Posted on 01/12/2014 7:49:32 PM PST by restornu
The Apostle Paul admonished young Timothy, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;" (1 Timothy 4:1)
The Greek word that was translated into English as "depart from" is aphistemi (Strong's G868) pronounced ä-fe'-sta-me meaning ...
1) to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to remove a) to excite to revolt 2) to stand off, to stand aloof a) to go away, to depart from anyone b) to desert, withdraw from one c) to fall away, become faithless d) to shun, flee from e) to cease to vex one f) to withdraw one's self from, to fall away g) to keep one's self from, absent one's self from
Some use this portion of Scripture to accuse those of us who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine, as opposed to the Holy Trinity, as being the ones who are being described above. However, what should be determined is who said and did what ... and when did they say and do it. First off, we know the "foot print followers" of our Lord Jesus Christ had it right! If anybody has ever had it right, they had it right. And, no where do we find where they were authorized to come up with anything other than what Jesus gave them. By the way, Jesus did NOT leave them with a bunch of pages with a lot of blanks on them, which would have to be filled out a couple centuries later, either. Therefore, what they embraced and taught was "first". Any thing other than that came along later, period!
Brother Paul being as bold and blunt as he was, put it this way ... But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8-9)
Again, the Apostle Paul admonished Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:2-4 The Greek word that was translated into English as "endure" is anecho (Strong's G430) pronounced ä-ne'-kho meaning ...
1) to hold up 2) to hold one's self erect and firm 3) to sustain, to bear, to endure
Many are taught, firmly believe and will adamantly defend a position, that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity comes straight from the pages of the Bible, itself. When, in fact, the word "Holy" is the only part that can be found in the Bible. The word "Trinity" can't be found in a single solitary Scripture in the entire King James Version of the Holy Bible. Neither did anyone in the entire King James Version of the Holy Bible ever refer to God or the Godhead with these words, "One God in three persons", as multitudes do today.
With such a widely accepted belief, and millions just going with the flow, the crowd has to be right, right? Well, let's see what Jesus had to say in Matthew 7:13-14 ... "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
Folks, it's time for a "gut level" reality check. According to the greatest Teacher ever to walk upon Planet Earth, when it comes to spiritual matters ... THE CROWD IS WRONG!
Not one single solitary person in the entire Bible ever used the following terms ...
"One God in three persons", "God the Son", "God the Holy Ghost (or Holy Spirit) "The Holy Trinity"
So, how and when did the doctrine of the Holy Trinity come into existence? And, why is it so widely accepted, today? Those two questions are certainly valid ones, and deserve serious examination and consideration.
Encyclopedia International, 1975 Edition, Vol.18, p.226 - The doctrine of the "Trinity" did not form part of the apostles' preaching, as this is reported in the New Testament.
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967 Edition, Vol.13, p.1021 - The first use of the Latin word "trinitas" (trinity) with reference to God, is found in Tertullian's writings (about 213 A.D.) He was the first to use the term "persons" (plural) in a Trinitarian context.
Encyclopedia Americana, 1957 Edition, Vol.27, p.69 - The word "Trinity" is not in Scripture. The term "persons" (plural) is not applied in Scripture to the Trinity.
World Book Encyclopedia, 1975 Edition, Vol. T, p.363 - Belief in Father, Son and Holy Ghost was first defined by the earliest general council of churches. This was the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.
New International Encyclopedia, Vol.22, p.476 - The Catholic faith is this: We worship one God in Trinity, but there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost. The Glory equal - the Majesty co-eternal. The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the Old Testament. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took aver the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination.
Life Magazine, October 30, 1950, Vol.29, No.18, p.51 - The Catholics made this statement concerning their doctrine of the Trinity, to defend the dogma of the assumption of Mary, in an article written by Graham Greene: "Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in Scripture... But the PROTESTANT CHURCHES have themselves accepted such dogmas as THE TRINITY, for which there is NO SUCH PRECISE AUTHORITY in the Gospels"
Many use the human reasoning and logic that the non-Biblical words "trinity", "triune" or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) should be accepted just as the word "rapture" is .... or even the word "sandwich" (for that matter). And, even though "sandwich" is not a Biblical word, I know they're real 'cause I ate one yesterday. So, my point ... or my question ... is, what Biblical words could be used in the place of the words "trinity", "triune" OR "persons" pertaining to God and/or the Godhead? I wouldn't have any trouble at all finding Biblical words to use in the place of "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible". They are: "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book".
