The Trinity: The Nature of God
Jun 2, 2021 05:10:49 #
The Trinity is one God revealed in three coequal coeternal coexistent distinct persons (not people) who share one nature.
Athanasius (born c. 293, Alexandria—died May 2, 373"), in his Statement of Faith, put into plain words the doctrine of the indivisible and inseparable tri-unity of God:
“We believe in one Unbegotten God, Father Almighty, maker of all things both visible and invisible, that hath His being from Himself. And in one Only-begotten Word, Wisdom, Son, begotten of the Father without beginning and eternally; word not pronounced nor mental, nor an effluence of the Perfect, nor a dividing of the impassible Essence, nor an issue; but absolutely perfect Son. . . . We believe, likewise, also in the Holy Spirit that searcheth all things, even the deep things of God (1 Cor. ii. 10), and we anathe-matise doctrines contrary to this. . . .For neither do we hold a Son-Father, as do the Sabellians, calling Him of one but not of the same essence, and thus destroying the existence of the Son. Neither do we ascribe the passible body which He bore for the salvation of the whole world to the Father. Neither can we imagine three Subsistences separated from each other, as results from their bodily nature in the case of men, lest we hold a plurality of gods like the heathen. For neither is the Father the Son, nor the Son the Father. For the Father is Father of the Son, and the Son, Son of the Father. The Father, possessing His existence from Himself, begat the Son, as we said, and did not create Him, as a river from a well and as a branch from a root, and as brightness from a light, things which nature knows to be indivisible; through whom to the Father be glory and power and greatness before all ages, and unto all the ages of the ages. Amen.”
Note that the repetition of the Greek article (tou, “the”) and the conjunction (kai, “and”) in this passage: lit., “of the [tou] Lord Jesus Christ . . . and [kai] . . . of the [tou] God and [kai] . . . of the [tou] Holy Spirit. . . .” Grammatically, this construction (viz. Granville Sharp’s Greek rule #6) indicates a distinction of persons. Same with Matt. 28:19: lit., “in the name of the [tou] Father and of the [kai tou] Son and of the [kai tou] Holy Spirit.”
One God – Monotheism (monos, “one, only” + theos, “God”)
It is a basic straw-man to imply monotheism opposes the Trinity - the foundation of the Trinity is ontological monotheism, to anyone familiar with the basics of the biblical doctrine of the Trinity.
Unitarian or unipersonal groups (such as Muslims, Oneness Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses et al.) assume that every place “one,” “alone” etc. (in word or concept) are applied to God (e.g., Deut. 6:4; Isa. 44:24; Mark 12:29; 1 Tim. 2:5);
the unitarians read into these passages a meaning of “one person” reinterpreting monotheism to mean unipersonalism, although, there is no passage in the OT or NT, which clearly identifies God as “one person.”
Unitarians are deeply confused between “being” and “person.” Simply, “being” (an ontological reference) is What something is, while “person” is Who something is. Scripture presents one eternal God (one Being) revealed in three distinct persons, the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, naturally and historically, the Christian church has steadfastly held to and affirmed the glorious Trinity and preexistence of the person of God the Son, Jesus Christ.
The Trinity is Essential Doctrinal
Essential doctrine is any doctrine that involves the person, nature, and finished work of Christ (gospel). Hence, since Jesus is God in the flesh, second person of the Trinity, the nature of God is the utmost highest essential doctrine (Hosea 6:6; John 4:24; 17:3; 1 John 2:22-23).
The Trinity is The Foundation of The Gospel, it is the Mutual Operation of the three Persons that infallibly accomplishes the work of salvation—it is therefore the Triune God that Saves.
Three Biblical Truths
I. There is only one God.
II. There are three Persons or Selves that are presented as and called God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
III. The three divine persons are distinct from each other.
Conclusion: The three distinct persons share the nature or Being of the one true God – only Regenerate will accept (John 8:43, 47; 1 Cor. 1:18).
Scriptural References
I. There is one eternal God (cf. Deut. 6:4; Isa. 43:10; 44:6, 8; Jer. 10:10-11)
- Not unitarianism, unipersonalism (monotheism means one God, not one person).
II. The three persons (or self-aware subjects) are presented as fully God—namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The Father – – (God and unipersonal; cf. Rom. 5:10; Gal. 1:3).
The Son, Jesus Christ, is called and presented as theos, Kurios, and YHWH in a religious context in both the OT and NT (unipersonal).
The Holy Spirit is God (unipersonal): The Holy Spirit also possesses the attributes of God:
Eternal, having neither beginning nor end (cf. Heb. 9:14),
Omnipresent, being everywhere at the same time (cf. Ps. 139:7).
Omniscient, understanding all things (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-11).
Omnipotent (cf. Luke 1:35).
The Holy Spirit is a Person: – The Holy Spirit communicates and personal pronouns (“I,” “He”) are applied to Him. Acts 10:19-20: “While Peter was reflecting on the vision, the Spirit eipen autō, [“said to him”] – “Behold, three men are looking for you. 20 But get up, go downstairs and accompany them without misgivings, for egō (“I”) have sent them Myself” (cf. Acts 13:2; Heb. 3:7-11; 10:15-17).
Personal Pronouns (e.g. John 16:13-14); – Possesses “personal” attributes (e.g., He has a will (cf. 1 Cor. 12:9-11); Emotions (cf. Eph. 4:30); Intelligence in that He Investigates (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-11; Rom. 8:27); He intercedes/prays (cf. Rom. 8:26); He can be lied to (cf. Acts 5:3); He can be blasphemed (cf. Mark 3:29-30); Again as seen above- He issues commands (cf. Acts 10:19-20; 13:4; Acts 16:6]; He gives love (cf. Rom. 15:30: “Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me”; He is also our paraklētos (“Advocate; cf. John chaps 14-16).
The Three Biblical Truths: 1) There is only one God 2) There are three Persons or Selves that are presented as and called God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and 3) The three divine persons are distinct from each other.
The three Persons are Distinct from each other: Angel of the Lord; John 1:1b. 17:5; Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 13:14; 1 John 1:3; 2 John 1:3; Revelation 5:13.
Passages such as Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 13:14; 1 John 1:3; and Revelation 5:13 (and are many others) all distinguish the persons in the Trinity from each other. This is due to their grammatical construction—namely, the repetition of both the article (ho, “the”) and conjunction (kai, “and”).
Matthew 28:19: “Baptizing them in the name of the [tou] Father, and [kai] the [tou] Son, and [kai] the [tou] Holy Spirit.”
2 Corinthians 13:14: “The grace of the [tou] Lord Jesus Christ and [kai] the love of the [tou] God and [kai] the fellowship of the [tou] Holy Spirit with all of you.”
1 John 1:3: “Indeed our fellowship is with the [tou] Father and [kai] with the [tou] Son of Him Jesus Christ.”
Revelation 5:13: “The [tō] One sitting upon the throne and [kai] to the [tō] Lamb, the blessing and the honor and the glory and the dominion into the ages of the ages.”
