May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
Why Is the Doctrine of the Trinity a Vital Belief for Christians to
Understand?
By Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon
When we speak of the Trinity, we must do so with caution and modesty, for,
as St. Augustine saith, "Nowhere else are more dangerous errors made, or is
research more difficult, or discovery more fruitful.'" (St. Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Theologica, ia q. xxi, 1272)
The biblical doctrine of the Trinity is vital to understand because it
concerns who God is, i.e., a proper realization of the nature of God as
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To understand the Trinity is to understand God
as He has revealed Himself to be.
Why is this important? Because if we are to worship God "in spirit and
truth" (John 4:24), as Jesus commanded, we must know and worship the one
true God as He really is. To fail to do this is to fail to know and worship
God-and this cannot bring Him glory. Thus, those who reject the Trinity
invariably deny the nature of God.
Consider several examples of professedly Christian religions that forcefully
reject what the Bible teaches. By denying the biblical teaching on the
Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses make Jesus merely a creation of Jehovah and the
Holy Spirit Jehovah's impersonal force. Thus, Jesus "was actually a creature
of God" who earned his own salvation and immortality1 and the Holy Spirit
"is not a person at all but is God's invisible active force by means of
which God carries out his holy will and work."2
In rejecting the Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses founder C. T. Russell
blasphemously stated that the God of Christianity "is plainly not Jehovah
but the ancient deity, hoary with the iniquity of the ages-Baal, the Devil
Himself."3 Second Watchtower President Judge Rutherford declared in a
similar fashion, "The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine and is
promulgated by Satan for the purpose of defaming Jehovah's name"-and for
keeping others from "learning the truth of Jehovah and his Son, Jesus
Christ." Indeed, "God-fearing persons.find it a bit difficult to love and
worship a complicated, freakish-looking three-headed God."4 Surely,
teachings that caricature God in this manner do not bring to Him honor and
glory.
In a similar fashion, Mormons maintain that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit
are not immortal, but were individual spirit-men created by the sexual union
of their parent deities, each of whom then later evolved into Godhood.5
Mormonism thus rejects the ontological unity of the Father, Son and Holy
Spirit in teaching tritheism, or a belief in three separate Gods.
Indeed, Mormons are ultimately polytheists who reject the concept of one
true God. As a standard text on Mormon doctrine declares:
As pertaining to this universe, there are three Gods: the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost.. To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the
only Gods we worship. But in addition there is an infinite number of holy
personages, drawn from worlds without number, who have passed on to
exaltation [i.e., Godhood] and are thus gods.6
Mary Baker Eddy was the founder of Christian Science, another group that
claims to be truly Christian. Yet in her Science and Health with Key to the
Scriptures, the Bible of Christian Science, she writes:
The theory of three persons in one God (that is, a personal Trinity or
Tri-unity) suggests polytheism, rather than the one ever-present I Am.. The
name Elohim is in the plural, but this plurality of Spirit does not imply
more than one God, nor does it imply three persons in one.7
Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of The Way International, reveals additional
common consequences of rejection of the Trinity-a denial not only of the
Person of Jesus Christ but also of His atoning Work on the cross. Wierwille
argues as follows:
Through the years, the more and more I carefully researched God's Word for
knowledge, the less and less I found to substantiate a trinity. Even though
I had always accepted the idea of a three-in-one-God, I continually found
evidence in the Word of God which undermined a Christian trinity.. [Further]
If Jesus Christ is God.we have not yet been redeemed.. Our very
redemption.is dependent on Jesus Christ's being a man and not God.. So how
then did a trinitarian doctrine come about? It gradually evolved and gained
momentum in late 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries as pagans, who had converted to
Christianity, brought to Christianity some of their pagan beliefs and
practices. Trinitarianism then was confirmed at Nicaea in 325 by Church
bishops out of political expediency.8
In essence, the reason the Trinity is important to understand according to
its biblical and theological formulation is that failure to do so can lead
to heretical views about who God is. This in turn can lead to rejection of
the one true God and worship of a false God. But if the Bible is clear on
anything, it is clear that faith in and worship of a false God is powerless
to save people from their sins. Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of
having an accurate knowledge of God when he said, "And this is eternal life,
that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast
sent" (John 17:3).
God warned Israel through the prophet Hosea, "My people are destroyed from
lack of knowledge" and "You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Savior
except me" (Hosea 4:6; 13:4). As their history so amply demonstrates, the
Israelites were spiritually ruined because they had rejected true knowledge
of God and had turned to false gods and idols. Unfortunately, in a similar
manner, those who deliberately reject the Trinity, knowing in advance what
the Bible teaches about it, only reveal their own lack of salvation (1
Corinthians 2:14). In other words, no one can consistently dishonor what the
Holy Spirit has revealed in Scripture as to the true nature of God and
logically claim to be a Christian.
Of course, prior knowledge of the Trinity, especially in its theological
formulation, is not necessary for a person to be saved. But once saved, it
is vital for Christians to know the true nature of the God who has so
graciously pardoned them. This explains why the Church has always recognized
the importance of a proper understanding of God and maintained that those
who reject the scriptural view of God, as long as they do so, cannot be
saved.
For example, in discussing the placing of a divine curse or anathema on
those who reject God, the Athanasian Creed begins and ends with the solemn
declaration that the catholic [i.e., universal] faith in the Trinity and the
Incarnation is the indispensable condition of salvation, and that those who
reject it will be lost forever. This anathema, in its natural historical
sense, is not merely a solemn warning against the great danger of heresy,
nor, on the other hand, does it demand, as a condition of salvation, a full
knowledge, and assent to, the logical statement of the doctrines set forth,
(this would condemn the great mass even of Christian believers); but it does
mean to exclude from heaven all who reject the divine truth therein taught.
It requires everyone who would be saved to believe in the only true and
living God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, one in essence, three in persons,
and in one Jesus Christ, very God and very man in one person.9
As Vladimir Lossky once put boldly in The Mystical Theology of the Eastern
Church (1957, p. 66), "Between the Trinity and Hell there lies no other
choice."
Thus, an examination of religions claiming to be Christian, who yet deny the
Trinity, invariably reveals that other key Christian doctrines, such as
salvation by grace through faith alone, are also rejected. In other words,
if one does not start with a proper respect for Scripture and its
understanding of God, it is unlikely one will get much else correct
biblically. This is exactly what we find in the world of the cults.
However, before we discuss what the Bible does teach about the Trinity, we
must also remember that this doctrine is something finite minds can never
fully comprehend. The Trinity may be logically defined, but this is partly
the problem because "the infinite truth of the Godhead lies far beyond the
boundaries of logic, which deals only with finite truths and categories."10
In other words, as an infinite being, God can never be fully understood by
any finite person. If we can't understand something as basic as particle
physics, who would argue we should be able to rationally comprehend all that
the infinite God is?
As Dorothy L. Sayers once stated in Current Religious Thought (1957),
Why do you complain that the proposition God is three in one is obscure and
mystical and yet acquiesce meekly in the physicist's fundamental formula,
'two P minus PQ equals IH over two Pi where I equals the square root of
minus one' when you know quite well that the square root of minus one is
paradoxical and Pi is incalculable?
Consider that an ant could never comprehend all that a human being is, even
if it tried. Yet, if a human being could somehow become an ant, it might be
able to explain enough about what a human is so that the ant could gain
something of an understanding as to what a human is.
When we consider that God is, quite literally, infinitely removed from men,
the parallel suffers immeasurably. All we can truly understand about God is
what He has revealed to us in the Bible. And while this does give us a great
deal of accurate information, it obviously does not give us exhaustive
information that plumbs the depths of His infinity. Indeed, one of the
glories of eternal salvation (John 5:24; 6:47) will be that finite creatures
will forever learn wondrous things about the exhaustless glories and
perfections of an infinite God. This heavenly knowledge will make the things
learned on earth pale in contrast.
Regardless, what Christians can do is accept what God has revealed and what
the Church has formulated historically that is in accordance with biblical
teaching. So just what does it mean that God is a Trinity?
God has revealed that He is three persons or centers of consciousness within
one Godhead. Again, because the concept cannot be fully comprehended does
not mean the doctrine cannot be accurately described or defined. One good
definition of the Trinity is provided by noted church historian Philip
Schaff:
God is one in three persons or hypostases [i.e., distinct persons of the
same nature], each person expressing the whole fullness of the Godhead, with
all his attributes. The term persona is taken neither in the old sense of a
mere personation or form of manifestation (prosopon, face, mask), nor in the
modern sense of an independent, separate being or individual, but in a sense
which lies between these two conceptions, and thus avoids Sabellianism on
the one hand, and Tritheism on the other. [Sabellianism taught that God was
one person only who existed in three different forms or manifestations;
tritheism refers to a belief in three separate gods.] The divine persons are
in one another, and form a perpetual intercommunication and motion within
the divine essence. Each person has all the divine attributes which are
inherent in the divine essence, but each has also a characteristic
individuality or property, which is peculiar to the person, and can not be
communicated; the Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy Ghost is
proceeding. In this Trinity there is no priority or posteriority of time, no
superiority or inferiority of rank, but the three persons are coeternal and
coequal.11
It is important to note here that the Bible teaches both monotheism and
trinitarianism. It teaches a monotheistic view-that there is only one true
God-and a trinitarian view-that this one true God exists eternally as three
persons. This triunity of God was defended from earliest times as Christian
theologians and apologists were careful to safeguard both the unity of God
against tritheism and to also maintain the respective deity of the three
persons. As Gregory of Nyssa stated in his letter to Ablabius,
To say that there are three gods.is wicked.not to bear witness to the deity
of the Son and the Spirit.is ungodly and absurd. .therefore one God must be
confessed by us according to the witness of Scripture, "Hear Israel, the
Lord your God is one Lord" (Deut. 6:4), even if the word "deity" extends
through the holy trinity.12
So, how do we know that the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical? That the
Trinity is a biblical doctrine can be seen from five simple statements
supported by the Bible. And, since the Jehovah's Witnesses are one group so
adamantly opposed to the doctrine as being something "pagan," "unreasonable"
and "of the devil," we thought it might be instructive to them to cite their
own Bible, The New World Translation (NWT; 1970 edition), in support of the
doctrine. (In the scriptures below, the term "Holy Spirit" is not
capitalized because Jehovah's Witnesses believe that "holy spirit" is merely
God's active, impersonal force, not a true Person.) Thus, even the New World
Translation teaches the doctrine of the Trinity.
1. There is only one true God: "For there is one God, and one mediator
between God and men." (1 Timothy 2:5 NWT, emphasis added; cf. Deuteronomy
4:35, 6:4; Isaiah 43:10).
2. The Father is God: "There is actually to us one God the Father.(1
Corinthians 8:6, NWT, emphasis added; cf. John 17:1-3; 2 Corinthians 1:3;
Philippians 2:11; Colossians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:2).
3. Jesus Christ, the Son, is God: ".but he [Jesus] was also calling God his
own Father, making himself equal to God": (John 5:18 NWT, emphasis added);
"In answer, Thomas said to him [Jesus]: 'My Lord and my God!'" (John 20:28
NWT, emphasis added, cf. Isaiah 9:6; John 1:1 Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2
Peter 1:1).
4. The Holy Spirit is a Person, is eternal, and is therefore God: "However,
when that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all
the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he
hears he will speak and he will declare to you the things coming" (John
14:13 NWT, emphasis added). The Holy Spirit is also eternal: "the
Father.will give you another helper to be with you forever, the spirit of
the truth" (John 14:16-17) "How much more will the blood of the Christ, who
through an everlasting spirit offered himself without blemish to God."
(Hebrews 9:14, NWT, emphasis added). The Holy Spirit is therefore God: "But
Peter said: 'Ananias, why has Satan emboldened you to play false to the holy
spirit..' You have played false, not to men, but to God" (Acts 5:3, 4 NWT,
emphasis added).
5. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons with equal
authority: ".Baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and of the
Holy Spirit"; "Now I exhort you, brothers, through our Lord Jesus Christ and
through the love of the spirit, that you exert yourselves with me in prayers
to God for me"; "The undeserved kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ and the
love of God and the sharing in the holy spirit be with all of you" (Matthew
28:19; Romans 15:30; 2 Corinthians 13:14 NWT, emphasis added).
In Scripture, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are clearly
distinguished, yet there is only one God. Thus, "There is. one Spirit. one
Lord [Jesus]. one God and Father of all." (Ephesians 4:4-6; cf., 1
Corinthians 12:4-11). Further, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are never
identified as one Person only, as modern modalists teach, such as the United
Pentecostal Church/"Jesus Only" groups. For example, in John 6:38 Jesus
says, "I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of Him
that sent me." In that the will is the essence of personality, we certainly
have two personalities here.
For 1,900 years the historic Christian Church has found in the Bible the
doctrine of the Trinity. This can be seen by anyone who reads the Church
Fathers and studies the historic creeds. The creeds declared faith in only
one God, yet clearly taught that both the Son and the Holy Spirit were God.
For example, the Creed of Nicaea in 325 A.D. was the creed of 318 church
fathers. It reads, "We believe.in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
begotten of the Father as only begotten,. Light from Light, true God from
true God, begotten not created."13
The Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 A.D., a creed of 150 church fathers,
reads, "[We believe] in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-giver, Who
proceeds from the Father, Who is worshiped and glorified together with the
Father and Son,."14
Although the official, precise definition and explanation of the Trinity
codified at Nicaea (351 A.D.) and Constantinople (381 A.D.) is lacking in
the New Testament and writings of the early church leaders, the fact of the
Trinity was clearly recognized by both the apostles and post-apostolic
fathers. Scholars of historical theology could be cited in abundant
confirmation, e.g., "The second-century Fathers were convinced that the
Godhead is a triad."15
And,
From the Old Testament and the Judaism of the intertestamental period, the
early church accepted the conviction that God, the maker of heaven and
earth, is one.. In addition, even before the canonization of the New
Testament books, the apostolic traditions and popular faith of the church
were indelibly marked by the notion of a plurality of divine persons.the
idea of the triadic manifestation of the Godhead was present from the
earliest period as part of Christian piety and thinking. But no steps were
taken to work through the implications of this idea and to arrive at a
cohesive doctrine of God. The triadic pattern supplies the raw data from
which the more developed descriptions of the Christian doctrine of God will
come.16
Thus, in his book on the Trinity, God in Three Persons, E. Calvin Beisner
has provided an in- depth study of the historic development of the Trinity
from apostolic times through the final form of the Nicene Creed which was
adopted at the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381. He includes a
line-by-line comparison of the Creed with New Testament teaching, proving
that the doctrine of the Trinity as thus formulated is biblical.17
Indeed, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are so effortlessly and
consistently linked in Scripture that to assume God is not three Persons
makes it impossible to understand some passages. For example, consider the
following Scriptures:
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 (Matthew 28:19).
May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the
fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all (2 Corinthians 13:14).
For through him [Jesus] we both have access to the Father by one Spirit
(Ephesians 2:18; cf., 3:11-16).
But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray
in the Holy Spirit. Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy
of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life (Jude 20, 21).
To further illustrate, try answering the following questions without
concluding that the Bible teaches the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. Who raised Jesus from the dead? The Father (Romans 6:4; Acts 3:26; 1
Thessalonians 1:10)? The Son (John 2:19-21; 10:17, 18)? The Holy Spirit
(Romans 8:11)? Or God (Hebrews 13:20; Acts 13:30; 17:31)?
2. Who does the Bible say is God? The Father (Ephesians 4:6)? The Son (Titus
2:13; John 1:1; 20:28)? The Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 4)? Or God (Deuteronomy
4:35; Isaiah, 45:18)?
3. Who created the world? The Father (Ephesians 3:9-14; 4:6)? The Son
(Colossians 1:16, 17; John 1:1-3)? The Holy Spirit (Genesis 1:2; Psalm
104:30)? Or God (Genesis 1:1; Hebrews 11:3)?
4. Who saves and regenerates man? The Father (1 Peter 1:3)? The Son (John
5:21, 4:14)? The Holy Spirit (John 3:6, Titus 3:5)? Or God (1 John 3:9)?
5. Who justifies man? The Father (Jeremiah 23:6, cf. 2 Corinthians 5:19)?
The Son (Romans 5:9; 10:4; 2 Corinthians 5:19, 21)? The Holy Spirit (1
Corinthians 6:11; Galatians 5:5)? Or God (Romans 4:6; 9:33)?
6. Who sanctifies man? The Father (Jude 1)? The Son (Titus 2:14)? The Holy
Spirit (1 Peter 1:2)? Or God (Exodus 31:13)?
7. Who propitiated God's just anger against man for his sins? The Father (1
John 4:14; John 3:16; 17:5; 18:11)? The Son (Matthew 26:28; John 1:29; 1
John 2:2)? The Holy Spirit (Hebrews 9:14)? Or God (2 Corinthians 5:19, 21;
Acts 20:28; 1 John 4:10)?
Thus, although one member of the Trinity may have a more prominent part in a
specific action or role such as creating, redeeming, etc., all three Persons
are still involved. What this means is that it is proper for purposes of
illustration to substitute (or include) any specific Person of the Trinity
in any event in the Old Testament or New Testament where the term "God" is
used. In fact, Scripture itself does this. In Acts 28:25-26 the Holy Spirit
is said to speak to Isaiah, but in Isaiah 6:8-9 the speaker of the same
words is said to be God.
In his Christian Theology, Millard J. Erickson offers six points that must
be included in a proper understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. There is only one God.
2. Each Person in the Godhead is equally deity.
3. The threeness and oneness of God constitute a paradox or an
antinomy-merely an apparent contradiction, not a genuine one. This is
because God's threeness and oneness do not exist in the same respect-i.e.,
they are not simultaneously affirming and denying the same thing at the same
time and in the same manner. God's oneness refers to the divine essence; His
threeness to the plurality of persons.
4. The Trinity is eternal-there have always been three persons, each of whom
is eternally divine. One or more of the Persons did not come into being at a
point in time or at some point in time became divine. There has never been
any change in the essential divine nature of the triune God. He is and will
be what He has always been forever.
5. The function of one member in the Trinity may for a time be subordinate
to one or both of the other members, although this does not mean He is in
anyway inferior in essence. Each Person of the Trinity has had, for a period
of time, a particular function unique to Himself. In other words, the
particular function that is sometimes unique to a given Person in the
Trinity is only a temporary role exercised for a given purpose. It does not
represent a change in His status or essence. When the second Person of the
Trinity incarnated and became Jesus Christ, He did not become less than the
Father, although He did become subordinate to the Father functionally. In
like manner, the Holy Spirit is now subordinated to the ministry of the Son
(John Chs. 14-16), as well as to the will of the Father, but He is not less
than they are.
Certain examples may illustrate this. A wife may have a subordinate role to
a husband, but she is also his equal. Equals in some business enterprise may
elect one of their number to serve as head or a chairperson for a period,
without any change in rank. During World War II, the highest ranking member
of an aircraft, the pilot, would nevertheless carefully subordinate his
decisions to the bombardier, a lower ranking officer.
6. Finally, as noted, the Trinity is incomprehensible. Even when we are in
heaven and fully redeemed, we will still not totally comprehend God because
it is impossible that a finite creature could ever comprehend an infinite
being: Thus, "Those aspects of God which we never fully comprehend should be
regarded as mysteries that go beyond our reason rather than as paradoxes
which conflict with reason."18
Indeed, the problems inherent in fully comprehending the doctrine of the
Trinity are also inherent in the Person of Jesus Christ. Thus, the doctrine
known as the hypostatic union assimilates all the biblical data in order to
accurately describe the nature of the Incarnation. It declares that Jesus is
undiminished deity and full humanity in one person. Jesus Christ is both God
and man. Jesus is not part human and part divine-he is fully man and fully
God.
