Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Trinity: Is Jesus really God?

You want me to waste more energy making more of a case when you are already dancing around two facts already made :). Shall I get some popcorn?

1. 1 Cor 12:3 Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,except by the Holy Spirit.

In this verse, scripture is quite clear that the Holy Spirit will reveal Jesus as Lord, to us.

What do you think the word 'Lord' means?
It means master. There were lords all through the Bible.

6 Yet Jeroboam the son of Nebat, the servant of Solomon the son of David, is risen up, and hath rebelled against his lord.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 2 Ch 13:5–6.

9 But Uriah slept at the door of the king’s house with all the servants of his lord, and went not down to his house.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 2 Sa 11:9.

Here David is lord.
2. Jesus was punished when not guilty of sin

Now scripture is VERY clear that God is NOT evil. God is NOT unjust. As such if Jesus was somebody other than the Creator, the Creator would be both unjust and evil.

Job 34:12 Unthinkable that God do what is evil or pervert justice.

----------------------
Not so. Jesus went of His own free will. However, your argument falls apart. Even if He was God, punishing Him for the sins of other is unjust. So, where is your argument?
There is a lot of scripture linking the Messiah to God, but I will not waste my time with you going there. The above two facts cannot be debunked. You are dancing around them and for some reason unable to grasp that you have already lost the debate.
You won't waste your time or you can't make an argument? Regarding the two above as you can see, they've been debunked. Not only debunked but you've been left with another dilemma within your theology.
 
I guess for me it was not believing but accepting it even though I didn't understand it. It wasn't until about 5 or so years ago that the Holy Spirit allowed me to understand it. Clear as day while I was looking something else up, I hear "Hierarchy" and I was like "huh". Then whatever I was researching went away, and I understood it. At least up to a point, of understanding roles without the personal intimacy I believe that God wants us to have with Him. Good thing we'll have Eternity to get to know God. :)
I did likewise. I accepted it even though I didn't understand it. However, over time I came to see that it was not so. I always knew it defied logic. However, I learned that it also defied Scripture. Then I learned the source of the doctrine, which is dubious at best. Then I learned the creeds which also show the doctrine is not original. When it was instituted, it was done so under the threat of loss of salvation. If you didn't believe it they said you couldn't be saved. That kind of sounds like a vax that everyone was talking about recently.
Yes they will, but so will churches from as early as 300's held to a different conical listing. Some here have even argued for them as being so. I guess the easiest differences are which books Catholicism vs Protestantism hold to. Add the Eastern Orthodox and as I've been saying you do have to realize that clearly there is no one size fits all when it comes to Scripture. :(
But again, what people accept doesn't change reality. As I said, Luther didn't want the book James in the Bible. Just because he didn't want the book doesn't mean it wasn't Scripture. It's no different for the atheist who rejects God. God is still his God whether he accepts it or not. That some reject certain books doesn't mean they aren't Scripture to them. They just don't accept it. The Scripture is still authoritative
For me it has, as I mentioned above. I can't do it for you, and you can't do it for me, or in truth for anyone else that is not moved to understand it by the Holy Spirit.

For the rest you now see why denominations have sprung up like weeds! Reminds me of the Tower of Babel in many ways.
But the point is that we have all of these people who claim they've gotten their beliefs from the Spirit and yet they don't agree. How can that be? If the Spirit doesn't contradict then a lot of people who claim they got their beliefs from the Spirit are simply wrong. Now, if someone believes that God told them something, they're not going to think they're wrong. That begs the question. How does one know it was the Spirit and not one's own mind?
Or that you've experienced yourself. I've studied under JW as a teen for a couple of years of personalized study. Christian Scientist for a couple of years as well. Talked with Mormons for a while, and I'm friends with one for a few years now. New Age, etc. I've been Baptized 4 times, Lutheran (baby), Catholic (won't accept the Lutheran one though I believe I've been told they should have), Baptist (full emersion except for a plastic bag around my leg), Pentecostal (because that plastic bag around my leg always played on my mind). lol

