2Ti 2:24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient,
2Ti 2:25 in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth,
2Ti 2:26 and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will
Col 3:12 Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering;
Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.
Thought you might like this...
DouglasKC wrote: “Note: 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.”
It’s important for everyone to note before participating in this thread that the “church” DouglasKC represents is a non-Christian religious cult, which claims that they alone possess the Holy Spirit due to their rejection of the Trinity, their embrace of dietary laws and Jewish festival observance, their denial of everlasting torment in hell, their affirmation of the possibility of salvation after death, and their doctrine that the Holy Spirit must be passed on by right-believing ministers of the UCG by direct physical contact, amongst many other disturbing facts. IOW, they believe that they are the one true church of God on Earth, and we are all members of a counterfeit religion.
However, what is most relevant to this thread is their view of God and monotheism. They are, in fact, thinly veiled polytheists. They do not believe there is only one God, but two Gods joined together in a collective sense in a “God Family.” Below is a long post I wrote to Douglas previously, which he never addressed, but nevertheless documents the UCG’s stance on this issue.
The first part is a quick review of Trinitarian scripture, followed by information on the UCG’s views of their “open” Godhead:
That the Trinity is in the scripture, that cannot be questioned:
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. Not two different gods who are made “one” by being in the same family, but One God:
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.
At the center of all of this is the fact that Christianity is monotheistic. We believe in only one God, as clearly taught in the scriptures. Is YOUR religion monotheistic? Let’s find out:
According to the papers on the UCG website, their war with the Trinity actually centers on their rejection of God being limited to “only one being” (11). According to the UCG, God is one in the sense of collective unity, when 2 different beings are one in a collective sense, as sharing common goals, but not one in substance:
“This idea of collective unity is clearly demonstrated in Genesis 2:23-24, “And
Adam said: ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man.’ Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be
joined to his wife, and they shall become one [echad] flesh.” Here two distinct individuals are
“one” flesh. This is not talking about one in number but one in collective unity, harmony, peace
and the sharing of common goals.” (10)
Thus, the idea of there being only one God, is changed to merely a devotion to but one God, but leaves the door open for many gods to exist, citing various scriptures to allege that they are “problematic if one concludes there
is only one being called God in the Old Testament” (14). And more:
“The purpose of Deuteronomy 6:4 is to show ancient Israel that their Elohim is the only
God and that all the pagan gods are to be rejected. Thus the purpose is not to explain the nature
of God but to show that He is unique and the only God to worship.” (11)
Due to the obvious problems of this theology, your religion uses the concept of the “God Family,” and the “collective unity,” in order to maintain the idea that they are yet “one” God, though there are actually two separate beings in the Godhead (the Holy Spirit is simply done away with, since His name does not fit the “Family” concept), as they say here: “God can be defined as a family—one God family, although currently consisting of two beings” (15).
The logic follows from hence, after they deny the idea of “adoption,” that we will partake of divinity and join with God in the God-Family, IOW, become “one” in the Godhead the same way their version of Jesus and the Father are one:
“Thus, the Godhead is not a closed Trinity, nor an absolute unity of only one God, but a dynamic family unity that allows for Spirit-born believers to become the very children of God.” (41)
http://members.ucg.org/papers/NatureofGod.pdf
Throughout those entire 40 something pages, not once were any of the scriptures addressed which refute their claims. What does the scripture really say of these ideas, in brief?
That there is only one God, not defined as a “family unit,” but having no other “God” beside Him:
Isa_44:8 ... Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.
This unity utterly precludes the possibility of there being “two” separate beings who are merely “united” in the sense of cooperation. There is only one God, united in substance, and yet not contradictory to when Isaiah writes the phrase “The Lord GOD, and His Spirit hath sent me.”
Neither can there be any other gods formed. There are no other gods joining the godhead, no “open” trinity. It is utterly closed. There is, and always will be, and always has been, just one God:
Isa_43:10 ... before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
None formed before, none formed after.
