Posted on 08/30/2015 10:04:00 AM PDT by CHRISTIAN DIARIST
“Who do men say I am?” Jesus posed the question to his disciples as they went out to the towns of Caesarea Philippi. John the Baptist, Elijah or other of the prophets, they answered.
“But who do you say that I am?” Jesus asked them. And while 11 of the 12 disciples were uncertain, Peter responded, “You are the Christ.”
This account, taken from the Gospel According to Mark, appears in slightly different form in Matthew and Luke, the other two synoptic gospels. What is noteworthy is that in none of the accounts does Jesus say He is other than the Son of God.
He does not say He is, at once, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
It is because of that ambiguity that in 325 AD the Roman emperor Constantine the Great – who reputedly converted to Christianity 13 years earlier – summoned some 300 bishops of the post-Apostolic church – including Philocalus of Caesarea Philippi – to the lakeside city of Nicaea to decide who the church believed Jesus to be.
And 1,690 years ago this past week, the so-called First Council of Nicaea concluded two months of ecumenical debate with the decision that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one and the same.
That bestowed the church’s official imprimatur upon the disputed doctrine of trinitarianism, leaving a mark on Christendom that endures to this very day.
Indeed, those who refused to accept the conclusions at Nicaea were condemned as heretics – like Arius, the Alexandrian presbyter who accepted the divinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but who challenged the idea of a triune “godhead” made up of three coequal, coeternal supreme beings.
Arius believed God the Alpha and the Omega; the beginning and the ending; the One Who was, Who is, and is to come; the Almighty.
He believed Jesus to be, “the first born of all creation,” the “only begotten Son of God.” He held that Jesus and God were of like essence, but not the same essence. He also taught that Jesus was perfect and unchanging; that He was in all things subject and obedient to the Father; that He was sent to earth to take away the sin of the world.
As to the Holy Spirit, Arius did not think it an actual being, but the illuminating and sanctifying power of God, which was indeed divine, but unequal to either the Father or the Son.
In today’s Christian church, be it Roman Catholic or Protestant, those who bend towards the Arian view, who question the “mystery” of the Trinity – that “the Lord is one,” yet He manifests Himself as three distinct beings – are perceived as having theological views that border on the blasphemous.
But the Trinitarian doctrine is extremely problematic. It requires those who read the Word of God to convince themselves that it doesn’t really mean what it plainly says with respect to the relationship between God and the Son of God.
Indeed, if Jesus is God, and God Jesus, as most Christian churches espouse today, why did Jesus say, in the Gospel According to John, “I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I.”?
Why did Jesus advise his disciples, in the Gospel According to Mark, all would one day see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory, but that of that day and hour no one knows, “not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the father.”
Then there’s the passion of Christ, from the Garden of Gethsemane to the cross at Golgotha.
As the Lord prayed in the garden, He cried out, according to Mark’s gospel, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Take this cup away from Me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what You will.”
Then on the cross, the Gospel of Matthew tells us that, about the ninth hour Jesus cried out, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
If Jesus and God were one and the same being, then the Lord need not have asked the Father to spare Him the ordeal that awaited. He could have decided so Himself. And he needn’t have asked God why He had forsaken Him. Because He would have been asking Himself why He had forsaken Himself.
Because the Trinitarian doctrine has been accepted wisdom in Christendom since the First Council of Nicaea nearly 1,700 years ago, we accept it today as gospel truth. But it is abundantly clear, not from church traditions, but from the words of Christ Himself, that the doctrine is wrong.
**In other words, the Apostles had no problem with equalizing the Son with the Father and Holy Spirit.**
“In other words?”....Is it so hard to admit that the name of Jesus is the only name they used in baptism? And that the Son inherited it?
**That said, those verses do not teach that Christians did not baptize in all three names. Christ name is merely given prominence..**.
“three names”?
Matt. 28:19 doesn’t use the word ‘name’ in the plural. And the verse isn’t worded this way: “..baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the name of the Son, and the name of the Holy Ghost”.
**the Didache, which dates from the late 1st century to early 2nd:**
I’m guessing that he wasn’t in the upper room. It’s not the titles that the Devil hates, it’s the NAME. I don’t have time to check right now, but I don’t recall the devils ever addressing the Son by his proper, inherited, name. Interesting.
**1) So Jesus is in the Father.
2) The Father is in the Son.