So, yes many believe they come from God, and most doctrines do that are found in scripture, but then how they are to be applied or how they are understood again can create the separation that we see. Are they all wrong, right, or a little of this or that? Does, being a little bit off in one, mean that you are not now a believer, and so Saved? Sadly, some folks seem to think so.
But that's my point, the doctrine aren't there. They're not in the Bible and yet many Christians believe they've come from God. How does a Christian believe a doctrine is from God when it's not found in Scripture? Where did they get this doctrine? It obviously isn't from God if it's not in Scripture. This is what I'm talking about. There are four doctrines that many Christians are certain come from God and not one of them is found in Scripture. Where did they come from?
I do end this with one question. Do you believe Jesus is divine?
Some go either way in the non-triune belief. Some believe yes, while others do not, and is why I ask. I would think you do, because you did believe in the Trinity at one time but just wanted to check to make sure. :)

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
Can you define what you mean by divine? I know it sounds ridiculous. But there are so many opinions about these things I'd just like to make sure we're on the same page.
 
Before the Son came to earth, and even before the world was created, for all eternity the Father has been the Father, the Son has been the Son, and the Holy Spirit has been the Holy Spirit. These identities and their respective relationships are eternal, not something that occurred only in time. We may conclude this first from the unchangeableness of God (see chapter 11):

if God now exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then he has always existed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We may also conclude that the relationships are eternal from other verses in Scripture that speak of the relationships the members of the Trinity had to one another before the creation of the world. For instance, when Scripture speaks of God’s work of election before the creation of the world, it speaks of the Father choosing us “in” the Son: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . . He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him” (Eph. 1:3–4). The initiatory act of choosing is attributed to God the Father, who regards us as united to Christ or “in Christ” before we ever existed. Similarly, of God the Father, it is said that “those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son” (Rom. 8:29).

We also read of the “foreknowledge of God the Father” in distinction from particular functions of the other two members of the Trinity (1 Peter 1:2; cf. 1:20).51 Even the fact that the Father “gave his only Son” (John 3:16) and sent the Son into the world (John 3:17) indicates that there was a Father-Son relationship before Christ came into the world. The Son did not become the Son when the Father sent him into the world. Rather, the great love of God is shown in the fact that the one who was always Father gave the one who was always his only Son: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son” (John 3:16). “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son” (Gal. 4:4). When Scripture speaks of creation, once again it speaks of the Father creating through the Son, indicating a relationship prior to when creation began (see John 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; Heb. 1:2; also Prov. 8:22–31). But nowhere does it say that the Son or Holy Spirit created through the Father. These passages again imply that there was a relationship of Father (as originator) and Son (as active agent) before creation and that their relationship made it appropriate for the different persons of the Trinity to fulfill the roles they actually did fulfill.

Wayne Gruden:
 
Last edited:
I did likewise. I accepted it even though I didn't understand it. However, over time I came to see that it was not so. I always knew it defied logic. However, I learned that it also defied Scripture. Then I learned the source of the doctrine, which is dubious at best. Then I learned the creeds which also show the doctrine is not original. When it was instituted, it was done so under the threat of loss of salvation. If you didn't believe it they said you couldn't be saved. That kind of sounds like a vax that everyone was talking about recently.
I guess the difference between us was that you made the determination that "...always knew it defied logic.", whereas I had made no determination either way, except to acknowledge my lack of understanding.

I never looked outside of scripture at the time, until some folks would post this or that on the many sides on the subject. What was presented outside of scripture was never convincing, so I placed that data in an archive folder of my mind so to speak. :)

To be honest until again reading postings, I had never heard from the pulpit that if you didn't believe in the Trinity, you weren't saved.

Also, I don't necessarily associate the "vax that everyone was talking about recently" which I would assume is COVID, with being a vaccine in the first place. Being an old military fellow that has a shot or two in my twenty years, let me know with this prior knowledge that the questions asked, and answers given about it showed it was not what they advertised it as being (vaccine)! So, never got it. I don't usually say I'm one of those that goes along to get along kind of fellows. :)

Yes they will, but so will churches from as early as 300's held to a different conical listing. Some here have even argued for them as being so. I guess the easiest differences are which books Catholicism vs Protestantism hold to. Add the Eastern Orthodox and as I've been saying you do have to realize that clearly there is no one size fits all when it comes to Scripture. :(
But again, what people accept doesn't change reality. As I said, Luther didn't want the book James in the Bible. Just because he didn't want the book doesn't mean it wasn't Scripture. It's no different for the atheist who rejects God. God is still his God whether he accepts it or not. That some reject certain books doesn't mean they aren't Scripture to them. They just don't accept it. The Scripture is still authoritative
Agreed, but who determines that reality, and how they come about that determination does. Your example of Luther just confirms what I am saying. As well as what the atheist who rejects God believes. You can reverse that "some reject certain books doesn't mean they aren't Scripture to them" nor those who accept all books as well. That is why faith comes into play and with that the Holy Spirit, because Godly men as well intentioned as they may be, are not always right.