Lastly, note, we find at several places, NT authors citing Old Testament passages referring to YHWH and yet applies them to the Son (e.g., compare Ps. 102:25-27 with Heb. 1:10-12; Isa. 6:1-10 with John 12:39-41; Isa. 8:12-13 with 1 Pet. 3:14-15; Isa. 45:23 with Phil. 2:10-11; Joel 2:32 with Rom. 10:13).
Summary: Scripture presents a tri-personal God. There is one God, and there are three distinct, coequal, coeternal, and coexistent, self-cognizant divine persons or Egos that share the nature of the one God—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is God’s highest revelation to mankind.
Edward Dalcour, Ph.D.
James R. White
Josh McDowell
Athanasius (born c. 293, Alexandria—died May 2, 373"), in his Statement of Faith, put into plain words the doctrine of the indivisible and inseparable tri-unity of God:
“We believe in one Unbegotten God, Father Almighty, maker of all things both visible and invisible, that hath His being from Himself. And in one Only-begotten Word, Wisdom, Son, begotten of the Father without beginning and eternally; word not pronounced nor mental, nor an effluence of the Perfect, nor a dividing of the impassible Essence, nor an issue; but absolutely perfect Son. . . . We believe, likewise, also in the Holy Spirit that searcheth all things, even the deep things of God (1 Cor. ii. 10), and we anathe-matise doctrines contrary to this. . . .For neither do we hold a Son-Father, as do the Sabellians, calling Him of one but not of the same essence, and thus destroying the existence of the Son. Neither do we ascribe the passible body which He bore for the salvation of the whole world to the Father. Neither can we imagine three Subsistences separated from each other, as results from their bodily nature in the case of men, lest we hold a plurality of gods like the heathen. For neither is the Father the Son, nor the Son the Father. For the Father is Father of the Son, and the Son, Son of the Father. The Father, possessing His existence from Himself, begat the Son, as we said, and did not create Him, as a river from a well and as a branch from a root, and as brightness from a light, things which nature knows to be indivisible; through whom to the Father be glory and power and greatness before all ages, and unto all the ages of the ages. Amen.”
Note that the repetition of the Greek article (tou, “the”) and the conjunction (kai, “and”) in this passage: lit., “of the [tou] Lord Jesus Christ . . . and [kai] . . . of the [tou] God and [kai] . . . of the [tou] Holy Spirit. . . .” Grammatically, this construction (viz. Granville Sharp’s Greek rule #6) indicates a distinction of persons. Same with Matt. 28:19: lit., “in the name of the [tou] Father and of the [kai tou] Son and of the [kai tou] Holy Spirit.”
One God – Monotheism (monos, “one, only” + theos, “God”)
It is a basic straw-man to imply monotheism opposes the Trinity - the foundation of the Trinity is ontological monotheism, to anyone familiar with the basics of the biblical doctrine of the Trinity.
Unitarian or unipersonal groups (such as Muslims, Oneness Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses et al.) assume that every place “one,” “alone” etc. (in word or concept) are applied to God (e.g., Deut. 6:4; Isa. 44:24; Mark 12:29; 1 Tim. 2:5);
the unitarians read into these passages a meaning of “one person” reinterpreting monotheism to mean unipersonalism, although, there is no passage in the OT or NT, which clearly identifies God as “one person.”
Unitarians are deeply confused between “being” and “person.” Simply, “being” (an ontological reference) is What something is, while “person” is Who something is. Scripture presents one eternal God (one Being) revealed in three distinct persons, the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, naturally and historically, the Christian church has steadfastly held to and affirmed the glorious Trinity and preexistence of the person of God the Son, Jesus Christ.
The Trinity is Essential Doctrinal
Essential doctrine is any doctrine that involves the person, nature, and finished work of Christ (gospel). Hence, since Jesus is God in the flesh, second person of the Trinity, the nature of God is the utmost highest essential doctrine (Hosea 6:6; John 4:24; 17:3; 1 John 2:22-23).
The Trinity is The Foundation of The Gospel, it is the Mutual Operation of the three Persons that infallibly accomplishes the work of salvation—it is therefore the Triune God that Saves.
Three Biblical Truths
I. There is only one God.
II. There are three Persons or Selves that are presented as and called God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
III. The three divine persons are distinct from each other.
Conclusion: The three distinct persons share the nature or Being of the one true God – only Regenerate will accept (John 8:43, 47; 1 Cor. 1:18).
Scriptural References
I. There is one eternal God (cf. Deut. 6:4; Isa. 43:10; 44:6, 8; Jer. 10:10-11)
- Not unitarianism, unipersonalism (monotheism means one God, not one person).
II. The three persons (or self-aware subjects) are presented as fully God—namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The Father – – (God and unipersonal; cf. Rom. 5:10; Gal. 1:3).
The Son, Jesus Christ, is called and presented as theos, Kurios, and YHWH in a religious context in both the OT and NT (unipersonal).
The Holy Spirit is God (unipersonal): The Holy Spirit also possesses the attributes of God:
Eternal, having neither beginning nor end (cf. Heb. 9:14),
Omnipresent, being everywhere at the same time (cf. Ps. 139:7).
Omniscient, understanding all things (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-11).
Omnipotent (cf. Luke 1:35).
The Holy Spirit is a Person: – The Holy Spirit communicates and personal pronouns (“I,” “He”) are applied to Him. Acts 10:19-20: “While Peter was reflecting on the vision, the Spirit eipen autō, [“said to him”] – “Behold, three men are looking for you. 20 But get up, go downstairs and accompany them without misgivings, for egō (“I”) have sent them Myself” (cf. Acts 13:2; Heb. 3:7-11; 10:15-17).
Personal Pronouns (e.g. John 16:13-14); – Possesses “personal” attributes (e.g., He has a will (cf. 1 Cor. 12:9-11); Emotions (cf. Eph. 4:30); Intelligence in that He Investigates (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-11; Rom. 8:27); He intercedes/prays (cf. Rom. 8:26); He can be lied to (cf. Acts 5:3); He can be blasphemed (cf. Mark 3:29-30); Again as seen above- He issues commands (cf. Acts 10:19-20; 13:4; Acts 16:6]; He gives love (cf. Rom. 15:30: “Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me”; He is also our paraklētos (“Advocate; cf. John chaps 14-16).
The Three Biblical Truths: 1) There is only one God 2) There are three Persons or Selves that are presented as and called God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and 3) The three divine persons are distinct from each other.
The three Persons are Distinct from each other: Angel of the Lord; John 1:1b. 17:5; Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 13:14; 1 John 1:3; 2 John 1:3; Revelation 5:13.
Passages such as Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 13:14; 1 John 1:3; and Revelation 5:13 (and are many others) all distinguish the persons in the Trinity from each other. This is due to their grammatical construction—namely, the repetition of both the article (ho, “the”) and conjunction (kai, “and”).