The UCG’s view, therefore, is a thinly veiled polytheism, very similar to the Mormon concept which argues that they themselves are monotheistic, because there is one Godhead, but that the Father literally had sex with a goddess wife and produced the Son. They make the same argument against “strict monotheism,” and veil it with the same concept of strict devotion to just one God, but not that there are not any other gods.
Very doubtful. Peter and Paul talk extensively about the Trinity, were Jews, and I seriously doubt that Platonic beliefs had any sway with them.
These men were torn from Talmudic law to the new law of Christ - and Christ himself says in Mark 13:11:
But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.
Even Aristotle spoke of the “prime mover” in his Metaphysics, and he was certainly more pertinent in that day and age as Alexander’s legacy was still fresh in the annals of history.
Rather than going through long winded historic explanations for which no verifiable references are cited, why not just make your case from the entire body of scripture dealing with the subject?
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem;
Creatorem caeli et terrae.
Et in Jesum Christum,
Filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum;
qui conceptus est
de Spiritu Sancto,
natus ex Maria virgine;
passus sub Pontio Pilato,
crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus;
descendit ad inferos;
tertia die resurrexit a mortuis;
ascendit ad caelos;
sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis;
inde venturus est
iudicare vivos et mortuos.
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum;
sanctam ecclesiam catholicam;
sanctorum communionem;
remissionem peccatorum;
carnis resurrectionem;
vitam aeternam. Amen.
In English:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ,
his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived
by the power of the Holy Spirit,
and born of the Virgin Mary,
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
He descended into hell.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
he will come again
to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen
The Mind of the Maker, by Dorothy L. Sayers.
http://tinyurl.com/mindofthemaker
The most brilliant book about the Trinity. And funny!
yes...well, there are mistranslations in the bible! Jesus quarreled plenty with the false leaders of his day! And the trinity as taught today is indeed the brainwashing of the church to gullible souls. Apostasy.
Thread-poster DouglasKC claims "various" as the source for this article, yet when you click on the link source for this piece, it takes you to a United Church of God Web source.
Who is the United Church of God? It's an offshoot of cultist Herbert W. Armstrong. While much of the post- Armstrong era church sect went orthodox after Armstrong's death, the United Church of God has been around a grand total of 18 years...and elected to keep the following cultic elements:
(Source is United Church of God per Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry -- I won't pull a "douglas" here and claim the source is "various"):
The United Church of God is a non-Christian cult that denies the Trinity, the true divinity of Christ, and requires both baptism and obedience to the commandments to be saved. It teaches that there is a "God family" of which we can become members through keeping the Law. Jesus is one of two divine beings, the Father being the other. The Holy Spirit is a force, a power, and is not the 3rd person of the Trinity, and it is received only through the laying on of hands by their church members. It also teaches that their members are obligated to keep the Sabbath and must observe seven festivals. They cannot eat unclean meat. This is a false religious system that teaches a false God, false Christ, and false gospel. Stay away from it. Other Teachings: They teach that the wicked, or unsaved, are not alive in hell but are annihilated.
So this "church" ignores Jesus' clear teaching about an everlasting personal hell endured; it ignores the many clear Biblical passages about the personality of the Holy Spirit...you can't lie to an impersonal force in the Book of Acts, for example...you can't grieve an impersonal force; the UCG is polytheistic in teaching a double divine being...
Well, DouglasKC, I just took in a couple of randomly selected sermons from your UCG website to get the general flavor of the theology you represent. Having done so, I confirmed my initial inclination, that is, not to expend any further effort delving into the matters you raise here.
I have no doubt of what is called the trinity... however, I do not believe that I am gifted to adequately communicate what the word 'trinity' literally and figuratively means. Modern Christianity has a forest of dead wood doctrine that by and large distracts all of us from having in our minds what to expect next. Christ said He had foretold us all things (Mark 13:23) before one jot or tittle of the so called New Testament ever got placed upon plant fibers or animal skins... I am not hearing that wealth of instruction getting fed to the sheep. I keep hearing about who is first, oldest and only representative of God and God and Mary. This is not food this is hot air.