"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own [authority], but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. John 16:13 NKJV

For me it has, as I mentioned above. I can't do it for you, and you can't do it for me, or in truth for anyone else that is not moved to understand it by the Holy Spirit.

For the rest you now see why denominations have sprung up like weeds! Reminds me of the Tower of Babel in many ways.

But the point is that we have all of these people who claim they've gotten their beliefs from the Spirit and yet they don't agree. How can that be? If the Spirit doesn't contradict then a lot of people who claim they got their beliefs from the Spirit are simply wrong. Now, if someone believes that God told them something, they're not going to think they're wrong. That begs the question. How does one know it was the Spirit and not one's own mind?
It reminds me of this story that precedes this verse comes from.

And when the prophet that brought him back from the way heard [thereof], he said, It [is] the man of God, who was disobedient unto the word of the LORD: therefore the LORD hath delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake unto him. 1 Kings 13:26 KJV

I'm sure some wonder how I can communicate with those I don't necessarily agree with in scripture, and how I can agree to disagree with them too! :rolleyes: Sadly, we too often behave as if Salvation is a group thing, though most in truth know it's an individual one.

"For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward. Mark 9:41 NKJV

Note: Though as a Moderator my actions are driven by the sites SOF & Terms of the site. If they ever become untenable to what I believe through the Holy Spirit to be true, I will then relinquish my duties as such.

Or that you've experienced yourself. I've studied under JW as a teen for a couple of years of personalized study. Christian Scientist for a couple of years as well. Talked with Mormons for a while, and I'm friends with one for a few years now. New Age, etc. I've been Baptized 4 times, Lutheran (baby), Catholic (won't accept the Lutheran one though I believe I've been told they should have), Baptist (full emersion except for a plastic bag around my leg), Pentecostal (because that plastic bag around my leg always played on my mind). lol

So, yes many believe they come from God, and most doctrines do that are found in scripture, but then how they are to be applied or how they are understood again can create the separation that we see. Are they all wrong, right, or a little of this or that? Does, being a little bit off in one, mean that you are not now a believer, and so Saved? Sadly, some folks seem to think so.
But that's my point, the doctrine aren't there. They're not in the Bible and yet many Christians believe they've come from God. How does a Christian believe a doctrine is from God when it's not found in Scripture? Where did they get this doctrine? It obviously isn't from God if it's not in Scripture. This is what I'm talking about. There are four doctrines that many Christians are certain come from God and not one of them is found in Scripture. Where did they come from?
Now if it is your calling, then in truth you can't do no other, but if it is not yours to begin with, then as it always is anyway, it's all in His good time. Again, how you came about your understanding is not the same as I did. Similar in certain aspects, but still different from what I can tell.

Now for differences and how you deal with it. You present, and again He will move them or not. The problem is that you as well as others can't abide the inability in another person to see what you believe is true.

I do end this with one question. Do you believe Jesus is divine?
Some go either way in the non-triune belief. Some believe yes, while others do not, and is why I ask. I would think you do, because you did believe in the Trinity at one time but just wanted to check to make sure. :)
Can you define what you mean by divine? I know it sounds ridiculous. But there are so many opinions about these things I'd just like to make sure we're on the same page.
That's why I asked you first what you believed as it pertains to Jesus! lol

That being said, it is more important to consider how you interpret the term "divine," whether it applies to Jesus or not, and if it does, how it does so, or if it does not, why that is the case. Therefore, your definition would be helpful in this context. :)

You already know what I believe, except for certain nuances, because I believe in the Trinity. ;)

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
 
I guess the difference between us was that you made the determination that "...always knew it defied logic.", whereas I had made no determination either way, except to acknowledge my lack of understanding.