Now, if those who embrace the man-made theory of the Trinity can find any words that will do for "truine", "persons" or "trinity" what the words "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book" will do for "sandwich" and "rapture", I would love to see them. Unless or until they can, I suggest that they stop adding to or taking from (depending on how you look at it) the Word of God by embracing, as dogmatically held doctrine, theories which aren't specifically mentioned in the Bible ... and without any Biblical words which could serve as a substitute for such.
While the Bible does NOT authorize a belief in three "persons" who jointly form One God. However, the Bible does accurately describes God as the Father in Creation, the Son in Redemption and the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of believers throughout the New Testament Church Age. But, that is three "forms" of God ... three "manifestations" of God ... three "titles" of God ... three "offices/positions" which God holds and ... three "roles" in which God functions ... BUT NOT THREE PERSONS. NOWHERE can it be found in the Bible which says that is that there is one God "in three persons". That's an "add on" that people would do well to just leave off.
I can very accurately be described as a father, son and husband ... or a teacher, student and minister. While I function in more than one capacity and occupy more than one office, and wear a number of different hats, I am still just ONE person. As a matter of fact, I can be in the same room with, and in the presence of, my mother, my wife and my daughters, and I can speak, act and function as a father, son and husband without anybody getting confused as to how many persons I am or who is talking.
English was my worst subject in school, but I do remember a few things. For illustration purposes only, it is not proper to link the singular pronoun "He", which refers to one "person", to verbs like: "see", "hear" and "warn" ... which would look like this ... "He see", "He hear" and "He warn". When using the singular pronoun "He", it is necessary to use the verbs "sees", "hears" and "warns" ... "He SEES", "He HEARS" and "He WARNS". In order to use the verbs "see", "hear" and "warn", you must use a noun or pronoun which is "plural" and identifies "more" than one person like, "People" ... "People see", "People hear" and "People warn". Yet, intelligent people who know this rule, but who have been indoctrinated to believe that there are three "persons" of God, ignore this rule when it comes to the word "GOD" (the Hebrew word Elohim).
**IF** the word "GOD" (Elohim) identifies more than one "person", as the trinitarians insist, the Bible should read like this, "God SEE", "God HEAR" and "God WARN" ... AND IT DOESN'T! The word "GOD" is never linked to a verb like that. Instead, the word "GOD" is ALWAYS linked to verbs just as the word "He" (a singular person) is ... like this, "God SEES", "God HEARS" and "God WARNS". Again, I use these particular words for illustration purposes only, but I hope I have made my point ... and that it's CLEAR.
Men started "reading" things into the Scriptures a couple centuries or so AFTER Jesus ascended back up into Heaven, and after the "foot print followers" of our Lord had passed on. As a result, there has evolved all sorts of religious beliefs and denominations. However, in order to get people to stop and think about a few things, I use the Clark Kent/Superman analogy quite a bit. Jesus said and did some of the things He said and did to set an example for those who witnessed it to follow, as well as for those of us who would read about it 2,000 years later. At any rate, the reason I use Clark Kent/Superman is because people are familiar with the scenario. And, although Clark Kent/Superman is a fictitious character, I contend that the Incarnate Christ was, indeed, the REAL Superman. And, as a result, Jesus often spoke of the Father as if the Father where someone other than Himself who was way off in another galaxy or solar system.
