|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Is the trinity doctrine good enough? - 4/25/2008 6:49:16 PM
|
|
|
CurlyQ19
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/22/2008
Status: offline
|
mariadreamer
quote:
you are correct that the Bible does not use the word Trinity. But here is the problem with saying there is such a thing as "bible alone". There is no "bible alone", everyone interprets it according to what they have been taught. This is why God established His Church, "the dwelling place of the Spirit...". The Church unfolded the biblical doctrine of the Holy Trinity a very long time ago, struggling against the heretics that also used the scriptures to deny the Trinity, but rejected the Church Tradition. The "doctrine of man" is what you have when someone asserts his own interpretation against that which God revealed through the Church, His Body.
the only time the Trinity ever formed was at the council of nicaea because there was so much controversy! and before that and even in the Bible there was no such thing ever taught or mentioned of! but now it is all traditions, which is not a good thing because you need to figure it out for yourself instead of following a traditional path that just tells you without you digging deep into the Word and praying hard about it! it can really only come by revelation from God himself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the trinity doctrine good enough? - 4/26/2008 3:43:23 PM
|
|
|
figmentPez
Posts: 2789
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sabellius
For the moment however I believe the most important point to make here is that the Oneness of God is not equivalent to what we historically know as Modalism. It may share likeness, but we would be making a logical mistake to say likeness is sameness. The little information we know of Modalism is limited to quotes by Trinitarian church father apologetics, as far as I know.
Mormons also claim that they have something different than polytheism, but I know better. There are some fine points that are vaguely different, but it's all heresy and against scripture, preaching a false god.
quote:
Quickly, what we know of Modalism seems to suggest that God merely manifested Himself like an actor changing masks in a play. Modalism is correct, IMHO, in that there is only God and only one person of God. The person of God however took on true human nature. God became a man (John 1:14). The Son of God, the only begotten of the Father. The Incarnation and the union of the humanity of Christ with diety however informs us that God was not merely walking around with flesh on, but had truly become a man.
See, right here you are wrong about the Sonship of Jesus Christ. The incarnation CANNOT be when the Son of God was begotten. Each begets after it's own kind. This is a teaching from creation. Saying that God begat human flesh is like saying a stalk of wheat begat a trout. It's absurd. God begets God. The only begotten Son of God is God, and since God does not change, the Son must be eternally God. Furthermore, the Son says that He had glory with the Father before the world began. The incarnation, when the Son of God became the Son of Man, is not a begetting, and the Holy Spirit is not the father of the Son, the Father is the father of the Son. The Son of God, who is God, really and truly did become a man, with real unity between His divine nature as the eternal Son of God, and His human nature as the Son of Man (a nature that He retains, even now), but it was not the Father who became incarnate.
This truth, that the Son of God is a son in deity, is very important to understanding Christian doctrine, and what His sonship means. If the Son of God were, in some bizzare absurdity that violates all the Bible says about being begotten, just human flesh, then that human flesh would not have the rights to all that God has. Human flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven. The Son of God must be God to deserve all the things that scripture says are part of His inheritance as Son.
_____________________________
imaginary candy, purple dragon peppermint, thought condensed into little bricks of flavored sugar.
Now 30% nerdier!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the trinity doctrine good enough? - 4/26/2008 3:48:27 PM
|
|
|
figmentPez
Posts: 2789
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
I do not accept the view that Yeshua(Jesus) and Ruach Ha Chedosh(The Holy Spirit) can not be Adonai because Adonai is one.
You have some serious misunderstandings about what trinitarian doctrine teaches. I'm assuming that you're using Adonai to refer to the name of the LORD? Aside form there being a real difference between Adonai (lord or Lord) and the tetragrammaton (YHWH, LORD in all caps), you're wrong that trinitarian doctrine claims that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not the LORD. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are each known by the name of God, yet there are not three lords, but only one LORD.
I think your preconceptions are causing you some serious troubles in understanding the truth.
_____________________________
imaginary candy, purple dragon peppermint, thought condensed into little bricks of flavored sugar.
Now 30% nerdier!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the trinity doctrine good enough? - 4/26/2008 9:08:22 PM
|
|
|
Ps103
Posts: 11791
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: Here, now
Status: offline
|
MODERATOR'S NOTE :: ATTENTION PLEASE
I am going to say this one more time, primarily for the benefit of the newer poster (who had been warned before), and if it is not heeded poster's accounts will be subject to restrictions and/or loss of posting priviledges.
This is a Trinitarian website. We do not require that you believe as we do, but we do not allow arguments against our beliefs.
If you are not a believer in the Trinity, please find other topics to post about, as this is your final warning on the subject.
Please do not reply to this message within the Community.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.
_____________________________
Fasten your seatbelts...it's going to be a bumpy night.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the trinity doctrine good enough? - 4/26/2008 11:02:34 PM
|
|
|
Sabellius
Posts: 51
Joined: 6/27/2005
Status: offline
|
Figmentpez, I will have to refrain from a reply. Please know there are answers though that are apropos for the conclusions you have posited, which I believe are invalid. I do not wish to be banned, as I enjoy diversity. If you wish you can PM me and we can discuss this there, or in an alternative venue.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the trinity doctrine good enough? - 5/6/2008 4:08:01 AM
|
|
|
pmilst
Posts: 47
Joined: 2/22/2008
Status: offline
|
I don't deny trinitarian or oneness doctrine, I just say that there is an easier way to view God. Just simply let the scripture comment on the above question. So many times we want to make a square peg fit in a round hole and it just won't work. The same way with God, trinitarian and oneness beliefs have so clouded the issue of trying to explain God that true biblical common sense can not and probably will not prevail.
There have been wars during the era of roman Constintine over the issue and good men and honorable theologians have lost their lives over the issue. The issue will only be rectified as honest, fairminded believers study the Word of God under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The issue is,
will we find such honesty and integrity in the face of denominational wall
building.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
