A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity
On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill codifying same-sex marriage into federal law. The bill now heads to President Joe Biden’s desk for signature.
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)
Ricky Grimsley [09/01/2015 1:07 PM]
Its pretty dangerous to to say that believing the trinity is what it takes t
John Kissinger [09/01/2015 1:10 PM]
the Early Church sure did…
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 3:06 PM]
Yes, I think the Nicene/Athanasian creedal understanding of the Trinity is a minimal necessity for any claim to orthodoxy.
Peyton Gurley [09/01/2015 3:48 PM]
The early church sure didn’t.
Peyton Gurley [09/01/2015 3:49 PM]
The claim to orthodoxy is a joke. No were does the Bible say you have to believe in it just because extra biblical people did.
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 3:57 PM]
One of the arguments rightly used by the Church Fathers was that they were only defending what had been passed down to them directly from the Apostles, and that this teaching was not extra-Biblical, but a defense of Biblical orthodoxy.
Peyton Gurley [09/01/2015 4:02 PM]
Do you know the story of Athanasius?
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 4:03 PM]
“when most people today talk about Sola Scriptura, what they really have in mind is Solo Scriptura. “Solo” Scriptura is the idea that we can learn all matters about faith and practice using the Bible alone, plus nothing else. If a group or person studies the Bible, and they think they have found some truth, doctrine, or practice in Scripture, then they should believe or practice this idea, whether or not it was ever believed or practiced previously in the history of the church. This is “Solo” Scriptura.
Sola Scriptura, on the other hand, as talked about by the Reformers, held to nothing of the sort. They believed that Scripture should be studied in conjunction with the rest of the community of the Saints, especially those Early Church Fathers who helped develop the Creeds of Nicaea and Chalcedon.” http://redeeminggod.com/sola-scriptura-solo-scriptura/
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 4:16 PM]
http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2011/09/28/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-no-christianity-without-it/
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 4:17 PM]
http://www.str.org/articles/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-at-nicaea-and-chalcedon
Henry Volk [09/01/2015 4:24 PM]
??????? ????????!
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 4:55 PM]
A related issue, though slightly off topic, against those who claim that Pentecostal/Charismatic Christianity is itself an innovation outside the tradition of the Church, most of the Church Fathers, and most medieval monastic reform movements, would have disagreed. http://prodigalthought.net/2010/05/16/the-charismata-in-church-history/
Ricky Grimsley [09/01/2015 6:54 PM]
In all seriousness, how can you say that three persons is not three gods. There is only one god. Jesus is the express image of the invisible, the fullness of the godhead bodily. We are one person but we have three separate parts with three different wills at times. Sometimes your body craves something but the spirit says no and your mind decides. How many times do what we dont want to because its the right thing. When we are really like christ we do what we want but all we want is good. Personally i see jesus as the body and father as the mind and the spirit as the spirit. Three but one. Still only one. Three persons sounds like three gods.
Henry Volk [09/01/2015 8:31 PM]
In the Ancient Greek and Latin the word “persons” did not carry the exact connotations that it does today.
John Kissinger [09/01/2015 10:56 PM]
Volk, do tell!
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 11:02 PM]
As Henry points out, the term “persons” used by the Fathers did not have the same meaning as the modern use of the term, so we are not talking about three separate individuals, and thus three gods. In Scripture Jesus uses personal language to talk of the Father and the Spirit, and clearly submits to Father and His will. Such talk would be meaningless if we were only talking about a single person who manifests in three different ways. It would suggest a form of split personality in Jesus.
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 11:08 PM]
http://bible-truth.org/Trinity.html
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 11:09 PM]
http://www.bethinking.org/god/understanding-the-trinity
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 11:09 PM]
http://www.josh.org/resources/study-research/answers-to-skeptics-questions/what-is-the-trinity/
Ricky Grimsley [09/01/2015 11:15 PM]
So in what context is jesus the “everlasting father”Isaiah 9:6 KJVS
[6] For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Shawn Herles [09/01/2015 11:21 PM]
In one sense Jesus is father insofar as he is the firstborn from the dead. This does not mean he is the Father in the Biblical sense, and if he was, it would make no sense for him to pray to the Father, and statements like this one, ““Father, if Thou art willing, remove this cup from Me; yet not My will, but thine be done” would make no sense.
Ricky Grimsley [09/01/2015 11:32 PM]
What is the “father”s name?
John Kissinger [09/01/2015 11:41 PM]
Ricky Grimsley well we know it aint #Jesus
Peyton Gurley [09/03/2015 10:25 AM]
I know Jesus is the Father. I know Jesus is the Son. I know Jesus is the Holy Ghost and all these three are one. Let me tell you who Jesus is. He’s the rock of all ages. He’s the Alpha and the Omega. He’s the Heavenly Father. The Beginning and the End, He’s much more than this my friend. He’s the Son of God and He’s coming back again. Many people today say they know Jesus but they don’t know who He is. They put Him second in the Godhead, they’ve got some strange ideas. But if Jesus Christ created everything and has all power I’m asking you, if Jesus Christ is Lord of Lords, how can He be number two?
Henry Volk [09/03/2015 10:30 AM]
Peyton, how can the Father be the Logos?
Peyton Gurley [09/03/2015 10:33 AM]
The same way He’s the Rose of Sharon and He’s the Lilly of the Valley.
Agreed Ricky Grimsley David Lewayne Porter
I say a Christian is one who models Christ (isn’t that why they were named that at Antioch)?
Now as far as the Trinity and God-Head,, I believe Jesus reference God the Father and the Holy Ghost.
So if we are following Christ we will too, after repentance through the Son.
Well Jesus only people model Christ. Athanasius is proposing A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity. Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head. NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)… Peyton Gurley Henry Volk Ricky Grimsley John Conger John Ruffle
With all (due respect),
Oneness, Jesus only, United Pentecostals are not modeling Christ if they are not adhering to all of His sayings which includes (Father) references, and (Holy Ghost/Spirit – Comforter) references.
If they don’t or can’t then they are not true followers of Christ thus Christians. (MHO).
They are modeling Jesus only 🙂
Oneness Pentecostalism’s denial of the Trinity is really just a novelty, just like it is with the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses. It’s just Romophobia at an extreme level.
Not as novelty as one may think. Most nontrinitarians take the position that the doctrine of the earliest form of Christianity Montanists, Marcionites, and Christian Gnostics. Early Christianity eventually changed after the edicts of Emperor Constantine I and his sentence pronounced on Arius – ‘cunctos populos’ it was called. Certain groups emerging during the Protestant Reformation have historically been known as antitrinitarian.
You are Christians by excepting Jesus as Lord And Savior. I believe in The Trinity. The Lord One of the Disciples if you had known me. You would have Known the Father. It seemed like he was talking to Phillip. I’m not sure.
Acts 11:26
And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Christian is the term used for DISCIPLES of Jesus.
Though it is true that all those that accept Christ should be disciples, the fact is that many naming the name of (accepting) Jesus, do not go on to maturing into disciples and in effect can’t truly be called Christians.
(Just look around at the groups today calling themselves Christians); (Transgender, same-sex, alcoholics, fornicators, etc.)
Jesus asked if we were going to take up our cross and follow him. He also asked Matthew 20:22-23
But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.
They are the true Christians.
Great Scripture.
David Lewayne Porter If you read their literature that’s exactly what they are doing – modeling Jesus only. Would this be the proper Biblical foundation is another question which you have your right to doubt them in. As far as they are concerned they model Jesus only. As far as we are concerned this is not the trinitarian Jesus of the Bible. As far as the Catholics are concerned a non-Trinitarian Jesus is no Jesus at all. But aint no Catholics, right? Pope
My stance Bro Jon Ray
Is that if they do not recognize the God-Head Trinity,
I doubt they can truly (model) Jesus, the Jesus of the Scripture. I submit that is another – any other Jesus, a Jesus that does not eternally exist in unity with the Father and Comforter.
Just MHO.
You are right about this one. Is modeling a non-Trinitarian Christ modeling Christ at all? A very good question for Jesus only people
This argument didn’t make any sense to me. He is the express image of the God head. If we’ve seen him we’ve seen the Father. And the Holy Spirit is the spirit of Christ. How is modelling Jesus not also modelling the Father and Spirit
Ricky Grimsley
Why is there a need for the God-Head if Jesus models it all?
Why did Jesus submit to The Father if He models it all? Why was Jesus delusional in Gethsemane and on the cross while talking to a non-existent being (or another part of himself)?
Why,?,
Even the best question yet
Did the Pharisees want to kill Him for coming from Himself? Why didn’t He just tell them that (I AM GOD),?.
No He said He was From God – The Father, we are told equal with God.
1 Peter chapter 1 is excellent showing us Jesus AND The Father.
Jesus also modeled submission to God (The Father ) which “Jesus only’s” can’t model?
That point in itself voids the entire discussion.
Screen shots provided
All questions Jesus-only people always ask 🙂 The term Godhead is found three times in the King James Version: Acts 17:29; Romans 1:20; and Colossians 2:9. In each of the three verses, a slightly different Greek word is used, but the definition of each is the same: “deity” or “divine nature.” The word Godhead is used to refer to God’s essential nature. We’ll take a look at each of these passages and what they mean.
In Acts 17, Paul is speaking on Mars Hill to the philosophers of Athens. As he argues against idolatry, Paul says, “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device” (Acts 17:29, KJV). Here, the word Godhead is the translation of the Greek theion, a word used by the Greeks to denote “God” in general, with no reference to a particular deity. Paul, speaking to Greeks, used the term in reference to the only true God.
In Romans 1, Paul begins to make the case that all humanity stands guilty before God. In verse 20 he says, “The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (KJV). Here, Godhead is theiotés. Paul’s argument is that all of creation virtually shouts the existence of God; we can “clearly” see God’s eternal power, as well as His “Godhead” in what He has made. “The heavens declare the glory of God; / the skies proclaim the work of his hands” (Psalm 19:1). The natural world makes manifest the divine nature of God.