Because of this He has two natures, one divine and one human. But He is not
two persons i.e., He is not schizophrenic. Further, He is one person with
two different kinds of consciousness (a divine consciousness and also a
human consciousness). Also, He is one person with two wills (if He truly has
two natures, then He must have two wills, one human and one divine),
however, Jesus Christ never had a conflict of wills.
Christ's two natures were not altered by their union within the one person
of Christ; both divine and human characteristics and deeds may be attributed
to the Person of Christ under any of His names whether they are divine or
human titles. Also, both the human and divine natures of Christ may be
manifested during a single event. Finally, the union of Christ's two natures
was not altered by His death, burial, resurrection or ascension but will
remain throughout eternity.19
The above material illustrates the importance of precision for accurately
formulating the biblical data-and also how easily misconceptions might arise
concerning the nature of God. This is why God encourages and commands us to
"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not
need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15).
Christians should therefore study the doctrine of the Trinity in order to
know how to effectively deal with the biblical data and answer the arguments
of those in opposition:
And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to
everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must gently
instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a
knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape
from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will (2
Timothy 2:24-26).
Thomas a Kempis once stated Christian priorities eloquently when he wrote
what is also a fitting conclusion to this article:
Grant to us, O Lord, to know that which is worth knowing, to love that which
is worth loving, to praise that which pleaseth Thee most, to esteem that
which is most precious unto Thee, and to dislike whatsoever is evil in Thy
eyes. Grant us with true judgment to distinguish things that differ, and
above all to search out and to do what is well pleasing unto Thee, through
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Notes
1 q.v., "Jesus Christ," Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Aid to Bible
Understanding (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), p.
918, p. 437; Anthony A. Hoekema, The Four Major Cults (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1970), p. 295 citing Let God Be True (1952), p. 74.
2 Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Things in Which It Is Impossible for
God to Lie (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1965), p. 269.
3 C. T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures - Vol. 7: The Finished Mystery,
p. 410 cited by Wilton M. Nelson and Richard K. Smith, "Jehovah's Witnesses"
in David J. Hesselgrave, ed., Dynamic Religious Movements: Case Studies of
Rapidly Growing Religious Movements Around the World (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1978), p. 181.
4 Cited by Charles S. Braden, These Also Believe: A Study of Modern American
Cults and Minority Religious Movements (New York: Macmillan, 1970), p. 371
quoting Judge Rutherford's Uncovered (Brooklyn, NY: WBTS, 1937), pp. 48-49;
Let God Be True (1946), pp. 82-83, 93.
5 See John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About
Mormonism (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992), ch. 10.
6 Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1977), pp.
270, 576-77.
7 Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Boston,
MA: The First Church of Christ, Scientist, 1971), pp. 256, 515.
8 Victor Paul Wierwille, Jesus Christ Is Not God (New Knoxville, OH:
American Christian Press, 1975), pp. 2-3, 6-7, 25.
9 Philip Schaff, ed., rev. by David S. Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom:
With a History and Critical Notes - Vol. 1: The History of the Creeds (Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983), pp. 39-40.
10 Ibid., p. 38.
11 Ibid., the Greek term was transliterated.
12 "Gregory of Nyssa.to Ablabius," in William G. Rusch, trans. and ed., The
Trinitarian Controversy (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), pp. 149,
151-52.
13 John H. Leith, Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Christian Doctrine
from the Bible to the Present 3rd ed., (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982), pp.
30-31.
14 Ibid., p. 33, emphasis added.
15 J. G. Davies, The Early Christian Church: A History of Its First Five
Centuries (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1980), 97.
16 Rusch, 2, emphasis added.
17 E. Calvin Beisner, God in Three Persons (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1984).
18 Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1986,
one vol. edition), pp. 337-338.
19 For a good discussion see Robert Glenn Gromacki, The Virgin Birth:
Doctrine of Deity (New York: Thomas Nelson, 1974), chs. 9, 11-13.
clip
>
> Why Is the Doctrine of the Trinity a Vital Belief for Christians to
> Understand?
It is not.
What IS vital, is that Christians understand that "trinity doctrine" is
NOT IN the Bible!
--------
Jesus said: "Unless you believe I am He you shall die in your sins."
John 8:24
Who is the "He" to whom He is referring?
Trinitarians would pervert these words of Jesus, and make His words
mean, "unless you believe the doctrine of the trinity... you will die in
your sins."
The Trinitarians say:
"This is unfortunate because if you do not know who
Jesus is (who He REALLY is), then your faith is not
on the true foundation. This is not a light matter.
When you change who Jesus is, you by necessity pervert
the Gospel message."
I agree... When you change who Jesus IS, then you have perverted the Gospel.
Now the Question is, "Who is Jesus (really), and who is it that perverts
the Gospel message?"
FIRST:
What the Bible Teaches, Who is Jesus?
A) What did the Law and Prophets say about Jesus?
Jesus is descendant of Eve, through Abraham, Gen. 3:15, 12:3, 18:18.
Born in the Line of David, Psalms 89:3-4,
Born of a virgin, Isa. 7:14,9:6-7,
Born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2,
A forerunner would precede Him. Mal. 3:1.
He would preach in Galilee. Isa. 9:1-2.
He would be a Prophet, a preacher of deliverance. Deu. 18:15, Isa. 61:1-3.
He would be meek, and rejected. Isa. 42:2, 53:3.
And, He would be ordained a Priest after the order [type or kind] of
Melchizedek. Psalms 110:4.
B) Who does Jesus say He Is?
In Matthew and John there are about 59 references to "My Father."
He referred to God as "My God":
"And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi,
Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why
hast thou forsaken me? [KJV] Mark 15:34
"Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my
Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my
Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. [KJV] John 20:17
He told John's messengers that He was the fulfillment of the prophecies,
"he who is to come." John 7:19-23,
CONFESSIONS OF PETER AND MARTHA
"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Mat 16:16
"Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that
believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever
liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
"She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the
Son of God, which should come into the world." John 11:25-27
Jesus did not correct Peter or Martha. Did Jesus teach the doctrine of
the trinity? No, there is no scripture of Jesus referring to himself as
a persona of a multiple personality being, or to His Father God as a
triune being.
C) Who did the Apostles say Jesus is?
John 1:1-3 [Greek]
3788 2258 1722 746 4314 3588 2316
He was in beginning with *THE* God
John distinguished between God the Son and God the Father.
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm
[KJV] John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
"Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to
God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all
authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies
under his feet." 1 Cor 15:24-25
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man
Christ Jesus" [KJV] I Timothy 2:5
"And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of
sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel." [KJV]
Hebrews 12:24
1 Cor 11:3 "the head of Christ is God."
Did the Apostles teach that Jesus is a member of a 'triune being'? No,
there is no reference to Jesus as a persona of a multiple personality
being, or to His Father, or God, as a triune being.
GIVEN ALL AUTHORITY, ALL POWER
"The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make
thine enemies thy footstool. The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength
out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies." Ps 110:1-2 Mat
28:18, 1 Cor 15:24-28.
Since Jesus was given ALL Power and ALL Authority then He had the power
to heal and walk on water, AND to forgive sin.
Did Abraham, Moses, Isaiah or any Old Testament Prophet describe Jesus
as a "persona of a triune being"? No. Nowhere in the Old Testament is
God defined or described as a triune being.
In fact, Deu 6:4 defines the Lord, God. as One, not triune.
SECOND:
What Trinity Doctrine teaches
1) Who do the Trinitarians say Jesus is?
That Jesus is person of a multiple personality being.
That the Holy Spirit is a person of a multiple personality being.
That God the Father is a multiple personality being.
2) When did the doctrine of the trinity come into the Church? After
Ad325-388, and it has continued to be edited and modified, and there are
at least two major versions of it.
3) Who is it that "changes who Jesus is"?
The Trinitarians.
Pagan theology
A.D. 150 Justin Martyr, introduces Greek Philosophy.
A.D. 170 The word "Trias", appears first in Christian literature.
A.D. 200 "Trinitas" is first introduced by Tertullian.
A.D. 260 Sabellius: "Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three names for the
same God".
A.D. 325 "Nicene Creed" affirms Christ to be "Very God of Very God".
A.D. 381 Council of Constantinople invents "Three persons in One God".
A.D. 388 Emperor Theodosius threatens punishment to all who won't
worship the Trinity.
CONCLUSION
Who is it that "changes who Jesus is"?
Since the Old testament Law and prophets do not teach that Israel knew
or worshiped a triune god,
And,
Since Jesus did not state or reveal that He was a person of a triune god,
And,
Since the Apostles did not teach the First Century Church the doctrine
of a triune god,
And,
Since the Apostles did not include the doctrine of a triune god in the
New Testament,
Therefore,
it is those who teach the doctrine of a pagan three headed god who
change who they believe Jesus is.
WHAT DO WE NEED TO BELIEVE?
As Jesus said, "unless you believe I am He," (John 8:24) "you will die
in your sin."
The "He" Jesus claimed to be is the Son of God as foretold in prophecy.
He claimed to be the Son of God as depicted in the Law of Moses,
writings of David and Solomon, and in the Law and Prophets.
If we read the Law, books of wisdom and the prophets, and believe that
Jesus of Nazareth is that Son of God, then we do, in fact, believe that
He is "He."
As Jesus told Martha, John 11:25-27) "I am the resurrection, and the
life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live."
Martha answered, " I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God,
which should come into the world." Martha did not exhibit any knowledge
of a triune being.
(In fact, triune gods were and are an abomination to the Jews.)
If we believe in this same Jesus, as confessed by Martha, as described
by the Old Testament, as described by the Apostles, then we have eternal
life.
A Scriptural Doctrine of God
http://tinyurl.com/2lw6ev
Glenn
His witness
--
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/
Note, the site at xprt.net will close 1Sept07 and open as
www.thelittlebookopened.org [Key words:] "The Little Book";
Glenn McClary, servitum, gaedhealic, oldwetdog
Actually it is and I've been providing proof from the Bible as has numerous
other individuals using sola scriptura. And it's quite revealing, Glenn,
that you continue to "snip" those points and proofs from the Bible. It's
because you cannot refute Biblical truth yet choose to hold onto your
heresies even though your heresies (the same ones that have been held to by
heretics for centuries) have been thoroughly and completely refuted time and
time again (by Godly individuals for centuries). I will keep you in my
prayers.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
P.S. -- For example, neither you nor any other heretic who deny the Biblical
teaching of the Trinity have been able to refute the following article by
Dr. Ankerberg and Dr. Weldon. Instead you and other heretics who deny the
Biblical teaching of the Trinity ignore it hoping it will go away. It will
not nor will the Biblical teaching of the Trinity.
What Does the Bible Reveal About the Trinity?
by Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon
PART 1
When we speak of the Trinity, we must do so with caution and modesty, for,
as St. Augustine saith, "Nowhere else are more dangerous errors made, or is
research more difficult, or discovery more fruitful." -St. Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Theologies, ia q. xxi, 1272
All we ask you to understand is that Trinitarian theology was not derived
from pagan sources. It was derived from biblical passages where honest,
godly men said, "Hey, 2 Peter says there is a Person called the Father, and
he's God. And Acts 5 says there is a Person called the Spirit, and he's God.
And John 1 says there's a Person called the Word and he's God." You've got
Three Persons, and Deuteronomy 6 says, "There is only one God." Logical
conclusion: the Three Persons, somehow, are the One God. That's how
Trinitarian theology started. Not with the pagans. -Dr. Walter Martin,
responding to Dr. Robert Sabin, President of the Apostolic Bible Institute
of St. Paul, Minnesota, on "The John Ankerberg Show"
The biblical doctrine of the Trinity is vital to understand because it
concerns who God is, that is, a proper realization of the nature of God as
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To understand the Trinity is to understand God
as He has revealed Himself to be.
Why is this important? Because if we are to worship God "in spirit and in
truth" (John 4:24), as Jesus commanded, we must know and worship the one
true God as He really is. To fail to do this is to fail to know and worship
God-and this cannot bring Him glory. Thus, those who reject the Trinity by
definition deny the true nature of God.
Consider several examples of professedly Christian religions that forcefully
reject what the Bible teaches. By denying the biblical teaching on the
Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses make Jesus merely a creation of Jehovah and the
Holy Spirit merely Jehovah's impersonal force. Thus, Jesus "was actually a
creature of God" who earned his own salvation and immortality 1 and the Holy
Spirit "is not a person at all but is God's invisible active force by means
of which God carries out his holy will and work."2
In rejecting the Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses founder C. T. Russell
blasphemously stated that the God of Christianity "is plainly not Jehovah
but the ancient deity, hoary with the iniquity of the ages-Baal, the Devil
Himself."3 Second Watchtower president Judge Rutherford declared in a
similar fashion, "The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine and is
promulgated by Satan for the purpose of defaming Jehovah's name" and for
keeping others from "learning the truth of Jehovah and his Son, Jesus
Christ." Indeed, "God-fearing persons find it a bit difficult to love and
worship a complicated, freakish-looking three-headed God."4 Surely teachings
that caricature God in this manner do not bring to Him honor and glory.
In a similar fashion, Mormons maintain that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
are not immortal, but were individual spirit-men created by the sexual union
of their parent deities, each of whom then later evolved into Godhood.5
Mormonism thus rejects the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by
teaching tritheism, or a belief in three separate Gods.
Indeed, Mormons are ultimately polytheists who reject the concept of one
true God. As a standard text of Mormon doctrine declares:
As pertaining to this universe, there are three Gods: the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost. To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the
only Gods we worship. But in addition there is an infinite number of holy
personages, drawn from worlds without number, who have passed on to
exaltation [that is, Godhood] and are thus gods.6
Mary Baker Eddy was the founder of Christian Science, another group that
claims to be truly Christian. Yet in her Science and Health with Key to the
Scriptures, the bible of Christian Science, she writes:
The theory of three persons in one God (that is, a personal Trinity or
Tri-unity) suggests polytheism, rather than the one ever-present I Am. The
name Elohim is in the plural, but this plurality of Spirit does not imply
more than one God, nor does it imply three persons in one.7
Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of The Way International, reveals additional
common consequences of rejection of the Trinity: a denial not only of the
person of Jesus Christ but also of His atoning Work on the cross. Wierwille
argues as follows:
Through the years, the more and more I carefully researched God's Word for
knowledge, the less and less I found to substantiate a trinity. Even though
I had always accepted the idea of a three-in-one-God, I continually found
evidence in the Word of God which undermined a Christian trinity. [Further]
If Jesus Christ is God we have not yet been redeemed. Our very redemption is
dependent on Jesus Christ's being a man and not God. So how then did a
trinitarian doctrine come about? It gradually evolved and gained momentum in
late 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries as pagans, who had converted to
Christianity, brought to Christianity some of their pagan beliefs and
practices. Trinitarianism then was confirmed at Nicaea in 325 by Church
bishops out of political expediency.8
In essence, the reason the Trinity is important to understand according to
its biblical and theological formulation is that failure to do so can lead
to heretical views about who God is. This in turn can lead to rejection of
the one true God and worship of a false god. But if the Bible is clear on
anything, it is clear that faith in and worship of a false god is powerless
to save people from their sins. Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of
having an accurate knowledge of God when He said, "And this is eternal life,
that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast
sent" (John 17:3).
God warned Israel through the prophet Hosea, "My people are destroyed from
lack of knowledge" and "You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Savior
except me" (Hosea 4:6; 13:4). As their history so amply demonstrates, the
Israelites were spiritually ruined because they had rejected the true
knowledge of God and had turned to false gods and idols. Unfortunately, in a
similar manner, those who deliberately reject the Trinity, knowing in
advance what the Bible teaches about it, only reveal their own lack of
salvation (1 Cor. 2:14). In other words, no one can consistently dishonor
what the Holy Spirit has revealed in Scripture as to the true nature of God
and logically claim to be a Christian.
Notes
1 Q.v., "Jesus Christ," Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Aid to Bible
Understanding (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), pp.
437, 918; Anthony A. Hoekema, The Four Major Cults (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1970), p. 295 citing Let God Be True (1952), p. 74.
2 Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Things in Which It Is Impossible for
God to Lie (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1965), p. 269.
3 C. T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures- Vol. 7: The Finished Mystery, p.
410 cited by Wilton M. Nelson and Richard K. Smith, "Jehovah's Witnesses" in
David J. Hesselgrave, ed., Dynamic Religious Movements: Case Studies of
Rapidly Growing Religious Movements Around the World (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1978), p. 181.
4 Cited by Charles S. Braden, These Also Believe: A Study of Modern American
Cults and Minority Religious Movements (New York: Macmillan, 1970), p. 371
quoting Judge Rutherford's Uncovered (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and
Tract Society, 1937), pp. 48-49; Let God Be True (1946), pp. 82-83, 93.
5 See John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Behind the Mask of Mormonism (Eugene, OR:
Harvest House, 1996), chap. 10.
6 Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1977), pp.
270, 576-577.
7 Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Boston,
MA: The First Church of Christ, Scientist 1971), pp. 256, 515.
8 Victor Paul Wierwille, Jesus Christ Is Not God (New Knoxville, OH:
American Christian Press, 1975), pp. 2-3, 6-7, 25.
PART 2
What is the Trinity?
God has revealed that He is three persons or centers of consciousness within
one Godhead. Because the concept cannot be fully comprehended does not mean
the doctrine cannot be accurately described or defined; however, precision
here requires some technicality. One good definition of the Trinity is
provided by noted church historian Philip Schaff:
God is one in three persons or hypostases [that is, distinct persons of the
same nature], each person expressing the whole fullness of the Godhead, with
all his attributes. The term persona is taken neither in the old sense of a
mere personation or form of manifestation (prosopon, face, mask), nor in the
modern sense of an independent, separate being or individual, but in a sense
which lies between these two conceptions, and thus avoids Sabellianism on
the one hand, and Tritheism on the other. [Sabellianism taught that God was
one person only who existed in three different forms or manifestations;
tritheism refers to a belief in three separate gods.] The divine persons are
in one another, and form a perpetual intercommunication and motion within
the divine essence. Each person has all the divine attributes which are
inherent in the divine essence, but each has also a characteristic
individuality or property, which is peculiar to the person, and cannot be
communicated; the Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy Ghost is
proceeding. In this Trinity there is no priority or posteriority of time, no
superiority or inferiority of rank, but the three persons are coeternal and
coequal.1
It is important to note here that the Bible teaches both monotheism and
trinitarianism. It teaches a monotheistic view-that there is only one true
God-and a trinitarian view-that this one true God exists eternally as three
persons. This triunity of God was defended from earliest times as Christian
theologians and apologists were careful both to safeguard the unity of God
against tritheism and also to maintain the respective deity of the three
persons. As Gregory of Nyssa stated in his letter to Ablabius, "To say that
there are three gods is wicked. Not to bear witness to the deity of the Son
and the Spirit is ungodly and absurd. Therefore one God must be confessed by
us according to the witness of Scripture, 'Hear Israel, the Lord your God is
one Lord' (Deuteronomy 6:4), even if the word 'deity' extends through the
holy trinity."2
In his Christian Theology, Millard J. Erickson offers six points that must
be included in a proper understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. There is only one God.
2. Each person in the Godhead is equally deity.
3. The threeness and oneness of God constitute a paradox or an
antinomy-merely an apparent contradiction, not a genuine one. This is
because God's threeness and oneness do not exist in the same respect-that
is, they are not simultaneously affirming and denying the same thing at the
same time and in the same manner. God's oneness refers to the divine
essence; His threeness to the plurality of persons.
4. The Trinity is eternal-there have always been three persons, each of whom
is eternally divine. One or more of the persons did not come into being at a
point in time or at some point in time become divine. There has never been
any change in the essential divine nature of the triune God. He is and will
be what He has always been forever.
