The Holy Trinity

General discussions about Christianity including salvation, heaven and hell, Christian history and so on.
Locked
Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#226

Post by Fortigurn » Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:50 pm

B. W. wrote:I Wrote -
Yes — Zygote divides from one cell and makes many. It is amazing that it can make a Human being in the image (reflection) of God.
You, Fortigun, said:

I agree. But it's not analogous to the trinity.

And I said in reply:

If God consisted of just One then why are Human Beings described as have a Body, Soul - Matthew 10:28, and Spirit - Ecc. 12:7?

Fortigun, You said in answer:

How does this actually have anything to do with the fact that God is one? What do you understand these three to mean?

------------------------------------------
Now I'll explain using philosophic reasoning and I pray you can catch on:

New Zealand cannot exist because I have never seen it. I have never touched it, or tasted it, or seen it. Any pictures of it, travel brochures about it, maps, and anyone saying they've seen it, are therefore false.

Why, only mere humans drew the maps and wrote about it, there are way too many descriptions to be true - humans concocted a mythical place. It has to be a myth because logically I have never touched it, or tasted it, or seen it. It must be empirically proven and approved by my logic for verification, since I never seen it, it cannot be true.

Likewise, the Grand Canyon, one thousands miles from me, does it exist because I cannot see it? Pictures cannot show its grandeur nor provide experience; therefore, the Grand Canyon is a false place of without wonder and without grandeur because I cannot see it. Its place cannot be true because I cannot understand how it could be so granduerous and wonderful to behold, therefore it cannot be. Waaw!!
------------------
I have no idea how this analogy is relevant to what I believe. I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.
Fortigun, the real issue is this, understanding, or not understanding, comprehending or not comprehending, believing in, or not believing, accepting, or not accepting the Trinity does not determine one's eternal future.

This has no bearing on the most important fact we all must face: we will die. If one understands, or not understands the doctrine of Trinity has no bearing on this fate, and death's true eternal consequences.
I suggest you try telling that to Bylos.
What does have eternal consequences is found in Jesus Christ. If Jesus is not the reconciler between man and God — then we are all most pitiful.
I agree.
Only hope now is in Jesus Christ and what He did on the cross. It is there; you may see and find your answer, if not??
I agree.
You asked for definition of Atonement - here it is:

The word atonement used in Romans 5:11 is the Greek word pronounced 'katalage' which means reconciliation.
Thank you, I agree.
In Exodus 30:10 the Hebrew word translated atonement is pronounced 'Kaphar' and means expiate, placate, make reconciliation through an act of cleansing. It is also used to denote covering or hiding of sin by use of blood - Lev 4:13-21. Or covering the ark with pitch to protect it from sinking — Gen 6:14.
I agree with all of that except 'expiate, placate'. Making reconciliation through covering and cleansing is exactly right, but that is not 'expiation' or 'placation'.
Jesus was humanities reconciler and to be so He had to be something you cannot grasp, just like the New Zealand argument denotes. Since you do not grasp it, does not mean it does not exist.
Can you show me where the Bible says that Christ 'had to be something you cannot grasp' in order to be humanity's reconciler?
Genesis 9:4-5 speaks about blood and so does Hebrews chapter 9. I ask, who's blood can truly atone?
Blood does not atone.

User avatar
Deborah
Senior Member
Posts: 548
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:55 pm
Christian: No
Location: Australia
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#227

Post by Deborah » Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:40 pm

forgive me if this has already been posted but I did a search and could not find it. so

Philippians 2

Imitating Christ's Humility
1If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. 3Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.


Some beleive that God is like a collective, that we are all called to have the or at least work towards the nature of God.
Church tradition tells us that when John, son of Zebadee and brother of James was an old man, his disciples would carry him to church in their arms.
He would simply say, “Little children, love one another”
After a time his disciples wearied at always hearing these same words and asked “Master why do you always say this?
He replied, “it is the Lords command, and if done, it is enough”

User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6028
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY
Has liked: 100 times
Been liked: 142 times

#228

Post by Byblos » Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:54 pm

Fortigurn wrote:
Fortigun, the real issue is this, understanding, or not understanding, comprehending or not comprehending, believing in, or not believing, accepting, or not accepting the Trinity does not determine one's eternal future.