Colossians 2:9 is one of the clearest statements of the deity of Christ anywhere in the Bible: “In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” The word for “Godhead” here is theotés. According to this verse, Jesus Christ is God Incarnate. He embodies all (“the fulness”) of God (translated “the Deity” in the NIV). This truth aligns perfectly with Colossians 1:19, “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him [Christ].”
Let’s not overlook the plurality of several of God’s names.
What attribute of the Father do you believe we should model that is not found in the son?
Do you believe that Jesus expressed ALL of the Father in his human form?
The question is not what attribute of the Father (if any) …. is not found within the son.
The question is if all was included within the Son why would there be a Father and Holy Spirit?
(Don’t get me wrong, I believe that Jesus showed us what we need to be saved and live victorious and fruitful here. I also believe He showed us all we needed to make it to our eternal reward.
But I also realize there is a need for The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost.
In verses like Ephesians 3:14-19
For this cause I bow my knees unto
“the Father”
of our Lord Jesus Christ,
Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.
Of course I believe there is a distinction but the question here is in the modelling of a communicable attribute. What could we possibly model?
John, My issue (personal issue) is that the (Jesus only, Oneness, United Pentecostals) that my wife and I have known do “model” Jesus – and they do an excellent job of that
[[[except]]] Jesus lifted up the Father. The ones we have known personally do not just exalt Jesus,
BUT they go out of their way to make sure they
lessen and talk down
THE FATHER
and
THE HOLY SPIRIT/GHOST.
Jesus never did that.
So how then is that modeling the
TRUE JESUS?
I agree with that
The word Elohim is the plural of El (or possibly of Eloah) and is the first name for God given. Genesis 1:26 “Then God said (singular verb), ‘Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness'”, but there some say Elohim is singular. And so what?
And
So
What,,
So much for Jesus only.
Ephesians 3:14-19
For this cause I bow my knees unto
“the Father”
of our Lord Jesus Christ, Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.
John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Or
John 1:12
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
But then how would this be possible as sons of God?
Romans 8:14-19
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
Sons of God,
Heirs of the Father
Joint heirs of the Son
So sons of, heirs of, joint heirs with,,,
The same person?
That would be
So
What..
Elohim is used of many spirit beings. There is only one jehovah elohim though. Is not every time that God is seen…..is it not Jesus? For he is the express image of the invisible. Personally i feel the trinity is more like body, soul, and spirit. In the beginning God created…..but we also know that it was jesus?
Theophanies were not necessarily (just Jesus).
Some believe that the Old Testament references to “The Angel of The Lord” was actually Jesus and not an actual angel.
Yes Jesus is the expressed image of the Invisible. Yet, at this time (only in part, not in fulness and completeness).
So does this mean Jesus-only people shall not be saved?
Depends on if they accept the redeeming work of Christ.
The only thing that can keep them out of God’s eternal kingdom after that is Blasphemy of The Holy Ghost (but how can they blasphem who they disallow or do not fully understand)?
Well from what they are saying that’s exactly what they are accepting – the the redeeming work of Christ Jesus – only. With only difference their Jesus is not quite trinitarian…
My wife dated and was engaged to a Jesus only.
The differences are more and deeper than that.
That is why they broke up (one of the main reasons).
Michel Gutman How would you comment this stand of the Early Church
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)
I’m not going to respond to a commentary. I’ll be happy to talk about scripture…. The “Athanasian Creed” isn’t in my Bible…
But the Athanasian Creed is based ON the Bible. Athanasius did defend the biblical, apostolic teaching on this issue. Arius, on the other hand, dismissed John 8:58 and made Jesus a mere man.
Its not in the bible…. But does it contradict the bible?
//Troy Day Michel Gutman How would you comment this stand of the Early Church
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed) Yesterday at 4:56pm//
Well there is the early church, defined by creeds, and there is an earlier church. Not sure you can find such a statement in the first 100 years.
NO problem Michel Gutman Here it is 1 Jn 5:7 ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι Walter Polasik
The best thing for me to do right now is remove myself from this conversation. Have a good day.
The better for you to do is to patiently listen and learn Scripture. That’s what I’m here for as well. I don’t have a corner on everything and the brethren here mention things that may be new to me or that I hadn’t considered. If we debate, it’s always on the basis of God’s Word.
Walter Polasik Metzger’s committee never fully discharged of 1 Jn 5:7 ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι regarldes of Desiderius Erasmus poor findings on the actual sources
Noted. I’ll have to do a little more research on that. Metzger is a good authority. It’s a shame Dr. Bart Erhman constantly refers to him as if he upheld Erhman’s views. He doesn’t. Thanx.
I am firmly NA/UBS and totally against Textus Receptus HOWEVER it constituted the translation-base for the original German Luther Bible, the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version, the Spanish Reina-Valera translation, the Russian Synodal Bible and most Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western and Central Europe – that is 1 Jn 5:7 included in all of them
Troy Day Erm, Troy, my brotha,…why would you say you’re AGAINST Textus Receptus? That’s a strange position to hold. Receptus and the Majority Text (which you cited) are the best manuscript sources. It’s the “Critical Text” and manuscripts that the NIV and some other modern translations use that are the dangerous ones (Vaticanus and Siniaticus, specifically). That’s where the major contradictions and omissions are. (And no, I’m not a KJV-onlyist either. Nor do I subscribe to baseless theories like Gail Riplinger’s or Peter Ruckman’s. I’ve done my homework on these issues…because a decade back I WAS a KJV-onlyist. This was one of the issues that taught me to do careful research and homework. I also learned much by looking at the who New World Translation issue of the JW’s).
There are many reasons for that Mainly too many later editions that have no MSS backup. But pls note I was speaking to the original TR by Erasmus where even the title had an error and read Novum Instrumentum instead of Testamentum – too many man made additions and errors. Way too many for a single textual tradition I do not approve of NIV NLT or later deviations However the NA/UBS text is a scholarly standard and I’ve worked with it enough to respect the work behind it Why is Siniaticus so dangerous to you personally ?
Troy Day I hadn’t heard anything about the title being wrong. I HAD heard about a closing remainder of the Book of Revelation being missing, necessitating a hasty translation from Jerome’s Vulgate.
Oh brother come on 🙂 Over 1500 errors in TR have been corrected alone since and not even by the critical readers of TR – read the first 2 words 🙂
It translates to “A New general work by Erasmus of Rotterdam” (omne is the word for “general” or “compendium’).
Actually the literal Translation means – A new tool Latin word for work is opus
Walter Polasik per the picture above
NOVVM IN
strumentia omne
vs
NOVVM TEST
amentia omne 🙂 You can see the later changes here
https://archive.org/details/novumtestamentum00eras
I am deeply trinitarian ..that being said I have modalist , oneness friends…most of the time the difference in our views are not much more than semantics..now the UPC does go a little far with tongues issue ..that being said I enjoy Phillips, Dean and Craig and many of us sing their songs. I liked TD Jake’s even when he was still oneness..
But in the end there is a big difference between a person or a title or mode …
I think oneness people have the essence part down and the trust and put their life into Christ….
I don’t know if I’m ready to say they are not Christians ..more like misguided trinitarians ..haha
The danger with the UPCI modalists is somewhat different than that of other Unitarians or modalists. This is because the UPCI claims that their doctrine was gotten by “special revelation” as if really from God. The truth is, it is arrived at by faulty reasoning and they continue to use faulty reasoning to defend it. How sad that they ascribe to the activity of the Holy Spirit a doctrine that denies His own personhood! It’s a slap in the face of all Christians who really do believe in the operation of the gifts of the Spirit and in the use of dreams, visions etc. But then, that’s why we have cult leaders like Joseph Smith who attributed HIS false system to “modern revelation” as well. The issue is not, “Does God still speak through dreams and vision”. The issues is, “Is what is presented consistent with the previous teaching and character of God that He has revealed”?
I’ve studied Trinity vs. Oneness for years. So I can argue either side as long as I am willing to ignore certain conflicting verses. 🙂
In the end I felt God tell me that out of love and respect for my Oneness brothers I am to limit my descriptions of God to biblical terms and that if I’m not comfortable doing that to keep studying till I am.
Wayne Scott Well, the truth of the matter is that Oneness theology doesn’t have a biblical leg to stand on. It’s not just that they use one set of verses and ignore others. Even the ones they use are bent and twisted out of shape. Sorry, there are SOME doctrines, like Calvinism, that you can use SOME biblical verses for and get away with it. Modalistic Unitarianism isn’t one of those doctrines. Usually, when I talk to a modalist, he either quiets down and examines the Scriptures I show him or he walks away fuming and angry. But the text is the text, case closed. The same can be said for Cessationism. Chapter and verse, no theorizing and making things up. If the Bible don’t say it, I don’t obey it. 😉
Well I do agree with Walter on the person hood of the Holy Spirit
Do you understand what is meant by,
II cor 3
17Now the Lord is the Spirit…
Or by,
I Cor 15
45So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.
I recently found those. But for years I’ve pondered, “His name shall be called…Everlasting Father.”
Jesus said the HS will come. Describing the same event He also said He will return to us.
“You have one teacher, the Christ” and “When the HS comes He will teach you all things…”
But then, again, the Father said He would put His words in Jesus’ mouth (Deut 18:18-19) and called Jesus a prophet like Moses.
Wayne Scott Ok, and your point being? . . . .
After years of trying to determine if God was Trinity or Oneness, I gave up in frustration conceding defeat. I was frustrated that I could not fully understand God.
But then I laughed at myself. If I could fully understand God He would not be God. I can no more fully understand God than the ant on the computer screen can understand the internet.