3) We are in the Son.
4) And the Son is in us.
5) And we are, consequently, in the Father also.
6) And the Father is in us.**
You downplay the expressions, that the Lord uses, to show how completely the Father empowers him, and then admit the Lord’s declaration to be true with your questions:
**Does this mean that I can declare myself to be Almighty? May I receive worship, as Christ constantly does (Mat_14:33, Mat_28:9, Mar_5:6 etc etc)? (Though Christ forbids worship to anyone but God alone in Matt 4:10.) May I forgive sins as only God does? May I be credited with creating the universe, as Christ is?**
The next two paragraghs are just more of your personal interpretations. Just believe Jn 14:10. And read Jn 12:44-50 a few times.
**So we rightly cannot say that the Word of Zuriel is both with Zuriel and is Zuriel. But the scripture clearly teaches this of God, and trying to force God into a box by comparing him to your own limitations is absurd.**
Are you and your word two separate and distinct persons?
Jesus Christ had words of his own, after all he had to deny his will, and do the Father’s. “I come to do thy will, Oh God”.
If God speaks through you, like He did with the prophets, whose Words are they.
God spoke though the Son. Read JN 12:44-50 again, please.
**Logos is simply yet another name of the Son.**
Go ahead, use the phrase “God the Son”..........even though neither Jesus Christ, nor his apostles/writers of the NT EVER used it.
Are you wiser than Paul, who said that Christ is “the image of the invisible God”? Am I not correct when I say that you would not only use the phrase “God the Son”, but also “God the visible image”?
**A completely ridiculous statement, with literally no logical reason to say it, almost like you are just making things up as you go along, vomiting up random words without care if they have any meaning.**
Not only are you an apologist; you’re an entertainer. Is Don Rickles one of your favorite entertainers? (I admit I used to got a kick out of him, when I watched such shows years ago.)
Here’s a ridiculous question: Did the Son inherit his name, Jesus, and if so, from who?
**Paul preached the doctrine of the Trinity**
No he didn’t, and Paul baptized in the name of Jesus, before Acts 15, and AFTER.
**of Grace, and of faith, and of order and decency.**
Yes he did! (Are you sure that you want to bring up decency?)
**Yours barks like dogs shrieking in your filthy churches**
Could (or should) we be allowed to hear you sing?
Jesus Christ cried with a loud voice several times during his ministry (not counting when giving up the ghost). Which of those instances offend you?
**as you tell people they are damned if they don’t belong to your church and do not follow your obscure rules, kind of like the Pharisees.**
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned”. Mark 16:16
Well, this statement doesn't refute what I said: that if 1) the name of Jesus stands in for the name of the Father and Holy Spirit, 2) then the names have equal meaning. Therefore Jesus Christ is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. I'll also add that consecration cannot be in the name of a created being, but to God only.
But your claim that they "only baptized in the name of Jesus" is unproven. Peter stating "repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ," it does not follow that Peter took a disciple to water and didn't baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as commanded in Matthew. It only proves that Peter used the name of Jesus to either sum up the baptism-- that it is in the religion of Christ, or either to highlight the name of Christ which the Jews rejected. Anything else you say is merely reaching without any logical grounding for it.
So, in other words, none of what you claim is in fact proven. On the contrary, the fact that they are commanded to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and that we have historical evidence that this is true from the earliest ages, proves you wrong.
doesn’t use the word ‘name’ in the plural
It doesn't have to. The name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three different names, not one.
Everything else you wrote in this post struck me as rambling, so I moved on to the second one:
You downplay the expressions, that the Lord uses, to show how completely the Father empowers him, and then admit the Lord’s declaration to be true with your questions:
This is rambling. Remember that your argument-- which is mostly left unsaid by the way, you've not even explained it properly-- is that Christ may call Himself Almighty because the Father is in Him and He is in the Father. It is clear that this is true for us as well. Therefore, you are proven false.
Are you and your word two separate and distinct persons?
This is just a non-sequitur and repetition of what you said before. Obviously you are not God, you are not a God to be compared with Him, and the scripture does not clearly say of you "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1). As long as this verse exists in the scripture, that the Word is both with and is God, you can talk all you want, twist individual verses all you want, but you cannot remove Christ's divinity from the scripture. Same thing with your ignorant dismissal of Christ calling Himself "I Am".