This has no bearing on the most important fact we all must face: we will die. If one understands, or not understands the doctrine of Trinity has no bearing on this fate, and death's true eternal consequences.
I suggest you try telling that to Bylos.
Please show me where I ever said you needed to believe in or to even understand the trinity to have eternal salvation. Here's a shock for you Fortigurn, I happen to believe that even non-christians have a chance at salvation so I guess there's hope even for you. I also do happen to think that direct salvation must be through Jesus Christ (the divine). But what I believe was not the purpose of this thread. It was the trinity, and by association, the divinity of Jesus.

Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#229

Post by Fortigurn » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:54 am

Byblos wrote:Please show me where I ever said you needed to believe in or to even understand the trinity to have eternal salvation. Here's a shock for you Fortigurn, I happen to believe that even non-christians have a chance at salvation so I guess there's hope even for you.
That is indeed a shock for me. I thought that being a Catholic you would submit to the Oecumenical Councils and the Creeds, not to mention the Roman Catholic Councils.
I also do happen to think that direct salvation must be through Jesus Christ (the divine).
That seems to contradict what you said above, unless you're a Universalist.

User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6028
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY
Has liked: 100 times
Been liked: 142 times

#230

Post by Byblos » Fri Nov 11, 2005 4:05 am

Fortigurn wrote:
Byblos wrote:Please show me where I ever said you needed to believe in or to even understand the trinity to have eternal salvation. Here's a shock for you Fortigurn, I happen to believe that even non-christians have a chance at salvation so I guess there's hope even for you.


That is indeed a shock for me. I thought that being a Catholic you would submit to the Oecumenical Councils and the Creeds, not to mention the Roman Catholic Councils.
I also do happen to think that direct salvation must be through Jesus Christ (the divine).


That seems to contradict what you said above, unless you're a Universalist.


Well, I'm sort of an independent Catholic. There is no contradiction as I qualified it as a direct salvation but that is for another thread.

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8365
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 260 times

#231

Post by B. W. » Fri Nov 11, 2005 8:23 am

Fortigun you satated
I have no idea how this analogy is relevant to what I believe. I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.

So you agree with the philosopher's razor? If you can't see me, how do you know I exist? Because I typed this?

Isaiah 55:8-11 states
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 "For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return not thither but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, 11 so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it. (RSV)

How can you believe in God whom you cannot see clearly if as you stated — I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.

Now I ask you, in Psalms 45:6-7
6 God's divine throne endures for ever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity; 7 you love righteousness and hate wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above your fellows; (RSV)

Hmmm, God has a God? How can this be? Let's count God —one: Your God-two: has anointed-who? Three?

Oh, I forgot, the bible was written by men, and this part does not count.

However — the map of the world was written and drawn by men; New Zealand is on the map, but I believe it because: I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.

Yet, if you have never seen a place — how can you really know it is there?

Same with God — you know God exist out of the evidence of things not seen but you still do not see how God chooses to reveal Himself. That's the point. Even the demons believe God exist.

In Isaiah 55:11 God will accomplish what He speaks. You agree with this?
Last edited by B. W. on Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8365
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 260 times

#232

Post by B. W. » Fri Nov 11, 2005 8:39 am

I wrote:

You asked for definition of Atonement - here it is:

The word atonement used in Romans 5:11 is the Greek word pronounced 'katalage' which means reconciliation.[/quote]

Your answer was Thank you, I agree.

I replied -
In Exodus 30:10 the Hebrew word translated atonement is pronounced 'Kaphar' and means expiate, placate, make reconciliation through an act of cleansing. It is also used to denote covering or hiding of sin by use of blood - Lev 4:13-21. Or covering the ark with pitch to protect it from sinking — Gen 6:14.

You Fortigurn answered-
I agree with all of that except 'expiate, placate'. Making reconciliation through covering and cleansing is exactly right, but that is not 'expiation' or 'placation'.

My response:
The answer is simple - I am using the full Hebrew definition of the word for atonement. Context and grammar clarifies meaning when used in the bible. You should know this. For example, a King can send a gift to an invader to placate the enemy king and thus atone - prevent the enemy from destroying the people - hence cover them with such a gift. It depends on how the word is used and its construct.

Fortigurn asked;
Can you show me where the Bible says that Christ 'had to be something you cannot grasp' in order to be humanity's reconciler?

Answer: Sure in time - do you want to know Jesus Christ? Shoulds like you are seeking Him. Are You? In time, if God permits, you'll see how this is so.

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8365
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 260 times

#233

Post by B. W. » Fri Nov 11, 2005 8:43 am

Who is the Holy Spirit?