Well they are all equally God..Jesus physical body had to go away so that the Spirit could indwell US..not just be among us..but the only place for me that makes I real real distinction is the blasphemy part..
Wayne Scott And that’s the way it should be. However, at least those things that God HAS revealed to us, He’s made clear for us to understand. (Deut. 29:29; Rom. 1: 19,20).
Mark. I think about blasphemy, Jesus is saying that we can talk bad about Him as a person but not disobey the HS. Blasphemy is in the present continual sense and means to continue to disobey. “Those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.”
We have all at one time disobeyed (blasphemed) the HS.
Walter, I know Romans 1 and will read Deut 29 right now.
Nothing in either says we must understand the Trinity to be saved. But I do not think that is what you were saying.
We must know God but here is what I think that means:
jer 22
15“Does it make you a king
to have more and more cedar?
Did not your father have food and drink?
He did what was right and just,
so all went well with him.
16He defended the cause of the poor and needy,
and so all went well.
Is that not what it means to know me?”
Wayne Scott The sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit mentioned by Jesus in Matt. 12:31,32 has to do with someone who sees evidence of the work of the Holy Spirit and yet attributes this to Satan, as the Pharisees were doing. Really, the only ones capable of committing this sin are Christians who are in rebellion against the work of the Holy Spirit. This is why it was so dangerous for the Pharisees to oppose Jesus’ miraculous work. Christians today who have the same attitude regarding the supernatural work of God are just as much in danger of committing this sin.
Wayne Scott To disobey is not the same as to blaspheme. Blasphemy is a SPEAKING sin. It’s verbalizing hatred and animosity towards God’s supernatural work. What this sin is CLEARLY spelled out.
Walter. I see your point. But I see another side of blaspheme as in David, by his sin, causing the Gentiles to blaspheme God. Looks to me like they looked at Israel’s righteous king and saw him sin and figured that if he had decided his God was not worth walking with, then He is not.
Sad to say I never understood blasphemy from this light until my wife of 30 years divorced me.
It’s important to know God the way the Bible teaches us to know Him. Note that Jesus told the Pharisees that unless they recognized that He is God, that He is the “i AM”, they would DIE IN THEIR SINS. (Jn. 8:58). It’s not a small matter.
The more I study the simpler it gets.
James 1
27Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”
And I just recently noticed that in Matt 25:31-46 the sheep seem to have been saved by serving/loving Jesus without knowing it was Jesus they were serving.
John the elder wrote,
I John 4
7Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God.
But which kind of love? Mmmm
Amen!!!
Mark How is on deeper or shallow Trinitarian? You are either or .. right? Wayne Scott UPC modailistc Trinity is plainly heretical
Haha yeah I guess your right. But I focus alot on the person of the Holy Spirit
// Wayne Scott UPC modailistc //
I do not think so. Please support your statement.
False Doctrine of Modalism: As taught by the United Pentecostal church http://www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-modalism.htm
Troy, I’m not UPC and I’m not a modalist. I was UPC for 10 years but it ended when I was in my early 30’s about half my life ago.
While “Trinity” might be our best attempt to explain the Godhead, as I explained I felt God tell me to limit my descriptions of God to biblical terms out of love and respect for my oneness brothers.
I shared that earlier but what I did not share is that I also felt God tell me that if they are offended by a verse that seems to describe God as a Trinity, they can get over it.
Still sounds pretty modalistic if you ask me
I do not respond well to people who try to control me by making me parrot words I do not understand.
I’m now 62 but I remember graduating high school, which ended my 8 year stint playing football. I entered college at 17 years old and being sick of football, as a lark tried out for the wrestling team and won a starting position and was winning matches before my 18th birthday.
I was a long haired pot smoking hippie who had suddenly physically matured and took to wrestling like a duck takes to water.
I was an atheist who was spitting in the face of authority. I hated anyone who tried to control me in a negative way. I’ve tried to tone it down a little but I still hate for insecure people to try to control others.
So have half ot the ppl in this group but what does this have to do with OP? :: A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity
Christian, by definition, means “a follower of Christ.” I am a follower of Christ and you would brand me as a heretic because I do not understand the Trinity and take steps to not offend my modalist brothers?
Good to know Let’s stick to the OP on this one pls
The OP is about the Trinity. Does “sticking with the OP” mean I must agree? Are you wanting to preach only to the choir or are your opinions open for discussion?
I was simply explaining how UPC is modalistic. Now that we agree, there’s no further issue with UPC modalism
Okay. I must have misread. I thought you were calling me a modalist.
Wayne Scott Nicene/Athanasian creedal understanding of the Trinity is a minimal necessity for any claim to orthodoxy UPC is not orthodox in their modalistic explanation of Trinity; nor Trinitirian; probably not Christian either – if we compare St. Atanasius
As I told you 34 min ago, I’m not modalist.
Maybe you’re a totalist…haha
A Christian also believes the Lord their God is One. To say, “I believe in the Trinity,” seems without much real meaning, as we can acknowledge references to the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, while believing radically different things about what that means. And, if we use our Trinitarian assertion in such a way as to obscure the intrinsic Oneness of God, we’re dead wrong; ie. considering the Lord’s greatest commandment.
It meant a lot for the Early Church as well, and that is exactly what they said:
ONE GOD ~
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)
I agree with you
Ricky Grimsley when I posted this back in the day was namely to show unitiarian Jesus-only oneness fellers like Michael Hazlewood that their believe in what they call Jesus-only-Trinity is not the orthodox Christian Trinitarian believe
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)
YOU are False accusing son I am a One God Apostolic Baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sins
You mean you have to believe in the Trinity to be a Trinitarian….WOW
IF Holy God and The Lord Jesus Christ are not ONE in the same person there is no remission of sin
Well I guess that depends on your definition of Christianity
I have had a new view of this recently. I have always believed there was one God and most others believe the same. However, the way most see the godhead, or rather explain the godhead, seems to border on polytheistic unity, or a schizophrenic deiety with a multiple personality disorder. Not accusing any of beliveing those things, just pointing out the appearance of many explanations.
I was studying baptisim, because something someone told me challenged my view, and was something I hadn’t heard before. In my study, I was stongly impressed on by the Holy Spirit the start looking at a box. It has height, width, and depth. It is not 3 boxes, but one. It has 6 side surfaces and volume inside, but it is still one box. Everything in the universe is comprised in 3 dimensions. Height, width, and depth. Those 3 dimensions can also be seen as space, matter, and time. I had a strong feeling that God was nudging me as if saying, “Can you not see the Creator reflected in the creation?” I sat and drew out this simple diagram. Followed by several others, to help me wrap my mortal little mind around it. I will share them latter this evening when I’m at my computer.
Troy Day, On my computer now. Here is that drawing. Is this not how we explain the universe? Everything has Height, Width, and Depth, as well as Space, Time, and Matter?
Is this not how the Bible explains mankind?
Here is an example of how I see people explain the One God of the Bible. This is my understanding as taken from actual conversations of the differing ideas explained to me.
This is how I have become to understand the makeup of God. Godhead is a term I don’t nesissaryily care for, but it is the one that is accepted in English speaking society since the KJV was translated in 1611.
flat earth? Jared Cheshire
Lol. No
I’ve lived on the water. You can see the curve. The arguments the flat earthers make demontrate a lack of experience and education. In my humble opinion.
Jared Cheshire Michael Hazlewood I think the saint was right when he said
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)
Did the church teach a trinity of three separate persons before 300 AD? I haven’t found that.
check the words of Jesus (in red)
So are the rest of the words in black of lesser value? Were they wrong? Or are all scripture given by inspiration of God and if there is a seeming contradiction, it is in our mortal understsnding?
When you have seen me, you have seen the Father.
What? Have I been so long with you and you don’t know me Philip?
My Father to send the comforter in my name.
I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you.
Does the “angel of the Lord”, fit somewhere into this wheel?
Is the angel of the Lord, Jesus or theophany ?
Depending on the circumstances, the angel of the Lord could have been just a messenger. Although I believe there were throphanies several times. Example, in the fire with the 3 Hebrew boys. But if Jesus is eternal, and Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God, would it make sense that a theophany is Jesus? Something to wrap your mind around, isn’t it? I have been looking at that trying to figure it out for quite a while. While I believe that is quite likely, I haven’t been able to prove or disprove it.
Jared Cheshire I love this observation.
Thank you sir.
Yw
I believe every throphany was Jesus… 🙂
throphany? milenial spell checker?
Troy Day it us called autocorrect
we used to call it spell checker back in the day – milenials may call it something new; Once a program was a program not an app
Troy Day the good thing about spell checker is it does not automatically correct you.
Either way a little common sence goes a very long way.
Mine did as early as Office 1997
Troy good for you!
I prefer to call that feature auto corrupt. Lol ?
Jared it gets tricky. Lol
Pick your reference.
I’d say the Angel of the Lord is Jesus
The Angel of the Lord = Jesus? But that can’t be so.
Why?
Logically, Jesus’ angel would be “the Angel of the Lord.” At Rev. 22:16 Jesus is quoted saying, “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. . .” Jesus sent Himself? (Not likely.)
That is in Revelation. Not the old Testament
The NT is a different angel of the Lord than the OT?
Very well could be…
Are you Trinitarian?
Dan Irving here is a great read on some of them…
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdriscoll/2017/03/jesus-in-the-old-testament-part-4-christophanies/
Dan Irving this is another great read in it
https://www.gotquestions.org/angel-of-the-Lord.html
I’ve never really classified myself, as I sense dogmatism on both sides. Oneness proponents who deny the principles expressed by Trinitarians can be fiercely dogmatic. But Triinitarians can hold their own in this arena too. Thanks for those links. I’ll give them a view.
It can go either way that is for sure. I have a reason to believe the Angel of the Lord was Jesus… Especially as a Trinitarian.