5. The function of one member in the Trinity may for a time be subordinate
to one or both of the other members, although this does not mean He is in
anyway inferior in essence. Each person of the Trinity has had, for a period
of time, a particular function unique to Himself. In other words, the
particular function that is sometimes unique to a given person in the
Trinity is only a temporary role exercised for a given purpose. It does not
represent a change in His status or essence. When the second person of the
Trinity incarnated and became Jesus Christ, He did not become less than the
Father, although He did become subordinate to the Father functionally. In
like manner, the Holy Spirit is now subordinated to the ministry of the Son
(John 14-16), as well as to the will of the Father, but He is not less than
they are. Certain examples may illustrate this. A wife may have a
subordinate role to a husband, but she is also his equal. Equals in some
business enterprise may elect one of their number to serve as head or a
chairperson for a period, without any change in rank. During World War II,
the highest ranking member of an aircraft, the pilot, would nevertheless
carefully subordinate his decisions to the bombardier, a lower ranking
officer.
6. Finally, the Trinity is incomprehensible. Even when we are in heaven and
fully redeemed, we will still not totally comprehend God because it is
impossible that a finite creature could ever fully comprehend an infinite
being. Thus, "Those aspects of God which we never fully comprehend should be
regarded as mysteries that go beyond our reason rather than as paradoxes
which conflict with reason."3
This last point takes us to our next question.
Why is the Trinity a mystery?
Before we discuss what the Bible teaches about the Trinity, we must remember
that this doctrine is something finite minds can never fully comprehend. The
Trinity may be logically defined, but this is partly the problem because
"the infinite truth of the Godhead lies far beyond the boundaries of logic,
which deals only with finite truths and categories."4 In other words, as an
infinite being, God can never be fully understood by any finite person. If
we can't understand something as basic as particle physics, who would argue
we should be able to rationally comprehend all that an infinite God is? As
Dorothy L. Sayers once stated in Current Religious Thought (1957), "Why do
you complain that the proposition God is three in one is obscure and
mystical and yet acquiesce meekly in the physicist's fundamental formula,
'two P minus PQ equals IH over two Pi where I equals the square root of
minus one' when you know quite well that the square root of minus one is
paradoxical and Pi is incalculable?"
Consider that an ant could never comprehend all that a human being is, even
if it tried. Yet, if a human being could somehow become an ant, it might be
able to explain enough about what a human is so that the ant could gain
something of an understanding as to what a human is.
When we consider that God is, quite literally, infinitely removed from men,
the parallel suffers immeasurably. All we can truly understand about God is
what He has revealed to us in the Bible. And while this does give us a great
deal of accurate information, it obviously does not give us exhaustive
information that plumbs the depths of His infinity. Indeed, one of the
glories of eternal salvation (John 5:24; 6:47) will be that finite creatures
will forever learn wondrous things about the inexhaustible glories and
perfections of an infinite God. This heavenly knowledge will make the things
learned on earth pale in contrast.
The problems inherent in fully comprehending the doctrine of the Trinity are
also inherent in the person of Jesus Christ. The doctrine known as the
hypostatic union assimilates all the biblical data in order to accurately
describe the nature of the Incarnation. It declares that Jesus is
undiminished deity and full humanity in one person. Jesus Christ is both God
and man. Jesus is not part human and part divine-He is fully man and fully
God.
Because of this He has two natures, one divine and one human. But He is not
two persons-He is not schizophrenic. Further, He is one person with two
different kinds of consciousness (divine and human). Also, He is one person
with two wills (if He truly has two natures, then He must have two wills,
one human and one divine); however, Jesus Christ never had a conflict of
wills.
Christ's two natures were not altered by their union within the one person
of Christ. Both divine and human characteristics and deeds may be attributed
to the person of Christ under any of His names, whether divine or human.
Also, both the human and divine natures of Christ may be manifested during a
single event. Finally, the union of Christ's two natures was not altered by
His death, burial, resurrection, or ascension but will remain throughout
eternity.5
The above material illustrates the importance of precision for accurately
formulating the biblical data-and also how easily misconceptions might arise
concerning the nature of God. This is why God encourages and commands us to
"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not
need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15).
Christians should therefore study the doctrine of the Trinity to know how to
effectively deal with the biblical data and answer the arguments of those in
opposition: "And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be
kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must
gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading
them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses
and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his
will" (2 Timothy 2:24-26).
Thomas Ä… Kempis stated Christian priorities eloquently when he wrote:
Grant to us, O Lord, to know that which is worth knowing, to love that which
is worth loving, to praise that which pleaseth Thee most, to esteem that
which is most precious unto Thee, and to dislike whatsoever is evil in Thy
eyes. Grant us with true judgment to distinguish things that differ, and
above all to search out and to do what is well pleasing unto Thee, through
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Christians can please God by accepting what God has revealed and what the
Church has formulated historically that is in accordance with biblical
teaching.
Must we believe in the Trinity in order to be saved?
Prior knowledge of the Trinity, especially in its theological formulation,
is not necessary for a person to be saved. But once saved, it is vital for
Christians to know the true nature of the God who has so graciously pardoned
them. This explains why the Church has always recognized the importance of a
proper understanding of God and maintained that those who reject the
scriptural view of God, as long as they do so, cannot be saved.
The great Athanasian Creed of the Church declares,
So the Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet
they are not three Gods: but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord: the
Son is Lord: and the Holy Ghost is Lord. And yet not three Lords: but one
Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity: to acknowledge
every Person by himself to be God and Lord: So are we forbidden by the
Catholic Religion: to say. There be three Gods or three Lords. The Father is
made of none: neither created, nor begotten, the Son is of the Father alone:
not made, nor created: but begotten. Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the
Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten: but proceeding... the whole
three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as
aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be
worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the
Trinity.6
Noted Church historian Philip Schaff comments as follows concerning the
creed's placing of a divine curse or anathema on those who reject the
Trinity. He points out the Athanasian Creed
.begins and ends with the solemn declaration that the catholic [i.e.,
universal] faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation is the indispensable
condition of salvation, and that those who reject it will be lost forever.
This anathema, in its natural historical sense, is not merely a solemn
warning against the great danger of heresy, nor, on the other hand, does it
demand, as a condition of salvation, a full knowledge, and assent to, the
logical statement of the doctrines set forth (this would condemn the great
mass even of Christian believers). But it does mean to exclude from heaven
all who reject the divine truth therein taught. It requires everyone who
would be saved to believe in the only true and living God: Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, one in essence, three in persons, and in one Jesus Christ, very
God and very man in one person.7
As Vladimir Lossky once put boldly in The Mystical Theology of the Eastern
Church, "Between the Trinity and Hell there lies no other choice."8
In fact, it is noteworthy that an examination of religions that claim to be
Christian yet deny the Trinity invariably reveals that they also deny other
key Christian doctrines, such as salvation by grace through faith alone. In
other words, without a proper respect for Scripture and its understanding of
God, it is unlikely one will get much else correct biblically. Throughout
its history, the Christian church has maintained that in order to be
faithful to the teaching of the New Testament, one must affirm at a minimum
the following doctrines: 1) the doctrine of the trinity; 2) the doctrine of
salvation by grace through faith; 3) the doctrine of the incarnation and
sinlessness of Christ; and 4) the sacrificial death, atonement, and
resurrection of Christ. It is almost exclusively true that those who deny
point one, the Trinity, also deny point two and often points three or four
as well.
As Dr. Harold O. J. Brown points out in his excellent historical survey
Heresies, modalism, for example, makes the event of redemption almost a
charade. Why? Because if the Son of God is not a distinct person, as
modalism teaches, He can hardly represent us before God the Father. And if
Jesus Christ is not a real, separate person from God the Father-One who can
stand before Him, address Him and intercede for us-then what happens to the
concept of substitutionary atonement? If Christ does not exist as a separate
person, how did He pay for our sins on the cross to satisfy the justice of
God the Father? Thus, Dr. Brown correctly states, "Where modalism prevails,
the concept of... vicarious atonement, will necessarily be absent, and so
modalism is sometimes adopted by those who object to the doctrine of
vicarious atonement."9
In other words, if there is no Trinity then there is no incarnation and no
objective redemption or salvation. There is no one who is acting as a
mediator between God and man. When the Trinity has been denied, the other
chief articles logically related to it such as atonement, regeneration, and
so on are almost always altered or abandoned. This is why theologian Loraine
Boettner concludes,
In the nature of the case, anti-trinitarianism inevitably leads to a
radically different system of religion. Historically the Church has always
refused to recognize as Christians those who rejected the doctrine of
Trinity. Also, historically, every great revival of Christianity down
through the ages has been a revival of adhesion to fullest Trinitarianism.
It is not too much to say, therefore, that the Trinity is the point on which
all Christian ideas and interests focus, at once the beginning and the end
of all true insight into Christianity.10
Notes
1 Philip Schaff, ed., rev. by David S. Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom:
With a History and Critical Notes-Vol. 1: The History of the Creeds (Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983). The Greek term was transliterated by the
authors.
2 "Gregory of Nyssato Ablabius," in William G. Rusch, trans. and ed., The
Trinitarian Controversy (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), pp. 149,
151-152.
3 Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1986,
one vol. edition), pp. 337-338.
4 Schaff, ed., p. 38.
5 For a good discussion see Robert Glenn Gromacki, The Virgin Birth:
Doctrine of Deity (New York: Thomas Nelson, 1974), chaps 9, 11-13.
6 Cited in E. Calvin Beisner, God in Three Persons (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale,
1984), pp. 12-13.
7 Schaff, ed., pp. 39-40.
8 Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (1957), p.
66.
9 Dr. Harold O. J. Brown, Heresies (Doubleday, 1984), pp. 99-100.
10 Loriane Boettner, Studies in Theology (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1980), p. 139.
PART 3
Is the Trinity taught in the Bible?
How do we know that the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical? That the
Trinity is a biblical doctrine can be seen from five simple statements
supported by the Bible. And, since the Jehovah's Witnesses are one group so
adamantly opposed to the doctrine as being something "pagan,"
"unreasonable," and "of the devil," we thought it might be instructive to
begin by citing their own Bible, the New World Translation (1970 edition),
in support of the doctrine. Thus, even the New World Translation teaches the
doctrine of the Trinity. In the scriptures below, the term "Holy Spirit" is
not capitalized because Jehovah's Witnesses believe that "holy spirit" is
merely God's active, impersonal force, not a true person. (For those who
have never done so, looking up these scriptures during your time of personal
Bible study will be a rewarding learning process.)
1. There is only one true God: "For there is one God, and one mediator
between God and men" (1 Tim. 2:5 NWT; cf. Deut. 4:35, 6:4; Isa. 43:10).
2. The Father is God: "There is actually to us one God the Father" (1 Cor.
8:6 NWT; cf. John 17:1-3; 2 Cor. 1:3; Phil. 2:11; Col. 1:3; 1 Pet. 1:2).
3. Jesus Christ, the Son, is God: "but he [Jesus] was also calling God his
own Father, making himself equal to God": (John 5:18 NWT); "In answer,
Thomas said to him [Jesus]: 'My Lord and my God!'" (John 20:28 NWT, cf. Isa.
9:6; John 1:1; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:1).
4. The Holy Spirit is a person, is eternal, and is therefore God: "However,
when that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all
the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he
hears he will speak and he will declare to you the things coming" (John
16:13 NWT, emphasis added). The Holy Spirit is also eternal: "How much more
will the blood of the Christ, who through an everlasting spirit offered
himself without blemish to God" (Heb. 9:14 NWT). The Holy Spirit is
therefore God: "But Peter said: 'Ananias, why has Satan emboldened you to
play false to the holy spirit?' You have played false, not to men, but to
God" (Acts 5:3, 4 NWT, emphasis added).
5. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons with equal
authority: "Baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and of the
Holy Spirit"; "Now I exhort you, brothers, through our Lord Jesus Christ and
through the love of the spirit, that you exert yourselves with me in prayers
to God for me"; "The undeserved kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ and the
love of God and the sharing in the holy spirit be with all of you" (Matt.
28:19; Rom. 15:30; 2 Cor. 13:14 NWT).
In Scripture, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are clearly
distinguished as separate persons, yet there is only one God. Thus, "There
is... one Spirit... one Lord [Jesus]... one God and Father of all" (Eph.
4:4-6; cf., 1 Cor. 12:4-11). Further, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are
never identified as one person only, as modern modalists such as the United
Pentecostal Church/ "Jesus Only" groups teach. For example, in John 6:38
(KJV) Jesus says, "I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the
will of Him that sent me." Because will is the essence of personality, we
certainly have two personalities here.
In addition, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are so dearly and consistently
linked in Scripture that to assume God is not three Persons makes it
impossible to understand some passages. For example, consider the following
Scriptures: 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 (Matt.
28:19).
For this reason I kneel before the Father... I pray that out of his glorious
riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner
being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith (Eph.
3:14,16,17a).
May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the
fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all (2 Cor. 13:14).
But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray
in the Holy Spirit. Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy
of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life (Jude 20, 21).
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal
Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts
that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God (Heb. 9:14).
I urge you, brothers, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the
Spirit, to join me in my struggle by praying to God for me (Rom. 15:30).
Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed
us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a
deposit, guaranteeing what is to come (2 Cor. 1:21, 22).
Give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God's will for you in Christ
Jesus. Do not put out the Spirit's fire (1 Thess. 5:18, 19).
But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not
because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved
us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he
poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior (Titus 3:3-6).
There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different
kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working,
but the same God works all of them in all men (1 Cor. 12:4-6).
For through him [Jesus] we both have access to the Father by one Spirit
(Eph. 2:18; cf., 3:11-16).
In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy
temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a
dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit (Eph. 2:21-22).
But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord,
because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying
work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth (2 Thess. 2:13,14).
(See also Rom. 14:17,18; 15:13-17; 1 Cor. 6:11,17-19; 2 Cor. 3:4-6; Gal.
2:21-3:2; Eph. 5:18-20; Phil. 2:1,6; Col. 1:6-8; 1 Thess. 1:1,5; 4:2,8; 2
Thess. 3:5; 1 John 3:23,24.)
To further illustrate, try answering the following questions without
concluding that the Bible teaches the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. Who raised Jesus from the dead? The Father (Rom. 6:4)? The Son (John
2:19-21; 10:17,18)? The Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:11)? Or God (Acts 3:26; 1 Thess.
1:10; Heb. 13:20; Acts 13:30; 17:31)?
2. Who does the Bible say is God? The Father (Eph. 4:6)? The Son (Titus
2:13; John 1:1,14; 20:28)? The Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3,4)? Or God (Deut. 4:35;
Isa. 45:18)?
3. Who created the world? The Father (Eph. 3:9-14; 4:6)? The Son (Col.
1:16,17; John 1:1-3)? The Holy Spirit (Gen. 1:2; Psa. 104:30)? Or God (Gen.
1:1; Heb. 11:3)?
4. Who saves and regenerates man? The Father (1 Pet. 1:3)? The Son (John
5:21,4:14)? The Holy Spirit (John 3:6, Titus 3:5)? Or God (1 John 3:9)?
5. Who justifies man? The Father (Jer. 23:6, cf. 2 Cor. 5:19)? The Son (Rom.
5:9; 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:19, 21)? The Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:11; Gal. 5:5)? Or God
(Rom. 4:6; 9:33)?
6. Who sanctifies man? The Father (Jude 1)? The Son (Titus 2:14)? The Holy
Spirit (1 Pet. 1:2)? Or God (Ex. 31:13)?
7. Who propitiated God's just anger against man for his sins? The Father (1
John 4:14; John 3:16; 17:5; 18:11)? The Son (Matt. 26:28; John 1:29; 1 John
2:2)? The Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14)? Or God (2 Cor.5:19,21; Acts 20:28; 1 John
4:10)?
So, although one member of the Trinity may have a more prominent part in a
specific action or role such as creating or redeeming, all three persons are
still involved. What this means is that it is proper for purposes of
illustration to substitute (or include) any specific person of the Trinity
in any event in the Old Testament or New Testament where the term "God" is
used. In fact, Scripture itself does this. In Acts 28:25, 26 the Holy Spirit
is said to speak to Isaiah, but in Isaiah 6:8,9 the speaker of the same
words is said to be God.
PART 4
Does Scripture declare the deity of Jesus Christ?
Many cults and liberal theologians reject the deity of Christ and the
Trinity as scriptural teachings only due to their own biases. But it is
significant that even some Unitarians who reject the Trinity nevertheless
confess that it is a biblical teaching based on "its obvious sense, its
natural meaning" as found in Scripture. These words of George E. Ellis, a
nineteenth century Unitarian leader, illustrate the biases of
anti-trinitarian groups and liberals who refuse to accept the Trinity on
personal-not biblical-grounds. Ellis confesses, "Only that kind of
ingenious, special, discriminative, and in candor I must add, forced
treatment, which it receives from us liberals can make the book teach
anything but Orthodoxy."1
No less an authority than the great Princeton theologian B. B. Warfield
pointed out that the doctrine of the Trinity "is rather everywhere
presupposed" in Scripture.2
As E. Calvin Beisner, author of God in Three Persons, states,
The testimony of the New Testament to the deity of Christ is unanimous....
Were there no passages at all which directly call Christ God, we would still
have a great weight of evidence that is the New Testament conception of him,
for in all senses he is depicted as precisely parallel to God the Father. C.
F. D. Moule wrote: "Far more impressive than any single passage are two
implicit Christological 'pointers.'" At first is the fact that, in the
greetings of the Pauline epistles. God and Christ are brought into a single
formula. It requires an effort of imagination to grasp the enormity that
this must have seemed to a non-Christian Jew. It must have administered a
shock comparable (if the analogy may be allowed without irreverence) to our
finding a religious Cuban today indicting a message from God-and-"Che"
Guevara....
The other Christological pointer, evidenced early, because in the undeniably
genuine Pauline epistles is the fact that Paul seems to experience Christ as
any theist reckons to understand God-that is, as personal, but as more than
individual: as more than a person. This is evidenced by certain uses (though
admittedly not all) of the well known incorporative formulae, "in
Christ,...3
Please consider the following scriptures. These clearly teach that Jesus
Christ is God. Indeed, only overwhelming evidence in favor of Christ's deity
would have convinced skeptical, staunchly monotheistic, and initially
frightened Jews to proclaim His deity to a hostile Jerusalem and later the
world.
1. John 1:1, 14- "The Word was God... The Word became flesh and made his
dwelling among us."
2. John 1:18- "The only begotten God."
3. John 20:28- Thomas said to him [Jesus] "My Lord and my God."
4. Titus 2:13- "Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ."
5. Hebrews 1:8- But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last
for ever and ever."
6. 2 Peter 1:1- "Our God and Savior Jesus Christ."
7. 1 John 5:20- "Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life."
8. Colossians 2:9- "In Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily
form."
9. Isaiah 9:6- "For to us a child is born... and he will be called... Mighty
God."
10. Isaiah 7:14/Matthew 1:23- "Immanuel"-which means, "God with us."
11. Hebrews 1:3- "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact
repre- sentation of His being...."
12. Colossians 1:15, 16- "He is the image of the invisible God... by him all
things were created."
13. Acts 20:28- The church was purchased with the blood of God.
14. 2 Corinthians 4:4- "Christ, who is the image of God."
15. Romans 9:5- "Christ, who is God over all, forever praised."
16. 1 Corinthians 1:24- "Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."
17. 2 Thessalonians 1:12- "Our God and Lord Jesus Christ."
18. Philippians 2:6- "being in very nature God." (The Greek could be
literally translated "continuing to subsist in the form of God.") 4
In light of these scriptures and more, can any thinking person logically
deny that the Bible teaches Jesus Christ is God?
Notes
1 In E. Calvin Beisner, God in Three Persons (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1984),
p. 25.