As a former trinitarian, myself, I understand why those who have been indoctrinated to believe there's two or three of 'em up there believe such, as well as those who interpret ... and try to understand ... the Bible "literally". However, spiritual things are NOT understood with human reasoning and logic. And, Jesus was unlike any one else who has ever walked upon planet Earth. While He possessed the Glory and Power of Deity, He went about as a lowly servant. He had a "human" nature as a result of actually being born of a woman. And, He had a "Divine" nature as a result of Him being God manifested in the flesh. Also, Jesus served as the example ... or the template (so to speak) ... for all Christians to pattern themselves after. And, as a result, He said and did many things for our benefit ... AND to set an example for us to follow. By the way, I am NOT saying Jesus was deceitful, nor that He lied ... far from it. It's just that He could (and did) speak, act and function as any "ordinary" man, at times. And, He also could (and did) speak, act and function as Almighty God, at other times, while here on Earth. Those who have ears to hear, hears what the Spirit saith, and aren't trying to fuel a flawed, man-made, pre-conceived and indoctrinated agenda, will, I believe, come to the understanding as to who Jesus "really" is **IF** they truly hunger and thirst for righteousness. Then, it will be up to them what they do from that point. They can continue on in their traditions and doctrines of men OR they can come out from among them and be ye separate.
Since Isaiah was a MAJOR Messianic Prophet in the Old Testament, my challenge for every "natural" Jew and every professing Christian who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity OR those who believe Jesus was Michael the Archangel or some other inferior subordinate is very simple. I challenge all "natural Jews", all professing Christians who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity, the entire Watchtower Society constituency, the Vatican, and the entire Roman Catholic Church constituency, as well as any and all members and/or associates, past and present, of the various and sundry Protestant denominations, any and all independent Bible students and scholars including the entire constituency of the anything connected to or remotely resembling the Mormon Church ... or anyone else (**IF** I missed anybody) ... to read 11 Chapters in the Book of Isaiah (Chapters 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 59, 60, and 63) and then provide me with the Scripture(s) they believe supports the belief that the coming (prophesied and promised) MESSIAH would be someone BESIDES Jehovah/God, Himself.
Those of us who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine understand something very important: The Incarnate Christ was the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last ... God manifest in the flesh. And, these are just a few of the documenting Scriptures I use ... Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 48:12; Micah 1:2-3; John 1:1-14; John 10:30-33; John 14:6-11; Colossians 2:8-10; 1 Timothy 3:16; Rev. 2:8; Rev. 21:6; and Rev. 22:13.
Yes, the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is a flawed man-made theory, and is NOT "sound doctrine" at all. Therefore, upon learn this, a person should ask themselves this question, "Do I want Truth in its entirety, or do I want man's flawed theories and traditions?" Whatever you decide, it is entirely up to you. In the final analysis of things, you and I will be justified or condemned not by just our faith and beliefs alone, but also by the words we speak AND our deeds. Silence can be interpreted as consent. There are sins of omissions and sins of commission. And, there will be lots of "good" people in hell. Being "good" is NOT good enough. If you doubt or dispute that, read Acts Chapter 10.
A very closely related subject to this is the words that are invoked at baptismal services. The name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 is the precious name of Jesus. Quoting Matthew 28:19 does NOT fulfill the Great Commission. Those who knew how it was to be done, invoked the precious name of Jesus in Acts 2:37-41; Acts 8:14-17; Acts 10:44-48; and Acts 19:1-6. Jesus was NOT telling His disciples what to "say" in Matthew 28:19, He was telling them what to "do". And, besides, nobody was baptized in Matthew 28:19. Nobody in the entire Bible was baptized in the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. We are admonished in Colossians 3:17 to do whatever we do in "word AND deed", to do it all of it in the "NAME of Jesus". And, besides baptism, here are a couple other places, and direct "quotes", where the "name of Jesus" was invoked in word and deed instead of the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost ....
Acts 3:6 Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.
Acts 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.
Not only does the Bible reveal baptism in the name of Jesus, but so does history ...
Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (1951). II, 384, 389: "The formula used was "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" or some synonymous phrase; there is no evidence for the use of the trine name… The earliest form, represented in the Acts, was simple immersion… in water, the use of the name of the Lord, and the laying on of hands. To these were added, at various times and places which cannot be safely identified, (a) the trine name (Justin)…"
Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), I 351: "The evidence… suggests that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the threefold name, but 'in the name of Jesus Christ' or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus.'"