I think there are mysteries concerning the angelic realm that are only touched upon in scripture. Christ tells of sending His angel. The believers to whom Peter came at night, believed it was, rather, Peter’s “angel” they were seeing. It seems the early church held a view/position/doctrine, we don’t have today.
So true Dan… I always keep in mind that is all during the time of Christ. However before Christ. I believe these manifestations were Jesus.
I tend to that view as well. He has always been “before all things,” “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.”
Amen. So with him making appearance in the Old Testament at times gave them proof of their faith.
That seems the key word, “Faith.” I think of the Lord’s words in Jn. 6 “you have seen me, and believe not.” I think those are the most fearsome words the Lord spoke. What does it mean to behold the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of our own spiritual nature, and yet, to “believe not.”????
angels are created
surprised Ricky Grimsley has not pitched in with the eternal sonship of Christ
What is the Son of God according to the ancient peoole of the OT? Did that thinking carry over into the New Testament?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14VHZGSV2gyHABLfYu7-jHB_4wLRg4M1E/view?usp=drivesdk
Jesus was not the son in eternal past. He is son forever now though.
If what Ricky said was true how can it be Jesus only Michael Hazlewood
You said Jesus only , I didn’t
I’m tired of debating people who don’t want to know the Truth they just want to pretend to know something that is not so and show off their ignorance
Quite an ignorant way to approach such people dont you think ?
Is there any other name given?
Yall don’t answer my questions , read my Scriptures or even care what they say
Why assume all that so wholeheartedly?
What assumption ???
The one you just stated in your previous comment
With soooo many Scriptures in the 1000s saying there is only One God and none else and soooo many Scriptures showing baptism is essential IN JESUS NAME for salvation and yall remain so proud of your false information saying there are 3 Persons coequal and baptism is works salvation , I feel I am waisting time with people who just don’t care or want to know
“Jesus only” is illogical on its face. How can jesus intercede for us if he is all there is?
In His Father the Holy Ghost
Matthew 1:18-21 and John 10:30 KJB
John 4:24 KJB
God the father is a spirit jesus is the body. Just like we triunity of man. Except they are in harmony
Ricky Grimsley That is not what the Scripture says
It certainly does.
God is a Spirit not a spirit
Ricky Grimsley NO , it doesn’t where is harmony in the Scripture or coequal in Scripture or God the Son or God the Holy Ghost or Trinity ?
Philippians 2:5-9 KJVS
[5] Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: [6] Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: [7] But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: [8] And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. [9] Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
How can there be two Almighty Gods ; if there were 2 then neither is Almighty Revelations 1:8 KJB
There arent two gods.
Ricky Grimsley So you are saying The Lord Jesus Christ is not The Almighty God ?
Philipians 2:10 KJB
Colossians 2:10 KJB
Jesus is what you see when you see God
Ricky Grimsley Jesus is WHO you see when you see God
John 14:9 KJB
Believing the Word of God above ALL else be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and receive the Baptism of the Holy Ghost that the Apostles and Christians of the Holy Bible KJB received
Ricky did you just ask: How can Jesus intercede if He is not all there?
No
If jesus is all there is he cant make intercession because intercession is between two parties. Their has to be three entities for there to be and intercessor. If jesus only is true then there are only two parties.
Cannot the flesh intercede with the Spirit?
Thats my assertion. To me the Godhead is like man. Body soul and spirit. Three different wills but in the case of the godhead they are in unity.
Next you go from 3 to 9 Just think about it
That is correct
I dont get nine because i believe one body one spirit one soul
Would one body, one spirit, and one soul still be one?
I am one
But my flesh wars with the spirit over the soul. God doesnt have that problem
7?
I know one church, its a holy godly church who believes in Jesus only. Most of their people would put most so called Christians to shame. They really live what they believe.
To me there are so many scriptural references to the contrary.
1. At least twice a voice from heaven said This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. One reference was at Christs baptism.
2. The great commission about baptism.
3. Most of the epistles written to the church begin with from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ
Link Hudson are you aware of the Creed being revised as John David Barton claimed? I know for a fact this statement here has NOT been revised any. Henry Volk how can the Father be the Logos?
Troy Day the logos is right here
Genesis 48:16
[16]The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.
Troy Day and here
Exodus 23:20-22
[20]Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
[21]Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
[22]But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.
Troy Day. And here
Revelation 10:1-7
[1]And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire:
[2]And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth,
[3]And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices.
[4]And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.
[5]And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,
[6]And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:
[7]But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
You guys need to brush up in your biblical knowledge. The preexistant logos was the Angel of the Lord. Jesus was the flesh. You teach evil and don’t contend for your own faith But rest on your laurels. I pray for your peace.
I feel Link Hudson already explained most of this
Troy Day the Logos is not the Father, but the second Person of the Trinity. John David Barton by saying the Logos is the angel of the Lord, do you mean to say the Logos is created?
There has been LOTS of angel of the Lord interpretation in this group lately
Ricky Grimsley said it was Michael
Link Hudson explored Heiser for it being 2nd YHWH
now John David Barton is killing Link Hudson + Heiser because Jesus in the OT being the 2nd YHWH / Logos opens the door for straight oneness heresy
Troy Day I don’t see the oneness connection. It is called second Yahweh, not the one-one Yahweh lol.
same as if Jesus was Michael per se
Henry Volk no. Who do you think God is. Who do you think God saints are
The mighty angel is God. As we know elohim means the plurality of God. But his name is Yehovah Elohim. The Lord God or master angel. You really need to study. Compare Matthew 24:30-31 with Revelation 7:1-2. Compare revelation 10 to revelation 1. Even Jacob saidwhen he placed his hands on Joseph’s sons the Angel who redeems me from all evil.
In exodus the Lord said beware of him don’t provoke him he will not forgive your transgressions for my name is in him.
How can an angel choose whether to forgive or not? Only if his name is Jesus. Jesus said i come in my father’s name. I am in my father and my father in me
God said he is a God of gods and we are called gods yet we will die like men. Who or what do you think we are?
You have one chance at returning to grace. Don’t forsake your first love. God is properly united as one. The spirit of God fully dwells in his logos Jesus. The mighty angels name is Yehovah.
John David Barton God is the Trinity-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Troy Day As I recall, you were the one who seemed fixed on the two powers hypothesis when it comes to Heiser, and I kept bringing up the Old Testament case he was making for ‘sons of God’ being the ‘ye are gods’ group in Psalm 82.
What is the two powers hypothesis again ?
Troy Day You called it ‘second Yahweh’. He calls it two powers in heaven.
Yes, I did make a very solid point that dualism is not Biblical though present in some church traditions. Paulinian dualism – Jesus and Lucifer being brothers was condemned as pure heresy by Eastern Orthodoxy Henry Volk may have some recollection on that too in some form
Troy Day To be fair, interpretations that have Christ having a pre-Incarnation role are not contrary to the idea of the Spirit having a role as well. Acts 2 does not speak of the Spirit sitting co-reigning with the Father in heaven. That does not make Peter’s message unorthodox. Isn’t Paulinian dualism about the flesh v. the Spirit? What would the idea of Jesus and Lucifer being brothers have to do with this? Does Heiser consider Lucifer to be Satan?
The Old Testament does speak of ‘sons of God’. For example, they rejoiced when the foundations of the earth were laid. But Jesus is the Son in a different and unique sense. Heiser would acknowledge that as well.
Little is known of the tenets of the Paulicians except the reports of opponents and a few fragments of Sergius’ letters they have preserved. Some argue that their system was dualistic,[22] although others have argued that it was actually adoptionist in nature.[23][24]
In dualistic theology, there are two principles, two kingdoms. The Evil Spirit is the demiurge, the author and lord of the present visible world; the Good Spirit, of the future world.[3] Of their views about the creation of humanity, little is known but what is contained in the ambiguous words of Sergius. The passage seems to teach that Adam’s sin of disobedience was a blessing in disguise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulicianism
Troy Day I thought you might have been talking about the Paulicians rather than Paulinian. I’d heard the name, but didn’t remember the details.
Sorry – spellchecker does NOT recognize them
Were you using a phone with auto-defect?
John David Barton I really dont think much brushing would be helpful with a heretical doctrine that is NOT based on the Bible as the onlyism you defend. I also dont see HOW you arrived at all these conclusions from just reading your Bible as most of them come straight from oneness forums. Link Hudson already explained several of your weaknesses – do we need to go over them again for further consideration?
I would not agree with the subject line. I wouldn’t consider all Christians pre Nicea, for example, who did not have a worked-out understanding of the Trinity to be damned. Or even all the groups that were labeled as Arian, etc.
If Trinitarianism were required to be a Christian, I would have expected Jesus and the apostles to have taught this and for it to have been recorded in the Bible. Is it reasonable to think that Peter’s audience in Acts 2 to have had trinitarian views based on the message recorded in Acts 2? Is that reasonable looking at any of the evangelistic messages in Acts or at any of the passages in the epistles that explain how we are saved? The apostles preached about the death, burial, resurrection and Lordship of Christ.
Realistically, how many Pentecostals in trinitarian denominations understand the trinity enough to believe in it? I occasionally hear people say things that sound sort of Oneness. Not so much Arian, though I did read about one group of Pentecostals that had Arian beliefs.
The intellectual and the spiritual are different parts of a person’s being/self. As long as people have faith through their spiritual being, that’s all that matters.
Be renewed in the spirit of your mind.
If I have ever hard a gnostic dualism since Heiser this is it right there plainly by Joshua A. Humphries
So Link Hudson Athanasius was not wrong of course regardless if you agree with him or not BUT Heiser draws on the Trinity from his 2nd YHWH studies. IF I had only had a fresh-er memory where exactly he talks about it But may be Brian Roden can help us located it soon enough
By Athanasius do you mean the psuedo-Athanasian Creed?