The rest of your post sounded like mad raving and ignorance, and since you barely responded to my post, I won't respond to any more of yours. Not worth my time!
**you cannot remove Christ’s divinity from the scripture. Same thing with your ignorant dismissal of Christ calling Himself “I Am”.**
You cannot remove the Father from Christ.
**Anything else you say is merely reaching without any logical grounding for it.**
Am I to assume, that in a timed debate, you would expect twice as much time allotted to you?
Do you ever quote Acts 2:38 to anyone that asks, “What shall we do?”?
**barely responded to my post**
Oh, I responded to much of it; just not to you liking.
**Not worth my time!**
Not even worth answering one final question? It’s an easy one.......In the Scriptures, do you EVER find the phrase “God the Son”.
Well, I've already gone over this, so there's no reason to repeat myself or keep addressing your statements. But if you can produce something like:
"And Peter took a man to water and said, "be thou baptized in the name of Jesus," and dunked him in," your argument would have merit. Otherwise, what I wrote stands unchallenged.
In the Scriptures, do you EVER find the phrase “God the Son”.
That exact phrase, no, but that exact meaning, quite a lot actually:
Here Paul does it by applying prophecies or statements in reference to God directly to Jesus Christ.
Original verse:
"Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear." (Isa 45:22-23)
Paul:
"But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God." (Rom 14:10-11)
Original verse:
"Sanctify the LORD of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem." (Isa 8:13-14)
"Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed." (Rom 9:32-33)
Original verse:
"The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place. Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them." (Psa 68:17-18)
Paul:
"But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)" (Eph 4:7-10)
John the Apostle does the same, besides the instances already mentioned in other posts:
Original verse:
"And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." (Isa 6:3-5)
Whose glory did Isaiah see? John says: Christ's!
"He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him." (Joh 12:40-41)
The evidence is so powerful that only a cultist or a complete idiot would try to argue that Christ is not called God everywhere in the scripture.
Jer 23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
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.
Isa_9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
**That exact phrase, no, but that exact meaning**
Ok, then what makes you wiser than Jesus Christ and the apostles, that you feel that “God the Son” means the same thing as “the Son of God”?
**but that exact meaning, quite a lot actually**
And then you give me a long list that only proves what I’ve been saying all along: that the Father is in Christ,....and that is the only literal place you find the Almighty (the fullness of the Godhead bodily).
In his epistles, does Paul ever go into ‘second person of God’ mode, using the phrase, “God the Lord Jesus Christ”?
Your trinity concept divides God (from henceforth, try eliminating the use of ‘separate’, in defining God).
Nicaea said that he was as as divine as the Father, Don’t see how once can haver a higher view of Jesus than that.
**But your claim that they “only baptized in the name of Jesus” is unproven. Peter stating “repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ,” it does not follow that Peter took a disciple to water and didn’t baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as commanded in Matthew. It only proves that Peter used the name of Jesus to either sum up the baptism— that it is in the religion of Christ, or either to highlight the name of Christ which the Jews rejected. Anything else you say is merely reaching without any logical grounding for it.**
More of your own personal interpretation. Which I will easily prove tomorrow night. Truck driver needs to sleep.
The doctrine of the Trinity might be wrong, but not for the reasons given in this article. This person clearly doesn’t even understand the doctrine. It doesn’t say the son and the father and the spirit are the same, it says they are 3 persons in one being.
And when I say the doctrine of the Trinity might be wrong, I mean wrong in the sense that Newtonian physics is wrong. It might not be wrong as in it is false, it might be wrong in that it might be an incomplete description of God. For example God might very well be four persons instead of three and one of them have never had a reason to reveal himself. I’m not saying that’s the case, just that nothing in what he has revealed says that this is definitely not the case. The fact that only 3 has been revealed to us does not mean there are only 3.
Well, how do those verses actually prove your nonsense, and why does Christ as Messiah being in the Father prove He may be called God, take the titles of God, create the world, be called Almighty, receive worship, etc etc., but we may not do these things when we also have the Father in us and are in the Father?
"My glory will I not give to another," [Isaiah 42:8]
Just repeating yourself and making assertions over and over again do not replace an argument.
Your trinity concept divides God (from henceforth, try eliminating the use of ‘separate’, in defining God).