2 Ibid., p. 26.
3 Ibid., pp. 33-34.
4 Ibid., p. 30.
You are suffering from delusion so deeply that you don't comprehend that
"Sols Scriptura" mean NO COMMENTARY, INTERPRETATION OR EXPLANATION!!
No, what you and numerous individuals have done is preach trinity
doctrine, trinity definition and trinity perversion of God's Word, NOT
Sola Scriptura.
If you have ANY _Scripture ONLY_ that CONTAINS Trinity doctrine, please
post it between these lines:
NOTE: do not quote commentary, explanation or interpretation, SCRIPTURE
ONLY!
-----------------
-----------------
Thanks for proving you can't do it, because it does not exist.
Glenn
His witness.
It's "sola scriptura" which is latin for "scripture only" and the Trinity is
taught via sola scriptura. I've proven it that way as has numerous other
Christians. Dr. Ankerberg and Dr. Weldon have done it as well yet you are
unable to handle their articles on the subject so you would rather run away
and deny their excellent article which proves quite well the Biblical
doctrine of the Trinity.
>> No, what you and numerous individuals have done is preach trinity
>> doctrine, trinity definition and trinity perversion of God's Word, NOT
>> Sola Scriptura.
A false accusation on your part. It's no wonder that you continually resort
to dishonesty to try to bolster your heresies since your heresies and all
heresies are satanic in origin. You are unable to be intellectually honest
about this. You are unable to be Biblically honest about this. So you
willingly embrace your heresies, been warned and corrected by Christians
about your heresies and dishonesty yet continue to espouse them. Therefore
by Biblical standards you are indeed a divisive person (e.g. - heretic) whom
we as Christians are to have nothing to do with. Goodbye, Glenn. I pray that
you will repent of your wicked false doctrines, your dishonest tactics and
one day come to accept Christ, the Biblical Jesus (God manifest in flesh,
the second person of the Trinity, the Alpha & Omega, the divine Jesus)
instead of the false Jesus you espouse.
> If you have ANY _Scripture ONLY_ that CONTAINS Trinity doctrine, please
> post it between these lines:
If you had bothered to read the articles, they contain the sola scriptura
evidence from the Bible which teaches the Trinity. But you run away from it
in cowardice. Typical. I pity you, my friend. You will suffer the
consequences of your heresies if you do no repent. I will be praying for
you.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
Here's the article again...maybe you'll actually take the time to read it.
What Does the Bible Reveal About the Trinity?
by Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon
PART 1
When we speak of the Trinity, we must do so with caution and modesty, for,
as St. Augustine saith, "Nowhere else are more dangerous errors made, or is
research more difficult, or discovery more fruitful." -St. Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Theologies, ia q. xxi, 1272
All we ask you to understand is that Trinitarian theology was not derived
from pagan sources. It was derived from biblical passages where honest,
godly men said, "Hey, 2 Peter says there is a Person called the Father, and
he's God. And Acts 5 says there is a Person called the Spirit, and he's God.
And John 1 says there's a Person called the Word and he's God." You've got
Three Persons, and Deuteronomy 6 says, "There is only one God." Logical
conclusion: the Three Persons, somehow, are the One God. That's how
Trinitarian theology started. Not with the pagans. -Dr. Walter Martin,
responding to Dr. Robert Sabin, President of the Apostolic Bible Institute
of St. Paul, Minnesota, on "The John Ankerberg Show"
The biblical doctrine of the Trinity is vital to understand because it
concerns who God is, that is, a proper realization of the nature of God as
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To understand the Trinity is to understand God
as He has revealed Himself to be.
Why is this important? Because if we are to worship God "in spirit and in
truth" (John 4:24), as Jesus commanded, we must know and worship the one
true God as He really is. To fail to do this is to fail to know and worship
God-and this cannot bring Him glory. Thus, those who reject the Trinity by
definition deny the true nature of God.
Consider several examples of professedly Christian religions that forcefully
reject what the Bible teaches. By denying the biblical teaching on the
Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses make Jesus merely a creation of Jehovah and the
Holy Spirit merely Jehovah's impersonal force. Thus, Jesus "was actually a
creature of God" who earned his own salvation and immortality 1 and the Holy
Spirit "is not a person at all but is God's invisible active force by means
of which God carries out his holy will and work."2
In rejecting the Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses founder C. T. Russell
blasphemously stated that the God of Christianity "is plainly not Jehovah
but the ancient deity, hoary with the iniquity of the ages-Baal, the Devil
Himself."3 Second Watchtower president Judge Rutherford declared in a
similar fashion, "The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine and is
promulgated by Satan for the purpose of defaming Jehovah's name" and for
keeping others from "learning the truth of Jehovah and his Son, Jesus
Christ." Indeed, "God-fearing persons find it a bit difficult to love and
worship a complicated, freakish-looking three-headed God."4 Surely teachings
that caricature God in this manner do not bring to Him honor and glory.
In a similar fashion, Mormons maintain that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
are not immortal, but were individual spirit-men created by the sexual union
of their parent deities, each of whom then later evolved into Godhood.5
Mormonism thus rejects the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by
teaching tritheism, or a belief in three separate Gods.
Indeed, Mormons are ultimately polytheists who reject the concept of one
true God. As a standard text of Mormon doctrine declares:
As pertaining to this universe, there are three Gods: the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost. To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the
only Gods we worship. But in addition there is an infinite number of holy
personages, drawn from worlds without number, who have passed on to
exaltation [that is, Godhood] and are thus gods.6
Mary Baker Eddy was the founder of Christian Science, another group that
claims to be truly Christian. Yet in her Science and Health with Key to the
Scriptures, the bible of Christian Science, she writes:
The theory of three persons in one God (that is, a personal Trinity or
Tri-unity) suggests polytheism, rather than the one ever-present I Am. The
name Elohim is in the plural, but this plurality of Spirit does not imply
more than one God, nor does it imply three persons in one.7
Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of The Way International, reveals additional
common consequences of rejection of the Trinity: a denial not only of the
person of Jesus Christ but also of His atoning Work on the cross. Wierwille
argues as follows:
Through the years, the more and more I carefully researched God's Word for
knowledge, the less and less I found to substantiate a trinity. Even though
I had always accepted the idea of a three-in-one-God, I continually found
evidence in the Word of God which undermined a Christian trinity. [Further]
If Jesus Christ is God we have not yet been redeemed. Our very redemption is
dependent on Jesus Christ's being a man and not God. So how then did a
trinitarian doctrine come about? It gradually evolved and gained momentum in
late 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries as pagans, who had converted to
Christianity, brought to Christianity some of their pagan beliefs and
practices. Trinitarianism then was confirmed at Nicaea in 325 by Church
bishops out of political expediency.8
In essence, the reason the Trinity is important to understand according to
its biblical and theological formulation is that failure to do so can lead
to heretical views about who God is. This in turn can lead to rejection of
the one true God and worship of a false god. But if the Bible is clear on
anything, it is clear that faith in and worship of a false god is powerless
to save people from their sins. Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of
having an accurate knowledge of God when He said, "And this is eternal life,
that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast
sent" (John 17:3).
God warned Israel through the prophet Hosea, "My people are destroyed from
lack of knowledge" and "You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Savior
except me" (Hosea 4:6; 13:4). As their history so amply demonstrates, the
Israelites were spiritually ruined because they had rejected the true
knowledge of God and had turned to false gods and idols. Unfortunately, in a
similar manner, those who deliberately reject the Trinity, knowing in
advance what the Bible teaches about it, only reveal their own lack of
salvation (1 Cor. 2:14). In other words, no one can consistently dishonor
what the Holy Spirit has revealed in Scripture as to the true nature of God
and logically claim to be a Christian.
Notes
1 Q.v., "Jesus Christ," Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Aid to Bible
Understanding (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), pp.
437, 918; Anthony A. Hoekema, The Four Major Cults (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1970), p. 295 citing Let God Be True (1952), p. 74.
2 Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Things in Which It Is Impossible for
God to Lie (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1965), p. 269.
3 C. T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures- Vol. 7: The Finished Mystery, p.
410 cited by Wilton M. Nelson and Richard K. Smith, "Jehovah's Witnesses" in
David J. Hesselgrave, ed., Dynamic Religious Movements: Case Studies of
Rapidly Growing Religious Movements Around the World (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1978), p. 181.
4 Cited by Charles S. Braden, These Also Believe: A Study of Modern American
Cults and Minority Religious Movements (New York: Macmillan, 1970), p. 371
quoting Judge Rutherford's Uncovered (Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and
Tract Society, 1937), pp. 48-49; Let God Be True (1946), pp. 82-83, 93.
5 See John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Behind the Mask of Mormonism (Eugene, OR:
Harvest House, 1996), chap. 10.
6 Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1977), pp.
270, 576-577.
7 Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Boston,
MA: The First Church of Christ, Scientist 1971), pp. 256, 515.
8 Victor Paul Wierwille, Jesus Christ Is Not God (New Knoxville, OH:
American Christian Press, 1975), pp. 2-3, 6-7, 25.
PART 2
What is the Trinity?
God has revealed that He is three persons or centers of consciousness within
one Godhead. Because the concept cannot be fully comprehended does not mean
the doctrine cannot be accurately described or defined; however, precision
here requires some technicality. One good definition of the Trinity is
provided by noted church historian Philip Schaff:
God is one in three persons or hypostases [that is, distinct persons of the
same nature], each person expressing the whole fullness of the Godhead, with
all his attributes. The term persona is taken neither in the old sense of a
mere personation or form of manifestation (prosopon, face, mask), nor in the
modern sense of an independent, separate being or individual, but in a sense
which lies between these two conceptions, and thus avoids Sabellianism on
the one hand, and Tritheism on the other. [Sabellianism taught that God was
one person only who existed in three different forms or manifestations;
tritheism refers to a belief in three separate gods.] The divine persons are
in one another, and form a perpetual intercommunication and motion within
the divine essence. Each person has all the divine attributes which are
inherent in the divine essence, but each has also a characteristic
individuality or property, which is peculiar to the person, and cannot be
communicated; the Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy Ghost is
proceeding. In this Trinity there is no priority or posteriority of time, no
superiority or inferiority of rank, but the three persons are coeternal and
coequal.1
It is important to note here that the Bible teaches both monotheism and
trinitarianism. It teaches a monotheistic view-that there is only one true
God-and a trinitarian view-that this one true God exists eternally as three
persons. This triunity of God was defended from earliest times as Christian
theologians and apologists were careful both to safeguard the unity of God
against tritheism and also to maintain the respective deity of the three
persons. As Gregory of Nyssa stated in his letter to Ablabius, "To say that
there are three gods is wicked. Not to bear witness to the deity of the Son
and the Spirit is ungodly and absurd. Therefore one God must be confessed by
us according to the witness of Scripture, 'Hear Israel, the Lord your God is
one Lord' (Deuteronomy 6:4), even if the word 'deity' extends through the
holy trinity."2
In his Christian Theology, Millard J. Erickson offers six points that must
be included in a proper understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. There is only one God.
2. Each person in the Godhead is equally deity.
3. The threeness and oneness of God constitute a paradox or an
antinomy-merely an apparent contradiction, not a genuine one. This is
because God's threeness and oneness do not exist in the same respect-that
is, they are not simultaneously affirming and denying the same thing at the
same time and in the same manner. God's oneness refers to the divine
essence; His threeness to the plurality of persons.
4. The Trinity is eternal-there have always been three persons, each of whom
is eternally divine. One or more of the persons did not come into being at a
point in time or at some point in time become divine. There has never been
any change in the essential divine nature of the triune God. He is and will
be what He has always been forever.
5. The function of one member in the Trinity may for a time be subordinate
to one or both of the other members, although this does not mean He is in
anyway inferior in essence. Each person of the Trinity has had, for a period
of time, a particular function unique to Himself. In other words, the
particular function that is sometimes unique to a given person in the
Trinity is only a temporary role exercised for a given purpose. It does not
represent a change in His status or essence. When the second person of the
Trinity incarnated and became Jesus Christ, He did not become less than the
Father, although He did become subordinate to the Father functionally. In
like manner, the Holy Spirit is now subordinated to the ministry of the Son
(John 14-16), as well as to the will of the Father, but He is not less than
they are. Certain examples may illustrate this. A wife may have a
subordinate role to a husband, but she is also his equal. Equals in some
business enterprise may elect one of their number to serve as head or a
chairperson for a period, without any change in rank. During World War II,
the highest ranking member of an aircraft, the pilot, would nevertheless
carefully subordinate his decisions to the bombardier, a lower ranking
officer.
6. Finally, the Trinity is incomprehensible. Even when we are in heaven and
fully redeemed, we will still not totally comprehend God because it is
impossible that a finite creature could ever fully comprehend an infinite
being. Thus, "Those aspects of God which we never fully comprehend should be
regarded as mysteries that go beyond our reason rather than as paradoxes
which conflict with reason."3
This last point takes us to our next question.
Why is the Trinity a mystery?
Before we discuss what the Bible teaches about the Trinity, we must remember
that this doctrine is something finite minds can never fully comprehend. The
Trinity may be logically defined, but this is partly the problem because
"the infinite truth of the Godhead lies far beyond the boundaries of logic,
which deals only with finite truths and categories."4 In other words, as an
infinite being, God can never be fully understood by any finite person. If
we can't understand something as basic as particle physics, who would argue
we should be able to rationally comprehend all that an infinite God is? As
Dorothy L. Sayers once stated in Current Religious Thought (1957), "Why do
you complain that the proposition God is three in one is obscure and
mystical and yet acquiesce meekly in the physicist's fundamental formula,
'two P minus PQ equals IH over two Pi where I equals the square root of
minus one' when you know quite well that the square root of minus one is
paradoxical and Pi is incalculable?"
Consider that an ant could never comprehend all that a human being is, even
if it tried. Yet, if a human being could somehow become an ant, it might be
able to explain enough about what a human is so that the ant could gain
something of an understanding as to what a human is.
When we consider that God is, quite literally, infinitely removed from men,
the parallel suffers immeasurably. All we can truly understand about God is
what He has revealed to us in the Bible. And while this does give us a great
deal of accurate information, it obviously does not give us exhaustive
information that plumbs the depths of His infinity. Indeed, one of the
glories of eternal salvation (John 5:24; 6:47) will be that finite creatures
will forever learn wondrous things about the inexhaustible glories and
perfections of an infinite God. This heavenly knowledge will make the things
learned on earth pale in contrast.
The problems inherent in fully comprehending the doctrine of the Trinity are
also inherent in the person of Jesus Christ. The doctrine known as the
hypostatic union assimilates all the biblical data in order to accurately
describe the nature of the Incarnation. It declares that Jesus is
undiminished deity and full humanity in one person. Jesus Christ is both God
and man. Jesus is not part human and part divine-He is fully man and fully
God.
Because of this He has two natures, one divine and one human. But He is not
two persons-He is not schizophrenic. Further, He is one person with two
different kinds of consciousness (divine and human). Also, He is one person
with two wills (if He truly has two natures, then He must have two wills,
one human and one divine); however, Jesus Christ never had a conflict of
wills.
Christ's two natures were not altered by their union within the one person
of Christ. Both divine and human characteristics and deeds may be attributed
to the person of Christ under any of His names, whether divine or human.
Also, both the human and divine natures of Christ may be manifested during a
single event. Finally, the union of Christ's two natures was not altered by
His death, burial, resurrection, or ascension but will remain throughout
eternity.5
The above material illustrates the importance of precision for accurately
formulating the biblical data-and also how easily misconceptions might arise
concerning the nature of God. This is why God encourages and commands us to
"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not
need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15).
Christians should therefore study the doctrine of the Trinity to know how to
effectively deal with the biblical data and answer the arguments of those in
opposition: "And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be
kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must
gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading
them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses
and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his
will" (2 Timothy 2:24-26).
Thomas Ä… Kempis stated Christian priorities eloquently when he wrote:
Grant to us, O Lord, to know that which is worth knowing, to love that which
is worth loving, to praise that which pleaseth Thee most, to esteem that
which is most precious unto Thee, and to dislike whatsoever is evil in Thy
eyes. Grant us with true judgment to distinguish things that differ, and
above all to search out and to do what is well pleasing unto Thee, through
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Christians can please God by accepting what God has revealed and what the
Church has formulated historically that is in accordance with biblical
teaching.
Must we believe in the Trinity in order to be saved?
Prior knowledge of the Trinity, especially in its theological formulation,
is not necessary for a person to be saved. But once saved, it is vital for
Christians to know the true nature of the God who has so graciously pardoned
them. This explains why the Church has always recognized the importance of a
proper understanding of God and maintained that those who reject the
scriptural view of God, as long as they do so, cannot be saved.
The great Athanasian Creed of the Church declares,
So the Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet
they are not three Gods: but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord: the
Son is Lord: and the Holy Ghost is Lord. And yet not three Lords: but one
Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity: to acknowledge
every Person by himself to be God and Lord: So are we forbidden by the
Catholic Religion: to say. There be three Gods or three Lords. The Father is
made of none: neither created, nor begotten, the Son is of the Father alone:
not made, nor created: but begotten. Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the
Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten: but proceeding... the whole
three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as
aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be
worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the
Trinity.6
Noted Church historian Philip Schaff comments as follows concerning the
creed's placing of a divine curse or anathema on those who reject the
Trinity. He points out the Athanasian Creed
.begins and ends with the solemn declaration that the catholic [i.e.,
universal] faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation is the indispensable
condition of salvation, and that those who reject it will be lost forever.
This anathema, in its natural historical sense, is not merely a solemn
warning against the great danger of heresy, nor, on the other hand, does it
demand, as a condition of salvation, a full knowledge, and assent to, the
logical statement of the doctrines set forth (this would condemn the great
mass even of Christian believers). But it does mean to exclude from heaven
all who reject the divine truth therein taught. It requires everyone who
would be saved to believe in the only true and living God: Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, one in essence, three in persons, and in one Jesus Christ, very
God and very man in one person.7
As Vladimir Lossky once put boldly in The Mystical Theology of the Eastern
Church, "Between the Trinity and Hell there lies no other choice."8
In fact, it is noteworthy that an examination of religions that claim to be
Christian yet deny the Trinity invariably reveals that they also deny other
key Christian doctrines, such as salvation by grace through faith alone. In
other words, without a proper respect for Scripture and its understanding of
Notes
1 Philip Schaff, ed., rev. by David S. Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom:
With a History and Critical Notes-Vol. 1: The History of the Creeds (Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983). The Greek term was transliterated by the
authors.
2 "Gregory of Nyssato Ablabius," in William G. Rusch, trans. and ed., The
Trinitarian Controversy (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), pp. 149,
151-152.
3 Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1986,
one vol. edition), pp. 337-338.
4 Schaff, ed., p. 38.
5 For a good discussion see Robert Glenn Gromacki, The Virgin Birth:
Doctrine of Deity (New York: Thomas Nelson, 1974), chaps 9, 11-13.
6 Cited in E. Calvin Beisner, God in Three Persons (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale,
1984), pp. 12-13.
7 Schaff, ed., pp. 39-40.
8 Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (1957), p.
66.
9 Dr. Harold O. J. Brown, Heresies (Doubleday, 1984), pp. 99-100.
10 Loriane Boettner, Studies in Theology (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1980), p. 139.
PART 3
Is the Trinity taught in the Bible?
How do we know that the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical? That the
Trinity is a biblical doctrine can be seen from five simple statements
supported by the Bible. And, since the Jehovah's Witnesses are one group so
adamantly opposed to the doctrine as being something "pagan,"
"unreasonable," and "of the devil," we thought it might be instructive to
begin by citing their own Bible, the New World Translation (1970 edition),
in support of the doctrine. Thus, even the New World Translation teaches the
doctrine of the Trinity. In the scriptures below, the term "Holy Spirit" is
not capitalized because Jehovah's Witnesses believe that "holy spirit" is
merely God's active, impersonal force, not a true person. (For those who
have never done so, looking up these scriptures during your time of personal
Bible study will be a rewarding learning process.)