Could you in your own words, NOT using some 'church' produced tutorial or a spam of 'church' produced dogma why the word 'trinity' is wrong?
Now to give a bit of background I was raised in your 'mother' church... way way back in my youth... while I have not attended or given money to this organization since I was 17, I have on occasion encountered people that were members or new members that joined since the big break-up back in the 70's. Now I could have written a book about the mother church, but it would have been only for cathartic purposes, I chose instead to find out for myself what the WORD actually said... you know that forbidden act of 'sola scripture' outside of the programmed methodology? See I firmly believe that too many in whatever denomination they attend actually worship the 'church' and turn themselves over to the organization rather than maintain their own personal interaction with the Creator of their very souls.
It is not my intent to come across as if I know everything, or that I am above or better than any other of God's children. I know that God is judge and He alone will decided individually the status of all His children on judgment day.
“Greek PLatonism ruined Christianity” is nonsense and has been totally rejected by scholars over the last 50 years.
The very reason why the Church argued over the exact details of the human and divine natures in Jesus Christ for so long is
that
all
the
rejected
solutions were not faithful to the Semitic/Jewish/original Jesus data from the Scriptures.
If they had been willing to let themselves be taken over by Greek Philosophy they would have REJECTED the Trinity. Arius was Greek, Greek, Greek, Greek, Greek — the demigod/demihuman Jesus of Arius illustrates Greek simplistic philosophy. The struggle for Trinitarianism represents a dogged determination to be faithful to the Biblical data about Jesus. It would have been so much easier and so much more amenable to the surrounding Greek philosophy to settle for a half-God Jesus, half-man Jesus.
The doctrine of the Trinity DEFIES Greek philosophy, precisely the opposite of capitulatig to Greek philosophy.
Jesus himself speaks to the Father as another Person and makes clear his own equality with the Father. He then explicitly speaks about the Father (and himself) sending the Spirit who will do X and Y, in other words, another Person.
Anti-trinitarianism gets recycled every two or three centuries by some new movement that tries to reinvent the wheel.
Tired old discredited arguments.
Waste of time.
To me this series is almost incomprehensible. I GUESS it's based on a misreading (IMHO) of what Paul says about "philosophies." What he is referring to is the bizarre "systems" of the Gnostics, who have since the beginning tried to co-opt Christianity and replace it with bad news.
It intrigues me that Plotinus, who was NOT a Christian, wrote a "tractate [essay] "Against the Gnostics", which I have read, though it was decades ago, and argued rightly that they were wrong because they thought the material world to be evil BECAUSE it was material. But a good "god" (he wouldn't use that term) wouldn't make an evil world. In some respects a good philosopher can be closer to the truth than a heretic.
Others may argue, and argue well, about the role the inspired community, the Church, plays in the interpretation of Scripture. I want to plead briefly for philosophy.
I think men philosophize, well or poorly. We wonder, we are made to wonder and to try to explain what a "thing" is, what we mean by "cause." We ask, "What do you mean by that?" We sort things out.
Informed by Scripture, for example by Thomas's calling IHS, "My Lord and my God," and by the First Commandment, we wonder how Jesus can be God and yet there is One God, whether and how we can say, "God suffered and died," How we can talk about IHS' being tempted.
And one reason we do this is so that we can evangelize. If someone accuses us of, as I have heard us accused, of polytheism, shall we just say, "Shut up and believe?"
Also, I think the article is, if not downright dishonest, at least tendentious. To quote the judgments of the highly anti-Christian Gibbon as though they were authoritative is, at best, questionable. He thought Christianity contributed greatly to the fall of Rome. And using the word "substance" without explanation will be at best confusing to readers who have no acquaintance with the term's philosophical use.
These days when people say "substance," they usually mean something like "material" or even "stuff." This understanding makes the ancients look like they were talking about some weird "ectoplasm" or "aether," when that is not what they meant at all.