Matthew 28:19: “Baptizing them in the name of the [tou] Father, and [kai] the [tou] Son, and [kai] the [tou] Holy Spirit.”
2 Corinthians 13:14: “The grace of the [tou] Lord Jesus Christ and [kai] the love of the [tou] God and [kai] the fellowship of the [tou] Holy Spirit with all of you.”
1 John 1:3: “Indeed our fellowship is with the [tou] Father and [kai] with the [tou] Son of Him Jesus Christ.”
Revelation 5:13: “The [tō] One sitting upon the throne and [kai] to the [tō] Lamb, the blessing and the honor and the glory and the dominion into the ages of the ages.”
Lastly, note, we find at several places, NT authors citing Old Testament passages referring to YHWH and yet applies them to the Son (e.g., compare Ps. 102:25-27 with Heb. 1:10-12; Isa. 6:1-10 with John 12:39-41; Isa. 8:12-13 with 1 Pet. 3:14-15; Isa. 45:23 with Phil. 2:10-11; Joel 2:32 with Rom. 10:13).
Summary: Scripture presents a tri-personal God. There is one God, and there are three distinct, coequal, coeternal, and coexistent, self-cognizant divine persons or Egos that share the nature of the one God—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is God’s highest revelation to mankind.
Edward Dalcour, Ph.D.
James R. White
Josh McDowell
Jun 2, 2021 06:29:01 #
Zemirah wrote:
The Trinity is one God revealed in three coequal c... (show quote)
A good thread...
I have class in a few minutes, but I'm looking forward to this one
Jun 2, 2021 15:03:21 #
TexaCan
Loc: Homeward Bound!
Zemirah wrote:
The Trinity is one God revealed in three coequal c... (show quote)
Thank you for sharing this.
The Trinity has not been easy for me to understand, it has taken time and much studying to get here.
Jun 3, 2021 06:26:47 #
You're welcome, TexaCan,
I don't think there is a human being on earth who, because of our finite minds, really understands exactly how our awesome God is configured, but "without faith, we cannot please Him," and we have faith.
That's the way He designed us, with free will to search, to seek, to discover, so that is the way He wants us to be.
We see examples all around us of of how fretful people can become when their home concocted theories on the subject of the Trinity aren't readily accepted.
There is so much more that can be written, but sometimes, it is good to just accept that less is more.
If severely tempted, I have had five books on the subject clasped in my inquisitive hands for days, from which I could quote, including a Ph.D. dissertation from Oxford University.
I love soaking up information, as long as it is from serious, thoughtful people; not some vacuous, long winded, publicity seeker, reeking of superiority and contempt toward others.
I sometimes write out several pages utilizing quotes from books and scriptures, as well as my own thoughts, but there are times that a check in my spirit convinces me to refrain from posting... something about pearls before swine.
There are occasions when it's best to contribute very little, and watch someone hang themself with their own rope.
At other times, legitimate information should be shared freely, with no hesitation at all.
I don't think there is a human being on earth who, because of our finite minds, really understands exactly how our awesome God is configured, but "without faith, we cannot please Him," and we have faith.
That's the way He designed us, with free will to search, to seek, to discover, so that is the way He wants us to be.
We see examples all around us of of how fretful people can become when their home concocted theories on the subject of the Trinity aren't readily accepted.
There is so much more that can be written, but sometimes, it is good to just accept that less is more.
If severely tempted, I have had five books on the subject clasped in my inquisitive hands for days, from which I could quote, including a Ph.D. dissertation from Oxford University.
I love soaking up information, as long as it is from serious, thoughtful people; not some vacuous, long winded, publicity seeker, reeking of superiority and contempt toward others.
I sometimes write out several pages utilizing quotes from books and scriptures, as well as my own thoughts, but there are times that a check in my spirit convinces me to refrain from posting... something about pearls before swine.
There are occasions when it's best to contribute very little, and watch someone hang themself with their own rope.
At other times, legitimate information should be shared freely, with no hesitation at all.
TexaCan wrote:
Thank you for sharing this.
The Trinity has not been easy for me to understand, it has taken time and much studying to get here.
The Trinity has not been easy for me to understand, it has taken time and much studying to get here.
Jun 3, 2021 07:08:39 #
This is just the tip of the iceberg, Canuckus,
To whet the appetite for facts and figures, avoiding rhetoric and suppositions.
To whet the appetite for facts and figures, avoiding rhetoric and suppositions.
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
A good thread...
I have class in a few minutes, but I'm looking forward to this one
I have class in a few minutes, but I'm looking forward to this one
Jun 3, 2021 08:50:44 #
Zemirah wrote:
This is just the tip of the iceberg, Canuckus,
To whet the appetite for facts and figures, avoiding rhetoric and suppositions.
To whet the appetite for facts and figures, avoiding rhetoric and suppositions.
Apologies... Class ended quite a while ago...
Not much attention being paid to this thread... Too bad...
I liked how you started it by pointing out that the Trinity doctrine didn't come about until centuries after the death of Christ...
And that it was contentious at the time...
Jun 3, 2021 14:02:51 #
TommyRadd
Loc: Midwest USA
Zemirah wrote:
The Trinity is one God revealed in three coequal c... (show quote)
Zemirah,
I have some simple yes or no questions for you before I respond to your post. Of course, you are welcome to elaborate, but I’m just asking for a yes or no. (I know you don’t like long, informative posts from me, so I’m going to try my best to consider that by making my responses to you personally in shorter segments. Hopefully, this one won’t be too long for you.)
We know that in the New Testament all the “law” is summed up in these two:
“36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the law?" 37Jesus said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and great commandment. 39A second likewise is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' 40The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."” Matthew 22:36-40.
Question number 1: Since Jesus has come and given us a greater Covenant based on greater promises, do you feel that you and other Christian teachers have been given the liberty to redefine God according to concepts adopted from pagan philosophy (i.e. the gods round about true Israel)? (Keep in mind that Jesus “upgraded” commandments such as “thou shalt not murder” to “thou shalt not hate your brother”; and “thou shalt not commit adultery” to “thou shalt not lust”).
Question number 2: Does God (rather than man) conclusively define and explain Who and what He is in the Bible?
Question number 3: Under the New Covenant, is unrepentant, habitual, deliberate idolatry a sin that will keep people otherwise “saved” out of the kingdom of God? (For example, if a murderer, say a gangster type, did and/or said all the right things, and claimed to be a Christian, yet continued murdering as part of the “gang’s” protocols, would that keep him out of the kingdom of God? Same type of question, except I’m inquiring about idolators.)
Thank you.
Jun 4, 2021 08:00:12 #
TommyRadd
Loc: Midwest USA
Questions for Zemirah, Part 2
Zemirah,
Here are a couple more questions for you, if you feel so disposed to answer...
We know that Jesus said “if the blind lead the blind they will both fall into a ditch” (Matthew 15:14). It is also written, “Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” Acts 17:11
So here are my next yes or no questions for you...
Question #4: is it still “honorable” (yes or no) to examine the scriptures to see whether things that are being taught are true or not?