I never looked outside of scripture at the time, until some folks would post this or that on the many sides on the subject. What was presented outside of scripture was never convincing, so I placed that data in an archive folder of my mind so to speak. :)
I don't see how one couldn't see that it defies logic. One being consists of three beings? It's illogical. I knew that but I bought into other erroneous teachings that allowed me to accept that idea.
To be honest until again reading postings, I had never heard from the pulpit that if you didn't believe in the Trinity, you weren't saved.
Just read the Athanasian creed. It opens and closes with such a statement.
Also, I don't necessarily associate the "vax that everyone was talking about recently" which I would assume is COVID, with being a vaccine in the first place. Being an old military fellow that has a shot or two in my twenty years, let me know with this prior knowledge that the questions asked, and answers given about it showed it was not what they advertised it as being (vaccine)! So, never got it. I don't usually say I'm one of those that goes along to get along kind of fellows. :)
I didn't get it either. Right before all of that happened, I had seen an article talking about how they had tried at least 10 times to make a vax for the Covid virus and all of them were abject failures. Now I'm supposed to believe they all of sudden got it right? Nah, sorry. I'm not buying that nonsense. However, my point about the vax is that they were trying to force it on everyone. It was kind of like that with this doctrine when the said if one doesn't believe it, they can't' be saved.
Agreed, but who determines that reality, and how they come about that determination does. Your example of Luther just confirms what I am saying. As well as what the atheist who rejects God believes. You can reverse that "some reject certain books doesn't mean they aren't Scripture to them" nor those who accept all books as well. That is why faith comes into play and with that the Holy Spirit, because Godly men as well intentioned as they may be, are not always right.
I don't see any gray areas. I don't think people get to choose what is Scripture.
"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own [authority], but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. John 16:13 NKJV
As I understand this passage Jesus said this to His disciples. It seems to me that this is not a universal statement but something specific to them. The evidence I would give to support that is modern Christianity. There's only one truth. I think if the Spirit was leading Christians into all truth, we'd all believe alike. However, we are far from that.
It reminds me of this story that precedes this verse comes from.

And when the prophet that brought him back from the way heard [thereof], he said, It [is] the man of God, who was disobedient unto the word of the LORD: therefore the LORD hath delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake unto him. 1 Kings 13:26 KJV

I'm sure some wonder how I can communicate with those I don't necessarily agree with in scripture, and how I can agree to disagree with them too! :rolleyes: Sadly, we too often behave as if Salvation is a group thing, though most in truth know it's an individual one.

"For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward. Mark 9:41 NKJV
I'm not sure what your point is here.
Note: Though as a Moderator my actions are driven by the sites SOF & Terms of the site. If they ever become untenable to what I believe through the Holy Spirit to be true, I will then relinquish my duties as such.



Now if it is your calling, then in truth you can't do no other, but if it is not yours to begin with, then as it always is anyway, it's all in His good time. Again, how you came about your understanding is not the same as I did. Similar in certain aspects, but still different from what I can tell.

Now for differences and how you deal with it. You present, and again He will move them or not. The problem is that you as well as others can't abide the inability in another person to see what you believe is true.
The problem is, they already believe He has moved them. That is one reason they are so adamant. Even when what they hold is refuted by Scripture. Paul warned the Galatians about receiving another gospel. I often wonder how far can we stray from the truth before we are believing another gospel? Someone who believes their doctrine is from God will be hard pressed to change their viewpoint.
That's why I asked you first what you believed as it pertains to Jesus! lol

That being said, it is more important to consider how you interpret the term "divine," whether it applies to Jesus or not, and if it does, how it does so, or if it does not, why that is the case. Therefore, your definition would be helpful in this context. :)

You already know what I believe, except for certain nuances, because I believe in the Trinity. ;)

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
I just wanted a definition of the word, not how it applies to Christ. Here is the Oxford English Dictionary definition.

  1. 1.
    Of or pertaining to God or a god.
  2. 2.
    Given by or proceeding from God; having the sanction of or…
  3. 3.
    Addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God; religious…
  4. Expand
    4.
    Partaking of the nature of God; characteristic of or…


Jesus said that He came out of God. That makes Him of like kind. According to Scripture kind begets kind. Thus, Jesus came out of God and was of the same essence or nature of God. Both John and Paul tell us that the Word, that came out of God, became flesh. The same life that came out of God, which was divine, put off the form of God and became flesh.
https://www.oed.com/dictionary/divine_adj?tl=true#6313949
 
It means master. There were lords all through the Bible.
6 Yet Jeroboam the son of Nebat, the servant of Solomon the son of David, is risen up, and hath rebelled against his lord.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 2 Ch 13:5–6.