And this shows that basic problem which is, as I said, that man MUST philosophize, and therefore he will do so well or poorly. These days we tend to do so poorly. We confuse what a thing IS with what it is MADE OF or even, sometimes, what it LOOK LIKE.
For example, a critical part of the pro-abortion argument was "It's just a clump of cells." The answer is, "It is MADE OF a clump of cells and it LOOKS like a little ball of cells, but it IS a human at a particular stage of physical development." That's a philosophical distinction which implies that the "What-it-IS," (or, for some, the "SUBSTANCE") is different from the appearance or the material.
I would venture that the vast majority of modern men are unwitting victims of lousy philosophy. And part of how this came to be is precisely that they rejected the philosophical aspects of Christian thought, mistakenly thinking that they could rely on Scripture alone while they used philosophical arguments in an attempt to explain that belief.
Baconian empiricism and Cartesian skepticism have infiltrated the modern mind so greatly that a very great many of those who profess Sola Scriptura in fact betray a kind of sloppy modernism in their thought.
And one outcome of this is precisely the rejection of Christian moral principles as a key element of political discourse. This sort of Christian renounces reason and uses it badly, so the non-Christian says, "You're just trying to impose your cultic values on us." And, to be consistent, the Christian has to say, "That's right, but my cult is the true one. I can't explain it; I won't explain it; you just have to believe or go to hell -- and take society with you."
So, I think the direction of this series of articles is not only wrong but anti-evangelical and anti-human, because God made us, among other things, to reason.
And yet the UCG teaching on death follows that of the greek philosophers such as Epicureus, Lucretius, etc. With your superior knowledge of ancient philosophy I’m sure you realized you were following the pagans too ....
I don't see how one could believe the bible does NOT teach the concept of the trinity.
Much said here about Platonic influence on the development of the Trinity, much said about the familial understanding of the Godhead, yet I fail to see what all the fuss is supposed to be about. Except for the Holy Spirit, I don’t see that much difference between Binitarians and Trinitarians.
Oneness Pentecostals, on the other hand, while agreeing about Platonic influence on the development of the Trinity, and the familial, they, however, differ at the most basic level the Biniarian view of Father and Son. They see it vertically.
They see Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as familial. In this way, God the Father from the beginning predestinated the Son, the firstoborn Son of His family. He predtinated the Sonship, in other words.
The Son the firstborn of many brethren, Rom. 8:29. The “brethren” becoming sons by means of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. As the Son was born of the Spirit, Matt. 1:18, likewise God the Father’s extended family...also born of the Spirit. God the Father IS Spirit, John 4:23,24, not an old grey bearded man.
The Son is the visible image of the invisible God the Father, Col. 1:15. Having no human father, the Son is the only begotten Son, John 1:16, whereas the extended sonship, the extended family, born of the same Spirit and Father, yet, due to the fact that they have human fathers, are adopted sons.
Oneness Pentecostals have a vertical view, the one God (the Father) in the Son, the head of His family, the same one God in his extended family:
“One God and Father, who is above all, through all, and IN YOU ALL,” Eph. 4:6.
The way Trinitarians and Binitarians see it is very different. (Though the latter claim a familial view). They both see Father, Son, and Holy Spirit horizontally, not vertically. Separate and distinct collateral and coequal divine “Persons” alongside each other (horizontal).
Though the Binitarians differ from the Trinitarians on the Holy Spirit, their horizontal view of Father and Son is the same as the Trinitarians.
Dear DKC,
These type of articles are from rank modern scholarship.
History has shown the early Church vehemently opposed much Platonic philosophy
Perhaps this might help you to understand
http://www.clarion-journal.com/files/platon.pdf
I will try on dig up some of my old information for you on this topic as well when I get the chance
I wish you a Blessed Day!
...of Zen where an entity is considered to be comprised of three components: mind, body and spirit. Mind - analogous to God the Father, body - Jesus, Spirit - Holy Spirit. Interesting that metaphysics around the world has more so much in common.