1. There is only one true God: "For there is one God, and one mediator
between God and men" (1 Tim. 2:5 NWT; cf. Deut. 4:35, 6:4; Isa. 43:10).
2. The Father is God: "There is actually to us one God the Father" (1 Cor.
8:6 NWT; cf. John 17:1-3; 2 Cor. 1:3; Phil. 2:11; Col. 1:3; 1 Pet. 1:2).
3. Jesus Christ, the Son, is God: "but he [Jesus] was also calling God his
own Father, making himself equal to God": (John 5:18 NWT); "In answer,
Thomas said to him [Jesus]: 'My Lord and my God!'" (John 20:28 NWT, cf. Isa.
9:6; John 1:1; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:1).
4. The Holy Spirit is a person, is eternal, and is therefore God: "However,
when that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all
the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he
hears he will speak and he will declare to you the things coming" (John
16:13 NWT, emphasis added). The Holy Spirit is also eternal: "How much more
will the blood of the Christ, who through an everlasting spirit offered
himself without blemish to God" (Heb. 9:14 NWT). The Holy Spirit is
therefore God: "But Peter said: 'Ananias, why has Satan emboldened you to
play false to the holy spirit?' You have played false, not to men, but to
God" (Acts 5:3, 4 NWT, emphasis added).
5. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons with equal
authority: "Baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and of the
Holy Spirit"; "Now I exhort you, brothers, through our Lord Jesus Christ and
through the love of the spirit, that you exert yourselves with me in prayers
to God for me"; "The undeserved kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ and the
love of God and the sharing in the holy spirit be with all of you" (Matt.
28:19; Rom. 15:30; 2 Cor. 13:14 NWT).
In Scripture, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are clearly
distinguished as separate persons, yet there is only one God. Thus, "There
is... one Spirit... one Lord [Jesus]... one God and Father of all" (Eph.
4:4-6; cf., 1 Cor. 12:4-11). Further, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are
never identified as one person only, as modern modalists such as the United
Pentecostal Church/ "Jesus Only" groups teach. For example, in John 6:38
(KJV) Jesus says, "I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the
will of Him that sent me." Because will is the essence of personality, we
certainly have two personalities here.
In addition, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are so dearly and consistently
linked in Scripture that to assume God is not three Persons makes it
impossible to understand some passages. For example, consider the following
Scriptures: 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 (Matt.
28:19).
For this reason I kneel before the Father... I pray that out of his glorious
riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner
being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith (Eph.
3:14,16,17a).
May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the
fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all (2 Cor. 13:14).
But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray
in the Holy Spirit. Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy
of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life (Jude 20, 21).
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal
Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts
that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God (Heb. 9:14).
I urge you, brothers, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the
Spirit, to join me in my struggle by praying to God for me (Rom. 15:30).
Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed
us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a
deposit, guaranteeing what is to come (2 Cor. 1:21, 22).
Give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God's will for you in Christ
Jesus. Do not put out the Spirit's fire (1 Thess. 5:18, 19).
But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not
because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved
us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he
poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior (Titus 3:3-6).
There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different
kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working,
but the same God works all of them in all men (1 Cor. 12:4-6).
For through him [Jesus] we both have access to the Father by one Spirit
(Eph. 2:18; cf., 3:11-16).
In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy
temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a
dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit (Eph. 2:21-22).
But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord,
because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying
work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth (2 Thess. 2:13,14).
(See also Rom. 14:17,18; 15:13-17; 1 Cor. 6:11,17-19; 2 Cor. 3:4-6; Gal.
2:21-3:2; Eph. 5:18-20; Phil. 2:1,6; Col. 1:6-8; 1 Thess. 1:1,5; 4:2,8; 2
Thess. 3:5; 1 John 3:23,24.)
To further illustrate, try answering the following questions without
concluding that the Bible teaches the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. Who raised Jesus from the dead? The Father (Rom. 6:4)? The Son (John
2:19-21; 10:17,18)? The Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:11)? Or God (Acts 3:26; 1 Thess.
1:10; Heb. 13:20; Acts 13:30; 17:31)?
2. Who does the Bible say is God? The Father (Eph. 4:6)? The Son (Titus
2:13; John 1:1,14; 20:28)? The Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3,4)? Or God (Deut. 4:35;
Isa. 45:18)?
3. Who created the world? The Father (Eph. 3:9-14; 4:6)? The Son (Col.
1:16,17; John 1:1-3)? The Holy Spirit (Gen. 1:2; Psa. 104:30)? Or God (Gen.
1:1; Heb. 11:3)?
4. Who saves and regenerates man? The Father (1 Pet. 1:3)? The Son (John
5:21,4:14)? The Holy Spirit (John 3:6, Titus 3:5)? Or God (1 John 3:9)?
5. Who justifies man? The Father (Jer. 23:6, cf. 2 Cor. 5:19)? The Son (Rom.
5:9; 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:19, 21)? The Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:11; Gal. 5:5)? Or God
(Rom. 4:6; 9:33)?
6. Who sanctifies man? The Father (Jude 1)? The Son (Titus 2:14)? The Holy
Spirit (1 Pet. 1:2)? Or God (Ex. 31:13)?
7. Who propitiated God's just anger against man for his sins? The Father (1
John 4:14; John 3:16; 17:5; 18:11)? The Son (Matt. 26:28; John 1:29; 1 John
2:2)? The Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14)? Or God (2 Cor.5:19,21; Acts 20:28; 1 John
4:10)?
So, although one member of the Trinity may have a more prominent part in a
specific action or role such as creating or redeeming, all three persons are
still involved. What this means is that it is proper for purposes of
illustration to substitute (or include) any specific person of the Trinity
in any event in the Old Testament or New Testament where the term "God" is
used. In fact, Scripture itself does this. In Acts 28:25, 26 the Holy Spirit
is said to speak to Isaiah, but in Isaiah 6:8,9 the speaker of the same
words is said to be God.
PART 4
Notes
2 Ibid., p. 26.
3 Ibid., pp. 33-34.
4 Ibid., p. 30.
PART 5
Do early Church doctrine and the Bible together declare the deity and
personality of the Holy Spirit?
Religious groups who deny the Trinity characteristically deny not only the
person and work of Jesus Christ, but also the personality and deity of the
Holy Spirit. For example, Jehovah's Witnesses teach that "the holy spirit is
the active force of God. It is not a person but is a powerful force that God
causes to emanate from himself to accomplish his holy will."1 Victor Paul
Wierwille, founder of The Way International, declared, "One of the most
misunderstood fields among Christians today is that of the Holy Spirit."2
Wierwille believed that the Holy Spirit is merely a synonym for the one
person of the Godhead, that is, the Father who alone is God. Thus, whenever
Wierwille uses the term "Holy Spirit," in his writings (with capital
letters), he is merely using a synonym for God. But whenever Wierwille uses
"holy spirit" (with small letters), he means the spiritual gifts given by
God the Father. In Wierwille's theology, therefore, the biblical Holy Spirit
does not even exist.3 Wierwille, Jehovah's Witnesses, and many others also
claim that the early Church never believed the Holy Spirit was God.
Although the doctrine of the Holy Spirit was theologically less refined in
the early Church than the doctrine of Jesus Christ, there was still
recognition that the Holy Spirit was both personal and God. Athenagoras
(170-80) wrote that of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Christians declared
"both their power in union and their distinction in order."4 According to
noted theologian Harold O. J. Brown, "Tertullian [160-230] was the first to
speak plainly of the Holy Spirit as God and to say that he is of one
substance with the Father."5 Tertullian stated, "Thus the connection of the
Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete [Holy Spirit], produces
three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These three
are one essence."6 Cyril of Jerusalem wrote that the "Holy Spirit is honored
together with the Father and the Son and is fully included in the holy
Trinity. We are not preaching three Gods, so let the Marcionites hold their
peace. We do not divide up the holy Trinity, as some do, nor, like
Sabellius, do we coalesce it into one. Great indeed is the Holy Spirit, and
in his gifts, omnipotent and wonderful."7 Athanasius wrote that "The Holy
Spirit cannot be a creature, and it is impious to call him so."8 In speaking
of the Holy Spirit as a gift to the church, Augustine wrote, "And therefore
the Holy Spirit, God though He is, is most rightly called also the gift of
God.."9 Basil of Caesarea wrote, "The Lord has delivered to us as a
necessary and saving doctrine that the Holy Spirit is to be ranked with the
Father."10 Origen wrote, "For if [He were not eternally as He is...] the
Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the Unity of the Trinity, i.e., along
with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy
Spirit."11
We re-emphasize that the early Christians concluded the Holy Spirit was God
because this was the scriptural testimony and the only thing they could do.
If we examine what the Scripture teaches about the Holy Spirit, we find that
the traditional Trinitarian view is clearly upheld. (Again, for those who
have never done so, looking up these scriptures during their personal Bible
study will be a rewarding learning process.) First, the Holy Spirit is
distinguished from both the Father and the Son, as many scriptures prove
(Isa. 48:16; Matt. 28:19; Luke 3:21; John 14:16, 17; Heb. 9:8).
Second, the Holy Spirit is clearly not an impersonal force, as Jehovah's
Witnesses claim, but a real person. He loves (Rom. 15:30); convicts of sin
(John 16:8); has a personal will (1 Cor. 12:11); commands and forbids (Acts
8:29; 13:2; 16:6); speaks messages (1 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 2:7); intercedes (Rom.
8:26); comforts, teaches, and guides into truth (John 14:26); and can be
grieved, blasphemed, and insulted (Eph. 4:30; Mark 3:29; Heb. 10:29). Thus,
once it is established that the Holy Spirit is a person, it is easy to see
that the terminology in Scripture, such as His "filling us," or "being
poured out," is not meant to imply the Holy Spirit is impersonal, but rather
illustrates the intimacy of the believer's relationship to Him.
The Holy Spirit is deity because He performs the functions of God, and
because He is called God in Scripture. He has the attributes of deity, such
as omnipresence (Psa. 139:7,8); omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10,11); eternality
(Heb. 9:14); omnipotence (Job 33:4); and He gives eternal life (John 3:3-8).
He is also the Creator (Job 33:4; Gen. 1:2). It goes without saying that no
impersonal force (Jehovah's Witnesses) or finite god (Mormonism) has the
personal and divine attributes Scripture assigns to the Holy Spirit.
It is also clear from Scripture that the Holy Spirit is God by the divine
functions He performs and the divine associations He has. He indwells all
believers (John 14:23; 1 Cor. 6:19 with 2 Cor. 6:16); strives with all men
and convicts the whole world of guilt (Gen. 6:3 with John 16:8); divinely
inspires (2 Pet. 1:21 with Luke 1:67 with Acts 1:16, 28:25; Isa. 6:1-13;
Heb. 10:15-17); sanctifies (2 Thess. 2:13 with 1 Thess. 4:7,8); and sends
forth laborers (Matt. 9:38 with Acts 13:2-4) (cf., Psa. 95:6-9 with Heb.
3:7-9; Rom. 5:5 with 1 Thess. 3:12,13; 2 Thess. 3:5). The Holy Spirit is
also called God. In Acts 5:3-4, the one lied to is first said to be the Holy
Spirit, who is then immediately identified as God. He is called "the Lord"
in 2 Corinthians 3:18 and Hebrews 10:15, 16. In Isaiah 6:8, 9 and Acts
28:25, 26, one passage says God is speaking to Isaiah, whereas the other
passage declares that the Holy Spirit is speaking the same message to
Isaiah.
There is only one eternal sin spoken of in all the Bible: the blasphemy
against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:32). All sins ever committed against the
Son of God will be forgiven. But blasphemy against the Holy Spirit of God
can never be forgiven. How can this be if the Holy Spirit is merely a
creature or an impersonal force? Thus, resisting the Holy Spirit's
conviction of the need to believe in Jesus Christ for forgiveness of sins
can never be forgiven. Why? Because one refuses to place faith in
Christ-which alone brings this forgiveness. Thus, unbelief to the point of
death is the only eternal sin. This is indeed blasphemy against the Holy
Spirit and against His testimony of Jesus (John 16:8). The Holy Spirit then,
must indeed be God because one can only commit eternal sin against an
eternal God.
The Holy Spirit, whose job is to glorify Jesus Christ, has been given His
rightful place in the Trinity by the historic Christian church. Sadly, He
has not been given the honor due Him by the cults. Indeed, the scriptural
testimony to the personality and deity of the Holy Spirit is far more
abundant than any cursory reading of Scripture would indicate.12
For those who desire more study, there are many good books conclusively
proving the biblical doctrine of the Trinity in great depth. We especially
recommend Dr. Robert Morey's book The Trinity: Evidence and Issues.13
Notes
1 Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Reasoning from Scriptures (Brooklyn,
NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1985), p. 381.
2 Victor Paul Wierwille, Jesus Christ Is Not God (New Knoxville, OH:
American Christian Press, 1975), p. 127.
3 Ibid., Appendix A; cf. Victor Paul Wierwille, Receiving the Holy Spirit
Today (New Knoxville, OH: American Christian Press, 1986), chap. 1.
4 E. Calvin Beisner, God in Three Persons (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1984), p.
53, citing Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (eds.), The Ante-Nicene
Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to AD 325, Vol. 2,
p. 133, A Plea for the Christians, p. X.
5 Dr. Harold O. J. Brown, Heresies (Doubleday, 1984), pp. 140-141.
6 Tertullian, Against Praxeas, p. 25, cited in Brown, Heresies, p. 145.
7 Cyril of Jerusalem, "Catechetical Lecture," 16, paragraph 4, in Maurice
Wiles and Mark Santers (eds.), Documents of Early Christian Thought
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 82.
8 Athanasius, "Third Letter to Serapion," I, in Wiles and Santers, p. 85.
9 Augustine, "On the Trinity," VX, xvii, 32, in Wiles and Santers, p. 94.
10 Basil of Caesarea, "The Book of Saint Basil on the Spirit," chap. X,
para. 25 in Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, A Select Library of Nicean and
Post-Nicean Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series, Vol. 8 (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975), p. 17.
11 In Beisner, God in Three Persons, p. 64, citing Roberts and Donaldson,
Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 253; de Principus I.iii.4.
12 See Edward Henry Beckersteth, The Holy Spirit: His Person and Work (Grand
Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1967), for an excellent scriptural study on the
personality and deity of the Holy Spirit.
13 Other good titles include Edward Beckersteth, The Trinity (Kregel, 1980);
and Millard J. Erickson, God in Three Persons (Baker, 1995).
PART 6
The Trinity and Early Church History: Have the historic creeds of the
Christian church always accepted the doctrine of the Trinity?
For 2,000 years the historic Christian church has found in the Bible the
doctrine of the Trinity. This can be seen by anyone who reads the church
fathers and studies the historic creeds. Creeds are important because they
express the beliefs of the church briefly and precisely and made prospective
converts aware of exactly what Christians believe and teach, enabling them
to make informed decisions. Further, creeds clearly illustrated the dividing
line between orthodoxy and heresy; in fact heresy was probably the most
powerful stimulant historically to the development of the creeds.
The historic creeds of the church declared faith in only one God, yet
clearly taught that both the Son and the Holy Spirit were God. For example,
the Creed of Nicaea in A.D. 325 was the creed of 318 church fathers. It
reads, "We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the
Father as only begotten. Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten
not created."1
The Constantinopolitan Creed of A.D. 381, a creed of 150 church fathers,
reads, "[We believe] in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-giver, Who
proceeds from the Father, Who is worshiped and glorified together with the
Father and Son."2
Although the official, precise definition and explanation of the Trinity
codified at Nicaea (A.D. 351) and Constantinople (A.D. 381) is lacking in
the New Testament and writings of the early church leaders, the fact of the
Trinity was clearly recognized by both the apostles and post-apostolic
fathers. Scholars of historical theology could be cited in abundant
confirmation, for example, "The second-century Fathers were convinced that
the Godhead is a triad."3 In addition,
"From the Old Testament and the Judaism of the intertestamental period, the
early church accepted the conviction that God, the maker of heaven and
earth, is one. In addition, even before the canonization of the New
Testament books, the apostolic traditions and popular faith of the church
were indelibly marked by the notion of a plurality of divine persons, the
idea of the triadic manifestation of the Godhead, was present/row the
earliest period as part of Christian piety and thinking. But no steps were
taken to work through the implications of this idea and to arrive at a
cohesive doctrine of God. The triadic pattern supplies the raw data from
which the more developed descriptions of the Christian doctrine of God will
come."4
In his book on the Trinity, God in Three Persons, E. Calvin Beisner has
provided an in-depth study of the historic development of the Trinity from
apostolic times through the final form of the Nicene Creed, which was
adopted at the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381. He includes a
line-by-line comparison of the Creed with New Testament teaching, proving
that the doctrine of the Trinity as thus formulated is biblical.5
The doctrine of the Trinity itself never evolved; what evolved was only its
specific theological formulation. As Harold O. J. Brown states in Heresies,
"The facts that Semi-Arianism created only a brief flurry and that the
consubstantiality of the Holy Spirit was accepted with little trouble are
evidence for the claim that the doctrine of the Trinity did not evolve by
stages, but was present in the church in an implicit form from New Testament
times.... As soon as the implications of consubstantiality were recognized
in the case of the Son, they were almost immediately seen for the Holy
Spirit as well. Trinitarianism was implicit in Christian faith from the
beginning; it is only its explicit formulation that took so long to
develop."6
Notes
1 John H. Leith, Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Christian Doctrine from
the Bible to the Present, 3rd ed. (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982), pp.
30-31.
2 Ibid., p. 33.
3 J. G. Davies, The Early Christian Church: A History of Its First Five
Centuries (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1980), p. 97.
4 William G. Rusch (Trans./ed.), The Trinitarian Controversy (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1980), p. 2.
5 E. Calvin Beisner, God in Three Persons (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1984)..
6 Dr. Harold O. J. Brown, Heresies (Doubleday, 1984), p. 139.
Why Is the Doctrine of the Trinity a Vital Belief for Christians to
Understand?
"When we speak of the Trinity, we must do so with caution and modesty, for,
".begins and ends with the solemn declaration that the catholic [i.e.,
universal] faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation is the indispensable
condition of salvation, and that those who reject it will be lost forever..
And,
2:13; John 1:1,14; 20:28)? The Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 4)? Or God
There is NO scripture which teaches trinity doctrine.
IF you HAD any Sola Scriptura which contains trinity doctrine (NO
COMMENTARY, DEFINITIONS OR EXPLANATIONS) you could post it between these
lines:
-----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
Thanks for proving there are NO Scriptures which contain trinity doctrine.
Glenn
His witness
1. Who does the Bible say is God?
The Father (Eph. 4:6)? Yes!
The Son (Titus 2:13; John 1:1,14; 20:28)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4)? Yes!
Or the one and only true God (Deut. 4:35)? Yes!
BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit are all Jehovah God.
2. Who raised Jesus from the dead?
The Father (Romans 6:4)? Yes!
The Son (John 2:19-21; 10:17,18)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit (Romans 8:11)? Yes!
Or God (Acts 3:26, 13:30, 17:30,31; 1 Thess. 1:9,10; Heb. 13:20)? Yes!
BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit in the unity as God were responsible for raising Jesus from the
dead.
3. Who saves man?
a. Who REGENERATES man?
The Father (1 Peter 1:3)? Yes!
The Son (John 5:21, 4:14)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit (John 3:6; Titus 3:5)? Yes!
Or God (1 John 3:9)? Yes!
BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit in the unity as God are responsible for regenerating man.
b. Who JUSTIFIES man?
The Father (Jer. 23:6, cf. 2 Cor. 5:19)? Yes!