9 But Uriah slept at the door of the king’s house with all the servants of his lord, and went not down to his house.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 2 Sa 11:9.

Here David is lord.

Well at least you tried to take a stab at it this time. You are not dealing with three facts though.

1. Jesus was a carpenter born in a manger. Not royalty.

We call someone a lord because they are a king, royalty or a landowner. IE someone with absolute authority. Note this fact in every scripture you quoted. Jesus was none of these in an earthly sense.

2. At the time of Jesus, only a few called Him Lord.

These people were given a revelation of Jesus's royalty, deity, Messiah status by God.

Thomas makes it clear in John 20:28

John 20:28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

And we see Peter in Matt 16:16-17.

3. We call Jesus Lord because He has absolute authority.

Matt 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Not so. Jesus went of His own free will. However, your argument falls apart. Even if He was God, punishing Him for the sins of other is unjust. So, where is your argument?

You won't waste your time or you can't make an argument? Regarding the two above as you can see, they've been debunked. Not only debunked but you've been left with another dilemma within your theology.

You like to answer questions with a question. This is called evasion. Deal with the fact that if Jesus was a creation punishing Him for sin He DID NOT commit would be unjust and evil. Say, YES, it would be evil. Be intellectually honest.

Now if God punished Himself, would it be unjust and evil? I don't think so. It would be part and parcel of His creation. Like a mother committing to pain in childbirth when she decides to have a baby.

Mankind + Cross has been the plan from day one.

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
 
Why was the church so concerned about the doctrine of the Trinity? Is it really essential to hold to the full deity of the Son and the Holy Spirit? Yes it is, for this teaching has implications for the very heart of the Christian faith.

First, the atonement is at stake. If Jesus is merely a created being and not fully God, then it is hard to see how he, a creature, could bear the full wrath of God against all of our sins. Could any creature, no matter how great, really save us?

Second, justification by faith alone is threatened if we deny the full deity of the Son. (This is seen today in the teaching of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who do not believe in justification by faith alone.) If Jesus is not fully God, we would rightly doubt whether we can really trust him to save us completely. Could we really depend fully on any creature for our salvation?

Third, if Jesus is not infinite God, should we pray to him or worship him? Who but an infinite, omniscient God could hear and respond to all the prayers of all God’s people? And who but God himself is worthy of worship? Indeed, if Jesus is merely a creature, no matter how great, it would be idolatry to worship him—yet the New Testament commands us to do so (Phil. 2:9–11; Rev. 5:12–14)

Fourth, if someone teaches that Christ was a created being but nonetheless one who saved us, then this teaching wrongly begins to attribute credit for salvation to a creature and not to God himself. But this wrongfully exalts the creature rather than the Creator, something Scripture never allows us to do.

Fifth, the independence and personal nature of God are at stake: If there is no Trinity, then there were no interpersonal relationships within the being of God before creation, and without personal relationships, it is difficult to see how God could be genuinely personal or be without the need for a creation to relate to. Sixth, the unity of the universe is at stake: if there is not perfect plurality and perfect unity in God himself, then we have no basis for thinking there can be any ultimate unity

Wayne Grudem:
 
I guess the difference between us was that you made the determination that "...always knew it defied logic.", whereas I had made no determination either way, except to acknowledge my lack of understanding.

I never looked outside of scripture at the time, until some folks would post this or that on the many sides on the subject. What was presented outside of scripture was never convincing, so I placed that data in an archive folder of my mind so to speak. :)
I don't see how one couldn't see that it defies logic. One being consists of three beings? It's illogical. I knew that but I bought into other erroneous teachings that allowed me to accept that idea.
That is not what I meant. :) What I was trying to say, was you made your determination, "defied logic", and stopped, while I did not. I look to these 2 verses.

"For My thoughts [are] not your thoughts, Nor [are] your ways My ways," says the LORD. "For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9 NKJV

"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. John 17:3 NKJV

I however, was not looking to grab a hold from this writing or that (outside of Scripture) that would convince me of this or that. Unbeknownst to even myself, what I was waiting for was for the Holy Spirit to open my understanding.