Again, we know that Jesus said, “13"Enter in by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter in by it. 14How narrow is the gate, and restricted is the way that leads to life! Few are those who find it.” Matthew 7:13-14. Furthermore, looking over the hall of faith (Hebrews 11), we find almost no one who demonstrated God-pleasing faith by “going with the flow” of the status quo of the majority of God’s people. Finally, we know that Jesus openly wondered, “7Won't God avenge his chosen ones, who are crying out to him day and night, and yet he exercises patience with them? 8I tell you that he will avenge them quickly. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:7-8)
Question #5: Do you believe things have changed from Jesus’ observation, and now, instead, the wide road, or we could call it, the majority opinion, is to be sought, commended, and defended against all challenges or challengers, yes or no?
Thank you,
Tommy
Zemirah,
Here are a couple more questions for you, if you feel so disposed to answer...
We know that Jesus said “if the blind lead the blind they will both fall into a ditch” (Matthew 15:14). It is also written, “Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” Acts 17:11
So here are my next yes or no questions for you...
Question #4: is it still “honorable” (yes or no) to examine the scriptures to see whether things that are being taught are true or not?
Again, we know that Jesus said, “13"Enter in by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter in by it. 14How narrow is the gate, and restricted is the way that leads to life! Few are those who find it.” Matthew 7:13-14. Furthermore, looking over the hall of faith (Hebrews 11), we find almost no one who demonstrated God-pleasing faith by “going with the flow” of the status quo of the majority of God’s people. Finally, we know that Jesus openly wondered, “7Won't God avenge his chosen ones, who are crying out to him day and night, and yet he exercises patience with them? 8I tell you that he will avenge them quickly. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:7-8)
Question #5: Do you believe things have changed from Jesus’ observation, and now, instead, the wide road, or we could call it, the majority opinion, is to be sought, commended, and defended against all challenges or challengers, yes or no?
Thank you,
Tommy
Jun 4, 2021 11:03:19 #
Zemirah wrote:
You're welcome, TexaCan, br br I don't think ther... (show quote)
Your post stands on its own. No need to defend it.
Jun 4, 2021 20:12:49 #
Canuckus,
I neither started nor finished the post in question by asserting when the Trinity is first visualized in Scripture??
Misstating and attempting to misrepresent my words is a quick and easy way to cut off any dialogue.
You need to rethink that.
You can not see something within my writing which I neither said nor intimated about the revelation of the chronology of God.
The progressive revelation of God's Triune nature, rather than late, is first seen in Genesis 1:1, and in every verse, page, chapter and book of holy Scripture thereafter, through Revelation 22:21.
It is not God who is contentious.
It is we, His creation.
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Malachi 3:6
“For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.
Revelation 1:8
“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
James 1:17
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
Hebrews 13:1-25
Let brotherly love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body. Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” ...
Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isaiah 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
John 3:16
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Hebrews 1:12
Like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.”
Hebrews 1:8
But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
Revelation 22:13
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”
Revelation 1:17-18
When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last, and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.
I neither started nor finished the post in question by asserting when the Trinity is first visualized in Scripture??
Misstating and attempting to misrepresent my words is a quick and easy way to cut off any dialogue.
You need to rethink that.
You can not see something within my writing which I neither said nor intimated about the revelation of the chronology of God.
The progressive revelation of God's Triune nature, rather than late, is first seen in Genesis 1:1, and in every verse, page, chapter and book of holy Scripture thereafter, through Revelation 22:21.
It is not God who is contentious.
It is we, His creation.
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Malachi 3:6
“For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.
Revelation 1:8
“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
James 1:17
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
Hebrews 13:1-25
Let brotherly love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body. Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” ...
Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isaiah 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
John 3:16
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Hebrews 1:12
Like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.”
Hebrews 1:8
But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
Revelation 22:13
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”
Revelation 1:17-18
When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last, and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Apologies... Class ended quite a while ago... br... (show quote)
Jun 4, 2021 20:26:27 #
I know, Rose.
Thank you.
Through the grace of God, I am gloriously retired; no accounting office; no classroom schedule, no set routine.
Thank you.
Through the grace of God, I am gloriously retired; no accounting office; no classroom schedule, no set routine.
Rose42 wrote:
Your post stands on its own. No need to defend it.
Jun 4, 2021 21:28:40 #
Tommy Radd,
What ever gave you the impression that I would submit to "yes and no" quizzes on matters you should search out in your own study Bible, after humbly and prayerfully requesting wisdom from God?
I have no way of ascertaining whether I would "like" your informative posts, as I've never seen you post one.
The royal/majestic "we know" which you utilize is inaccurate, as what you think you know differs from my own knowledge.
Matthew 22:36-40
“Teacher, which commandment is the greatest in the Law?”
37 Jesus declared, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Tommy,
To fulfill these commandments requires an understanding of the Triune nature of God, i.e., who God is.
You would spiritually prosper by continuing to the next two verses following your chosen portion of Matthew 22, assembling yourself with the Pharisees, turning your gaze upon the question Jesus asked of them, and scripturally search out the correct answer for your soul's sake.
Matthew 22:41-42
41While the Pharisees were assembled, Jesus questioned them:
42 “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is He?”
What ever gave you the impression that I would submit to "yes and no" quizzes on matters you should search out in your own study Bible, after humbly and prayerfully requesting wisdom from God?
I have no way of ascertaining whether I would "like" your informative posts, as I've never seen you post one.
The royal/majestic "we know" which you utilize is inaccurate, as what you think you know differs from my own knowledge.
Matthew 22:36-40
“Teacher, which commandment is the greatest in the Law?”
37 Jesus declared, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Tommy,
To fulfill these commandments requires an understanding of the Triune nature of God, i.e., who God is.
You would spiritually prosper by continuing to the next two verses following your chosen portion of Matthew 22, assembling yourself with the Pharisees, turning your gaze upon the question Jesus asked of them, and scripturally search out the correct answer for your soul's sake.
Matthew 22:41-42
41While the Pharisees were assembled, Jesus questioned them:
42 “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is He?”
TommyRadd wrote:
Zemirah, br br I have some simple yes or no quest... (show quote)
Jun 4, 2021 22:01:25 #
TommyRadd,
I suggest you join an elementary age Sunday Bible class, not as a teacher, but as a student.
I knew the Biblical answers to these questions when I was eight years old, as do all those in Christian families.
The answers to your questions, especially regarding the identity of God, lie in the Scriptures.
Spend a day with a concordance.
I suggest you join an elementary age Sunday Bible class, not as a teacher, but as a student.
I knew the Biblical answers to these questions when I was eight years old, as do all those in Christian families.
The answers to your questions, especially regarding the identity of God, lie in the Scriptures.
Spend a day with a concordance.
TommyRadd wrote:
Questions for Zemirah, Part 2 br br Zemirah, br ... (show quote)
Jun 9, 2021 16:26:18 #
TommyRadd
Loc: Midwest USA
Zemirah wrote:
TommyRadd,
I suggest you join an elementary age Sunday Bible class, not as a teacher, but as a student.
