> General Discussions
Trinity ???
kudeta:
--- Quote from: Jrila ---but our human minds cant understand how the father, son, and holy spirit are God.
--- End quote ---
Appeals to mystery, comments that "it's just too hard for us to understand" are signs of dogmatism. We should never just shrug and declare that something cannot be known.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---think of it like this brother, the sun has three rays right? u have a invisible ray, u cant see. a visible ray, u can see. and a heating ray u can feel right? does that make it three suns? the sun has three different roles, but its still one sun.
--- End quote ---
It is not at all the case that there are three rays. There is one ray that we sense in two ways. I don't even know what you are trying to say by "invisible ray."
--- Quote from: Jrila ---think about it brother if there is no jesus how can we ever see God in physical form? God is a spirit. if theres no holy spirit how can god live in us???
--- End quote ---
God is Spirit, yes. Do you even realize that you keep describing two aspects of God while claiming there are three? Heat and Light, Spirit and Physical. You aren't in any way making a case for a third Person.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---well who was living with them at the time? Jesus! how does jesus live in us? through the holy spirit. so wouldnt you say jesus lives in us in spiritual form???
--- End quote ---
His Spirit is in us. That's it. Not, "There's a third person of God which is the Spirit who Jesus uses to live in us." Do you see the difference? How scripture says the first, and doesn't even hint at the second?
--- Quote from: Jrila ---and before i share this other verse look at it like this u say the holy spirit isnt equal to God right?
--- End quote ---
The Holy Spirit isn't COequal, because He is not a seperate person.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---look at the bible brother in the old testament it was all about the Father right? he played a dominate role ok. in the new testament jesus played a predominate role. now the holy spirit is playing the dominate role.
--- End quote ---
No. Jesus is Lord. He has not faded into the background.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---what does that tell me and you? the holy spirit is omnipresent. now lets see if the holy spirit is omniscient.
1corin 2:10-the spirit searches all things, even the deep things of god.
--- End quote ---
The Spirit is God, not a seperate person.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---well there u have it show me some verses that prove otherwise but int'll then have a blessed week
--- End quote ---
Prove other than what? You haven't offered your side. You keep saying the Holy Spirit is God, when I have consistantly agreed with that. What you have not done is discuss the Trinity. At all.
You don't need to explain your theory to me. I understand it, as far as it is comprehensible. What you need to do, if you want this conversation to be of any value, is to describe WHY you think the Holy Spirit is a person distinct from God or Jesus. WHY do you think there's a Trinity?
Do you understand?
Blessings,
- John
Jrila:
oh ok i see what youre saying why do i think ther distintive because there are three that bear witness brother. it doesnt say two,three! were not baptized in the name of the father and son only but also in the holy spirit. brother i see what ur saying but please realize this i believe its god the father, god the son, and god the holy spirit, there roles are differnt. god the fathers role was to redeem israel because of the covenant he made with jacob and abraham. god the sons role was to die for humankind so that we may have access to the father once again and to be a role model for us to follow. the holy spirits role is to convict the world of sin, and to dwell in believers to finish christ work, and to bulid up the church,
so u see the holy spirit is the third person of the god head. they are the same but they are distinctive in works you get me and its important that we know this because to say he is god is good but to say he's not equal to god sends confusing messages to the listener.
but yeah brother i see what ur saying and im kind of new here so i really dont know how to respond like the way u do.
god bless brother!
kudeta:
Jrila,
I'm going to stop responding in the other thread, because it's pretty pointless to split the conversation like this.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---why do i think ther distintive because there are three that bear witness brother. it doesnt say two,three!
--- End quote ---
This was decisively answered in the other thread. The verse was modified from the original, which does not mention the heavenly witnesses.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---so u see the holy spirit is the third person of the god head. they are the same but they are distinctive in works you get me and its important that we know this because to say he is god is good but to say he's not equal to god sends confusing messages to the listener.
--- End quote ---
"The Spirit" refers to God. So does "the LORD," "Master," "The Shepherd," "The Almighty," and "The Holy One."
Are each of these Persons comprising God? No. They are names for God, they are ways to talk about God, they are not seperate Beings that together form God.
What you are doing when you talk about the "Trinity" is to pick out one name and grant it the status of personhood. You call it coequal with the Father and Son. THERE IS NO REASON TO DO THIS. It makes no more sense to call the Spirit the third Person of Tri-God than it would to call the Shepherd the fourth Person of tetra-God, or the Holy One the fifth Person of penta-God, etc, etc.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---to say he is god is good but to say he's not equal to god sends confusing messages to the listener.
--- End quote ---
I do not say that the Holy Spirit is not equal to God. I say the Holy Spirit is God, and not a seperate Person. I have said it many, many times already. If you are confused, it is because you are adding to what I am saying.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---but yeah brother i see what ur saying
--- End quote ---
It... really doesn't seem like you do.
--- Quote from: Jrila ---im kind of new here so i really dont know how to respond like the way u do.
--- End quote ---
Oh, there's certainly no need to do the quote,reply,quote,reply thing. I do it because it normally helps me be a bit more precise.
Blessings,
- John
jerreye:
Jrila: You say "oh ok i see what youre saying why do i think ther distintive because there are three that bear witness brother. it doesnt say two,three! were not baptized in the name of the father and son only but also in the holy spirit. "
Actually, none of this is true. 1 John 5:7 and Matt 28:19 ("...in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost") are complete fabrications of the Roman Catholic Church. Almost every translation out there (with the exception of a couple, including the KJV) has omitted 1 John 5:7, and correctly so. This passage was added in the 15th century! Not one manuscript prior to the 15th century contains this passage. There are TWO that bear witness, the Father and the SON, Whom BOTH have the same SPIRIT. When the phrase "Holy Spirit" is used, it is talking about the POWER/INFLUENCE of God (ie - the workings/attributes of God, Who IS the Holy Spirit). It was the POWER OF GOD that was poured out on the apostles, not a "person". A "person" cannot be "poured", but POWER and INFLUENCE can!