"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own [authority], but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. John 16:13 NKJV

The problem is His time, and when I want to know, is not the same! lol He's not a search engine, where you type in a question, ask, and immediately get a pop up with all the possibilities! lol

To be honest until again reading postings, I had never heard from the pulpit that if you didn't believe in the Trinity, you weren't saved.
Just read the Athanasian creed. It opens and closes with such a statement.
Why, when I told you I've never heard it preached from the Pulpit?

I mean do those who don't believe in a Trinity, have a creed by which they go by? If so, please share it, since I've never been told one existed. It's as if non-Trinitarians believe there is no way independent thought could come up with the belief on the Trinity. Which is not logical if you think about it. :)

Also, I didn't realize when I first came to Jesus, that I had to know it all in order to be saved! If I had, I'd have probably turned around and walked away, knowing my own limitations as I do! Unless you count the different denominations, I studied under but never took to heart.

Also, I don't necessarily associate the "vax that everyone was talking about recently" which I would assume is COVID, with being a vaccine in the first place. Being an old military fellow that has a shot or two in my twenty years, let me know with this prior knowledge that the questions asked, and answers given about it showed it was not what they advertised it as being (vaccine)! So, never got it. I don't usually say I'm one of those that goes along to get along kind of fellows. :)
I didn't get it either. Right before all of that happened, I had seen an article talking about how they had tried at least 10 times to make a vax for the Covid virus and all of them were abject failures. Now I'm supposed to believe they all of sudden got it right? Nah, sorry. I'm not buying that nonsense. However, my point about the vax is that they were trying to force it on everyone. It was kind of like that with this doctrine when the said if one doesn't believe it, they can't' be saved.
I see your point though I don't see the correlation as being the same. And as I explained, I was never introduced to the you must believe in the Trinity, or you're not saved doctrine.

Agreed, but who determines that reality, and how they come about that determination does. Your example of Luther just confirms what I am saying. As well as what the atheist who rejects God believes. You can reverse that "some reject certain books doesn't mean they aren't Scripture to them" nor those who accept all books as well. That is why faith comes into play and with that the Holy Spirit, because Godly men as well intentioned as they may be, are not always right.
I don't see any gray areas. I don't think people get to choose what is Scripture.
Agreed! Only God does. The problem is not everyone is listening. On average few people look to see the authencity of each book and with the increase of knowledge it actually gets worse and so the grey areas to those who come to the faith in Jesus Christ. At least in my eyes. When in doubt go back to the Cross, or to when you were drawn to come to Him.

Story time. :)
An example is Salvation can only be found in Jesus Christ is a life preserver and it gets tossed into the water. The Devil knows he can't do anything about that preserver, so what does he do? Well, he tosses in other life preservers, that look just like the only one that can save.

When push comes to shove, I love what Paul and Peter had to say.

For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. 1 Corinthians 2:2 NKJV

and the Lord God sanctify in your hearts. And [be] ready always for defence to every one who is asking of you an account concerning the hope that [is] in you, with meekness and fear; 1 Peter 3:15 YLT

"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own [authority], but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. John 16:13 NKJV
As I understand this passage Jesus said this to His disciples. It seems to me that this is not a universal statement but something specific to them. The evidence I would give to support that is modern Christianity. There's only one truth. I think if the Spirit was leading Christians into all truth, we'd all believe alike. However, we are far from that.
The days are getting darker. I think modern Christianity's problem has to do with a bit of the life preserver story I mentioned above. :(

As to the working of the Holy Spirit, I can only speak to what has happened in my own life and how the Holy Spirit has worked in and through me. Nothing miraculous to most, but awesome to me. Words of knowledge, understanding on Scripture. Taking over when witnessing to others. Also, hearing of His working in others as well. \o/

As far as truth....another story. :)
I recall many different folks of religions and denominations being asked if they could explain what truth is. Oh, everything from New Age, and on, gave their thoughts. The only one I remember is an artistic child in a wheelchair who said, "Truth is what you see when you look through the eyes of God.".

It reminds me of this story that precedes this verse comes from.