I knew the Biblical answers to these questions when I was eight years old, as do all those in Christian families.
The answers to your questions, especially regarding the identity of God, lie in the Scriptures.
Spend a day with a concordance.
I suggest you join an elementary age Sunday Bible class, not as a teacher, but as a student.
I knew the Biblical answers to these questions when I was eight years old, as do all those in Christian families.
The answers to your questions, especially regarding the identity of God, lie in the Scriptures.
Spend a day with a concordance.
Zemirah,
It is written:
“19This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. 20For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn't come to the light, lest his works would be exposed. 21But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his works may be revealed, that they have been done in God." John 3:19-21
“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts; and always be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, with humility and fear” 1 Peter 3:15
“22But be doers of the word, and not only hearers, deluding your own selves...” James 1:22-25
I can understand, in light of these scriptures (and others), why you wouldn’t want to answer my questions, being as they shed so much light on your actions, and thus you would prefer instead to attempt to belittle me and act like I don’t know what I’m talking about or referring to. Nevertheless, I forgive you, and I pray the Lord forgives you as well.
Now, I do want to thank you for offering me your advice to “join an elementary Bible class…as a student.” I’m sure you meant that in a sincere way, caring for my soul. And since you have been so gracious and thoughtful, I think it is only fair that I take the time to explain to you my reasons for not taking you up on what must seem to you to be perfectly sound advice.
Reason #1: First off, (after pointing out to you that “No Trinitarian can quote or refer to a scripture that states, unambiguously, that, ‘God is a Trinity of three coequal persons in one substance’” (https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-215511-15.html#3746406), I notice that, rather than attempting to quote scripture that says such, you quoted in approval Athanasius. Which reads in part: “We believe in…one Only-begotten Word, Wisdom, Son, begotten of the Father without beginning and eternally…of the impassible Essence…and we anathe-matise doctrines contrary to this…”
Personally, I have no desire to be taught by people who so perfectly fit the one’s about whom Jesus said:
“But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” Mark 7:7
Since no scripture at all commands me to either believe that Jesus was “begotten of an impassible essence” nor that “God is a Trinity of coequal persons in one substance/essence”, therefore it is obvious that holding people to such “commandments of men” by anathematizing them for breaking their man-made commandments, would cause vain worship. As for me, I am not interested in producing vain worship so the educational path you have recommended would be counterproductive to my goal of worshipping the Father in Spirit and in truth. Hopefully you can understand that and not hold this conviction against me.
Reason #2: I have personally done quite extensive research into the development of the Trinity including men like Athanasius whom you quote and obviously admire and respect enough to hold his words in the place where I would prefer only to put scripture. Here’s a summary of some information that, while it may be okay with you, doesn’t sit very well at all with me:
“6. Conflict and Violence. …This homoousian [one substance doctrine] let loose a fury among mankind that has rarely been paralleled. Millions suffered violence or death in the pursuant wars and persecutions. Hundreds of bishops were exiled or murdered at the command of other bishops who, when the tide was turned, visited the same treatment on their rivals. The great Athanasius was driven from his see five times, and on at least two occasions barely escaped with his life. His Arian enemies, seated in his place of power, were not so fortunate: two of them were lynched, and another was barely saved from the blood-thirsty mobs by the police. Arians and Athanasians alike sought to use the secular arm to terrify and assassinate their opponents, and to seize their congregations, churches, and revenues by force…
“12. The World Goes Mad. It is difficult for us now to realize what madness these theological controversies created, not only within the clerical orders, but among whole populations. One faction consisting of thousands of wild-eyed fanatics stood ready at any moment to engage in civil war any other faction adhering to a variant formulary, the meaning of which neither could comprehend. Nevertheless, they were convinced that their temporal as well as their eternal welfare depended upon the adoption or rejection of the precise term for which they fought. Mobs consisting of metropolitan populations, or hordes of monks, could be inflamed by a slogan to go forth to loot, burn, desecrate, kill, and destroy. The great cities of the East, such as Alexandria, Antioch, and Constantinople were in an almost perpetual state of mob violence. Eusebius states that such rage took possession of bishops and congregations alike that the war spread from Alexandria and Egypt into all parts of the empire. Conditions became so scandalous, he adds, ‘that the sacred matters of inspired teaching were exposed to the most shameful ridicule in the very theatres of the unbelievers.’
“Basil declares that bishops were convicted upon calumny alone; many did not know who had accused them or what the charges were. Some were seized at night and exiled into remote wastes, where they died. All factions, he admits, were equally ferocious and ‘more brutish than wild beasts.’ The bishops ‘roused the strife,’ which was like a ‘contest in the dark’; for no one understood the controversy… One day, two mobs, one of Homoousians and the other of Arians, converged upon the Church of the Apostles ‘in two hostile divisions, which attacked one another with great fury, and great loss of life was occasioned, so that the churchyard was covered with blood, which ran into the adjacent portico, and thence even into the very street’.” Martin A. Larson, The Story of Christian Origins (Tahlequah, OK: Village Press, 1977), 572-576.
As you know, it is written that Jesus said:
“16By their fruits you will know them. Do you gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? 17Even so, every good tree produces good fruit; but the corrupt tree produces evil fruit. 18A good tree can't produce evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree produce good fruit. 19Every tree that doesn't grow good fruit is cut down, and thrown into the fire. 20Therefore, by their fruits you will know them.” Matthew 7:16-20
As far as I know, you may well believe that you have somehow “distanced” yourself from the excesses of the Trinitarian Churches over the centuries. But what is now inescapable is that, when pressed to provide scripture for the one “he”, one “lord” God, you have, instead, quoted Athanasius the champion of Nicene Trinitarianism, and engrafted yourself as a branch on that corrupt tree by your own admission.
Being as Jesus said, “by your fruits you will know them”, I have decided, without any hesitation, it would be more prudent for me to take Jesus’ advice instead of your advice to be indoctrinated by the theological predecessors of the “gang” who took the whole world with them into “The Dark Ages”.
You know, in our current events, we have seen the destructive nature of leftist ideology via the mob violence of ANTIFA and BLM and so forth. I can’t imagine what this country will look like if and when ANTIFA and BLM were to gain the governance here. Well, as for the Dark Ages, we don’t have to “imagine”. The Trinitarians, upon codifying (making into law) their Trinity doctrine, had pretty much complete rule, particularly as far as spiritual matters are concerned. Perhaps you feel compelled to join yourself at the root to the people of an ideology that, when they were in spiritual and political prominence and control, were guilty of practical genocide –murdering millions of dissenters– (much more than ANTIFA and BLM have yet to their record), but that is not an association that I am interested in whatsoever.
