people write instead of simply posting boilerplate.

Yes I have - but you cannot see. This argument of yours is like this. The word — Monotheism is not in the Bible anywhere; therefore, since this word is not in the bible — the bible does not teach Monotheism. Is this true simply because the writers did not use the word Monotheism? According to you logic — it is. If the word Trinity is not in the bible the bible does not teach Triune nature of God: Yet, the very words Elohim and Echad express God is more than a sinlge blob with a single attribute. It is not that the bible does not teach it — it is you that cannot see or hear.

Fortigrun, I have to repeat myself because the scripture I shared cannot be twisted and by your examples of twisting them — you set yourself up above God as you know better than God!

Why do you hate us Trinitarians so much? We see God as he is not how we want to make him out to be as you do! The only way Jesus can save is to be the Messiah — both God and Man so that the scriptures are not violated by God contradicting himself!

Fortigrun the bible plainly teaches the preexistence of Christ Jesus. He himself said so — that He came down from heaven. Fortigrun — admit it you HATE JESUS CHRIST!

The bible is so clear on the matter of who Jesus is. It is you that cannot see or hear as you deny who the real Holy Spirit is too.

I asked the other moderators if you should be allowed back to discuss this topic and so far it has been okay. It is you that are spamming this thread — not me — as I have not responded in any degree like you have.

I am going to be gracious and grant you a temporary ban from this Forum so that we can answer your arguments line by line. This ban I expect will be coming shortly either from me or another. After we answer your doctrinal arguments, the ban will be lifted or it maybe perpetual. This does not prove you are right but rather allows others to voice their objections to you false doctrine and give us time to back up our position.

Here is what you don't believe:

Jesus work on the cross cannot atone for sins

Jesus had a beginning and was only a creature man and nothing more

The Holy Spirit is either just the bible or is it some type of energy force? I am not sure what you believe about Spirit.

Satan does not exist as an real entity.

And what else? And correct me about what you believe if do not have it right stated above?

With doctrine such as this that are so contrary to what the bible clearly and plainly teaches the readers need to know who and what you are. And what gospel you teach!

You will be notified when the ban starts…

I hate and regret this but it is time to expose you and your false doctrine for those that will read this Forum.
-
-
-

[B. W.]

As I've said before, Jesus is said to 'come down from heaven', just as the manna in the wildnerness is said to 'come down from heaven'. Now the manna in the wildnerness did not exist in heaven before it was on the ground, and it didn't float down from the sky, it formed on the ground. The same is true of Christ. He didn't exist in heaven before he was born, and he didn't float down from the sky, he was born on earth, which is where his existence began.

The reason why he is said to be 'from heaven', and to 'come down from heaven' is that his origin is heavenly, just like the manna (the manna was created by God and sent by Him, and so was Christ). The same goes for the new Jerusalem, which is said to 'come down from heaven'. There isn't a city up in heaven right now called' New Jerusalem', waiting to drift down from the skies, it's talking about God's Kingdom on earth, which is heavenly in its origin.....

No, I don't believe that for a moment. We are nowhere told that the son of God existed prior to the birth of Jesus (you seem to be splitting Jesus up into two different people here). We are told that he was and is a human being, not an immortal spirit being who 'incarnated' into an embryo and pretended to be a human, walking around in a 'man suit' for 33 and a half years before the 'man suit' broke and he had to go back to the mothership. Jesus isn't a space alien.

This is pure Hyperbole! Poppycock and shows you do not understand the Trinity at all!

What wisdom and twisting of facts about manna — you know nothing of the Jewish Trinity.

It does not matter what the scriptures really say, or word meanings, Fortigrun, or what we show you.

Your are the best example whom Jesus spoke about in Matthew 13:13-14,

“13 This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says: "'You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive...” ESV
-
-
-