Do you think that early Jewish Christians, if they believed that Jesus died for their sins, rose from the dead, is the Son of God, is Lord, seated on the right hand of God, repented, confessed their faith and were baptized were not saved if they did not believe every detail of the Athanasian Creed? If that is the case, then why do not all the details of the creed appear in the presentations of the Gospel related to what one needs to do the be saved in the BIble?
How many Pentecostals in the A/G, CoG, IPHC, etc. would be damned if this were the case? Should Pentecostals teach out of the Athanasian Creed and have everyone recite it in church so that they can believe it and be saved? Should we all add it to the Bible?
Athanasian Creed => https://www.britannica.com/topic/Athanasian-Creed
And this is why Heiser is strange and dangerous – he borrows much from this:
The group given credit for initiating the spread of pseudo-Devil worship in the Christian world are Gnostics. Their dualist theory of the universe included reversals of Christian belief, such as the idea that the world is really hell, and that mankind was created by a race of rebel angels known as Archons. (Since the world is evil it could not have been created by a good God.) The supreme Archon was identified with the God of the Old Testament, whom the Gnostics saw as savage and cruel. Still other groups of Gnostics believed that the world was created by seven fallen angels, led again by the Old Testament God. It is he who inspired the prophets to lead mankind astray. Astray from whom? The Devil, who was a good angel in opposition to the evil God of the Jews. Strangely enough, many of them saw Jesus Christ as a savior who was to liberate humans from the evil God who had led them astray. This was not enough to convince Christians that they were not worshipping the Devil, however, and the Church Fathers sought to warn good Christians to steer clear of these heretics.
Troy Day Those Gnostics were various different groups who had their own beliefs and ideologies, not just one big group with the same ideas. I’m not sure what your tie-in is there with Heiser.
Heiser borrows their Jesus-Lucifer dualism but not from Gnostics it would be worthwhile to recollect that generally in such Cathar radical
dualist teachings Satan-Lucifer (seen on occasions as the son of an eternal evil
god) initiates an attack on the heaven of the good God, causing the fall of the angels
and the imprisonment of angelic souls in human bodies;
auto-spell, auto-link, auto-read, auto-type, etc
Troy Day what does your theology say the mighty angel of revelation 10 is? And what do you say the “A”ngel of exodus is?
Exodus 23:20-21
[20]Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
[21]Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
it says it is NOT a 2nd YHWH
Troy Day look into the exodus passage. I’m not saying second YHWH I’m saying he is the master Angel. Do angels not look like God and men? Aren’t they also called sons of God? Cannot Elohim be translated as either God or angels. Yet he is YHWH Elohim. Not Michael, Lucifer, or Gabriel. He was made so much better than the angels because he had obtained a more excellent name then they. Anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows.
In exodus God says If you obey his voice, and do what “I” speak. He is telling us plainly that this Angel is HIM. “For my name is in HIM” even Jacob said the Angel that Redeemeth me from all evil. Can an angel redeem us? No but the Angel can! Open your eyes brother and know the truth. What’s done is the spirit is manifest in the physical. The fall. Colossians speaks of reconciliation of all things in Heaven and Earth. Does that mean fallen angels? Are they a part of all things? Are we the fallen saints given a chance at redemption before the mercy seat? Probably not. But he cast them into the earth and then fashioned man from the earth. He cast them to the earth to die like men. We are all sons of God. What do you think? I’m still collecting my evidence but if i can’t prove it then I’m wrong and I’ll repent of my wickedness. Just please look into this. What If that’s the truth. Then I’d say our God is truly merciful and his love endures forever right?
John David Barton Hebrews says the Law was delivered through angels. But ir says for to which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art My Son. This day have I begotten thee.
Angels can speak words God says like prophets do.
Yes John David Barton I am not seeing a 2nd YHWH either as I have already advised Link Hudson about that in detail
Troy Day this sound pretty similar to what I read of Heisler’s theory if you add to it references to certain passages. The idea of Christ as the Angel of the Lord goes back to at least the second century but I am notconvinced it squares with Hebrews.
Christ as the Angel of the Lord is twisted by Heiser to be a 2nd YHWH – a terminology that is just NOT Biblical HE twists Said the LORD to my LORD and then jumps to Elohim Tom Steele already addressed this partially saying he’s never seen in rabbinic literature. I have not either. Hesier is mix-n-matching to create a better looking theory
Troy Day you misinterpret my understanding. I am not claiming 2 YHWH’s, but one! The Angel in genesis 48 is God. God is our Redeemer. The angels are the sons of God correct. They are sons of Emmanuel the YHWH Elohim, the first and the last! The Seven spirits of God are the plurality of el. Right? Yet EmmanuEL is the first and the last HE is the seventh spirit of God. He is God! MichaEL, GabriEL, RaphaEL, UriEL, RaguEL, SarakiEL. SarakiEL being released by MichaEL the fifth angel, to blow his trumpet as the sixth angel which starts the war on the Euphrates river called Armageddon. Then the mighty angel comes. EmmanuEL, with the book of life!
Troy DayThe mighty angel in revelation 10. The head of this angel is the glory of God which is the head of Christ. The rainbow is the manifestation of light. Light being the glory of God. Satan has perverted the rainbow in these end times. His face shone with the strength of the sun symbolizing the brightness of his glory which manifested itself visible as a rainbow(or flesh of Jesus) of promise for redemption(like Noah) to all those who look to HIM. His garments were clouds symbolizing the distance in strength between HIM and his angels as he was placed a little higher than the angels. His feet were pillars of fire which lit(or caused to be) the mountains of fire(or lampstands) which were his children(angels). Do you see this?
John David Barton a __little___ higher than the angels?
John David Barton I did not misinterpret your understanding because I do not know your understanding; I am trying to simply understand your understanding not interpret it but thus far I still can figure out your understanding It is an understanding that will fit better a oneness group. In this Pentecostal theology group most of us are AG which refused oneness theology as heresy as early as 1914. So over a century later you are beating a dead horse which is getting even dead-er when you claim this is your understanding all and while you quote the claims of other people and not really your understanding
John David Barton you are YET to answer the original claim of this post THAT one cannot be a Christ believer ie Christian if does not believe the Trinity. Like a Jew who does not recognize Jesus in the Trinity is not a Christian – how do you feel about the original claim in this OP?
Can you show me where the Bible teaches that if one does not believe in the deity of Christ, he cannot be saved? If this were the case, when Peter and Paul were preaching to Jewish audiences, why don’t their sermons in Acts hammer home this point. Considering the beliefs of their audience, does it not make sense that this would have to be preached?
In the little mini-creed at the beginning of I Corinthians 15, Paul does not include accepting the doctrine of the deity of Christ or the idea that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit among the things one has to believe in order to be saved.
1 Jn claims the opposite is the spirit of the antichrist – can you show me where the Bible teaches the opposite ?
Troy Day which name saves you? Does the father save you as Isaiah says? Does the holy spirit save you as Romans 8 11 says or does Jesus save you as acts 4 12 says? Who saves you? Who redeems you from all evil? What’s his name? Of you believe there is salvation in any other then you are not saved!
Really confusing stuff.
No confusion.
Genesis 48:16
[16]The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.
Exodus 23:20-21
[20]Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
[21]Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
Acts 4:12
[12]Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Romans 6:3-4
[3]Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
[4]Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
1 Peter 3:20-21
[20]Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
[21]The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Acts 2:38
[38]Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
John David Barton Is this Angel in Exodus 23:20-21 Jesus?
John David Barton firemen save people too. That does not prove Oneness doctrine
John David Barton why are you repeating these verses? They dont say what you want them to say! You claim you just read the BIBLE and found them and figured out oneness but what you say comes straight from oneness forums. We have all seen it before I have proposed to start looking into each of this verses so you can see the actual BIBLE and not some strange false doctrine you picked up at an internet forum
Here is the FIRST one The rest to come soon This is how its done
https://www.facebook.com/groups/pentecostaltheologygroup/permalink/1996481500406855/
Link Hudson the Angel is a theophany of God.
Troy Day read revelation 19-22.
Revelation 19:9-14
[9]And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
[10]And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
[11]And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
[12]His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
[13]And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
[14]And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Revelation 19:17-21
[17]And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
[18]That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.
[19]And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
[20]And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
[21]And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.
These are the same story. Why would John worship anyone but God
Revelation 21:9
[9]And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.
This angel is Jesus
Check out the next chapter. It’s continues what this Angel says
Revelation 22:1-16
[1]And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
[2]In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
[3]And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
[4]And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
[5]And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.
[6]And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.
[7]Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.
[8]And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
[9]Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.
[10]And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
[11]He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
[12]And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
[13]I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
[14]Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
[15]For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
[16]I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Then it said his name Jesus
Jesus is the seventh angel with all the fullness of the seven vials with the rainbow of the seven crowns. His promise of redemption. Jesus even said we will be like the angels in Heaven. And we will judge the fallen angels on his right hand. What done in the Spirit manifest in the flesh. We are given a chance at redemption. Were all His “saints” read revelation twelve and it will tell you why redemption wad necessary. Because of the Dragon swiping the stars.
Use the key Jesus has given me to unlock the truth of scripture. Adam and eve symbolic of God’s host being a whore of submission and being cast out. Cain and able symbolic of the sacrifice of innocent blood that would come later as Abel was younger. The sins of Cain caused Abel to be slain.
Adam and eve are symbolic of all creation. That’s why adam named the beast. But God created man after the beast? Adam and eve is symbolic of the punishment of separation from God as fallen angels. Eve was a whore like God calls us whores
Thank you
John David Barton you are quoting the SAME 3 verses with NO interpretation Pls give us your interpretation in order to be understood instead of just trolling the group for Terry Wiles
I read Rev 19-22 I does NOT say what you want it to say You are continuing to post verses that do not prove your idea. Read Is. 53
You came to the group claiming you wanted to learn
Soon enough you began trolling the group with copy/paste arguments from oneness group. Proper answered are presented
As you see, we have taken the time to respond to each of your Biblical texts However, the trolling and spamming are unbecoming and out of control
John David Barton Very wrong Mister.
