Posted on 04/15/2013 5:06:15 PM PDT by DouglasKC
>> “I just caught this. Paul wrote the epistle, not Timothy. Timothy was receiving it.” <<
.
We get those bloopers all the time here; you have to just laugh it off.
Suitable used in the military-sense, yes.
Unsuitable in the evaluative sense, as Jesus said "the Father and I are one", and so cannot be of a lesser quality.
(Like a glass of seawater, being [the same] seawater, is not inferior water to the sea; but a glass of seawater, being smaller than the sea, is lesser than the sea.)
http://tinyurl.com/mindofthemaker
The most brilliant book ever written about the Trinity. And funny!
Well..........you can call them what you want but at least they understand the problem....which is:
To support the idea of a three in one Godhead you must use terms not found in the Bible; You must rely on false scripture....based upon twisted interpretations that contradict extremely clear scriptures. Then....you have to create a convoluted theory that no one really understands....forcing its adherents to declare it a mystery!
Most ancient religions offered their own form of a multiple godhead and this influence was quickly picked up by the early church fathers (many of whom came out of paganism itself). Here's what the Catholic Church says about the situation:
"In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together…. The Vatican Council has explained the meaning to be attributed to the term mystery in theology. It lays down that a mystery is a truth which we are not merely incapable of discovering apart from Divine Revelation, but which, even when revealed, remains hidden by the veil of faith and enveloped, so to speak, by a kind of darkness" (Const., “De fide. cath.”, iv). (Joyce G.H. The Blessed Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company).
And...........
"In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the Church had to develop its own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin: “substance,” “person,” or “hypostasis,” “relation” and so on." (Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 74).
What does your church say about it?
CARM? Seriously?
LOL! - Like the Weekly World News. Or The Globe!
Is CARM available at the grocery check-out aisle?
No
In Genesis, “we made man in our image.” Who is “we”?
A little Hebrew is in order... In Genesis G-D is ELoHIM and man is ADaM, names not titles. And yes ELoHIM is plural. Now on to the text.
26 And ELoHIM said, "Let us make ADaM in our image, after our likeness...
27 And ELoHIM created ADaM in His image, in the image of ELoHIM He created him; male and female He created them...
Ergo, the image of ELoHIM is male and female. Look around, there's no such thing as a Father and a Son without a Mother. And chapter one deals with ADaM the spirit, as ELoHIM is a spirit. The physical form of ADaM is made in chapter 2.
Here's a good book, the library should be able to obtain a copy.
Judaism in the Theology of Sir Isaac Newton
Matt Goldish
He, (Sir Isaac Newton) privately rejected the doctrine of trinitarianism (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
For the record you don't have to be a genius to reject trinitarianism.
The White Goddess by Robert Graves is another great addition to any library. R. Graves categorizes every ancient religion he could get his hands on and when he arrives at Christianity he correctly notes that the only original concept they have is that of a Messiah, the rest is co-opted paganism, including the trinity.
See: The Prodigal Son, Lucus (Luke)15 and read... The elder brother is Judaism the younger is Christianity. The elder brother never left the Father and the younger must make teshuvah! Return! ...to Torah.
“It is not idea supported in the Scriptures.”
From the post I pinged you to earlier:
The union of the names of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit proves they are equal one with another. It would be absurd to place the Father and two “inferior” created beings with the name of the Father in this solemn rite.
Mat_28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
2Co_13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.
Isa_48:16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
That Jesus is literally God, there is no question of it:
Mat_1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
That the Father and Son are distinct, and yet one God, cannot be questioned:
Joh 8:17-18 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. (18) I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
Joh_10:30 I and my Father are one.
God Speaking in the Old Testament:
Isa_41:4 Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.
Isa_44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
Jesus Christ speaking in the new, calling Himself by the same name.
Rev_1:17 ... Fear not; I am the first and the last:
Rev_22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Rev_1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
That the Holy Spirit is God, and not an inanimate “force,” cannot be questioned:
1Co_3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
Act_13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
Joh_14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
This idea is very well supported by the scriptures.
