Jump to content
IGNORED

The Holy Trinity?


Paper mache

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  134
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  8,142
  • Content Per Day:  2.35
  • Reputation:   6,612
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  11/02/2014
  • Status:  Offline

On 1/31/2017 at 11:50 AM, JaniceR said:

I believe that the trinity are the three aspects of God. Not three separate persons.

This is called Modalism, which is actually not sound doctrine. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct Divine Persons as seen below and in other Scriptures.

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16,17).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ezra said:

This is called Modalism, which is actually not sound doctrine. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct Divine Persons as seen below and in other Scriptures.

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16,17).

The father and the son are 2 distinct features. The Holy spirit is an aspect of God.

1. Jesus   saw

2. A spirit and heard

3. A voice from heaven

That is more than one entity.

I am not going to debate this. I said my piece.

It is possible I am incorrect just as it is possible you are incorrect. Since we both are seeking the truth, I am sure the Lord will help us both to grow and give us conviction. 

Edited by JaniceR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ezra said:

This is called Modalism, which is actually not sound doctrine. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct Divine Persons as seen below and in other Scriptures.

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16,17).

I didn't know what modalism was, so I looked it up.  

 In other words, this view states that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit never all exist at the same time--only one after another.  https://carm.org/modalism

I never said anything close to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  134
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  8,142
  • Content Per Day:  2.35
  • Reputation:   6,612
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  11/02/2014
  • Status:  Offline

21 minutes ago, JaniceR said:

It is possible I am incorrect just as it is possible you are incorrect. Since we both are seeking the truth, I am sure the Lord will help us both to grow and give us conviction

Sorry, but since all conservative Christians for the past 2,000+ years have believed what I have posted, there is nothing incorrect about it.  If you wish to persist in your error that's your choice. Just understand that Modalism is FALSE DOCTRINE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  134
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  8,142
  • Content Per Day:  2.35
  • Reputation:   6,612
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  11/02/2014
  • Status:  Offline

7 minutes ago, JaniceR said:

I never said anything close to that.

You used the term "aspects" which is exactly what Modalism teaches. Here's what CARM says, so aspects, modes, forms means exactly the same thing.

Modalism states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three modes or forms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  905
  • Topics Per Day:  0.19
  • Content Count:  9,646
  • Content Per Day:  2.02
  • Reputation:   5,832
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

I do not recall ever offering the explanation that the Trinity is a mystery. I believe it was Shiloh who did so here. I reject your definition of mysteries, Brakelite... regardless. A mystery is the unknown until it becomes known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  905
  • Topics Per Day:  0.19
  • Content Count:  9,646
  • Content Per Day:  2.02
  • Reputation:   5,832
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

On 1/31/2017 at 7:17 AM, brakelite said:
On 1/30/2017 at 5:14 AM, JohnD said:

I am on record about being against anything (creeds included) that is of extra biblical origin that conflicts with scripture.

 

That's great, and exactly as it should be for all of us. So when Jesus declares His Father as the only true God (John 17:3), informs Mary not to touch Him yet because He has not yet risen to His Father, His God, (John 20:17), and then from heaven declares to the church of Philadelphia that the Father He is referring to is still His own God, (Rev. 3:12), why do you go to extra Biblical origin as introduced to the church by the Gnostic trained Athanasius and teach a three in one God?

Do not presume I am doing so.

And you missed at least one other quote where Jesus cried out on the cross "My God My God why have you forsaken me?"

You're slipping!

I already answered this point with scripture. Not a creed.

If this or any creed partially echoes scripture, so what? Means nothing to me. I give no credence to creeds. I even stated as much. If you want to debate what is in creeds go right ahead... with somebody else. I'm not interested. And I consider this an attempt on your part to conflate the argument in order to mask the fact that the Bible is on the side of Trinitarian theology (which is derived from the over all context of the Bible). 

I gave a biblical dissertation.

I won't be chasing down rabbit trail arguments with you.

If you want to disbelieve the Bible that's your business. And your responsibility to account for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  905
  • Topics Per Day:  0.19
  • Content Count:  9,646
  • Content Per Day:  2.02
  • Reputation:   5,832
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

On 1/31/2017 at 7:17 AM, brakelite said:
On 1/30/2017 at 5:29 AM, JohnD said:

And if, Brakelite, God calling another God disqualifies him as God then observe what the Father calls the SOn:

Don't presume to know what I believe concerning the deity of the Son until you have read other posts of mine elsewhere on the subject. What I am asking in my last post was for people to simply deal with the indisputable fact that Jesus declared the Father as the only true God...His God...even after His ascension. Once we can settle on that without qualifying it, then we can move on to who Jesus is.

I did not go into the aspect of Jesus' statement "only true God" regarding the semantics of individual verses which people like you try to use to confound the over all point the entire Bible is making on the subject. I already answered this quoting scriptures in overall context of the entire Bible.  The Father calls the Son "God" in Hebrews 1:8 (which you conveniently omitted). Unless he is wrong in Hebrews 1 or Jesus is wrong in John 17 then we must interpret as both being right.

And it is precisely because who Jesus was and is that shows us the answer to John 17... Jesus is God (John 1:1) and man (1 Timothy 2:5). The Father is only God. And not a man.  

I am only trying to determine now whether you are simply deceived or you are trying to deceive.

Either way you should read Galatians 1:8-9 carefully.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  905
  • Topics Per Day:  0.19
  • Content Count:  9,646
  • Content Per Day:  2.02
  • Reputation:   5,832
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

On 2/2/2017 at 10:51 AM, Ezra said:

Sorry, but since all conservative Christians for the past 2,000+ years have believed what I have posted, there is nothing incorrect about it.  If you wish to persist in your error that's your choice. Just understand that Modalism is FALSE DOCTRINE.

That's correct JaniceR.

Sabellianism / Modalism is false. God is not like an egg part this part that but three who are a compound one (like a family or a corporation etc.). 

Not calling God a family or corporation BTW just using examples of compound ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  22
  • Topic Count:  1,294
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  31,762
  • Content Per Day:  5.23
  • Reputation:   9,762
  • Days Won:  115
  • Joined:  09/14/2007
  • Status:  Offline

The Trinity is show in three verses, Genesis 1:2 and John 1:1-2

Genesis 1:2 - The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters

John 1:1-2 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was in the beginning with God.

Within these three verses, we find the Spirit of God hovering hovering over the face of the waters - Holy Spirit; The Word (Jesus) is God, and the Word was with God (the Father).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...