Why did Jesus tell us that if a man blasphemes the Son, that it shall be forgiven men, but if a man blasphemes the HOLY SPIRIT, it will NOT (in this age or the next age)? Is the so-called "person" of the "Holy Spirit" more sensitive and more unforgiving than Jesus? Hardly :) The reason that blaspheming the Holy Spirit is much worse than blaspheming Jesus Himself is because you are blaspheming the very source of Christ's power and works! That power and source is the SPIRIT of the Father (which was given to His Son). To say that His power came from the devil and NOT His Father is a HUGE SIN!
As for Matt 28:19, this was added in and around the 3rd century. It also completely contradicts many scriptures.
Here is a EXCELLENT snippet from the following URL which proves that Matthew 28:19 is spurious and has no place in the scriptures (sorry if it is long, but it is well worth the read):
(From: http://jesus-messiah.com/apologetics/catholic/matthew2819.html)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ONE TEST is that of the CONTEXT
Examining the context, we find that in the AV the sense of the passage is hindered, but if we read as under, the whole context fits together and the tenor of the instruction is complete:
"All power is given unto ME ... go therefore... baptizing in MY name, teaching them... whatsoever I have commanded... I am with you..."
ANOTHER TEST is that of FREQUENCY
Is the phrase "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" used elsewhere in Scripture? NOT ONCE!
Did Jesus use the phrase "in my name" on other occasions? YES! 17 times!
Matthew 18:5, 20; 24:5
Mark 9:37, 39, 41; 13:6; 16:17
Luke 9:48; 21:8
John 14:13, 14, 26; 15:16; 16:23, 24, 26, etc..
ANOTHER TEST is that of ARGUMENT
Is any argument is Scripture based on the fact of the threefold name, or of baptism in the threefold name?
None whatever!
Is any argument in Scripture based on the fact of baptism in the name of Jesus?
Yes! This is the argument in 1 Cor. 1:13:
"Is Christ divided?
Was Paul crucified for you?
Were you baptized in the name of Paul?"
From this argument, if carefully analyzed, it will appear that believers ought to be baptized in the name of that One who was crucified for them. The Father, in His amazing love, gave us His beloved Son, who by the Spirit was raised to incorruptibility, but it is the Lord Himself who was crucified, and in HIS name, therefore, must believers be baptized in water.
Dr. Thomas says: "There is but one way for a believer of the things concerning the Kingdom of God, and the Name of Jesus the Christ, to put him on, or to be invested with his name, and that is, by immersion into his name. Baptism is for this specific purpose" [Revealed Mystery, Art. XLIV].
"There is none other name under heaven" no other name or names "given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12.
"As for its significance: baptism is linked inseparably with the death of Christ it is the means of the believer's identification with the Lord's death" [God's Way, p190].
Now the Father did not die, nor did the Spirit.
"Buried with him" (not the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) Rom. 6:3-5.
Robert Roberts uses this argument: "According to trine-immersion, it is not sufficient to be baptized into the Son. Thus Christ is displaced from his position as the connecting link-the door of entrance the 'new and living way.' And thus there are three names under heaven whereby we must be saved, in opposition to the apostolic declaration, 'that there is none other name (other than the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth) under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved" [The True Nature of Baptism, p. 13].
This, of course, is the same argument as Paul's (see above), and although R.R. did not so intend, his argument is equally effective against the use of the triune name as against the practice of triune-immersion. Were ye baptized in the name of Paul, or the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, or in any other name that displaces Christ from his position as the 'connecting link,' as the ONLY name for salvation? That is the argument, and confirms the genuine text of Matthew 28:19 to contain the phrase "in my name."
ANOTHER TEST is that of ANALOGY
Is there anything in Scripture analogous to baptism in the Trine name?
NO!
Is there anything analogous to baptism in the name of Jesus?
YES! The Father sent the Holy Spirit and baptized the waiting disciples with the Spirit in the name of Jesus. John 14:26. There is a reason for this. The Holy Spirit is the promise (Acts 2:33) which Christ received on ascending to the Father and only those who were in the corporate body of Christ, the Ecclesia, which is His Body-only those could receive the Gift, and only because they were in that one Body. The Lord Jesus Christ is the "connecting link" both for baptism in water and for baptism in spirit" [John 3:5].
ANOTHER TEST is that of CONSEQUENCE
In being baptized, do we put on the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
NO!
Do we put on the name of Jesus?
Dr. Thomas wrote: "Believers of the Gospel Jesus preached are justified by faith through HIS name; that is, their Abrahamic faith and disposition are counted to them for repentance and the remission of sins, in the act of putting on the name of Jesus, the Christ" [Revealed Mystery, Art. XLIII].
The Lord said, "I am in my Father, and ye in me" [John 14:20]. Not until the Thousand years have passed, and the Lord Jesus Christ returns his "Kingdom to God, even the Father" 1 Co. 15:24-28, shall God be all and in all. Till then we may not aspire to be "in the Father."
Believers bear the name of JESUS now, and so that name is not mentioned in Re. 3:12. Believers do not now bear the name of the Father, nor the new name of Jesus, nor the name of the City of God, but these three names are promised to the faithful. Then, not now, shall we bear the name of the Father.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Craig:
Jrila I suggest you do a few things.
1) Read the forum Rules and how it is moderated
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3.0.html
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3614.0.html
2) Read Rays study on this subject. And many emails
http://bible-truths.com/trinity.html
3) Listen to Rays latest audio on Christ, located at the bottom
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2641.0.html
Craig
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version