And when the prophet that brought him back from the way heard [thereof], he said, It [is] the man of God, who was disobedient unto the word of the LORD: therefore the LORD hath delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake unto him. 1 Kings 13:26 KJV

I'm sure some wonder how I can communicate with those I don't necessarily agree with in scripture, and how I can agree to disagree with them too! :rolleyes: Sadly, we too often behave as if Salvation is a group thing, though most in truth know it's an individual one.

"For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward. Mark 9:41 NKJV
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what your point is here.
You have to be true to what God has given to you to do. You can't be what others want you or believe you ought to be.

Note: Though as a Moderator my actions are driven by the sites SOF & Terms of the site. If they ever become untenable to what I believe through the Holy Spirit to be true, I will then relinquish my duties as such.



Now if it is your calling, then in truth you can't do no other, but if it is not yours to begin with, then as it always is anyway, it's all in His good time. Again, how you came about your understanding is not the same as I did. Similar in certain aspects, but still different from what I can tell.

Now for differences and how you deal with it. You present, and again He will move them or not. The problem is that you as well as others can't abide the inability in another person to see what you believe is true.
Click to expand...
The problem is, they already believe He has moved them. That is one reason they are so adamant. Even when what they hold is refuted by Scripture. Paul warned the Galatians about receiving another gospel. I often wonder how far can we stray from the truth before we are believing another gospel? Someone who believes their doctrine is from God will be hard pressed to change their viewpoint.
Agree. All you can do as Paul did, was present, and then in this environment of communication, move on. You or I are not going to change anyone's belief that is intrenched. The only ones you can help, Lord willing, are those who are seeking. Send your prayers heavenward for them, and shower them with love brother.

Love never fails. But whether [there are] prophecies, they will fail; whether [there are] tongues, they will cease; whether [there is] knowledge, it will vanish away. 1 Corinthians 13:8 NKJV

That's why I asked you first what you believed as it pertains to Jesus! lol

That being said, it is more important to consider how you interpret the term "divine," whether it applies to Jesus or not, and if it does, how it does so, or if it does not, why that is the case. Therefore, your definition would be helpful in this context. :)

You already know what I believe, except for certain nuances, because I believe in the Trinity. ;)

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
Click to expand...
I just wanted a definition of the word, not how it applies to Christ. Here is the Oxford English Dictionary definition.

  1. 1.
    Of or pertaining to God or a god.
  2. 2.
    Given by or proceeding from God; having the sanction of or…
  3. 3.
    Addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God; religious…
  4. Expand
    4.
    Partaking of the nature of God; characteristic of or…


Jesus said that He came out of God. That makes Him of like kind. According to Scripture kind begets kind. Thus, Jesus came out of God and was of the same essence or nature of God. Both John and Paul tell us that the Word, that came out of God, became flesh. The same life that came out of God, which was divine, put off the form of God and became flesh.
divine, adj. & n.¹ meanings, etymology and more | Oxford English Dictionary
I know and believe it would be better if you provided it. I have no problem with what you have provided the above. Which leaves the question of, where does Jesus fall into all that is defined therein? :)

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
 
That is not what I meant. :) What I was trying to say, was you made your determination, "defied logic", and stopped, while I did not. I look to these 2 verses.

"For My thoughts [are] not your thoughts, Nor [are] your ways My ways," says the LORD. "For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9 NKJV

"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. John 17:3 NKJV

I however, was not looking to grab a hold from this writing or that (outside of Scripture) that would convince me of this or that. Unbeknownst to even myself, what I was waiting for was for the Holy Spirit to open my understanding.
Is God logical? I think that really is the answer to the issue. If God is logical, then that which is illogical is contrary to truth.
"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own [authority], but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. John 16:13 NKJV

The problem is His time, and when I want to know, is not the same! lol He's not a search engine, where you type in a question, ask, and immediately get a pop up with all the possibilities! lol
Again, this was a statement to the apostles. What is the justification for applying this apart from the apostles?
Why, when I told you I've never heard it preached from the Pulpit?