Otto Heick, A History of Christian Thought (1965), I, 53: "At first baptism was administered in the name of Jesus, but gradually in the name of the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (1898). I, 241: "[One explanation is that] the original form of words was "into the name of Jesus Christ" or 'the Lord Jesus,' Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development."
Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church (1947), page 58: "The trinitarian baptismal formula,,, was displacing the older baptism in the name of Christ."
The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1957), I, 435: "The New Testament knows only baptism in the name of Jesus… which still occurs even in the second and third centuries."
Canney's Encyclopedia of Religions (1970), page 53: "Persons were baptized at first 'in the name of Jesus Christ' … or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus'… Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.'"
Encyclopedia Biblica (1899), I, 473: "It is natural to conclude that baptism was administered in the earliest times 'in the name of Jesus Christ,' or in that 'of the Lord Jesus.' This view is confirmed by the fact that the earliest forms of the baptismal confession appear to have been single-not triple, as was the later creed."
Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. (1920), II 365: "The trinitarian formula and trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning… Bapti[sm] into the name of the Lord [was] the normal formula of the New Testament. In the 3rd century baptism in the name of Christ was still so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian of Carthage, declared it to be valid."
My advice to you is, if you aren't affiliated with one now, that you find yourself a church which embraces, teaches and preaches the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine and baptizes in the precious name of Jesus ... the name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 ... and go there, and see (and feel) the difference for yourself.
John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. About the Author:
Encyclopedia Internationa
New Catholic Encyclopedia
The King James Bible
Article Source: http://www.articleseen.com/Article_ The Holy Trinity: Sound Doctrine or a Man-Made Tradition?_77437.aspx
“greek expert and neither are you. So I’ll listen to the greek expert and not you if you don’t mind...”
From your own link:
“from huios, “a son,” and thesis, “a placing,” akin to tithemi, “to place,” signifies the place and condition of a son given to one to whom it does not naturally belong.”
And more:
“from huios, “a son,” and thesis, “a placing,” akin to tithemi, “to place,” signifies the place and condition of a son given to one to whom it does not naturally belong.”
The UCG and LDS position does not teach that we are only “placed into the position of sons,” but that we become literal gods after the ‘God Kind.”
Strong’s dictionary agrees:
uihothesia
hwee-oth-es-ee’-ah
From a presumed compound of G5207 and a derivative of G5087; the placing as a son, that is, adoption (figuratively Christian sonship in respect to God): - adoption (of children, of sons).
“Are you dismissing the promise in Romans 8?”
There’s nothing in Romans 8 that contradicts Isaiah, or any of the scriptures, in claiming that we will become gods too. Nor do I regard any of the LDS claims, so why even quote them at me?
“I whole heartedly believe in the near future more Bible scriptures will come forth”
Sure, right after DNA evidence proves that the Native Indians were all really Jews after all, despite the skin of blackness that the Mormon God(s) gave to them.
>sigh<
>rolls eyes<
Okay. Let’s make this simple people. This is Torah 101 class (five books of Moses for all you out there in Rio Linda) that’s still as valid today as it was before this universe and the Earth were made and will be after the universe is long gone.
The Shema is recited by Jews every day around the globe three times a day (evening, morning, and afternoon), before going to sleep, and right before death.
What is the Shema you ask?
Please break out your Torah or Tanach (the Bible) and turn to Deuteronomy 6:4 which says the following.
“Shema Yisrael Adonai Elokenu Adonai Echad.”
Translation into English:
“Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One.”
Jews have told the world over and over and over and over and over and over again (and over again) that there is only one God and he is non-corporeal, can never be corporeal and thus not a man or woman nor male or female on any level. He is above time and space yet He is closer than any of us can even begin to imagine.
Any time you see a phrase in the Tanach like ‘the outstretched arm of God’ or ‘God walked in the Garden’ are simply anthropomorphisms of His interactions within this level of reality.