“33Don't be deceived! "Evil companionships corrupt good morals." 34Wake up righteously, and don't sin, for some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame.” 1 Corinthians 15:33-34
Perhaps you find some kind of “comfort” or “benefit” being in fellowship and affinity with people who bore the kinds of fruits your Trinitarian forbears exhibited once their “doctrine of men” became the official, legal “law of the land”, but not me. For me, that would be just like joining a criminal street gang.
A criminal street gang is defined as, “…Any ongoing organization, association or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more of the criminal acts…” etc. (nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-gang-definitions) Another definition puts it this way:. “A group of criminals or hoodlums who band together for mutual protection and profit.” (freedictionary.com)
Since the Trinitarian street gang was organized for the specific purpose of breaking the first commandment of God and replacing it with the commandments of men, in open defiance of God’s law, it definitely qualifies under the first definition of street gang activity.
As for the second definition, perhaps you may feel somehow “benefitted” by the “mutual protection”, of being associated with a large group of people, or whatever the case may be, that being in a marauding “street gang” affords you. But again, such just is not for me; that is, it isn’t the spiritual “career path” that I am interested in. For one, I’m not willing to either break God’s law or compromise my morals. Sure, I’ll admit, the “security in numbers” does have some appeal to the carnal mind, all such temtations do. And maybe that kind of peer pressure works for you. But I prefer the liberty to do my own critical thinking, and not be dictated to regarding what to think and believe (especially by murderers) and also especially if such goes against both scripture and my conscience. And if that leaves me lonely more often than not, so be it. For I know that in God there are more with me than against me.
Besides, it is written:
“20But I have this against you, that you tolerate your woman, Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. She teaches and seduces my servants to commit sexual immorality, and to eat things sacrificed to idols. 21I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. 22Behold, I will throw her into a bed, and those who commit adultery with her into great oppression, unless they repent of her works. 23I will kill her children with Death, and all the assemblies will know that I am he who searches the minds and hearts. I will give to each one of you according to your deeds.” Revelation 2:20-23
Since you know your bible, I’m sure you are aware of sexual immorality being used as a metaphor for spiritual idolatry. If this is the case here, which I believe it is since Revelation is chock full of metaphors and symbology, then your “offer of advice” to go be a student at a Sunday school that indoctrinates people into the Trinity would fall under that category of “teach[ing] and seduc[ing] my servants to commit [spiritual] whoredom, and to eat things sacrificed to idols…” being as the Trinity is definitely a man-made image.
So, now I’m even more concerned about you. Along with the above, about giving “her time to repent”, in another place Jesus said, ““O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!” Matthew 23:37.
You’ve definitely been given space to repent of the idolatry that the Romish whore has imposed on Christianity. And now your open acknowledgment of going along with Athanasius in the idolatry and whoredom of their day.
Fortunately for me, I live in a day where I still have liberty to believe, and speak, contrary to Trinity, unlike my spiritual forbears who your forbears hunted down like animals and forced to submit on pain of excommunication, persecution, or death, by the secular arm of the Roman Empire, and others, even up to the time of Calvin and Luther who were complicit in the martyrdom of Michael Servetus.
Perhaps your conscience has been somehow desensitized to these atrocities by the “strength” of your “intellectual” prowess in reciting the traditions of men; but I cannot and will not ever be able to stomach them.
Am I pouring it on “to thick”? Perhaps it is because the blood of the millions of martyrs killed by Athanasius and his street gang, your spiritual forbears, cries out! And being alive, I can still give their cries and protests a voice in this world. I am sure they would have much to say against being in league with the proteges of their murderers. So protest I will, and must.
“4I heard another voice from heaven, saying, "Come out of her, my people, that you have no participation in her sins, and that you don't receive of her plagues, 5for her sins have reached to the sky, and God has remembered her iniquities.” Revelation 18:2-5
You may have come out of the Romish Church, but you are still firmly attached by the branches to the root, which was the official creation and imposition of a man-made doctrine made into a law that all must submit to.
If you’re still not convinced of the idolatrous nature of the Trinity, perhaps my reason # 3 of why I can’t accept your advice will help reach your conscience…
Continued with Reason #3
Jun 9, 2021 16:29:13 #
TommyRadd
Loc: Midwest USA
Reason #3: …is this little piece of information:
“To…the assembly in Pergamum write:…I know…where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is.” (Revelation 2:12–13)
“Pergamum served as the residence of the Attalid dynasty…When Eumenes’s son and second successor, Attalus III, died without an heir, he bequeathed the kingdom [Satan’s seat] to Rome (133 AD). Rome accepted it…” “Pergamum,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, 1974. [Bracket’s mine].
Imagine going to church one day, and the highest diplomatic representative of Satan’s kingdom on earth shows up and asks to sit with the leaders of your church. His open purpose is to help your church come to a consensus about what the entire church body of Christians is to believe. If you can imagine that, then you’ve almost imagined the magnitude of the pagan Emperor Constantine, Satan’s legal heir, showing up to regulate affairs in the Trinitarian Church Councils.
“The emperor Constantine [Satan’s legal heir] granted to himself, as ‘bishop of foreign affairs,’ certain rights to church leadership… leading imperial councils and ratifying their decisions…” “Christianity; Church and state; The history of church and state; The church and the Byzantine, or Eastern, Empire,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, 1974.
Satan’s legal heir led the councils that developed the Trinity, and he ratified their decisions! Satan’s legal heir legitimized Athanasius’ Nicene Trinitarianism. Satan’s legal heir provided the word for “one substance” that you now claim as your own standard… and your conscience is okay with that?
I can’t understand why Trinitarians don’t seem to comprehend the implications of this truth. This means that the Trinitarian bishops repeated the sin of Adam and Eve. They submitted to Satan’s kingdom, rather than God’s. They forsook the kingdom of God that had been purchased back from Satan by Christ’s blood, and turned back to Satan’s kingdom instead. The bishops, thereby, counted the blood of the new covenant “an unholy thing,” and “insulted the Spirit of grace” (Hebrews 10:29).
Now let’s read where Constantine, Satan’s legal heir on earth, actually got his concept of “homoousios” (one substance/essence) from…
“Having…excluded any relationship of the Nicene homoousios with the Christian tradition, it becomes legitimate to propose a new explanation, based on an analysis of two pagan documents which have so far never been taken into account. The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine’s Hermetic background. As can be seen clearly in the Poimandres, and even more clearly in an inscription mentioned exclusively in the Theosophia, in the theological language of Egyptian paganism the word homoousios meant that Nous-Father and the Logos-Son, who are two distinct beings, share the same perfection of the divine nature.” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” Church History 71:2 (June 2002), available at Highbeam Reasearch, www.highbeam.com. Pier Franco Beatrice is a professor of Early Christian Literature at the University of Padua, Italy. This paper was presented as a Master Theme of the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies (Oxford, 16-21 Aug. 1999).