No, the scripture does not divide the essence of God, which is always One, but it does divide the person of God over and over again:
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.
Gen_1:26 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.
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. Amen.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
In other words, you will repeat what you wrote before in a crazed cult-fueled posting, stick up your nose, and then do it again for a 3rd day running.
Sorry! Not engaging your posts anymore unless you say something truly new in them.
“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” Col. 2:9. The fulness of deity is God the Father, thus all of God dwells in Jesus. The Trinity doctrine says no, all of God does not dwell in Jesus, it dwells in three coequal divine people. So which belief has the higher view of Jesus? It should be obvious.
By the way, this is why when Saul asked, “who are thou” on the road to Damascus, the answer from heaven was “I am Jesus.” Since Jesus has all deity, of course it would be him to answer.
**but we may not do these things when we also have the Father in us and are in the Father?**
Have you received the Spirit without measure? Are you appointed to be the Judge of the quick, and the dead?
Let’s take a verse (2Cor. 13:14) that you quoted and put it in a ‘Trinitarian amplified version’:
The grace of God the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God the Father, and the communion of God the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.
Let’s use another verse, using the ‘Trinitarian amplified version’. This one has Peter testifying of the Lord to Cornelius. Remember, the Lord commended Peter for his God-given understanding of who he (Jesus Christ) was. So, there is no confusion on Peter’s part as he relates to Cornelius who Jesus Christ is:
How God the Father anointed God the Son, Jesus of Nazareth with God the Holy Ghost and with power.... T.A.V. (heh)
**”My glory will I not give to another,” [Isaiah 42:8]**
The Father is in Christ, so he’s not giving up any glory.
**Gen_1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:**
And what is that likeness.....a man, with a soul, filled with the Spirit of God.
**John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.**
Already answered that verse, in post #86, remember?...
*Keep in mind, the following is presented using your separate and distinct, co-equal Gods idea: the Son is the Word, and the Father in NOT the Word. So did the Father just put the Son’s words in a hard drive somewhere, until the Son needed them? But then there’s that pesky problem about the Son saying repeatedly that the words that he spoke were not his, but the Father’s.*
But, you demand that the Word be the Son, separate and distinct, when they aren’t separate. Anywhere you find the Son, you find the Father. John 14 makes that quite clear. Jesus Christ is the mouthpiece (among many other things) of the Father.
I’ve been decent to you. Prove you are honest, and answer this question: Did the Son inherit his name, Jesus, and if so, from who?
“[A]ll of God dwells in Jesus”. But since Jesus is a man, IS he just a “divinized man” That would make him no more than what we shall be, if we are among the Elect? That is merely the highest in the hierarchy of divine beings.
All of us have fathers of the flesh, except Jesus the only begotten Son of God. He had no natural, fleshly, or earthly father. God the Father was his Father, who is supernatural - Spirit not flesh. We are but adopted sons, he is the only begotten Son. Totally unique.
In 1 Tim. 2:4, Paul desires that we be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, the truth about the Father and Son? Next verse.
For there is one God (three divine “persons” as one God? No, the one God here is God the Father, Father of the Son),
and one mediator (the Son of the Father) between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
The one mediator is as totally unique as the one God is. Unique in that he is the only begotten Son.
No obtuse Trinity theory here, it is really very simple, there is simply just One God - the Father, and one mediator the MAN Christ Jesus. Mediating between the one God and men.
In disputes between management and a union, a mediator is usually called in. He can’t be mangagement, the union would reject him. He can’t be Union, management would reject him. He has to be absolutely unique in his mediatorship...so that he can rightly represent both sides.
We have a most serious issue between management (the one God) and men, only Jesus the one mediator can resolve the issue. Only he can represent both sides. In the one mediator there is both the one God and man, the Father in the Son. Which is why Jesus could say, “when you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father,” John 14:9.
In other words, you and Arius are on the same page.
Are you on the same page with Mormons (Tri-theists)? Who believe Father, Son, Holy Spirit are three Gods?
If that offends you, then consider your assertion equally as offensive to me. Arians do not believe what I just said about the one Mediator.
Then why did it take 300 years and a whole bunch of men to "agree" on it?
Athanasian Creed
1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;
2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal
12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.
13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.
14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.
15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;
16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;
18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.
26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.
31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.
35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.
36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;
39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;
40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. and shall give account of their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.
44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.
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.