According to Christadelphians, the Holy Spirit is only God's Power and not God — is this correct?

This belief of yours is based on Luke 1:35 and John 17:3, etc. Correct?

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8365
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 260 times

#234

Post by B. W. » Fri Nov 11, 2005 8:45 am

I wrote:
Genesis 9:4-5 speaks about blood and so does Hebrews chapter 9. I ask, who's blood can truly atone?

Fortigurn you answered:
Blood does not atone

My relpy:
How so?

Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#235

Post by Fortigurn » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:43 pm

Deborah wrote:forgive me if this has already been posted but I did a search and could not find it. so

Philippians 2

Imitating Christ's Humility
1If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. 3Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.


Thanks, I have actually dealt with this before, but I can do so again if you like.

Some beleive that God is like a collective, that we are all called to have the or at least work towards the nature of God.


Yes, some of them do. This is not the trinity.

Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#236

Post by Fortigurn » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:44 pm

B. W. wrote:Who is the Holy Spirit?

According to Christadelphians, the Holy Spirit is only God's Power and not God — is this correct?
Yes - it is qualitatively Divine, but it is not 'God'.
This belief of yours is based on Luke 1:35 and John 17:3, etc. Correct?
Among other passages.

Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#237

Post by Fortigurn » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:45 pm

B. W. wrote:I wrote:
Genesis 9:4-5 speaks about blood and so does Hebrews chapter 9. I ask, who's blood can truly atone?

Fortigurn you answered:
Blood does not atone

My relpy:
How so?
Redemption is provided by forgiveness. Blood doesn't forgive, people forgive.
Hebrews 10:
11 And every priest stands day after day serving and offering the same sacrifices again and again—sacrifices that can never take away sins.

Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#238

Post by Fortigurn » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:50 pm

B. W. wrote:My response:
The answer is simple - I am using the full Hebrew definition of the word for atonement. Context and grammar clarifies meaning when used in the bible. You should know this. For example, a King can send a gift to an invader to placate the enemy king and thus atone - prevent the enemy from destroying the people - hence cover them with such a gift. It depends on how the word is used and its construct.
Yes it does, but if you believe that you can legitimately use every part of the definition anywhere in Scripture, you're committing the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer.
Fortigurn asked;
Can you show me where the Bible says that Christ 'had to be something you cannot grasp' in order to be humanity's reconciler?

Answer: Sure in time - do you want to know Jesus Christ? Shoulds like you are seeking Him. Are You? In time, if God permits, you'll see how this is so.
Actually I do know Jesus Christ (John 17:3), I don't have to seek him.

Fortigurn
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:29 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

#239

Post by Fortigurn » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:54 pm

B. W. wrote:Fortigun you satated
I have no idea how this analogy is relevant to what I believe. I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.

So you agree with the philosopher's razor? If you can't see me, how do you know I exist? Because I typed this?
I think you need to read what I wrote. You think that I don't believe in things I can't see, that if I can't see them, I think they don't exist.

That is not what I believe.
How can you believe in God whom you cannot see clearly if as you stated — I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.
If you read that statement of mine, you'll find that it says the opposite of what you think. It does not say 'I certainly do not believe that things I haven't seen exist'.
Now I ask you, in Psalms 45:6-7
6 God's divine throne endures for ever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity; 7 you love righteousness and hate wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above your fellows; (RSV)

Hmmm, God has a God? How can this be? Let's count God —one: Your God-two: has anointed-who? Three?
In trinitarian theology, God the Son has a God, who is God the Father. This passage is speaking of God and king David (I posted on this previously). This passage is also referred to Christ, since he is the son of David and heir to his throne.
Oh, I forgot, the bible was written by men, and this part does not count.
The Bible was written by God, and this part certainly counts.
However — the map of the world was written and drawn by men; New Zealand is on the map, but I believe it because: I certainly do not believe that things which I haven't seen do not exist.

Yet, if you have never seen a place — how can you really know it is there?

Same with God — you know God exist out of the evidence of things not seen but you still do not see how God chooses to reveal Himself. That's the point. Even the demons believe God exist.
You really need to read what I wrote, instead of what you think I wrote.
In Isaiah 55:11 God will accomplish what He speaks. You agree with this?
Yes.

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8365
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 260 times

#240

Post by B. W. » Sat Nov 12, 2005 11:35 am

My prior response:

The answer is simple - I am using the full Hebrew definition of the word for atonement. Context and grammar clarifies meaning when used in the bible. You should know this. For example, a King can send a gift to an invader to placate the enemy king and thus atone - prevent the enemy from destroying the people - hence cover them with such a gift. It depends on how the word is used and its construct.