So the Athanasian, Nicene Trinitarian, “unity of substance” came from Egyptian mythology. Trinitarians got their idea of “one-substance” from the gods round about them. But it came first into antichristian Gnostic usage before Constantine, according to surprising total agreement among scholars:
“Surprising though it may seem, there is total agreement among scholars on at least one point. Adolf von Harnack, Ignacio Ortiz de Urbina, Luis M. Mendizábal, George Leonard Prestige, Peter Gerlitz, Éphrem Boularand, John Norman D. Kelly, Frauke Dinsen, Christopher Stead—all without exception agree in claiming that the Gnostics were the first theologians to use the word homoousios…The late Aloys Grillmeir wrote: ‘The early history of the Nicene homoousios shows us that the theologians of the church were probably made aware of this concept, and thus of the doctrine of emanation, by the Gnostics.’” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” 248.
[Satan’s legal heir] “Constantine did not confine himself to imposing, by his authority, the inclusion of homoousios in Eusebius’s creed. He also supplied a ‘philosophical’ explanation with the intention of dispelling any possible misunderstanding connected with the usual ‘materialistic’ interpretation of this word…
“Constantine enunciated his ‘philosophy’ in a more extensive way in the so-called Speech to the Assembly of the Saints. Here…Constantine praises Plato for having said many true things about God…This statement evidently has no relation at all with Plato’s real doctrine. Neither is Numenius likely to have exerted any influence on Constantine’s speech…
“On the contrary, Hermetism offers more significant similarities, and a careful scrutiny reveals strong analogies of thought and language between Constantine’s theology and the tradition found in both the Corpus Hermeticum and the five Egyptian theological oracles of the Theosophia…
“…[I]n Constantine’s view homoousios was a pregnant technical term, with its own precise, traditional Hermetic meaning. In his thought the word homoousios did not contradict the distinction of two divine ousiai, precisely because it was the heritage of the ancient Egyptian theology and of the revelation of Hermes Trismegistus, and had therefore nothing to do with the Sabellian or monarchian identification-theology of the one hypostasis. Hermetism forms the conceptual background of the emperor’s theology…
“Many centuries before being portrayed on the floor of the Siena cathedral (at the end of the fifteenth century), Hermes Trismegistus had already entered the body of Christian doctrine in the semblance of Constantine, setting his seal on the formulation of the Nicene Creed.” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” 264-266, 270, 272..
Now, again, it may make perfect sense for you that Satan’s legal heir provided the catchword (homoousios) that enables you to “understand” the first commandment as meaning “one substance” rather than “one individual (i.e. one “he” or one “lord” Mark 12:29-34). But as for me, my conscience won’t let me go there. I don’t care how much “intellectual” sense it may make; redefining the first commandment of God according to the dictates of Satan’s legal heir isn’t an intellectual decision, for me, it’s a decision of morals and conscience… based utterly on my love for the God who commanded it.
The kind of submission to Satan’s legal heir that the Trinitarian bishops of the fourth century did (which you have spiritually aligned yourself with in your original post) reminds me too much of Adam’s transgression and Eve’s deception, in the Garden. And we know where that got them to say nothing of the rest of us.
Well, I’ve already gone and exceeded what you will typically allow for me to bring up before you start criticizing me for too much info. But then again, haven’t you been presenting yourself as a mature, knowledgeable saint? If what you claim of yourself is the case, I would think that you would be able to stomach strong meat. But since strong meat always seems to leave you “colicky”, even with all your maturity and proclaimed mastery with the word, that to me is yet another characteristic symptom that is not at all appealing to me as a personal spiritual goal for myself. I am interested instead, as the scripture says, to “go on unto perfection…” And the path you are offering evidently is not conducive to producing the fruits that I am striving for, for myself.
So, for all these reasons, and many others just like them, I hope you can understand, or at least accept, why I am forced to turn you down on your gracious offer to be indoctrinated by those you’ve been indoctrinated by
Alternatively, I would like to return the favor, and likewise offer you a bit of advice.
If you find that your conscience doesn’t take to the idea of following in the footsteps of those whom Jesus says that their worship is in vain, whose fruits are murder and persecution of those who don’t fall in with their gang, and who allow the devil’s legal heir to literally dictate to them how they should understand things of God, then perhaps you should consider changing your mind, and turning around (which, as you know, the Bible calls repentance), and allow yourself to follow the lead of those who have overcome such darkness and deception. Because it is quite evident that you have been overcome by those forces of darkness somewhere along the way in your Christian upbringing and indoctrination into literal doctrines of devils. And if at some point you don’t wake up and turn around, there is an expected end awaiting that I truly don’t think you want to be a part of.
“2But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.” 2 Corinthians 4:2-4
“and with all deception of wickedness for those who are being lost, because they didn't receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.” 2 Thessalonians 2:10
But perhaps, after being informed (or reminded as the case may be) of these things, you still feel perfectly at home being in league with the command-breaking, murderous, Satan’s-legal-heir-submitting crowd… Well… I certainly hope not and pray for you that’s not the case, but if so that’s your business. Now if that is the case, then I have yet another message from you from the Lord Jesus Christ…
“29"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and decorate the tombs of the righteous, 30and say, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we wouldn't have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.' 31Therefore you testify to yourselves that you are children of those who killed the prophets. 32Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. 33You serpents, you offspring of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehenna? 34Therefore, behold, I send to you prophets, wise men, and scribes. Some of them you will kill and crucify; and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city; 35that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom you killed between the sanctuary and the altar.” Matthew 23:29-35
And that, out of the mouth of Jesus, is the bottom line reason I have no desire nor intention, nor am I even tempted, to be indoctrinated as you advise, by the spiritual descendants of those who, once their man-made doctrine was made into the law of the land, turned and started murdering and martyring those who then believed as I do now.
“To…the assembly in Pergamum write:…I know…where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is.” (Revelation 2:12–13)
“Pergamum served as the residence of the Attalid dynasty…When Eumenes’s son and second successor, Attalus III, died without an heir, he bequeathed the kingdom [Satan’s seat] to Rome (133 AD). Rome accepted it…” “Pergamum,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, 1974. [Bracket’s mine].
Imagine going to church one day, and the highest diplomatic representative of Satan’s kingdom on earth shows up and asks to sit with the leaders of your church. His open purpose is to help your church come to a consensus about what the entire church body of Christians is to believe. If you can imagine that, then you’ve almost imagined the magnitude of the pagan Emperor Constantine, Satan’s legal heir, showing up to regulate affairs in the Trinitarian Church Councils.
“The emperor Constantine [Satan’s legal heir] granted to himself, as ‘bishop of foreign affairs,’ certain rights to church leadership… leading imperial councils and ratifying their decisions…” “Christianity; Church and state; The history of church and state; The church and the Byzantine, or Eastern, Empire,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, 1974.
Satan’s legal heir led the councils that developed the Trinity, and he ratified their decisions! Satan’s legal heir legitimized Athanasius’ Nicene Trinitarianism. Satan’s legal heir provided the word for “one substance” that you now claim as your own standard… and your conscience is okay with that?