I mean do those who don't believe in a Trinity, have a creed by which they go by? If so, please share it, since I've never been told one existed. It's as if non-Trinitarians believe there is no way independent thought could come up with the belief on the Trinity. Which is not logical if you think about it. :)

Also, I didn't realize when I first came to Jesus, that I had to know it all in order to be saved! If I had, I'd have probably turned around and walked away, knowing my own limitations as I do! Unless you count the different denominations, I studied under but never took to heart.
I suggested looking at the creed because that's where the doctrine comes from. None of the creeds prior to it contain the doctrine. None of the prior creeds claim that one must believe them in order to be saved. However, that is the claim of the Athanasian creed which introduced the doctrine. They didn't say you had to know everything. They just said people had to believe what they said, or they couldn't be saved.
I see your point though I don't see the correlation as being the same. And as I explained, I was never introduced to the you must believe in the Trinity, or you're not saved doctrine.
That may be the case in your instance. However, that's not the historical reality. The reality was that they did enforce the doctrine with the threat of a loss of salvation.
Agreed! Only God does. The problem is not everyone is listening. On average few people look to see the authencity of each book and with the increase of knowledge it actually gets worse and so the grey areas to those who come to the faith in Jesus Christ. At least in my eyes. When in doubt go back to the Cross, or to when you were drawn to come to Him.

Story time. :)
An example is Salvation can only be found in Jesus Christ is a life preserver and it gets tossed into the water. The Devil knows he can't do anything about that preserver, so what does he do? Well, he tosses in other life preservers, that look just like the only one that can save.

When push comes to shove, I love what Paul and Peter had to say.

For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. 1 Corinthians 2:2 NKJV

and the Lord God sanctify in your hearts. And [be] ready always for defence to every one who is asking of you an account concerning the hope that [is] in you, with meekness and fear; 1 Peter 3:15 YLT
That's where study comes in. I honestly believe that Biblical illiteracy is rampant. A recent survey showed that only about 37% percent of pastors has a Biblical world view. What does that say about all of the congregations they're teaching? And, if we are talking about a real Biblical world view and not a modern Christian worldview, I would guess that number fall much more.
The days are getting darker. I think modern Christianity's problem has to do with a bit of the life preserver story I mentioned above. :(

As to the working of the Holy Spirit, I can only speak to what has happened in my own life and how the Holy Spirit has worked in and through me. Nothing miraculous to most, but awesome to me. Words of knowledge, understanding on Scripture. Taking over when witnessing to others. Also, hearing of His working in others as well. \o/

As far as truth....another story. :)
I recall many different folks of religions and denominations being asked if they could explain what truth is. Oh, everything from New Age, and on, gave their thoughts. The only one I remember is an artistic child in a wheelchair who said, "Truth is what you see when you look through the eyes of God.".
Ok, but we're still left with a dilemma. If the Holy Spirit is leading Christians into all truth, then we should all believe the same things. Yet we don't. As I see it there are only two options. Either the Spirit isn't leading Christians into all truth, or many Christians are simply leading themselves and believing otherwise.
You have to be true to what God has given to you to do. You can't be what others want you or believe you ought to be.
I agree!
Agree. All you can do as Paul did, was present, and then in this environment of communication, move on. You or I are not going to change anyone's belief that is intrenched. The only ones you can help, Lord willing, are those who are seeking. Send your prayers heavenward for them, and shower them with love brother.

Love never fails. But whether [there are] prophecies, they will fail; whether [there are] tongues, they will cease; whether [there is] knowledge, it will vanish away. 1 Corinthians 13:8 NKJV
I don't try to change minds. A lot of the reason I post is for the lurkers. Over the years I've gotten messages thanking me for this or that that I post because it helped. However, many of these people I had never seen on the forum. Their message to me was my first knowledge of them.
I know and believe it would be better if you provided it. I have no problem with what you have provided the above. Which leaves the question of, where does Jesus fall into all that is defined therein? :)

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
Psalm 2 David prophesied the words of Christ, saying,

7 I will declare the decree:
The LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son;
This day have I begotten thee.

8 Ask of me,
And I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance,
And the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ps 2:7–8.

God begot a Son. This is prior to the incarnation. Kind begets Kind. Jesus was of the same essence as the Father. John and Paul tell us that He became flesh. That's human. We have no indication that that has changed. Actually, John wrote,

2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 1 Jn 4:2–3.

The word translated "is come" is in the perfect tense. This requires that Jesus was still in the flesh when John wrote his epistle. The Greek perfect tense indicates a past completed action whose result continues to the present. At some point in the past Jesus became flesh and that condition continues to the present, when John wrote his epistle.
 
Back
Top