Jesus is not an angel and cannot be one.
John 1: 1 plainly states He was before anything..or anyone(angels including)
Arent angels created beings?
Is Jesus a crrated being?
Why do you twist scriptures to fit in with your philosophy and doctrine instead of letting scriptures twist your doctrine and philosophies and make you right?
Am not a scholar but the moment someone comes and tells me Jesus is an angel I know they are in the wrong.
Do you feel comfortable to say Jesus is an angel?
Well, it could be that you have a different Advocate. ..a Holy Spirit who glorifies ANOTHER JESUS.
Jesus said I and the Father are one(not I and the angels) and what does Phillipian 2:9 state: every knee in heaven(are angels on earth)…..and on earth are to bow down and every tongue confess Jesus is Lord to the glory of the Father.
Father God i thabk you that even though im unschooled and untrained in philosophy and dogma and theology, you have enabled me to understand that Jesus is God…
John David Barton God calls us “His children” not whores.
John David Barton
Brother John i have never attended a Bible college but I know from the SCRIPTURES that what you are preaching is a man made philosophy.
It is a philosophical doctrinal captivity which Collosian 2:8 clearly warned us of..
Beware that no man enslave you with mere empty philosophies originating with man not with Christ…
Have read Rev 5….?
It says in an overview that the whole assembly of heaven bowed down to the slain lamb of God and what did they say”…Worthy is you…..to receive praise, honor……”
Is there an angel in heaven worthy of praise and honor anf power and worship..
Brother John if i was living near you I would have come over so that we could have a real fellowship …
Your understanding of who Jesus is determines your final destination…
Jesus is the Saviour..not an angel
John David Barton
When John prostrated to worship the angel the angel refused(read the scriptures you have sent)…verses 8 and 9..and the last words of this verse 9 the angel tells John ” worship God”
Troy Day have mery on brother Barton.
He has been fed the wrong things and he pours them as it is…
Teach him politely he will understand that he is in the wrong.
He needs a Saviour not a Bible school…
Isara Mo Troy Day please tell me who this scripture is referring to then?
Genesis 48:16
[16]The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.
Or this one?
Exodus 23:20-21
[20]Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
[21]Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
This is called a theophany right? An appearance of God. So why does it refer to God as the Angel or malak in Hebrew?
I’m not saying I’m worshipping angels. My Redeemer is Jesus. But Jesus is the almighty God or Angel. Angels are also called sons of God. God is the first. Everything proceeding from HIM. If he is an angel in appearance then that’s who he is. But to me He is Jesus my God.
Isara Mo Is a theophany God or not? Did God appear to Samson’s parents and tell them his name is wonderful?
Judges 13:18
[18]And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?
Secret or “Pil’îy pâlîy” in the Hebrew tongue means wonderful. Reference Isaiah 9:6.
Isaiah 9:6
[6]For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
This being the case, the oneness of Jesus as God(Colossians 2:9) is established and Trinitarianism holds no substance! Praise Jesus God of gods! Shema!
Kelly Crites I am Trinitarian but it is not true that early pentecostalism had no place for oneness – this was not resolved until our AG was established in 1914 Centuries before that, however, St Atanasius who Link Hudson calls pseudo for some odd reason of his, along with St Gregory – both great theologians claimed that
A true CHRISTIAN IS only THE ONE WHO ACCEPTS THE TRINITY
Does this make oneness NOT Christians ???
It is unlikely that Athanasius wrote the creed named after him. I did not call Athanasius pseudo, and I did not intent the term.
oneness don’t accept the Trinity. They usually believe in one person who has different roles or manifestations. That’s not classical Trinitarian doctrine at all
Troy Day accepting the Trinity is as important as believing we are saved by grace through faith alone, not plus works, the inerrancy of scripture, the deity of Christ, and the resurrection. These are extremely important topics. Which Jesus are we following? Can we believe a different gospel than the one Paul gave us? In the same way that water can not be mixed with poison and still be safe to drink, so the message of the Water of Life cannot be blended with error and retain its saving character. Some things are second hand issues. But is this something we should be getting wrong. We believe in God should we actually believe in who he is? The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit… it’s one thing to say we believe in God, its quite another to actually believe what he says and who he is.
I understand but how do you feel about all ppl who dont accept the Trinity ?
Troy Day it seems that they will not except a clear understanding of scripture. Rejecting who God is.
Troy Day my point exactly..
Trinity was declared “essential” in the emperor run Nicene Council. Those who are offended that I do not call God a Trinity are also quick to tell me that no one can understand the Trinity.
I have oneness friends who are offended by the term “Trinity,” and I do not like unnecessarily offending people. I remember the day I felt like God instructed me to limit my description of God to biblical terms and that if I’m not comfortable doing that, keep studying till I am.
I truly did not think anyone would object to that stand but my new Calvinist pastor kicked me out of church because I would not call God a Trinity. I’d even told him that God might be a Trinity but that I cannot make it fit all scripture.
There was Trinitarianism much before any emperor
I know. But it was open for discussion and not “essential.”
Being a Christian back then was based simply on living according to Christ’s teachings and bearing godly fruit.
Gas for my lawnmower is “essential” which means it doesn’t work without it.
So Wayne Scott you either DONT believe in sanctification as 2nd work of Grace OR how do you reconcile with your theology?
Here is how I reconcile it: I see scripture drawing a bold line between obedience and perfection/maturity which is never transgressed by one Bible writer but today has been trampled out of existence. This is who we have turned “Go,and sin no more” into “Go, and try to sin less and less as you mature.”
Obedience is always commanded as instant and the result of our commitment to obey Christ, which is what it means for Him to be our Lord.
Perfection/maturity is never presented as instant but as progressive, meaning that there will not come a day in my life I wake up and rightly determine “I’ve arrived! No more room for improvement!”
We are all somewhere on the scale of perfection/maturity. But we are all told to “Go, and sin no more” which is the only biblical definition of repent. Once we make that commitment (surrender our heart) we have all the power of God to empower us to succeed as is promises in I Cor 10:13.
The only exception is perfection of the heart (intent). God sees people who have surrendered to Him as “perfect,” which is why the KJV lists behaviorally righteous and perfect people in both testaments.
Perfection/maturity is never presented as instant but as progressive – progressive by who? Certainly not man, right?
wondering how Barbara Ellen Eaton feels about this one since personalisation or the so called person to person exchange is considered heresy by Pentecostal Orthodoxy
Which trinty?
did you open the link? says plainly – the DIVINE
Troy Day I am unfamiliar with the Divine. The RCC calls theirs the Holy
Neo Trinitarianism? Like Finis Dake are really tritheists?
Orthodox Trinitarians?
Economic Trinitarianism?
Etc
Who’s definition of “The Trinity”?
did you open the link? Says plainly
Athanasian Creed
This would include Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451) etc.
Troy Day it amazes me that Christians can call other Christians “Not Christians” because they do not believe Roman Catholic Doctrine. Your doctrine is Heresy! Jesus nor any Apostle believed or preached your false “Trinitarian” heresy!
W Wayne Pugh take it with Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451). Luther, Calvin, Zuingly virtually ALL protestant churches in Europe, virtually ALL protestant churches in the NEW world as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship who all said it
NOW who has called “Trinitarian” a heresy? Any proof?
Troy Day so where is the word “Trinity” or “God is THREE People” in the Bible!
W Wayne Pugh you failed to answer WHO called it heresy? Can you disprove these 89 Proofs of a Divine Trinity ? http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/proofs-of-a-divine-trinity/
Troy Day please give Chapter & verse where “Trinity “ or “Trinitarian” or “God in three persons Blessed Trinity” is in the Holy Scriptures!
W Wayne Pugh I gave you 89 – which one is not in the BIBLE according to your read BTW both Link Hudson and Philip Williams can cite you works by Heiser proving Jewish Trinity in the whole OT Now whosoever has called the Trinity a heresy?
Where do I find that in Scripture? The book of First Assumptions or some place in Hezekiah?
are you asking about the Trinity? Would this 89 Scripture Proofs of a Divine Trinity be enough for you?
Troy Day, I’m a Trinitarian, but I believe my Oneness friends are just as saved as us.
Steve Maxwell that is great The demons too believe and tremble BUT your belief was not shared by Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451) as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship
Troy Day, The Council at Nicea got it right, but the latee translation of the Greek word prospon into persons took the distinction to far in the following centuries of the Catholic church. The Catholic church screwed up a lot of doctrine.
Furthermore, the requirement for salvation is clear. We are to believe on Jesus Christ. I might add that there are several places in the word that emphasizes that God is one. There is no place that understanding the perfect structure of an infinite God in our finite minds, is required for salvation.
Oneness Pentecostals, believe that Jesus was the Son of God, who died for our sins. They also accept the full Gospel of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost.
Of course if you believe Jesus didn’t mean it, when he said if yee seek you shall find, then you may have a point.
IT was accepted by Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451). Luther, Calvin, Zuingly virtually ALL protestant churches in Europe, virtually ALL protestant churches in the NEW world as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship
Certainly you dont think you are a better theologian than the Early church father including Augustine also all the Reformers that were actually against the RCC Luther, Calvin, Zuingly and then all protestant churches since then including our AG fellowship where members adhere to the doctrine
Troy Day isn’t it funny how the first Christian emperor, Constantine adopted the Nicene creed and they swept the supporters of Arianism from the church, burning their writings, etc. Then every emperor and the whole church after that, adopted and practiced Arianism.
I stand with the original Nicene creed, there were no amendments dealing with the Godhead, needed after that.
After that the church headed into the descent of what became the many heresies of the Catholic church. So basically, I don’t have respect for much of what happened after the Nicene creed. This includes the Spanish inquisition and execution of Bishops with differing interpretations of the Godhead.
