Posted on 02/05/2007 10:35:59 AM PST by MichaelTheeArchAngel
Nice try, but if you're going to eliminate the concept of the Trinity from scripture, you're going to be left with an awful lot of hopeless contradictions.
Deum
Deum-----God
nemo-----noone
vidit---has seen
umquam----ever
unigenitus---onlybegotten
Filius----Son
qui-----who
est-----is
in---in
sinu----the bosom (literally, the curve)
Patris----[of the] Father
ipse-----himself
enarravit----has described.
IOW, "God, whom no-one has ever seen, the Son -- who is in the bosom of the Father -- himself has revealed."
King James dodged the awkwark translation of this by using the Son and the Father as names for God; note, however, that in the Latin (which also presumes that Son and Father, being capitalized, refer to God), "God" remains the subject of the sentence. This less clearly states that the Son is God to anyone who didn't accept that proposition in the first place. But keep in mind that it is merely a translation of the Greek, which inserted "theos" to make clear that the son is THE Son, namely, God.
If you describe Jesus you'll say that he is the only begotten son of God, is a man, was visible, was of limited knowledge, that all things were committed to Him by the Father, was tempted in all ways, was flesh and blood, died for sinners,came to teach who He was and what He was about, knowing that He would be killed, was raisedraised himself from the dead and sits at is the right hand of God, because He is God Himself.
There I fixed it. "God the Son (non Biblical term) and God the Holy Ghost (another non Biblical term) "
You were given Isaiah 63.
" these three are supposed to be co equal and co eternal. "
Coequal is a meaningless term. They all identify God. Jesus was begotten, before all worlds when God decided to create.
"And these three are one being who is three beings in one person and one person who has three beings.....
Yes, just like man is. That's already been pointed out.
God is His own mediator, and His own right hand man. That's clear in the Bible, as I pointed out.
>> First, I can't find YHWH used in the new testament even though it is common in the OT. <<
Right. That's what I'm trying to explain: the New Testament was written in Greek, and the Greeks used "Lord" to represent YHWH. Many English bibles follow this tradition, simply capitalizing LORD, to distinguish from the common British title, "lord." But when we proclaim that Jesus is LORD, we are proclaiming that Jesus is God.
>> I doubt that Marx or Stalin did that. <<
They certainly did not proclaim that Jesus was God, or that he rose from the dead. They did, however, acknowledge that Jesus existed. Again, my point is that confessing Jesus LORD means more than acknowledging his existence; it means proclaiming he is God. Notice that Paul says we must confess Jesus Lord AND that he rose from the dead. That means that we have to confess Jesus Lord.
>> Was/is Jesus a man? Of course, the Bible says so repeatedly. But was he "only" a man or 'merely' a man? No! <<
This is why it is baffling that you keep citing references to Jesus being a man as if it were refutation of Jesus being God; Jesus is both God and man.
>> He took part but did not partake. He shared the flesh but not the blood. The flesh was of Mary but the blood from his Father. <<
"Took part" is nothing more than a back-formation of "partake." Also, an unborn baby does not have its own blood. Its blood is the mother's, passing through the umbilical cord. Jesus's blood was Mary's.
Umm ... no. That's just wrong. An unborn baby has his own blood, with his own blood type, which doesn't change after he is born. The umbilical cord and placenta are also his; the 'interface' is in the lining of his mother's uterus. Oxygen, carbon dioxide, nutrients, and waste pass through but the blood does not. Unless there's a serious problem.
Of course, half the DNA that defines blood type, tissue type, etc. comes from his mother.
Jehovah's Witnesses or the Way International? I am guessing the later.
All of the bible proofs of a trinity have been falsified.Let me give just one, of many proofs; In Genisis 1 our bibles read "let us make man in our image"... The words "Let us" are not in actual scripture, but have been added. Look in the NIV exaustive concordence under "Let us". And the list go's on and on and on. All of the proofs,and again I say "ALL" have been added to the bible by the Catholic church. They CAN ONIZED the bible for their DOG MA.
God is invisible
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
God is spirit
Jhn 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth. God cannot be tempted
Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
God is not a man
Num 23:19 God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
God is not the son of man
Num 23:19 God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
God is His own mediator, and His own right hand man. That's clear in the Bible, as I pointed out.