He is unique and cannot be divide into three parts or 10 or a seemingly infinite amount. It can not be done nor will it ever be done. The closest he comes to being anything in this universe is spirit.
This is backed up by the Christian’s replacement Tanach (the New Testament) in John 4:24 which says...
“God is Spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
It’s very difficult to understand this oneness unless you have died, gone to Heaven and have been in His presence, and then were resuscitated back to life, or did an Aliyat Nefesh (soul travel) to Heaven while meditating or asleep, or have simply stepped into His presence fully conscious at His initiative.
Many Jews have suffered and died for not stepping away from this very simple but very powerful line of God’s own words.
The biggest lie told by the Adversary is that man (individually or collectively) can be God. If any Messiah shows up claiming to be such you know you have the wrong one because the real deal is going to say he isn’t. The Rev. Jim Jones and Obama are the Left’s messiahs and look how well they’ve done.
And it’s never kosher to deify a rabbi no matter how great he is even if he has overcome death. Overcoming death is not a qualifier to becoming God. When you receive eternal life (after being ‘saved’) does that mean you are God? Absolutely not.
People ask me about the passage in the ninth chapter of the Isaiah the (Jewish) Prophet, verse 6 which reads...
“For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.”
The Messiah will have the problems of Israel on his shoulders because he’ll be in charge. He will be called those names that are listed. Who is calling him those names? God or mankind? Mankind of course!
Even the Lubavitcher Rebbe (aka Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson) was deified and called Messiah by about fifty percent of his followers because how well he knew the Tanach and the small miracles he performed. Even his die-hard followers still insist he’ll re-incarnate soon.
The rabbis say a messiah shows up in every generation but doesn’t make his presence known unless Israel merits it. Will it happen in our time? I hope so just so he can teach the world he isn’t God so this debate can be over and done with for good. People can then quit tying themselves up in knots with doctrines not in line with His words or the interpretation of it handed down since Moses.
If you want to study the Shema more in depth just go ogle it.
I respect your understanding Just wondering if you would describe your family being more than one member to be polytheistic the point I am getting at is in the Christ family there are more than one member but it is a family and now mankind has an opportunity to be adopted into.
Rev 12 (War in Heaven and Jehovah aka Jesus doing the will of Heavenly Father?)
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
” Just wondering if you would describe your family being more than one member to be polytheistic”
Sure, if we were GODS.
” the point I am getting at is in the Christ family there are more than one member”
And what I’m getting at is, with all the authority of scripture behind me, that there is only one God, and there is no other God beside Him, nor will you ever become a god after you die.
As long as scriptures like those which you have ignored exist in the scripture, I will only regard your “understanding” as horrible and blasphemous.
It is late no pun indented but you haven’t heard the latest on the topic of DNA and the Book of Mormon.
Also those two who stir this up were in a different field of science and were limited in how to read DNA or understand the different kinds of process.
DNA and The Book of Mormon Explained full-length video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SStDH3SCj4Q
Sound as well as BIBLICAL doctrine. Something Jesus, Himself taught, as did His Apostles and disciples after Him.
Wait a sec...YOU ARE a Christian minister with over twenty years of experience or is it the author you posted from???
It IS in the Bible - both the Old and New Testaments. How else would Christians even know about it and believe it if it wasn’t in there?
It IS in the Bible - both the Old and New Testaments. How else would Christians even know about it and believe it if it wasn’t in there?
***
Ok show us the verse where it says the word Trinity?
It IS in the Bible - both the Old and New Testaments. How else would Christians even know about it and believe it if it wasn’t in there?
_________
Doctrine of the Trinity is one of those which some of you would call as in Colossians 2
8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
****
It seems to have been a man named Theophilus of Antioch who first applied the term trinity to this Biblical concept as early as 181 A.D. But it was the Anathasian Creed, completed some time in the fifth century, which stated it most clearly: “We worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons, nor separating the substance.” http://www.piney.com/HsTheopTrinity.html
Yes the Bible talks about The Father Son and Holy Ghost but nowhere can there be found the description as define in Trinity, because it is the “Tradition of men,” it is one of those things that get started it sounds good but it really never happen...