And yet Jesus did this:
John 5:19-20 "Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does."
“No, they believed that Torah and Tanach were scripture and that to add to them was forbidden.”
Which is immediately refuted by the very fact that they referred to their writings as scripture and quoted them alongside the Books of Moses. I’m not sure why you ignored it just to quote me and disagree.
It was forbidden to add on to the first books of Moses by man. But then, it was not Man that saw to the adding of all the other books of the Old Testament right afterwards. Neither is the New Testament, which was composed by the same Spirit.
Well, John [chapter 1] calls Jesus the Word. So it wouldn't be inconsistent to say Paul is telling Timothy to preach Jesus, and given that Jesus is the completion of "the Law and the Prophets" then preaching those naturally leads to Jesus.
“And yet Jesus did this:”
Which implies the inferiority of God the Son, how? Whether the Son does all that the Father doeth, or the Holy Spirit is sent forth from the Father and the Son, does not imply inferiority in God.
Joh 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.
Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.
Heb 1:8-12 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. (9) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (10) And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: (11) They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; (12) And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
Either Christ is Almighty, and the Father is Almighty, or the Holy Spirit is almighty, or these three are not one God.
The canon of scripture is closed just as special revelation is closed.
http://bible-truth.org/norevtod.htm
Those who “receive a special revelation from God” had better be “receiving” something already revealed in the Bible, or they are false prophets, saying something God has not said. Revelation 1:18 is self-referential and states that thie Revelation of Jesus Christ covers “what shall be hereafter.” When combined with Revelation 22:18,19 it paints a dire fate for these false prophets. 22:18 and :19 lay a curse on anyone who would add to or take away from this revelation. That curse is damnation, having one’s part removed from the Book of life.
DouglasKC wrote:
This could be a controversial thread. Let’s remember to act in a Christian manner and exhibit the fruit of the holy spirit to those who might be reading this.
I respond with:
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
“To support the idea of a three in one Godhead you must use terms not found in the Bible; You must rely on false scripture....”
This has been firmly refuted in my first post, clearly showing the existence of the Trinity within the scriptures. Whether one uses the word “Trinity” or not, doesn’t stop you from some basic reasoning. Now you say “false scripture,” are you saying those scriptures are wrong?
More importantly, if you are a member of his religious cult, and therefore you think that you are a Christian and we are not (you received the Holy Spirit from the laying on of hands from the UCG, which none of us have done), can you please defend your theology? I defined your positions (presumably, if you are not UCG, you’ll have to tell me what you are and I’ll get the appropriate documentation out...), can you please defend Polytheism in the Bible?
I look forward to your responses.
“CARM? Seriously?
LOL! - Like the Weekly World News. Or The Globe!
Is CARM available at the grocery check-out aisle?”
Are you a member of the UCG cult too? Why are you ignoring my original post, which confirms what CARM reported on the UCG?
>> “Which is immediately refuted by the very fact that they referred to their writings as scripture and quoted them” <<
.
No, that corruption came when the Hebrew originals were translated into Greek.
All of the bizzare anomalies of the NT seem to be of that nature.
I’m not saying that the apostles writings are not inspired; just that the term scripture was reserved.
>> “Are you a member of the UCG cult too?” <<
No!
And absolutely nothing confirms anything CARM says. You are free to believe their trash, but they are deceivers.
“No, that corruption came when the Hebrew originals were translated into Greek.
All of the bizzare anomalies of the NT seem to be of that nature.”
Well that’s convenient! How about you prove it?
And, I guess ALL the books of the Old Testament, except for the Books of Moses, are false, right?
Deu_4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Each and every book after Deuteronomy added to the word of God. Of course, they ARE the word of God, so...
Value was not the point but power, knowledge, authority.
Jesus explained in John 17, particularly vs. 22 what that the being “one” was that he and his followers enjoyed and he prayed for.
Vs.22 “....that they may be one just as we (praying to his Father) are one”.
That oneness was not in a godhead or such but purpose and actions, etc.
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.