And your current answer was:

Yes it does, but if you believe that you can legitimately use every part of the definition anywhere in Scripture, you're committing the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer.

My Response to you:

That was the point that I was making in the New Zealand didactic, for example, you stated that Psalms 45:6-7 means only Christiandelphanian doctrine is correct and all else is wrong and is thus an illegitimate totality transfer.

I will prove it by using the English words to translate Psalms 45:6-7 in the direct word order the Hebrew Scriptures use. I will also place the Hebrew grammatical form/tenses used following each word in brackets. Each single Hebrew word will be grouped according to English translated words:

Psalms 45: 6-7
6-Your throne (Noun, Pronominal Suffix, Construct) God (Plural Noun) is forever (Noun) and ever (Waw Conjunctive, Noun) a scepter of (Construct with Noun) uprightness (Noun Usage) is the scepter of (Construct — Noun) your kingdom (Noun, Pronominal Suffix, Construct). You love (Qal Perfect) rightwiseness (Noun Usage) and hate (Waw Conjunctive) wickedness (Noun Usage).
7-Therefore has (Preposition, Adverb) anointed You (Noun, Pronominal Suffix, Construct) God (Plural Noun), Your God (Noun, Pronominal Suffix, Construct) with the oil of (Construct — Noun) gladness (Noun Usage) more than your companions (Preposition, Noun, Pronominal Suffix, Construct).

Note verse 7 again in the Hebrew word chronological order:
Therefore has anointed You! God! Your God! with the oil of gladness more than your companions.

The person mentioned anointing is in verse 6 is God and He is the one anointing — follow context and continuity, and flow. This speaks of the Messiah to come. This is in direct reference to Jesus (Hebrews 1: 8, Revelation 1:17-20, Revelation 22:16).

Therefore, if God is anointing the Messiah as God and God shall send forth His word to accomplish it then who dare Jesus be? God? Man?

If you define the Messiah as being only a man then what about the biblical phrase — there is no God before God, None! And, here, somebody is being anointed God - not a human judge/ruler - God - not a person endowed with power, instead, God! Hebrew grammar is emphatic on this.

The Hebrew text shouts this in the Noun, Pronominal Suffix, Construct which means it is an absolute emphatic expression. You cannot not change the Hebrew grammar, nor change its contextual flow to fit Christiandelphanian doctrine.

When the bible says “Therefore has anointed You! God! Your God!” in the actual flow of Hebrew — you cannot read it any other way unless you use one or two definitions of a single word to define every scripture using the same word — as Christiandelphanian doctrine does: A movement founded by physician John Thomas in the 1840's to uphold his beliefs.

How, by committing the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer as evidence by Christiandelphanian abundant use of scriptures used to dazzle the poor eyes of the unwise just as 2 Peter 1:20 and 2 Timothy 2:15 states.

Christiandelphanians speak from founder's belief system to prove reliability of what they believe. It appears that they like to accuse anyone disagreeing with them of committing the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer.

How, basically, in my opinion, like this, the church founders all met one day in the back smoke filled rooms and concocted the doctrine of the Trinity by falsifying meaning of bible text to only mean their view. My response to this why? No reason too. Bible shouts truth - do not twist it.

The church founders in history came to the word of God itself and said — show me Lord, teach me Lord. They read Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and many languages and noted that certain passages in the bible cannot be altered in meaning due to grammar, syntax, construction, continuity of flow, etc.

They read and discovered: Jesus was the Messiah, The reconciler, the sacrifice for sin once and for all, Jesus both God and man, divine and Human for a specific reason and purpose. They discovered that Jesus is Lord!

Jude 4 "For admission has been secretly gained by some who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly persons who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."

Fortigurn, can you call Jesus Christ your only Master and Lord?

Fortigurn, can you like Thomas says in John 20:28, " My Lord and my God!"

Who is really guilty of committing an illegitimate totality transfer?

Christiandelphanian's understand that only their doctrine is the only correct one and all else is wrong and is thus an illegitimate totality transfer. An over-abundant use of scriptures does not prove anything other than an illegitimate totality transfer of ones idea at the expense of the honest scriptural investigation.

Stick with the subject - who was Jesus Christ - Fortigurn?
Last edited by B. W. on Sat Nov 12, 2005 11:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Locked