***
Just like the tale that George Washington never cut down the cherry tree but is has stuck as truth forever...
First off: George Washington did NOT chop down a cherry tree. The fable had young Washington ‘fessing up to “barking” his father’s prized sapling.
However, the whole story is a moral lesson invented by the patriot’s first biographer - a former Anglican pastor and itinerant Bible salesman named Mason L. Weems.
Known throughout the country as “Parson” Weems, he wrote several books on good conduct to supplement his Bible tracts.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/182628
restornu lives as a very confused person, she probably doesn’t know if her first post is her own, or something else.
She can’t answer.
THE ATHANASIAN CREED
Whosoever will be saved: before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith:
Which Faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
Neither confounding the Persons: nor dividing the Substance.
For there is one Person of the Father: another of the Son: and another of the Holy Spirit.
But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.
Such as the Father is: such is the Son: and such is the Holy Spirit.
The Father uncreated: the Son uncreated: and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
The Father incomprehensible: the Son incomprehensible: and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
The Father eternal: the Son eternal: and the Holy Spirit eternal.
And yet they are not three eternals: but one eternal.
And also there are not three uncreated: nor three incomprehensibles, but one uncreated: and one incomprehensible.
So likewise the Father is Almighty: the Son Almighty: and the Holy Spirit Almighty.
And yet they are not three Almighties: but one Almighty.
So the Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Spirit is God.
And yet they are not three Gods: but one God.
So likewise the Father is Lord: the Son Lord: and the Holy Spirit Lord.
And yet not three Lords: but one Lord:
For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity: to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord:
So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion: to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.
The Father is made of none: neither created, nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created: but begotten.
The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten: but proceeding.
So there is one Father, not three Fathers: one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
And in this Trinity none is afore, or after another: none is greater, or less than another.
But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal.
So that in all things, as aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped.
He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.
Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation: that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess: that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.
God, of the Substance of the Father; begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the Substance of His Mother, born into the world.
Perfect God: and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
Equal to the Father, as touching His Godhead: and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood.
Who although He be God and Man; yet He is not two, but one Christ.
One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh: but by taking of the Manhood into God.
One altogether; not by confusion of Substance: but by unity of Person.
For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ;
Who suffered for our salvation: descended into hell: rose again the third day from the dead.
He ascended into heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father God Almighty.
From whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
And shall give account for their own works.
And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting: and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.
This is the Catholic Faith: which except a man believe faithfully, he can not be saved.
I am not even sure how i view the trinity, but i do agree that the teaching is man made because the word is not there.
Although it is not as noticeable as the man made Sunday Sabbath and the collecting of tithes it is still adding to the word of God.
Good article...it’s amazing how a man made doctrine that was not complete until over 300 years after Christ died is the “criteria” to be a Christian.
“i am not a mormon and i agree that the “trinity” doctrine is garbage”
I suspect that means you do not understand how that doctrine was articulated, based on the totality of Scripture...
“Ok show us the verse where it says the word Trinity?”
Ha! Back to the see and say method of mormonic interpretation! Always leads to error.
***Ok show us the verse where it says the word Trinity?***
Irrelevant word games. Like the Seventh Day Adventists who proclaimed a $1000 reward if anyone could show them, in the Bible, where God ever changed the Sabbath to Sunday.
Because the word “Sunday” is not found in the Bible no one ever collected the reward, proving, to the SDA mind, that Saturday was the proper day of worship. But this is an argument for another time.
“Bible” isn’t in the Bible either.
“Church” isn’t in the Bible either (the word is “assembly” or “gathering”)
Doctrines are not arrived at because the name of the doctrine is in the Bible.
Doctrines are based on the totality of revelation.
“having gone therefore disciple all the nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”
Is it your contention that God was unable to preserve for us today His words to us and that the only text we have available is a corrupted text?
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.