The Son (Romans 5:9, 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:19-21)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:11; Gal. 5:5)? Yes!
Or God (Romans 4:6, 9:33)? Yes!
BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit in the unity as God are responsible for justifying man.
c. Who SANCTIFIES man?
The Father (Jude 1)? Yes!
The Son (Titus 2:14)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit (1 Peter 1:2)? Yes!
Or God (Exodus 31:13)? Yes!
BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit in the unity as God are responsible for regenerating man.
d. Who propitiated God's just anger against man for his sins?
The Father (1 John 4:14; John 3:16, 17:5, 18:11)? Yes!
The Son (Matthew 26:28; John 1:29; 1 John 2:2)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14)? Yes!
Or God (2 Cor. 5:1; Acts 20:28)? Yes!
BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit in the unity as God had propitiated God's just anger against man for
his sins?
BIBLICAL RESULT: The Bible clearly teaches the doctrine of the Trinity.
Though some exalt human reason against the doctrine of the Trinity, saying
that it is "unreasonable," people who submit their minds to God's Word must
conclude that it is unreasonable NOT to believe in it.
> Why Is the Doctrine of the Trinity a Vital Belief for Christians to
> Understand?
Yes, why is it considered "vital" by some of today's so calle
christians eventhough the word "trinity" is not in the Bible?
Gosh, does this mean that Carl is himself one of those unBiblical
heathens that he himself gets so worked up about???
Irony is so sweet!
>
> ...Trinitarian theology ... was derived from biblical passages where...men said,
> "Hey, 2 Peter says there is a Person called the Father, and
> he's God. And Acts 5 says there is a Person called the Spirit, and he's God.
> And John 1 says there's a Person called the Word and he's God." You've got
> Three Persons, and Deuteronomy 6 says, "There is only one God." Logical
> conclusion: the Three Persons, somehow, are the One God. That's how
> Trinitarian theology started.
Hey, Carl, Thanks for admitting that so called Christians have for a
very long time been making up stuff thats not actually in the Bible at
all.
I really don't have much of a problem with christians making up stuff
like the trinity. I don't even have much of a problem with them lying
and pretending that its in the bible when it is not. What I do have a
problem with is how christians take this little stretch of reason and
logic and turn it into a "Vital Belief for Christians to Understand".
If it is so "vital" then why didn't God or Jesus just say it?
and if its "not so vital" then that means christians like Carl have no
clue what their own religion is really all about.
Correct, only that The Father, the spirit and the son ar omnipotent,
ompnipresent ant omniscient.
AND????
Are any of the three above other than as defined?
There is one God.
Disagree? If so, you are neither christianor jew.
What definition of the TERM "God" do you want to use?
Shall we use the trinitarian definition (God is type triune)?
Or, may we use the SCRIPTURAL Definition ?
a) John 4:24 KJV "God is Being Type Spirit."
b) God is Lord, King, Absolute Ruler, Ps 110:1-2, Mat 24:18, 1 Cor 15:24-28.
> > The Father (Eph. 4:6)? Yes!
God the Father is (Being Type Eternal Spirit) God.
> > The Son (Titus 2:13; John 1:1,14; 20:28)? Yes!
1) Jesus the Son of God is the Same Essence and Nature as His Father:
Eternal Spirit. The Father is (Being type) God, therefore the Son is
(Being Type) God.
2: God the Father gave ALL Authority and ALL Power to His Son and told
Him to Rule. Therefore the Son is (Title of Authority) God.
> > The Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4)? Yes!
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God. God the Father and the Spirit of
God is one single, unique, individual being.
> > Or the one and only true God (Deut. 4:35)? Yes!
"Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he
is God; there is none else beside him."
This scripture does NOT state "the one and only true God..."
> >
> > BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the
Holy
> > Spirit are all Jehovah God.
No, the Bible does not say that: THAT is what the Trinitarians say.
> >
> > 2. Who raised Jesus from the dead?
> > The Father (Romans 6:4)? Yes!
> > The Son (John 2:19-21; 10:17,18)? Yes!
> > The Holy Spirit (Romans 8:11)? Yes!
> > Or God (Acts 3:26, 13:30, 17:30,31; 1 Thess. 1:9,10; Heb. 13:20)?
Yes!
> >
> > BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the
Holy
> > Spirit in the unity as God were responsible for raising Jesus from the
> > dead.
No, the Bible does not say "that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit
in the unity as God..."
That God the Father and His Spirit, and the Son of God work together
does not make them a triune being.
Triune God doctrine is a conclusion not found IN Scripture.
> >
> > 3. Who saves man?
> > a. Who REGENERATES man?
> > The Father (1 Peter 1:3)? Yes!
> > The Son (John 5:21, 4:14)? Yes!
> > The Holy Spirit (John 3:6; Titus 3:5)? Yes!
> > Or God (1 John 3:9)? Yes!
> >
> > BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the
Holy
> > Spirit in the unity as God are responsible for regenerating man.
No, the Bible does not say "the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in
the unity as God...": THAT is the conclusion of the trinitarians.
That God the Father and His Spirit, and the Son of God work together
does not make them a triune being.
> >
> > b. Who JUSTIFIES man?
> > The Father (Jer. 23:6, cf. 2 Cor. 5:19)? Yes!
> > The Son (Romans 5:9, 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:19-21)? Yes!
> > The Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:11; Gal. 5:5)? Yes!
> > Or God (Romans 4:6, 9:33)? Yes!
> >
> > BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the
Holy
> > Spirit in the unity as God are responsible for justifying man.
No, the Bible does NOT say, says that the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit in the unity as God..." and it is basically dishonest to claim it
does.
That God the Father and His Spirit, and the Son of God work together
does not make them a triune being.
> >
> > c. Who SANCTIFIES man?
> > The Father (Jude 1)? Yes!
> > The Son (Titus 2:14)? Yes!
> > The Holy Spirit (1 Peter 1:2)? Yes!
> > Or God (Exodus 31:13)? Yes!
> >
> > BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the
Holy
> > Spirit in the unity as God are responsible for regenerating man.
Dishonest claim! The Bible does NOT say "the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit in the unity as God..." THAT is a false statement!
That God the Father and His Spirit, and the Son of God work together
does not make them a triune being.
> >
> > d. Who propitiated God's just anger against man for his sins?
> > The Father (1 John 4:14; John 3:16, 17:5, 18:11)? Yes!
> > The Son (Matthew 26:28; John 1:29; 1 John 2:2)? Yes!
> > The Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14)? Yes!
> > Or God (2 Cor. 5:1; Acts 20:28)? Yes!
> >
> > BIBLICAL CONCLUSION: The Bible says that the Father, the Son and the
Holy
> > Spirit in the unity as God had propitiated God's just anger against
man for
> > his sins?
Dishonest claim! The Bible does NOT say "the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit in the unity as God..." THAT is a false statement!
That God the Father and His Spirit, and the Son of God work together
does not make them a triune being.
> >
> > BIBLICAL RESULT: The Bible clearly teaches the doctrine of the Trinity.
False: The Bible clearly reveals the Dishonesty of the trinitarians in
their effort to falsify God's Word in support of a false doctrine!
A Scriptural Doctrine of God
http://tinyurl.com/2lw6ev
Glenn
Carl wrote:
> Definitely an excellent article from Doctors Ankerberg and Weldon.
It is vital because it creates an imaginary and additional belief structure.
Whereas in truth all The Trinitiy does is provide another twist to the age old
saying
"Three are more believable than one"
Cheers
Bob
Man of old, the savage,
formed the belief,
the eruption of the volcano
was god's expression of grief.
Man believed the lightning bolt,
for the crops - a blessing of rain,
the curse of flood lending starvation,
was spewed from heavenly gates.
Man believed he could calm divine wrath,
through sacrifice of a virgin pure,
though blood appeased him not,
how the quake continues to tremble the earth.
Man believed the sting of a bee,
the fangs of the serpent, the teeth of a bear
were all signs of divine things,
deities by the dozens, some invented in pairs.
Silly superstitions thrive to this day,
if not for the rationalist, skeptic,
and freethinker,
where would we be?
In Church thumping Bibles, that's where!
See, we've came a long way.
Instead of cracking virgins' skulls,
[with acknowledgements to: Sharon]
>On Aug 7, 9:17 pm, Glenn <gamccl...@spiritone.com> wrote:
>> Carl wrote:
>>
>> clip
>>
>>
>>
>> > Why Is the Doctrine of the Trinity a Vital Belief for Christians to
>> > Understand?
>>
>> It is not.
>>
>> What IS vital, is that Christians understand that "trinity doctrine" is
>> NOT IN the Bible!
>
>Actually it is and I've been providing proof from the Bible as has numerous
>other individuals using sola scriptura. And it's quite revealing, Glenn,
>that you continue to "snip" those points and proofs from the Bible. It's
>because you cannot refute Biblical truth yet choose to hold onto your
>heresies even though your heresies (the same ones that have been held to by
>heretics for centuries) have been thoroughly and completely refuted time and
>time again (by Godly individuals for centuries). I will keep you in my
>prayers.
>
>May God bless,
>Carl
>my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
>my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
>
<snip unwanted personal opinion of paid professional>
Carl,
Actually, you have not been providing proof from the Bible that the
doctrine of the Trinity is in the Bible. What you have been showing
is false doctrines placed in the Bibles by the editors of the Bibles
through the use of fallacies of accent and false translations.
"Biblical" is not a Scriptural word because it refers to the versions
of the word of God generated by men. No Bible is the word of God; but
Bibles do contain some of the word of God in those passages where the
word of God is correctly translated. They are called "versions"
because they are versions; versions written by different men at
different times with different motivations.
All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness that the man of God may be throughly (on the inside)
perfected unto all good works (right behavior). That is because holy
men of God spake as they by (hupo, under) holy spirit (no article in
the Greek so not the Holy Spirit) were borne. No version can make
that claim because the editors of the versions were not holy men of
God. If they were holy men of God (prophets) then there would not be
no deliberate falsifications of the Scriptures designed to promote
false doctrines.
If the editors of the different versions of the word of God were holy
men of God; why did they disagree so much in the different versions
about what the word of God says? Then, too, why did the editors of
later versions deliberately put in their versions what they knew to be
false in earlier versions?
I appreciate the work that the editors did; but I do not elevate their
work to that equal to that of one of God's prophets and from their
fruit I can tell that the editors were not prophets.
What you can prove from the Bibles I can disprove from the Greek
texts. It is a very simple thing to do because the errors have been
known for centuries and have been exposed thousands if not millions of
times by different people. The only Godly way that you can prove the
trinity is to show from the Hebrew and Greek that the doctrine
literally exists in the word of God. The best educated scholars say
that the doctrine of the trinity cannot be proved and that it is a
matter of faith. It is very unlikely that you cannot prove what they
cannot prove. Then men you quote are just men; not prophets of God
and at best hit and miss in their teachings just like every other man.
Biblical truth is a misnomer unless you define it as those times when
the passages are translated correctly. To use the word set "Biblical
truth" as applicable to 100% of the Bible is misleading because it is
not literally true to fact. On my website is a file that lists 5,000
variant readings in the different editions of the Greek text. How
many thousand variant readings are there in the English versions? To
be "Biblical" means that something must "of the Bible". Since the
Bible is not accurate, Biblical is no proof of accuracy.
BB
<snip marketing strategies of paid professionals>
Carl,
I am trying not to be offensive, but you are making yourself look
unChristian by manifesting such blind worship of the words of two
hired guns of a money making operation represented as a church of God.
I don't know either man and I am using those words only to get you to
stop and think about how you are presenting yourself as the blind
being led by the blind.
Let's look at a recap of posting histories. You make claims and
support your claims with the claims of other men. Glenn makes claims
and supports his claims with a mix of Scripture and claims of other
men. Me, being the most perfect of the three (and modest, too) make
claims and support those claims from the Sriptures. Who should a real
Christian pay the most attention to? Me, of course, then Glenn, then
you. Well actually they should ignore you, some of what Glenn says
and worship what I write as holy and true.
No! They should read the holy scriptures which are not found in any
version of the Bible. Even Interlinears require cross checking of
variant texts. You, as a Christian, should search the scriptures; not
versions of the Bible or the writings of men to find out what is true.
It is not an easy task, but it is a rewarding task from which you can
derive much pleasure from.
It's not about who knows the most Carl; it's about who serves the most
the best. You can continue to serve watered down wine with admixtures
that poison a person; or you can serve the wine Jesus served at the
wedding. The choice is yours.
BB
Carl,
Nope. As has been proven many times, ther rightly divided word of
truth does not support all of your premises. Maybe you should rework
your cut and paste andf assign edition numbers to it. I'll let you
know when you get it right:)
BB
> 1. Who does the Bible say is God?
Who does the One God , Yahweh, say is God?
> The Father ?
Yes!
> The Son
No!
> The Holy Spirit
As the Shekinah glory of teh One God, yahweh, yes!
--
How to be a Bible Apologist
Step One: Accept the divine, absolute, and literal truth of the Bible.
Step Two: Redefine "literal" when needed.
Step Three: Learn to believe two or more contradictory ideas simultaneously
Step Four: Ignore or re-interpret the last 600 years of scientific knowledge
Step Five: Acknowledge the hundreds of fulfilled prophecies contained in the
Bible.
Step Six: Learn that moral relativism is not true.
Step Seven: Learn that absolute morals can change depending on the situation
or society
Step Eight: Become comfortable with your own insanity
adapted from http://craptaculus.com/eac/apologist/index.html
--
Fundies can kiss my left behind! {_l_}
--
My Blog - MARK T - my thoughts on Christianity & links
http://www.blognow.com.au/strooth/
FUNDY FUNHOUSE -
http://fundamentalistfunhouse.blogspot.com/
- a resource on the current Fundamentalist Dark Age and Christian
fundamentalism.
My Soundclick Page - download my original songs in mp3 format
http://www.soundclick.com/marktindall
BB, You fail to take into consideration it seems that the very
scriptures you claim to study and believe, says that God the Holy
Spirit has Gifted the Body, with various ministries of the Word, by
gifting some as Pastor/teachers, evangelist, prophets, and apostles!
These men or woman study the Word, and in their various functions
share what God has shown them, with the rest of the Body. These
ministries are blessing from God the Holy Spirit to the Body of
Christ, and we are told to listen and hear them!
That way we can build truth upon truth, and not each continually have
to study the exact same truth to come to the same conclusions. As a
particular ministry, is proven as being valid and spiritually mature
we more quickly learn to trust what they are saying. On the other
hand, if a particular ministry shows a tendencey to not hold to a
valid and spiritually mature interpretation, then we are wise to be
wary.
Now none of this does not mean that we, like the Bereans should not
take the things which we are being taught, and compare them to the
scriptures, to see if what is being taught, is in accord with the
Scriptures. There are certainly false teachers, for which we must be
aware, and as you point out much watered down wine in addition!
Ironically, the position you are maintaining, would exclude even you
from being here in this group teaching or saying a word about the
truth of which you claim to understand. We would have no need of your
insight into these matters, or your input even regarding declining the
belief of them! You are after all, no better as a teacher than the
men above that Carl introduces, and your teaching is no more
insightful just because you claim to use only the scriptures. You
have mutually excluded yourself, by excluding them!
The only reason to then listen to you over them, is if you are God
himself, which I seriously doubt! So either you have to allow for the
examination of all teachers and their teaching, whether Carl, Glenn,
or for that matter yourself, or you have to exclude all including
yourself!
Personally I find Carl and his teachers on many subjects to be more
acceptable than I find you in your boasting when you for all your
supposed wisdom, dig such a deep pit from which having fallen
yourself, there is no escape, except by standing on the shoulders of
others who are also standing in the Pit!
Now I only recently saw your posts showing up in ACC, and so I have no
particular position on what you have to say. However it seems that
you are off to a less than auspicious start! Be aware that I am, as
the Bereans, checking your teaching out against the Scriptures, and I
will check in with you from time to time to let you know what I am
finding! Like they say, "There ain't no free pass!"
The Eastgate is open, the King is in Residence!
Whosoever will, may come in!
Gatekeeper
Where does Jesus say "you come to the Trinity through me, or you come
to the Father through the Trinity or us or we or we are legion, etc
etc."
Until you answer that question, you are making mountains out of
insignificant molehills.
Until you answer that question, the reality (or not) of the Trinity is
unimportant.
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved!" This
means that who you believe in, is as important as what you believe!
Many may say, " I believe that Jesus died for my sins!" We are told
there are already many false Christs, so which one of them is the one
who died for your sins?
That is why the Trinity is important, it helps us identify which Jesus
we are talking about! If we are trusting the wrong Jesus, there is no
salvation, just because we use the right name!
Gatekeeper,
On the contrary, the Trinity denies who and what the real Jesus Christ
is and denies that God raised Jesus from the dead. Romans 10:9 says
that a person must confess Jesus as Lord and believe that God raised
Jesus from the dead. The doctrine of the trinity denies both the
death and resurrection of Jesus.
The trinity worshippers worship a Gee Zus who is another Jesus. The
oneness worshippers worship a Geez us who is another Jesus.:) Then
there are the WHOLLY GHOST worshippers who think God is dead:)
(Talking about how they pronounce their words)
BB
I believe that God raised Jesus from the Dead, and also I believe in
the Godhead as described by the doctrine of the Trinity! Where do you
see the conflict?
Gatekeeper,
If you have confessed Jesus as Lord and beleived that God raised Jesus
from the dead, then you are saved. If you also believe in the
trinity, then you are still saved. The trinity has nothing to do with
beging saved, it has to do with eternal rewards for works and
consequences in the present life (if that's the correct term).
If you believe the trinity and worship incorrectly then you will get
consequences because idolatry is sin. That's between you God. It is
none of my business until you say that I have to believe in the
trinity to be saved or you unrighteously condemn me to hell or label
me as a heretic for not beleiving in the trinity.
BB
Agree (mostly) with your comments here, BB...
Glenn
How does the Trinity have "nothing to do with beging saved, it has to
do with eternal rewards for works and consequences in the present
life." I would appreciate you expanding on this statement. My
understanding is that the Trinity has to do with the nature of the
Godhead, which is indepent from anything we do, or don't do!
>
> If you believe the trinity and worship incorrectly then you will get
> consequences because idolatry is sin. That's between you God. It is
> none of my business until you say that I have to believe in the
> trinity to be saved or you unrighteously condemn me to hell or label
> me as a heretic for not beleiving in the trinity.
>
> BB- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ok, I have no specific problem with what you say up to a point! The
point being that if you say you believe in Jesus, such as the Mormons
do, I do not believe that as a Christian, I can accept that they are
saved based on their testimony. This is because the Jesus they
believe in is not Jesus, the only begotten Son of God, but instead,
the co-equal brother of Satan. Their definition of Jesus, and God,
does not line up with orthodox Christian theology, and so they are
identified as a non-Christian cult. This is not to be condemnatory
toward them, it is just a matter of identification!
The Trinity is a theological tool that allow us to condense our verbal
recognition of who Jesus is as the only Begotten Son of God, and that
He is not a brother of Satan, or even an Angel, or even a good man.
Now I do not demand that anyone use the theological tool, though I
expect them to have the correct Christology, and I do not expect them
to use that word either. The word Trinity is not a magic incantation
for salvation or spirituality, though some use it that way! The
important thing is that a believer believe that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of the Living God! Then if we believe in His redemptive act on
our behalf, then we are saved!
There are many who claim they believe in Jesus, and they would do as
well believeing in the Man in the Moon, and they would not be saved!
So it is imperative that when we say we are saved by Jesus, that we
are speaking of the correct Jesus.