I can’t understand why Trinitarians don’t seem to comprehend the implications of this truth. This means that the Trinitarian bishops repeated the sin of Adam and Eve. They submitted to Satan’s kingdom, rather than God’s. They forsook the kingdom of God that had been purchased back from Satan by Christ’s blood, and turned back to Satan’s kingdom instead. The bishops, thereby, counted the blood of the new covenant “an unholy thing,” and “insulted the Spirit of grace” (Hebrews 10:29).
Now let’s read where Constantine, Satan’s legal heir on earth, actually got his concept of “homoousios” (one substance/essence) from…
“Having…excluded any relationship of the Nicene homoousios with the Christian tradition, it becomes legitimate to propose a new explanation, based on an analysis of two pagan documents which have so far never been taken into account. The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine’s Hermetic background. As can be seen clearly in the Poimandres, and even more clearly in an inscription mentioned exclusively in the Theosophia, in the theological language of Egyptian paganism the word homoousios meant that Nous-Father and the Logos-Son, who are two distinct beings, share the same perfection of the divine nature.” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” Church History 71:2 (June 2002), available at Highbeam Reasearch, www.highbeam.com. Pier Franco Beatrice is a professor of Early Christian Literature at the University of Padua, Italy. This paper was presented as a Master Theme of the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies (Oxford, 16-21 Aug. 1999).
So the Athanasian, Nicene Trinitarian, “unity of substance” came from Egyptian mythology. Trinitarians got their idea of “one-substance” from the gods round about them. But it came first into antichristian Gnostic usage before Constantine, according to surprising total agreement among scholars:
“Surprising though it may seem, there is total agreement among scholars on at least one point. Adolf von Harnack, Ignacio Ortiz de Urbina, Luis M. Mendizábal, George Leonard Prestige, Peter Gerlitz, Éphrem Boularand, John Norman D. Kelly, Frauke Dinsen, Christopher Stead—all without exception agree in claiming that the Gnostics were the first theologians to use the word homoousios…The late Aloys Grillmeir wrote: ‘The early history of the Nicene homoousios shows us that the theologians of the church were probably made aware of this concept, and thus of the doctrine of emanation, by the Gnostics.’” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” 248.
[Satan’s legal heir] “Constantine did not confine himself to imposing, by his authority, the inclusion of homoousios in Eusebius’s creed. He also supplied a ‘philosophical’ explanation with the intention of dispelling any possible misunderstanding connected with the usual ‘materialistic’ interpretation of this word…
“Constantine enunciated his ‘philosophy’ in a more extensive way in the so-called Speech to the Assembly of the Saints. Here…Constantine praises Plato for having said many true things about God…This statement evidently has no relation at all with Plato’s real doctrine. Neither is Numenius likely to have exerted any influence on Constantine’s speech…
“On the contrary, Hermetism offers more significant similarities, and a careful scrutiny reveals strong analogies of thought and language between Constantine’s theology and the tradition found in both the Corpus Hermeticum and the five Egyptian theological oracles of the Theosophia…
“…[I]n Constantine’s view homoousios was a pregnant technical term, with its own precise, traditional Hermetic meaning. In his thought the word homoousios did not contradict the distinction of two divine ousiai, precisely because it was the heritage of the ancient Egyptian theology and of the revelation of Hermes Trismegistus, and had therefore nothing to do with the Sabellian or monarchian identification-theology of the one hypostasis. Hermetism forms the conceptual background of the emperor’s theology…
“Many centuries before being portrayed on the floor of the Siena cathedral (at the end of the fifteenth century), Hermes Trismegistus had already entered the body of Christian doctrine in the semblance of Constantine, setting his seal on the formulation of the Nicene Creed.” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” 264-266, 270, 272..
Now, again, it may make perfect sense for you that Satan’s legal heir provided the catchword (homoousios) that enables you to “understand” the first commandment as meaning “one substance” rather than “one individual (i.e. one “he” or one “lord” Mark 12:29-34). But as for me, my conscience won’t let me go there. I don’t care how much “intellectual” sense it may make; redefining the first commandment of God according to the dictates of Satan’s legal heir isn’t an intellectual decision, for me, it’s a decision of morals and conscience… based utterly on my love for the God who commanded it.
The kind of submission to Satan’s legal heir that the Trinitarian bishops of the fourth century did (which you have spiritually aligned yourself with in your original post) reminds me too much of Adam’s transgression and Eve’s deception, in the Garden. And we know where that got them to say nothing of the rest of us.
Well, I’ve already gone and exceeded what you will typically allow for me to bring up before you start criticizing me for too much info. But then again, haven’t you been presenting yourself as a mature, knowledgeable saint? If what you claim of yourself is the case, I would think that you would be able to stomach strong meat. But since strong meat always seems to leave you “colicky”, even with all your maturity and proclaimed mastery with the word, that to me is yet another characteristic symptom that is not at all appealing to me as a personal spiritual goal for myself. I am interested instead, as the scripture says, to “go on unto perfection…” And the path you are offering evidently is not conducive to producing the fruits that I am striving for, for myself.
So, for all these reasons, and many others just like them, I hope you can understand, or at least accept, why I am forced to turn you down on your gracious offer to be indoctrinated by those you’ve been indoctrinated by
Alternatively, I would like to return the favor, and likewise offer you a bit of advice.
If you find that your conscience doesn’t take to the idea of following in the footsteps of those whom Jesus says that their worship is in vain, whose fruits are murder and persecution of those who don’t fall in with their gang, and who allow the devil’s legal heir to literally dictate to them how they should understand things of God, then perhaps you should consider changing your mind, and turning around (which, as you know, the Bible calls repentance), and allow yourself to follow the lead of those who have overcome such darkness and deception. Because it is quite evident that you have been overcome by those forces of darkness somewhere along the way in your Christian upbringing and indoctrination into literal doctrines of devils. And if at some point you don’t wake up and turn around, there is an expected end awaiting that I truly don’t think you want to be a part of.
“2But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.” 2 Corinthians 4:2-4
“and with all deception of wickedness for those who are being lost, because they didn't receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.” 2 Thessalonians 2:10
But perhaps, after being informed (or reminded as the case may be) of these things, you still feel perfectly at home being in league with the command-breaking, murderous, Satan’s-legal-heir-submitting crowd… Well… I certainly hope not and pray for you that’s not the case, but if so that’s your business. Now if that is the case, then I have yet another message from you from the Lord Jesus Christ…
“29"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and decorate the tombs of the righteous, 30and say, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we wouldn't have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.' 31Therefore you testify to yourselves that you are children of those who killed the prophets. 32Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. 33You serpents, you offspring of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehenna? 34Therefore, behold, I send to you prophets, wise men, and scribes. Some of them you will kill and crucify; and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city; 35that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom you killed between the sanctuary and the altar.” Matthew 23:29-35
And that, out of the mouth of Jesus, is the bottom line reason I have no desire nor intention, nor am I even tempted, to be indoctrinated as you advise, by the spiritual descendants of those who, once their man-made doctrine was made into the law of the land, turned and started murdering and martyring those who then believed as I do now.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.