Steve Maxwell I dont find it funny BTW Trinitarian teachings existed long before Athanasius As a matter of fact both Link Hudson and Philip Williams can cite you works by Heiser proving Jewish Trinity in the whole OT
Troy Day, I’m Trinitarian but there are different flavors of Trinitarians.
Steve Maxwell I know Charles Page likes grape flavor Alan Smith
This supports what I’m saying about the church(later the Catholic church) succumbing to Arianism.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01707c.htm
Strange title. The Bible leads us to understand that the term Christian came from Antioch. Nothing in history indicates that derived from the adaption of pagan ideas or concepts. Rather, it came from their. Love, acceptance and forgiveness.
the title itself is not strange to the Christian Church
it comes from the Athanasian Creed
A Christian is the one who accepts The Trinity.
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 Persons in the ONE God Head.
NOT 3 gods – ONE GOD (Athanasian Creed)
IT was accepted by Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451). Luther, Calvin, Zuingly virtually ALL protestant churches in Europe, virtually ALL protestant churches in the NEW world as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship
Troy Day The Church existed long before a group of men wrote the Anthanasian Creed.
Bishop Bernie L Wade Who called the Trinity heresy? like you did? Both Link Hudson and Philip Williams can cite you works by Heiser proving Jewish Trinity in the whole OT like you said long before the NT Church existed
The first defense of the doctrine of the Trinity was in the early 3rd century by the early church father Tertullian. He explicitly defined the Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and defended his theology against “Praxeas”, though he noted that the majority of the believers in his day found issue with his doctrine.
There are certain passages in the Old Testament that sounded to the ear like the God of Israel was two. There was this two-ness but yet one sort of idea going on. Rabbis took note of this and referred to the idea as Two Powers being in heaven.” While the Two Powers are evident throughout the Old Testament, there are also hints of the Trinity.
Watch Dr. Heiser introduce the idea of the Godhead in the Old Testamen https://blog.logos.com/2015/08/the-trinity-in-the-old-testament/
W Wayne Pugh In Genesis 1:1-2 we read, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” In the very beginning of God’s revelation of himself we read of two Persons—God and the Spirit of God.
Again, in Exodus 3:13-14, Moses says to God, “Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?” God’s answer to Moses is, “I AM THAT I AM…Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” Here God, when asked to identify himself, says, in effect, “I AM, I AM, I AM. Tell the children of Israel that the Triune God has sent you. Not Isis, not Moloch, not Baal, not Ishtar, but the unique Triune God of Israel has sent you.”
Then there is the blessing of Numbers 6:22-27: “And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, In this way ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them, The LORD bless thee, and keep thee; The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them.” Here God says three times that his name is THE LORD, and he promises to bless those who call upon him as THE LORD, THE LORD, THE LORD. This also seems to hint at the triune nature of God.
In Deuteronomy 6:4, the great Sh’ma prayer of Judaism, God says, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD.” Again we see the three in one, The LORD, God, the LORD—one.
It appears that God revealed himself in his Triune nature whenever he was about to make some drastic change in his dealings with his people or when he was about to act in judgment.
Moving on to the historical books, in I Samuel 3 we find the beautiful story of God’s call to Samuel. Israel was far gone in apostasy and immorality, but the child Samuel ministered faithfully in the Temple. One night, when all was quiet and old Eli and Samuel were asleep, the Lord called Samuel. The passage in verses 4-9 begins, “…the LORD called Samuel. And he answered, Here am I. And he ran unto Eli and said, Here am I; for thou calledst me. And he said, I called not; lie down again. And he went and lay down. And the LORD called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And he answered, I called not, my son; lie down again.…And the LORD called Samuel again the third time. And he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And Eli perceived that the LORD had called the child.” When the LORD called Samuel the third time, Eli knew that this surely was God calling Samuel, and not a dream. Could it not be that Eli and other godly Jews believed in a triune God?
In Isaiah 6:3 we see that the Lord of hosts is not merely holy, but “Holy, holy, holy.” Again one Lord, but three times holy.
Another hint that godly Jews believed in a triune God may be seen in Jeremiah 7:4: “Trust not in lying words, saying, The temple of the LORD, The Temple of the LORD, The Temple of the Lord, are these.” There was only one temple and only one Lord, but belief in a trinity might be expressed by saying three times, “The temple of the Lord.” In this chapter we see that the Lord was chiding those who were careful to keep up with their religious obligations, and to hold true doctrine, but who did not carry their religion into the streets and into their own lives. He was telling them that their worship was correct and their beliefs were true, but their deeds did not match their worship or their beliefs.
There are also other passages that would seem to indicate the triune nature of God. Isaiah 48:16 and Zechariah 4:6 refer to the Spirit of God; there are two references to God’s son—one in Psalm 2 and another in Proverbs 30:1-4. Thus, we see that God, the Son of God, and the Spirit of God were known to ancient Israel. Could it not be that the Lord’s ancient people, those who knew God in truth, did hold to a belief in the triune nature of God?
Troy Day gen 1:1-2 doesn’t mention 2 persons. We read of 1 God performing creation by His Spirit.
Is David’s spirit someone other than David? Or is Paul’s spirit?
Jevan Little the Gen creation is PRETTY clear on the persons Would you like to discuss it yet AGAIN?
Troy Day we never discussed it. There is not mention of multiple persons in Gen 1:1-2
Jevan Little oh you are quote wrong about that Gary Micheal Epping was here every time we discussed it Check it for yourself http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/?s=gap
Troy Day gap theory? I didnt discuss that and it has nothing to do with Whether Gen 1:1-2 mentions persons
You didnt but we did as I stated above and directed a question to you if we need to discuss it again?
I know the Bible is right… and somebody is wrong!
God is One!
W Wayne Pugh well I quoted you ONLY from the BIBLE
Troy Day and which verse says “Trinity “ or “God is Three Persons”???
W Wayne Pugh Dont you know? Do you want me to tell you again?
A direct influence on second century Christian theology is the Jewish philosopher and theologian Philo of Alexandria (a.k.a. Philo Judaeus) (ca. 20 BCE – ca. 50 CE), the product of Alexandrian Middle Platonism (with elements of Stoicism and Pythagoreanism). Inspired by the Timaeus of Plato, Philo read the Jewish Bible as teaching that God created the cosmos by his Word (logos), the first-born son of God. Alternately, or via further emanation from this Word, God creates by means of his creative power and his royal power, conceived of both as his powers, and yet as agents distinct from him, giving him, as it were, metaphysical distance from the material world
Ever since Aristotle rejected the cosmology of the Timaeus on the ground that it nonsensically required not just a beginning of the universe in time, but a beginning of time itself (Physics 251b14–26), defenders of the dialogue—perhaps wishing to neutralize Aristotle’s critique while conceding its point—have claimed that the creation story is not to be read literally, but metaphorically.[5] This metaphorical reading of the dialogue became the prevailing (though not exclusive) view among Platonists, from the Old Academy of Plato’s immediate successors to Plotinus (third cent. CE).
Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451). Luther, Calvin, Zuingly virtually ALL protestant churches in Europe, virtually ALL protestant churches in the NEW world as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship who all said it
Now then should we believe them or you?
As emperor, Constantine was in the unusual position of deciding church doctrine even though he was not really a Christian.
Bishop Bernie L Wade That’s not true. Constantine was not a Theologian, he went with what the church decided on. That’s why there were councils.
Shane Vanmeter wow. Enlighten us. Who was Pontifex maximus at these Counsel of Nicaea? What Pontiff or Church leader issued the Edict of Milan?
Bishop Bernie L Wade The edict of Milan just made Christianity legal….
Shane Vanmeter so you can’t or won’t answer the question? You said that what I wrote was not true. So enlighten us.
and was Constantine a Christian?
You said he decided church doctrine…
I dont care if he was a Christian.
Bishop Bernie L Wade What do you want me to enlighten you on, Constantine did not decide church doctrine. Very simple.
Shane Vanmeter Yes. You need to study. It is evident you do NOT know the subject material.
Bishop Bernie L Wade So you say Constantine was present at the Council of Nicaea which is true, but what was his role there?
Bishop Bernie L Wade
What really was Constantine’s role? Often it is alleged (especially by Jehovah’s Witnesses, for example) that, for whatever reasons, Constantine forced the “same substance” view upon the council,10 or, at the very least, insured that it would be adopted. This is not the case. There is no question that Constantine wanted a unified church after the Council of Nicea. But he was no theologian, nor did he really care to any degree what basis would be used to forge the unity he desired. Later events show that he didn’t have any particular stake in the term homoousios and was willing to abandon it, if he saw that doing so would be of benefit to him. As Schaff rightly points out with reference to the term itself, “The word…was not an invention of the council of Nicea, still less of Constantine, but had previously arisen in theological language, and occurs even in Origen [185-254] and among the Gnostics….”11 Constantine is not the source or origin of the term, and the council did not adopt the term at his command.
Troy Day, you can quote all your Roman Catholic forefathers all you want but…The Bible says GOD IS ONE!!!
which one is roman catholic? Certainly the Protestants were not RCH 🙂
Luther, Calvin, Zuingly virtually ALL protestant churches in Europe, virtually ALL protestant churches in the NEW world as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship who all said it Should we believe them or you?
Troy Day just men
Bishop Bernie L Wade from the BIBLE
Matthew 28:19 ►
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
Bishop Bernie L Wade just men who were all influenced by 325 AD Catholic Heresy!
W Wayne Pugh what about the BIBLE I just cited?
You cannot win with your flawed Theology… God is One!
W Wayne Pugh I just quoted the BIBLE – do you NOT believe the BIBLE now?
Troy Day Yes. That is a Scripture. Do you have a point related to that verse?’
Bishop Bernie L Wade I do hope you believe these Scripture. I just cited – do you believe them?