I would even go so far as to say I question much of the evangelistic
crusade type salvations where folks in an emotional moment crowd
around a platform, repeat a sinners prayer, and then it is announced
that they are now saved. They may be saved, but even according to
Billy Graham, less than 5% of his converts, supposedly continue the
walk of the narrow trail! Most of the seed is sown on hard ground,
but even that which is grown on shallow soil, springs up to apparent
life, and then whithers. I believe this is largely due to the
emphasis placed on repeating certain words in a particular form,
instead of a true belief in God, His redemptive Love, and our need for
a Savior. The proper seed bed takes a lot longer to prepare than a one-
night stand in an evangelistic crusade!
OTOH, I also believe, that there are those who adamantly deny the
Trinity, who believe in the Blood of Christ the begotten Son of God,
for their Salvation, and can be accepted as Christians, based on their
testimony! They manifest the correct fruit, and they in particular,
love the Truth and the Brotherhood of Believers. They may have other
issues confused, but this does not exclude them from the Body of
Christ!
The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead, the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You need ALL three in order to be
saved. You need the Son, to be forgiven of your sins. The Son is the only
way to the Father, which is the goal. The Holy Spirit is God's Spirit and
power, indwelling in the believer to bring wisdom, knowledge, truth and the
power of God to overcome sins, evil and grow into the perfection that God
requires for any soul to enter heaven.
"rogue" <rogu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186580076.5...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> The biblical doctrine of the Trinity is vital to understand because it
> concerns who God is, i.e., a proper realization of the nature of God as
> Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To understand the Trinity is to understand God
> as He has revealed Himself to be.
Yet another of your posts in which the first sentences of the quoted
passages are such presumptious and arrogant drivel that one gives up on
the entire passage immediately
The Trinity is about human perception of God
Not about the nature of God
And we've moved on since the days of Byzantium when the trinity doctrine
was forged
We even have flush toilets now
And down those is where most of the outdated sermons you seem so fond of
should be sent.
Move on Carl
Its 2007 now!
not 350AD
The attempt to place the responsibility on me for convincing you of the
truth of the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will
not work. I do not bear the guilt in relation to your beliefs; you do. I
know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others by claiming
they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of their position, which
you reject before the teaching is even presented. You are not the first to
adopt that approach, it is not a unique creation to you and you will not be
the last to use it. You have been given instruction and correction on
virtually every false and aberrant doctrine that you teach, so you know very
well what is the biblical position.
The question is not that you do not know the truth or have never had the
truth explained to you, but that you deliberately reject the truth that you
already know. If I would present an unassailable argument to you on every
point of dissent, it would be irrelevant to you. You have set yourself in a
place of absolute authority by which you reject any argument presented to
you even before it is presented, because you adopt the position that any
person who does not agree 100% with you on every point of doctrine or
religious belief, whether it be the most important or the most minute, are
completely wrong and are unable to rightly divide scripture. You have
established yourself as the criterion of truth, your self-presumed authority
rejecting the beliefs of anyone who is not taught by you or believes as you
claim. As you know, that is why I stated that you are unteachable. So, by
your own definition, I am a false teacher, so you would reject any argument
that I might present, no matter how cogent.
The truth of the Scripture is lost on you, because you think you know the
truth and reject the truth as a result of your continuing rebellion. From
whatever you are trying to escape, by running from that which reveals and
cuts to the heart of the deep issues in your life, you will not be allowed
to leave it behind. Nothing more is to be said, because the truth of
Scripture does not need a defense against you, and you do not require any
more truth to be explained to you in order to be accountable for your error.
You, sir are the proven Biblical heretic in this case and have been exposed
as such by countless Christians over the years. Your words of hatred,
slander and vitriol show that you lack the fruit of the Spirit and your
false doctrines oppose God's Word. From this point on you are simply a
bitter and arrogant little heretic whom is not worthy of my time and I
reject you according to scriptural guidelines. I firmly expect that you will
attempt to goad me with your usual sadistic flair, slander me and
misrepresent my position. You've been documented as doing so over the past
years and you continue to do so today. This proves conclusively that you
have a darkened and hardened heart and your rejection of God's Word and
essential Christian doctrine in favor of heresy proves conclusively at this
time you are self-condemned. And as long as you continue to hold to your
fake god and false doctrine you will continue to be self-condemned. The only
hope for you is that you renounce your heresies, accept orthodox Biblical
doctrine and repent of your evil ways. You have to accept Jesus Christ as
your Lord and Savior but the jesus you teach is a fraudulent one. I pity you
and will continue to pray for you however from now on, I will have nothing
to do with you.
May God bless and cleanse you before it is too late,
So, an unbeliever is told that Christ Jesus the Son of God was born of the
virgin Mary, lived a sinless life, suffered and died for our sins and was
dead and buried and that God raised him from the dead on the third day and
now salvation is given to all who will call upon his name. He prays,
"Lord Jesus have mercy on me a sinner, forgive me for this life I have
lived, come into my heart, I give my life to you."
(Now believe it or not what you guys are falling into is a trap, the trap of
adding to the Gospel of Christ. According to what being said on this very
news group, the sinner in my story could NOT be saved, (Born again), no way,
not unless he believes in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.)
That my friend and brother is religious nonsense.
Tbc ....
clip
There is no "biblical doctrine of the Trinity."
When you begin a statement with a falsehood, all that follows is worthless.
Glenn
His witness
You have nailed that one, ~SoG.
Preach it, Brother.
Glenn
Soggy, think about what you have just said,
"The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead,
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and their interrelationship.
You need ALL three in order to be saved. The Godhead is of supreme
importhance! Certainly not just a molehill.
The Trinity simply signifies the three members of the Godhead. I have
said repeatedly that I could care less whether anyone uses the term
Trinity, as long as they have the proper understanding of the
Godhead. I totally agree with you that ALL three are needed in order
to be saved.
If Jesus is not co-existant, co-equal with the Father, Son of God,
then you do not have a Savior! His sacrificial death would be empty
and meaningless!
If the Holy Spirit is not the third person of the Godhead, you do not
have the Paraclete. He is the one who teaches us about Jesus!
If you do not have the above "Persons" properly understood, then more
than likely you do not understand the Father either! For if you say
all authority was given to the Son, does that mean that the Father no
longer has any authority, or that He is no longer God!
In other words, if you do not have the Godhead based on scriptural
grounds, then you do not have God!
And yet Glenn has maintained all of these error even today in various
posts! I agree with you, all the Trinity has to do with is the
Godhead, and Glenn demonstrates in many ways that he does not have a
scriptural or orthodox understanding of the Godhead! That is all I am
saying when I say Glenn does not believe the Trinity, Glenn does not
believe the Godhead, so on this basis I question whether he is trully
saved.
You say Glenn believes Jesus is the Messiah, and I say so what! The
Devil even believes this and trembles! The Devil knows exactly who
Jesus is, no questions ask, but that does not mean the Devil is saved!
The Devil even believes in the Trinity, because he knows who the
Godhead is from his time in Heaven before the Fall! Even from his
time in the Desert of Sinai, the Devil knew all about Jesus! The
Devil knew that Jesus was sent by the Father, and now that Jesus has
died, the Devil will even acknowledge the historical facts!
The Devil also has the false gifts of the spirit, especially speaking
in tongues, and working signs and wonders! I spent time in Mexico,
and saw and heard the witch doctors with their incantations as they
cursed God and all those who served God! Yet then they would turn and
speak to you just as sweet as can be, and call you brother! or sister!
The Scriptural basis for identifying a believer, is by the Fruit of
the Spirit. This Fruit is a result of abiding in the Holy Spirit,
obeying the commands of the Lord, and Knowing the Love of the Father!
This all comes back to the Godhead, and a scriptural understanding of
the Godhead, which is theologically described by the term Trinity!
That Glenn does not like the term Trinity, is not a problem except
that his problem with the term, is founded in his rejection of the
Godhead!
Now does any of this mean that he should be banned from posting in the
NG, if that were possible and it is not! I say this is an open forum,
and not a church. There is no doctrinal statement anyone has to
adhere to inorder to prove orthodoxy! Glenn is free to post whatever
he chooses!
I do retain the right to warn others of him, and to ignore him when he
is spamming and trolling thru the NG. I feel no compulsion to
identify Glenn as a Christian, as long as he adhere to non-Christian,
unorthodox teachings about the Godhead in particular.
This does not mean that I hate Glenn, and infact I expect that he
would be a very animated friend and companion on a fishing trip.
There we could talk about all kinds of things, and there would never
be a dull moment! That you defend Glenn's right to post, I have no
problem with, and that you may have had some good times with him is
probably true. However I continue to be somewhat dismayed that you
are not more discriminating when it comes to his misrepresentation and
corruption of the Truth of the Godhead, and the open assault upon the
faith of those who are identified as Christians in the NG.
This Lack of the Fruit of the Spirit, Love of the Bretheren, is my
main concern! Jesus said that we are to love one another as He loved
the Father! I do not find this kind of Love in Glenn for the Body.
The issues about the Trinity, is just a symptom of a bigger problem!
The Eastgate is open, the King is in Residence!
Whosoever will, may come in!
Gatekeeper
>
> "rogue" <rogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1186580076.5...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 4:52 am, "Carl" <sai...@nettally.com> wrote:
> >> Definitely an excellent article from Doctors Ankerberg and Weldon.
>
> > JERRY
> > Yet, it still doesn't answer the question: where in the bible does it
> > say you must believe in the Trinity to be saved?
>
> > Where does Jesus say "you come to the Trinity through me, or you come
> > to the Father through the Trinity or us or we or we are legion, etc
> > etc."
>
> > Until you answer that question, you are making mountains out of
> > insignificant molehills.
>
> > Until you answer that question, the reality (or not) of the Trinity is
> > unimportant.- Hide quoted text -
Soggy, think about what you have just said,
Think it through. Joe Smuck comes to a Baptist church one Sunday
morning. The preacher preaches, Joe hears the word of God and faith
cometh by hearing the word of God. Joe confesses Jesus as Lord and
believes that God raised Jesus from the dead. The preacher pronounces
him saved and invites him back for the evening service to get
baptized. He comes back, get's baptized and as he leaves the parking
lot a 747 falls from the sky and smashes him. He did not have time to
read one of Carl's posts about the trinity. Does he get to keep
eternal life or does he go to the baptist hell?
To get saved one does not confess Jesus as God. One confessed Jesus
as Lord and believes that God raised Jesus from the dead. Any normal
person who knows no religion or no Bible would see no trinity in the
required confession and belief. The doctrine of the trinity is a
status symbol ranted and raved about by the high class intellectual
philosophers in the religious caste system. The average believer
knows little about it. The average believer is more concerned about
trying to be good and being nice to people. It is the ultra elitist
liberal hyperreligious fundamentalist pharisitical philosopher
pretender type that is gung ho about the trinity.:) What I am saying
is that the average believer is not fanatical about the trinity
because he knows there are weightier matters to be concerned with.
>>
>> If you believe the trinity and worship incorrectly then you will get
>> consequences because idolatry is sin. That's between you God. It is
>> none of my business until you say that I have to believe in the
>> trinity to be saved or you unrighteously condemn me to hell or label
>> me as a heretic for not beleiving in the trinity.
>>
>> BB- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Ok, I have no specific problem with what you say up to a point! The
>point being that if you say you believe in Jesus, such as the Mormons
>do, I do not believe that as a Christian, I can accept that they are
>saved based on their testimony. This is because the Jesus they
>believe in is not Jesus, the only begotten Son of God, but instead,
>the co-equal brother of Satan. Their definition of Jesus, and God,
>does not line up with orthodox Christian theology, and so they are
>identified as a non-Christian cult. This is not to be condemnatory
>toward them, it is just a matter of identification!
That's exactly what I am talking about. You are assuming that all
Mormons beleive the way that have been told they believe; that all
Mormans think what you have been told they think, and that all Mormons
do what you have been told they do. That is wrong. People are
different and believe and think and do different things. Not all
baptists are gay, not all baptists are whore mongers, not all baptists
are alcoholics. Anyone who is a member of a denomination is
committing idolatry because the denomination comes between he and God
or he and the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the one and only
head of the body of Christ which is the church of God. That is the
only God made church. All the rest are counterfiets unless they are
set up in the format established in the first century.
You can't say for sure that every Mormon believes in the Jesus you
have been told they believe in. Did you know that religious leaders
have been known to lie to their followers about other groups? It's
true.
First of all Satan had no brother, nor did Micharl or Gabriel. They
are angels and are not born; but are created beings. They have no
siblings. They cannot reproduce. Satan is spirit and Jesus is still
human; the man Jesus Christ the last Adam with a human body animated
by spirit rather than soul. I don't think the Mormons teach Jesus was
Satan's brother or that Michael was Satan's brother and that Michael
was Jesus. Those involved in the hate movement have a tendency to
exaggerate what others do or do not believe.
Orthodox is probably the best proof available of wrong doctrines. All
orthodox churches teach false docrines because they are orthodox. The
orthodox follow established traditions of men and beliefs of men
rather than the truth of the word of God. The trinity is an orthodox
belief system invented by men and is a tradition of men. Every verse
used by religionists to document a trinity can be refuted from the
texts. I am working on a study of the word spirit in the word of God
and through it have picked up on over a hundred examples of where
trinitarians have goofed up the text to support a trinitarian
doctrine.
>
>The Trinity is a theological tool that allow us to condense our verbal
>recognition of who Jesus is as the only Begotten Son of God, and that
>He is not a brother of Satan, or even an Angel, or even a good man.
>Now I do not demand that anyone use the theological tool, though I
>expect them to have the correct Christology, and I do not expect them
>to use that word either. The word Trinity is not a magic incantation
>for salvation or spirituality, though some use it that way! The
>important thing is that a believer believe that Jesus is the Christ,
>the Son of the Living God! Then if we believe in His redemptive act on
>our behalf, then we are saved!
It's a tool alright. A tool used by religious leaders to control and
motivate and discriminate and promote hatred. If it is such a true
doctrine, why is it taught with force? I understand what you are
saying, but I also understand that you are contradicting yourself. You
don't demand the theological tool but expect Christology which is the
trinitarian belief system. You don't demand A but you expect A; is
almost the same thing.
I believe human and divine exist in Jesus just as they both exist in
me. Jesus is human with spirit in him that replaced the blood he shed
( the spirit was upon him until the blood was shed then in him when a
vacancy existed). I am part human and part spirit (which is what the
divine nature is) What is God" Spirit (literally), Holy (literally),
Love (literally), and Light (figuratively). So the divine nature is
what God is holy spirit and love which is what holy spirit the gift of
God is.
>
>
>There are many who claim they believe in Jesus, and they would do as
>well believeing in the Man in the Moon, and they would not be saved!
>So it is imperative that when we say we are saved by Jesus, that we
>are speaking of the correct Jesus.
That's easy, we talk about the Father and the Son just like God did so
that people won't get confused. People understand that Jesus Christ
is the Son of God and that God is the Father. They go bonkers when
they try to figure out the intellectual philosophical mumbo jumbo of
the trinity.
>
>I would even go so far as to say I question much of the evangelistic
>crusade type salvations where folks in an emotional moment crowd
>around a platform, repeat a sinners prayer, and then it is announced
>that they are now saved. They may be saved, but even according to
>Billy Graham, less than 5% of his converts, supposedly continue the
>walk of the narrow trail! Most of the seed is sown on hard ground,
>but even that which is grown on shallow soil, springs up to apparent
>life, and then whithers. I believe this is largely due to the
>emphasis placed on repeating certain words in a particular form,
>instead of a true belief in God, His redemptive Love, and our need for
>a Savior. The proper seed bed takes a lot longer to prepare than a one-
>night stand in an evangelistic crusade!
I agree a 100%. How can people really believe what they do not
understand? They go to a meeting where they are told Jesus saves and
begin wondering if he saves coins or stamps and while they are day
dreaming about that comes the part about confessing sins which they
have to sit there and remember and can't do because its impossible to
remember and confess every sin a person has committed in his life and
then they are told to accept Jesus as their personal savior and they
say sure why not. Rather than being told the need to confess the
savior from sin as Lord, they are told to confess sins. rather than
confessing Jesus as Lord they are told to accept him as a savior. How
nutty can these money maker pep rallies get?
>
>OTOH, I also believe, that there are those who adamantly deny the
>Trinity, who believe in the Blood of Christ the begotten Son of God,
>for their Salvation, and can be accepted as Christians, based on their
>testimony! They manifest the correct fruit, and they in particular,
>love the Truth and the Brotherhood of Believers. They may have other
>issues confused, but this does not exclude them from the Body of
>Christ!
I am glad to read that, except that I would give more credence to how
they behave over their testimony. I have seen some people make up
some real doozies to impress upon people that "they" are changing
"their" lives by what God did for them. Know what I mean?
>"rogue" <rogu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1186580076.5...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> Yet, it still doesn't answer the question: where in the bible does it
>> say you must believe in the Trinity to be saved?
>>
>> Where does Jesus say "you come to the Trinity through me, or you come
>> to the Father through the Trinity or us or we or we are legion, etc
>> etc."
>>
>> Until you answer that question, you are making mountains out of
>> insignificant molehills.
>>
>> Until you answer that question, the reality (or not) of the Trinity is
>> unimportant.
>>
>
>The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead, the
>Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You need ALL three in order to be
>saved. You need the Son, to be forgiven of your sins. The Son is the only
>way to the Father, which is the goal. The Holy Spirit is God's Spirit and
>power, indwelling in the believer to bring wisdom, knowledge, truth and the
>power of God to overcome sins, evil and grow into the perfection that God
>requires for any soul to enter heaven.
>
Actually, the Holy Spirit is God (one of God's names or titles) and
holy spirit is the gift or agent of God. The problem is that Bible
editors added "the" and capitalized holy and spirit to make the gift
God so much that the average reader doesn't know what a passage is
talking about unless he cross checks it with the Greek. Here's the
easy way to understand the difference. The Holy Spirit has His
habitation in the heavens while holy spirit is at work on the earth in
the ages. The Holy Spirit is God the Giver while holy spirit is the
gift. More often than not when the Bible says the Holy Ghost (Spirit)
(God the Giver) the Greek reads (holy spirit) the gift (52 of 79
times, that's 58%).
Thank you for the rant Bible Bob! I will take awhile, to meditate and
digest what you have said! One point I can clarify is that testimony
is more than mouth words, it is also how they behave, also known as
fruit of the Spirit! These are hard things to duplicate or fake, in
order to impress others. Gk
> "Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
> news:j1kib39473toq94b5...@4ax.com...
>
> The attempt to place the responsibility on me for convincing you of the
> truth of the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will
> not work. I do not bear the guilt in relation to your beliefs; you do. I
> know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others by claiming
> they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of their position, which
> you reject before the teaching is even presented.
You sound more like John Wolf every day
It doesn't end well
we've seen it on this group already
>"Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
>news:j1kib39473toq94b5...@4ax.com...
>
>The attempt to place the responsibility on me for convincing you of the
>truth of the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will
>not work. I do not bear the guilt in relation to your beliefs; you do. I
>know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others by claiming
>they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of their position, which
>you reject before the teaching is even presented. You are not the first to
>adopt that approach, it is not a unique creation to you and you will not be
>the last to use it. You have been given instruction and correction on
>virtually every false and aberrant doctrine that you teach, so you know very
>well what is the biblical position.
Carl, you are joking aren't you? If you aren't joking; what are you
smoking, or snorting, or shooting up, or inhaling, or drinking? Your
joking right? Please tell me you are joking or on drugs so I won't
think you have gone completely bonkers.
I gladly submit myself to men or women who rightly divide the word of
truth. You do not rightly divide the word of truth, so I do not
submit myself to your false doctrines.
What kind of ego would come up with "The attempt to place the
responsibility on me for convincing you of the truth of the Biblical
doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will not work." ? I
never placed any responsibility on you. Responsibility is delegated
to those who have the maturity, intellect, and stamina to handle the
responsibility. Why would I place responsibility on you when you have
proven yourself to be immature, lacking in knowledge of the
Scriptures, and without the stamina necessary to complete the task I
might assign you.