Sorry, the Bible simply says you're wrong on that.
1Ti 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
No. This is simply an empty claim. You haven't addressed anyhting I said.
"In Genisis 1 our bibles read "let us make man in our image"... The words "Let us" are not in actual scripture, but have been added."
Wrong.
Gen 1:26,
כו וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם
בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ; וְיִרְדּוּ
בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם,
וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל-הָאָרֶץ,
וּבְכָל-הָרֶמֶשׂ, הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל-הָאָרֶץ.
And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.'
All of the proofs,and again I say "ALL" have been added to the bible by the Catholic church. They CAN ONIZED the bible for their DOG MA.
I supposed the Jews conspired with the Church to accomplish this. I wonder how much the Church paid, and how the Church influenced Isaiah? Creating and hiding those old manuscripts was a real work of art!
Partakers- koinonia- to share fully, to partner
Took part - metecho- to share
Unborn babies do not share their mother's blood supply. They share but don't share fully.
Had Jesus' blood been Mary's then he would not have had the sinless nature.
>> Umm ... no. That's just wrong. An unborn baby has his own blood, with his own blood type, which doesn't change after he is born. The umbilical cord and placenta are also his; the 'interface' is in the lining of his mother's uterus. Oxygen, carbon dioxide, nutrients, and waste pass through but the blood does not. Unless there's a serious problem <<
No, you're wrong. Wikipedia: "Both mother and fetus share a common blood supply. In particular, the fetus's blood supply is delivered via the umbilical vein from the placenta, which is anchored to the wall of the mother's uterus."
>> Had Jesus' blood been Mary's then he would not have had the sinless nature. <<
Unless Mary was also sinless. This is a large part of why ancient Christians deduced Mary must be sinless, even though the bible did not explicitly state that fact. (The tension between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church with regards to the Immaculate Conception has more to do with the concept of original sin; the Eastern Churches believe Mary did not sin.)
Let us make = `asah (Strong's)
1) to do, fashion, accomplish, make
a) (Qal)
1) to do, work, make, produce
a) to do
b) to work
c) to deal (with)
d) to act, act with effect, effect
2) to make
a) to make
b) to produce
c) to prepare
d) to make (an offering)
e) to attend to, put in order
f) to observe, celebrate
g) to acquire (property)
h) to appoint, ordain, institute
i) to bring about
j) to use
k) to spend, pass
b) (Niphal)
1) to be done
2) to be made
3) to be produced
4) to be offered
5) to be observed
6) to be used
c) (Pual) to be made
2) (Piel) to press, squeeze
I don't see anything that justifies "let us make" as a plural.
It isn't uncommon for the KJV translators to insert their theology from time to time. You can also see it in the way italicized words are used and translated.
The placental membrane separates the two circulatory systems.
Wikepedia....sheesh! LOL
Let the dead bury the dead. The living have work to do. I suspect the amount of demonic delusion that goes into the denial of the central fact of the universe (The Trinity) makes those who succumb to that denial immune to reason.
Unitarianism is still wrong, of course ...
>> God is not Man... God is not the Son of Man <<
God is spirit, and he is invisible. That is the deliberate paradox of Colossians, that Christ is the image of that which is invisible.
The rest of what you wrote is much simpler:
Numbers was written before the incarnation; God had not become Man. In Titus, a word normally derived from figurative connotations (mediator), is made literal: God/Man is the mediator between God and Man. As for the temptation of Jesus, it was his human nature which was tempted, not his divine nature. That's a difficult understanding to come to, which is why the monophysite heresy needed addressing, but the monophysites were refuted from the bible.
Incidentally, "mystery" does not mean "things Catholics believe, even though they make no sense." The common meaning of "mystery" used today (that which is unknown) is of very recent origin. Rather, it refers to that which can understand more fully by further reflection. IOW, the trinity isn't a mystery because it's nonsensical, but because the more one reflects on the nature of the trinity, the deeper one understands the truth.
I suspect that submitting wikepedia as a source in a serious research paper will get you laughed at.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.