Troy Day it’s pointless to talk to people who cannot defend their position but instead blindly reject what you share with them.
Shane Vanmeter Just shared the BIBLE – one can accept or reject the BIBLE It is a simply truth
Speaking directly to these heresies Apostle John pens John chapter 1. In the beginning was the Word.. and the Word was God.
W Wayne Pugh Bishop Bernie from the BIBLE
Matthew 28:19 ►
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
Troy Day What is the Name?
W Wayne Pugh 1 John 5:7 “For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.”
Troy Day What is the only saving Name?
W Wayne Pugh Jesus Christ.
Bishop Bernie L Wade What is the name of the Father? Anyone? Take a wild guess from the OT if you pls
Troy Day The Father of Jesus is the Holy Spirit.
Bishop Bernie L Wade SO What is the name of the Father ? Philip Williams
Troy Day He is the Most High God.
https://issuu.com/charismata/docs/baptism_according_to_matthew_28?fbclid=IwAR10dcZDLYUSzH9qxQCdxdJ-CCYuTZgFFQfnDoJfa4Fk3oQ1f3xxYhbR2qs
Troy Day ABBA
Philip Williams Philip Williams do you know in the Bible two fathers one is with lie and other is with truth.
Tara Sing Bhandari
Yes, very true.
Philip Williams have you researched how many Bible doctrines value is mixed with lie and truth , ..,
Tara Sing Bhandari
A lot of lie in many theological teachings. Stick strictly with the Bible in the light of Jesus to find truth.
Another influence may have been the Neoplatonist Plotinus’ (204–70 CE) triad of the One, Intellect, and Soul, in which the latter two mysteriously emanate from the One, and “are the One and not the One; they are the one because they are from it; they are not the One, because it endowed them with what they have while remaining by itself” (Plotinus Enneads, 85). Plotinus even describes them as three hypostases, and describes their sameness using homoousios (Freeman 2003, 189). Augustine tells us that he and other Christian intellectuals of his day believed that the Neoplatonists had some awareness of the persons of the Trinity
yes you copy pasted this quote a few times already NOW I can start copy pasting Augustine, Luther and Calvin – just tell us plainly what you believe and be done
https://issuu.com/charismata/docs/baptism_according_to_matthew_28
Troy Day, I do not have the time to keep on debating you but I will end this line of posting with this… When you get sick & tired of the fleshly, carnal men that you listen to and you start crying out to the One True God of Heaven & Earth… Jesus Christ will reveal Himself to you & you will repent of the false doctrines you have been deceived by. I command you to Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. I will be calling your name out in prayer daily! In the Only Saving Name under heaven JESUS CHRIST!
“It is generally, although erroneously, supposed that the doctrine of the Trinity is of Christian origin. Nearly every nation of antiquity possessed a similar doctrine. [The early Catholic theologian] St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, ‘All the ancient nations believed in the Trinity’ ”
Sumeria
“The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad.
Babylonia
“The ancient Babylonians recognised the doctrine of a trinity, or three persons in one god— as appears from a composite god with three heads forming part of their mythology, and the use of the equilateral triangle, also, as an emblem of such trinity in unity” (Thomas Dennis Rock, The Mystical Woman and the Cities of the Nations, 1867, pp. 22-23).
Egypt
“The Hymn to Amun decreed that ‘No god came into being before him (Amun)’ and that ‘All gods are three: Amun, Re and Ptah, and there is no second to them. Hidden is his name as Amon, he is Re in face, and his body is Ptah.’ . . . This is a statement of trinity, the three chief gods of Egypt subsumed into one of them, Amon.
Egyptologist Arthur Weigall, while himself a Trinitarian, summed up the influence of ancient beliefs on the adoption of the Trinity doctrine by the Catholic Church in the following excerpt:
“It must not be forgotten that Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon [the Trinity], and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord; and the origin of the conception is entirely pagan . . .
Bishop Bernie L Wade, are you referring to the writings of Alexander Hislop?
No sir, but I have read his writing. It is quite extensive.
Bishop Bernie L Wade, I want you read what my friend Bernie Yeater wrote yesterday. He’s converted from Oneness to Orthodox and is very familiar with the Godhead discussion.
“I am unable find any historical, biblical or archaeological evidence about Nimrod being married to Semiramis and having a Son named Tammuz.
No where in the Bible is Nimrod referenced to having a wife named Semiramis.
No artifact from the Sumerian ruins depicts Nimrod with Semiramis. Which most scholars believe is Naram-Sin of Akkad because he founded Nineveh. He is listed on the Sumerian King Tablet, and his Son that rules after him was not Tammuz. No where in the archaeological record ties Nimrod to Semiramis.
No book over two hundred years old list Nimrod being married to Semiramis and having a Son named Tammuz.
All of the posted references come back eventually to Alexander Hislop his “Book the Two Babylons” and his misunderstanding of a middle age Jewish targum.
Yes a search on Google generates thousands of hits for this. They all eventually go back to Mr. Hislop. Many look professional and credible.
Mr. Hislop was a stone mason who was a lay preacher. All of these associations appear to be a figment of his overactive imagination.”
“I completely embarrassed myself with my RCC family many decades ago with this information. I ruined my testimony with them.”
Eygypt Trinity
Some feel that Nicene Father’s borrowed from Eygyptian gods to form their trinity. That it is just a knock off of Isis, Osiris and Horus. Here are the problems with this.
1. Isis, Osiris and Horus are not described as one being.
2.. Ptah the creator is not part of the three. To fit into the story as the creator, Ptah would need to be part of it.
3. When the gods Thoth and Anubis restore Osiris body and he is resurrected,this does not fit the Trinity.
4. Ptah (creator) does not help with the resurrection.
5. The Christian trinity is one God in three persons, or three “realities”. Isis, Osiris and Horus is not described as one God.
6. Ra or Geb are not described.
7. Within Christian thought Christ assumes his father’s throne in heaven. In Egyptian thought this involves the deity Ennead. He is not in the Egyptian triad.
8. Where does Horus’ brother Set fit in?
9. the Christian Trinity does not have an equivalent female member of the Eygptian Trinity that represents Isis.
10. There is no documentation that any of the Nicene Father’s were influenced by Eygptian religion.
Yeah and Semiramis didnt even live in the same millennium as Nimrod.
Steve Maxwell pls bring in Bernie Yeater in the group to talk about this Philip Williams you see the danger you pointed out with Heiser – now people refer to stone masonic theology to slander the doctrine of Trinity
BOTTOM LINE here Shane Vanmeter
NO EARLY CHURCH FATHER believed oneness Jesus-only Just like mormonism and jahowah witnesses it is an american invented miss-more-logy not found anywhere else
Philip Williams rightly asserted that there was NO Jesus-only until oneness was first preached to Pentecostals by Canadian Assembly of God minister, Robert E. McAlister. But he wasn’t preaching rebaptism. Nor did he preach Oneness modalism.
I do believe that we should seek Jesus in order to know the Father and to receive the promised Holy Spirit. I pray to Jesus. But why this nonsense about him being his own Father?
When Pentecost occurred in America we had multiple movements seeking holiness who experienced the Holy Ghost baptism
– baptist – very very trinitiran
– methodist holiness – one dont get more Trinity than the bro. Wesley
– congregational – Sola Scriptura – Sola Trinitaria
basically all early Pentecostals were as Trinitarian as it get
I mean how ELSE does one GET the Holy Ghost if he is not a person but just a title How does the baptism happen with just a title? Does water baptism happened in the TITLE name of the water or in the actual water – come on somebody get a grip
Now, this is just what we see in the book of Acts. That’s why we refer to ourselves as Pentecostals. Why adopt second century modalism? Why not hold to first century Pentecostalism, the church founded by the Apostles?
Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa , Basil the Great , First Council of Nicaea First Council of Constantinople, Council of Ephesus (431), Council of Chalcedon (451). Luther, Calvin, Zuingly virtually ALL protestant churches in Europe, virtually ALL protestant churches in the NEW world as well as the churches members establishing our AG fellowship all read the the BIBLE and saw the GOD”s TRINITY Paul L. King
Troy Day People dont study church history enough to see the Trinity is a doctrine with a concept that is Biblical. They think if ots true then the word Trinity must be in the Bible and that is a non argument. It’s a way for them to not deal with the Biblical text. While I am not Pentecostal I was baptized by a Pentecostal Pastor and brother in the Lord. I believe there are many members in the Body so there is not one denomination that has everything correct but many from all over the Body will look different and will present fruits of the Spirit.
Shane Vanmeter People dont study to show themselves approved So Philip Williams and I have set to disprove them 🙂 though I love conversing with Jevan Little
Could you at least stop calling us Jesus only. I’m tired of you guys using that term
Jevan Little I was not calling you anything I was addressing the oneness Jesus-only UPC APC lack of historic continuity with the Early Church
Troy Day we are not Jesus only. It’s a slur. We are Oneness. Please stop
no problem – even the non-Jesus-only oneness cannot show historic continuity in theology and praxis with the Early ChurchBesides their beliefs about the Godhead, Oneness Pentecostals differ significantly from most other Pentecostal and Evangelical Christians in matters of soteriology. Whereas most Pentecostals and evangelicals believe that only faith in Jesus Christ is the essential element for salvation, Oneness Pentecostalism defines salvation as repentance, full-submersion water baptism (in the name of Jesus Christ or Jesus only) and baptism in the Holy Spirit, with the evidence of speaking in other tongues Today, most conservative Protestants view Oneness Pentecostalism, in all of its iterations, as a theological cult akin to the LDS Church (i.e., Mormonism) or the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (i.e., Jehovah’s Witnesses)
So are Oneness Pentecostals Christians? I know that they say that trinitarian Christians are In error.
I once asked David Bernard if I was his brother. He said I was as long as I accepted the true nature of God according to the UPC of which he is currently the president. It was at an SPS at ORU in 2001.