I don't want to know the doctrine of the trinity. I know it better
than you. Why would I blame you for not teaching me what you aren't
able to teach in the first place. Your ego is getting much too big.
Your ego is getting out of control. You said "I do not bear the guilt
in relation to your beliefs; you do." Why would I blame you for what
I believe whern I have said repeatedly that you lack the abilities
necessary to teach?
Let's see what else you are trying to spin. You said
"I know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others
by claiming they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of
their position, which you reject before the teaching is even
presented."
I know you know how spin works that what you are trying to do now; but
it won't work. But your statement does reveal something to me. You
wanna be a spinner like the big time spinners you quote but know you
cannot spin as good as them and feel guilty because you are not a good
spinner and post their professional spin material rather than you own
inadequate spin material.
I have not said the hogwash you said I said. I blame you for being
arrogant, and hateful, and ignorant of the Scriptures and for
worshipping man gods. I sure don't blame you for what I believe
because you lack the skills to teach me something to believe and
because you have a track record of being dishonest just as you being
in this post.
I have been studing the trinity doctrine for thirty years and know it
better than you do which is why I am able to counter every one of your
wrongly divided presentations with truth from the word of God. Oh,
you know the mumbo jumbo that you are supposed to parrott; but you do
not understand what's behind the mumbo jumbo or the ramifications of
the mumbo jumbo. When you post the same old posts ovcer and over
again; why would I waste my time reading them. When you post one of
your Joseph Smith posts and I see it is wrong; the next article by
your Joseph Smith will be ignored because he lost credability the
first time.
I don't care what they say. I want to know what you think because it
is you that I am trying to communciate with. Every time I try to
communicate with you, you repond with Pope so and so says so and so.
You are blowing smoke. I know the word of God because I study the
word of God rather than what men say about the word of God. I have
been careful to set myself under those men and women who really love
God and prove to me that they know God and know God's word by their
behavior and by rightly dividing the word of truth. I can tolerate
different teaching and preaching styles so long as the word of God is
rightly divided. But when they do what you do, tell me I have to
dance in the spiirt, be slain in the spirit, handle snakes, or believe
in a trinity - I walk away (or correct them). I do that because I can
because I know what the word of God says and do not care what men
think. I don't know all of the word, just a little bit; but a little
bit very well. I know its true because I learned it and then tested
it and it worked.
You are blowing smoke, trying to be intellectual and philosophical so
you can look like a spiritual big shot. What you are really doing is
showing your lack of spirituality and loyalty to the systems of the
world which are under the control of the god of this world who is
Satan.
You got potential, but waste it trying to be what God did not call you
to be. Why not just learn the word of God? Why not just love God's
people? That's "Biblical".
>The question is not that you do not know the truth or have never had the
>truth explained to you, but that you deliberately reject the truth that you
>already know. If I would present an unassailable argument to you on every
>point of dissent, it would be irrelevant to you.
You are wrong. You are trying to use natural man reason to handle a
spiritual matter. First of all, you have proven that you are not able
to explain truth to anyone. I know teenagers that know the word of
God better than you and who can teach it better than you. They don't
know the mumbo jumbo and the hokey pokey dance you do; but they know
and live the word of God.
You are wrong I do not reject truth. I reject your false
presentations of pseudo facts as truth. Truth comes from the rightly
divided word of God; not wrongly divided Bible which you offer. You
want to give me watered down poisonous wine. I want the wine that
Jesus served at the wedding and I can get it without your help.
Why would I reject truth I already know. That is silly. You see,
Carl, you don't know what truth is. Look it up. It is not defined as
what Carl says something is.
Your last sentence gives you away. It tells any spiritual man or
woman what you are really all about. You desire to present
unassailable arguments and that is nothing but raw ego talking. You
want to be contentious, full of strife, and debate. I don't. All I
want to do is learn and do the word of God and love God, the Lord
Jesus Christ, and God's people. I'm not here to argue or debate you.
Debating is a sin. Look it up.
You have set yourself in a
>place of absolute authority by which you reject any argument presented to
>you even before it is presented, because you adopt the position that any
>person who does not agree 100% with you on every point of doctrine or
>religious belief, whether it be the most important or the most minute, are
>completely wrong and are unable to rightly divide scripture. You have
>established yourself as the criterion of truth, your self-presumed authority
>rejecting the beliefs of anyone who is not taught by you or believes as you
>claim. As you know, that is why I stated that you are unteachable. So, by
>your own definition, I am a false teacher, so you would reject any argument
>that I might present, no matter how cogent.
Is that all you care about? Showing people how big and intellectual
you are is not what being a Christian is all about. You don't care
about truth. You care about winning arguments, about contention and
strife, and ebate. You just wannabe a big shot that people will
worship they way you worship your men gods. You were led down the
wrong path by false teachers as you prove every time you post one of
their articles. So I can empathize with you; but cannot absolve you
of your responsibility to worship and serve the one true God His way.
I am not unteachable. I learn very well from real teachers and from
personal study and since I have holy spirit in me it is possible to
learn that way, too. Thee is only one criterion for truth for me and
that is the word of God; not wrongly divided Bibles; but the word of
God which you cannot relate to because you don't know what it is. It's
not the Bible, although the Bible contains some of the word of God.
Actually, it makes reference to all of it; but twists the word of God
into the doctrines of men. I will be posting something on that soon.
Just because you are a false teacher does not mean that I can't learn
from you. False teachers show me what not to learn and reveal the
secrets behind their false doctrines; not knowing that they are doing
so.
Carl, you are the one who has made himself unteachable. You have to
believe what your bosses tell you to believe; money and power is at
stake. I don't have to worry about that because my boss spent time on
a stake.
You have spent a lot of time speaking a lot of junk. You have
demonstrated that you are only concerned with what your bosses tell
you that you are to believe. You must do what you man gods tell you
to do because that is the Third Reich way. This another of your tell
the big lie and stick to it posts. You are trying to clear yourself
of guilt for your vile actions by placing the blame on me. Go ahead,
but you aren't fooling God; or me, and anyone with half a brain that
reads your words.
You have exposed yourself as a fraud and an evil doer in this post and
you probably can't even see what you have done. That's really sad
because you are wasting what God could use.
"Ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of
meekness."
Gal 6:1 KJV
Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual,
restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself,
lest thou also be tempted.
You can't do that Carl because you lack the heart. You can't do that
Carl because you lack an accurate knowledge of the word of God. You
can't do that Carl because you don't know how to love God's way. You
can't do that Carl because you are not meek. You can't do that Carl
because when you are tempted you jump into action as the temptation
leads you.
>May God bless and cleanse you before it is too late,
He already has Carl and if you knew the word of God you would know
that.
>"Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
>news:n6qib3p57a8ieek54...@4ax.com...
>
>The attempt to place the responsibility on me for convincing you of the
>truth of the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will
>not work. I do not bear the guilt in relation to your beliefs; you do. I
>know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others by claiming
>they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of their position, which
>you reject before the teaching is even presented. You are not the first to
>adopt that approach, it is not a unique creation to you and you will not be
>the last to use it. You have been given instruction and correction on
>virtually every false and aberrant doctrine that you teach, so you know very
>well what is the biblical position.
Carl, you are joking aren't you? If you aren't joking; what are you
smoking, or snorting, or shooting up, or inhaling, or drinking? Your
joking right? Please tell me you are joking or on drugs so I won't
think you have gone completely bonkers.
I gladly submit myself to men or women who rightly divide the word of
truth. You do not rightly divide the word of truth, so I do not
submit myself to your false doctrines.
What kind of ego would come up with "The attempt to place the
responsibility on me for convincing you of the truth of the Biblical
doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will not work." ? I
never placed any responsibility on you. Responsibility is delegated
to those who have the maturity, intellect, and stamina to handle the
responsibility. Why would I place responsibility on you when you have
proven yourself to be immature, lacking in knowledge of the
Scriptures, and without the stamina necessary to complete the task I
might assign you.
I don't want to know the doctrine of the trinity. I know it better
than you. Why would I blame you for not teaching me what you aren't
able to teach in the first place. Your ego is getting much too big.
Your ego is getting out of control. You said "I do not bear the guilt
in relation to your beliefs; you do." Why would I blame you for what
I believe whern I have said repeatedly that you lack the abilities
necessary to teach?
Let's see what else you are trying to spin. You said
"I know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others
by claiming they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of
their position, which you reject before the teaching is even
presented."
I know you know how spin works that what you are trying to do now; but
>The question is not that you do not know the truth or have never had the
>truth explained to you, but that you deliberately reject the truth that you
>already know. If I would present an unassailable argument to you on every
>point of dissent, it would be irrelevant to you.
You are wrong. You are trying to use natural man reason to handle a
spiritual matter. First of all, you have proven that you are not able
to explain truth to anyone. I know teenagers that know the word of
God better than you and who can teach it better than you. They don't
know the mumbo jumbo and the hokey pokey dance you do; but they know
and live the word of God.
You are wrong I do not reject truth. I reject your false
presentations of pseudo facts as truth. Truth comes from the rightly
divided word of God; not wrongly divided Bible which you offer. You
want to give me watered down poisonous wine. I want the wine that
Jesus served at the wedding and I can get it without your help.
Why would I reject truth I already know. That is silly. You see,
Carl, you don't know what truth is. Look it up. It is not defined as
what Carl says something is.
Your last sentence gives you away. It tells any spiritual man or
woman what you are really all about. You desire to present
unassailable arguments and that is nothing but raw ego talking. You
want to be contentious, full of strife, and debate. I don't. All I
want to do is learn and do the word of God and love God, the Lord
Jesus Christ, and God's people. I'm not here to argue or debate you.
Debating is a sin. Look it up.
You have set yourself in a
>place of absolute authority by which you reject any argument presented to
>you even before it is presented, because you adopt the position that any
>person who does not agree 100% with you on every point of doctrine or
>religious belief, whether it be the most important or the most minute, are
>completely wrong and are unable to rightly divide scripture. You have
>established yourself as the criterion of truth, your self-presumed authority
>rejecting the beliefs of anyone who is not taught by you or believes as you
>claim. As you know, that is why I stated that you are unteachable. So, by
>your own definition, I am a false teacher, so you would reject any argument
>that I might present, no matter how cogent.
Is that all you care about? Showing people how big and intellectual
you are is not what being a Christian is all about. You don't care
about truth. You care about winning arguments, about contention and
strife, and ebate. You just wannabe a big shot that people will
worship they way you worship your men gods. You were led down the
wrong path by false teachers as you prove every time you post one of
their articles. So I can empathize with you; but cannot absolve you
of your responsibility to worship and serve the one true God His way.
I am not unteachable. I learn very well from real teachers and from
personal study and since I have holy spirit in me it is possible to
learn that way, too. Thee is only one criterion for truth for me and
that is the word of God; not wrongly divided Bibles; but the word of
God which you cannot relate to because you don't know what it is. It's
not the Bible, although the Bible contains some of the word of God.
Actually, it makes reference to all of it; but twists the word of God
into the doctrines of men. I will be posting something on that soon.
Just because you are a false teacher does not mean that I can't learn
from you. False teachers show me what not to learn and reveal the
secrets behind their false doctrines; not knowing that they are doing
so.
Carl, you are the one who has made himself unteachable. You have to
believe what your bosses tell you to believe; money and power is at
stake. I don't have to worry about that because my boss spent time on
a stake.
>
You have spent a lot of time speaking a lot of junk. You have
demonstrated that you are only concerned with what your bosses tell
you that you are to believe. You must do what you man gods tell you
to do because that is the Third Reich way. This another of your tell
the big lie and stick to it posts. You are trying to clear yourself
of guilt for your vile actions by placing the blame on me. Go ahead,
but you aren't fooling God; or me, and anyone with half a brain that
reads your words.
You have exposed yourself as a fraud and an evil doer in this post and
you probably can't even see what you have done. That's really sad
because you are wasting what God could use.
"Ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of
meekness."
Gal 6:1 KJV
Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual,
restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself,
lest thou also be tempted.
You can't do that Carl because you lack the heart. You can't do that
Carl because you lack an accurate knowledge of the word of God. You
can't do that Carl because you don't know how to love God's way. You
can't do that Carl because you are not meek. You can't do that Carl
because when you are tempted you jump into action as the temptation
leads you.
>May God bless and cleanse you before it is too late,
He already has Carl and if you knew the word of God you would know
that.
>Carl
>"Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
>news:9mrib3l6t8r7ki71p...@4ax.com...
>
>The attempt to place the responsibility on me for convincing you of the
>truth of the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will
>not work. I do not bear the guilt in relation to your beliefs; you do. I
>know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others by claiming
>they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of their position, which
>you reject before the teaching is even presented. You are not the first to
>adopt that approach, it is not a unique creation to you and you will not be
>the last to use it. You have been given instruction and correction on
>virtually every false and aberrant doctrine that you teach, so you know very
>well what is the biblical position.
Carl, you are joking aren't you? If you aren't joking; what are you
smoking, or snorting, or shooting up, or inhaling, or drinking? Your
joking right? Please tell me you are joking or on drugs so I won't
think you have gone completely bonkers.
I gladly submit myself to men or women who rightly divide the word of
truth. You do not rightly divide the word of truth, so I do not
submit myself to your false doctrines.
What kind of ego would come up with "The attempt to place the
responsibility on me for convincing you of the truth of the Biblical
doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will not work." ? I
never placed any responsibility on you. Responsibility is delegated
to those who have the maturity, intellect, and stamina to handle the
responsibility. Why would I place responsibility on you when you have
proven yourself to be immature, lacking in knowledge of the
Scriptures, and without the stamina necessary to complete the task I
might assign you.
I don't want to know the doctrine of the trinity. I know it better
than you. Why would I blame you for not teaching me what you aren't
able to teach in the first place. Your ego is getting much too big.
Your ego is getting out of control. You said "I do not bear the guilt
in relation to your beliefs; you do." Why would I blame you for what
I believe whern I have said repeatedly that you lack the abilities
necessary to teach?
Let's see what else you are trying to spin. You said
"I know how the spin works; attempting to place the blame on others
by claiming they have not thoroughly convinced you of the truth of
their position, which you reject before the teaching is even
presented."
I know you know how spin works that what you are trying to do now; but
>The question is not that you do not know the truth or have never had the
>truth explained to you, but that you deliberately reject the truth that you
>already know. If I would present an unassailable argument to you on every
>point of dissent, it would be irrelevant to you.
You are wrong. You are trying to use natural man reason to handle a
spiritual matter. First of all, you have proven that you are not able
to explain truth to anyone. I know teenagers that know the word of
God better than you and who can teach it better than you. They don't
know the mumbo jumbo and the hokey pokey dance you do; but they know
and live the word of God.
You are wrong I do not reject truth. I reject your false
presentations of pseudo facts as truth. Truth comes from the rightly
divided word of God; not wrongly divided Bible which you offer. You
want to give me watered down poisonous wine. I want the wine that
Jesus served at the wedding and I can get it without your help.
Why would I reject truth I already know. That is silly. You see,
Carl, you don't know what truth is. Look it up. It is not defined as
what Carl says something is.
Your last sentence gives you away. It tells any spiritual man or
woman what you are really all about. You desire to present
unassailable arguments and that is nothing but raw ego talking. You
want to be contentious, full of strife, and debate. I don't. All I
want to do is learn and do the word of God and love God, the Lord
Jesus Christ, and God's people. I'm not here to argue or debate you.
Debating is a sin. Look it up.
You have set yourself in a
>place of absolute authority by which you reject any argument presented to
>you even before it is presented, because you adopt the position that any
>person who does not agree 100% with you on every point of doctrine or
>religious belief, whether it be the most important or the most minute, are
>completely wrong and are unable to rightly divide scripture. You have
>established yourself as the criterion of truth, your self-presumed authority
>rejecting the beliefs of anyone who is not taught by you or believes as you
>claim. As you know, that is why I stated that you are unteachable. So, by
>your own definition, I am a false teacher, so you would reject any argument
>that I might present, no matter how cogent.
Is that all you care about? Showing people how big and intellectual
you are is not what being a Christian is all about. You don't care
about truth. You care about winning arguments, about contention and
strife, and ebate. You just wannabe a big shot that people will
worship they way you worship your men gods. You were led down the
wrong path by false teachers as you prove every time you post one of
their articles. So I can empathize with you; but cannot absolve you
of your responsibility to worship and serve the one true God His way.
I am not unteachable. I learn very well from real teachers and from
personal study and since I have holy spirit in me it is possible to
learn that way, too. Thee is only one criterion for truth for me and
that is the word of God; not wrongly divided Bibles; but the word of
God which you cannot relate to because you don't know what it is. It's
not the Bible, although the Bible contains some of the word of God.
Actually, it makes reference to all of it; but twists the word of God
into the doctrines of men. I will be posting something on that soon.
Just because you are a false teacher does not mean that I can't learn
from you. False teachers show me what not to learn and reveal the
secrets behind their false doctrines; not knowing that they are doing
so.
Carl, you are the one who has made himself unteachable. You have to
believe what your bosses tell you to believe; money and power is at
stake. I don't have to worry about that because my boss spent time on
a stake.
>
You have spent a lot of time speaking a lot of junk. You have
demonstrated that you are only concerned with what your bosses tell
you that you are to believe. You must do what you man gods tell you
to do because that is the Third Reich way. This another of your tell
the big lie and stick to it posts. You are trying to clear yourself
of guilt for your vile actions by placing the blame on me. Go ahead,
but you aren't fooling God; or me, and anyone with half a brain that
reads your words.
You have exposed yourself as a fraud and an evil doer in this post and
you probably can't even see what you have done. That's really sad
because you are wasting what God could use.
"Ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of
meekness."
Gal 6:1 KJV
Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual,
restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself,
lest thou also be tempted.
You can't do that Carl because you lack the heart. You can't do that
Carl because you lack an accurate knowledge of the word of God. You
can't do that Carl because you don't know how to love God's way. You
can't do that Carl because you are not meek. You can't do that Carl
because when you are tempted you jump into action as the temptation
leads you.
>May God bless and cleanse you before it is too late,
He already has Carl and if you knew the word of God you would know
that.
>Carl
Gk,
You are correct, fruit of the spirit is walking in love. I did not
express that as well as I could have. I was speaking about times when
someone that I knew very well and knew very well what had taken place
magnifies the experience in her testimony.
There is a catch, however. One must know what the love of God really
is and not confuse it with works of the flesh (phileo) which is
exactly what many people do. The love of God is always in harmony
with the wisdom of God because the love of God is from God manifested
through a child of God.
It is counterfieted by those seemingly charismatic men and women who
have spiritual help of the wrong kind; seducing and deceiving spirits.
BB
> On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 15:20:17 -0700, gatekeeper
> <gatekeepe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Aug 8, 3:33 pm, Bible Bob <bible...@saintly.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 11:24:59 -0700, gatekeeper
snip
>>>
>>> If you have confessed Jesus as Lord and beleived that God raised Jesus
>>> from the dead, then you are saved. If you also believe in the
>>> trinity, then you are still saved. The trinity has nothing to do with
>>> beging saved, it has to do with eternal rewards for works and
>>> consequences in the present life (if that's the correct term).
>>
>>How does the Trinity have "nothing to do with beging saved, it has to
>>do with eternal rewards for works and consequences in the present
>>life." I would appreciate you expanding on this statement. My
>>understanding is that the Trinity has to do with the nature of the
>>Godhead, which is indepent from anything we do, or don't do!
>>
>>
> Think it through. Joe Smuck comes to a Baptist church one Sunday
> morning. The preacher preaches, Joe hears the word of God and faith
> cometh by hearing the word of God. Joe confesses Jesus as Lord and
> believes that God raised Jesus from the dead. The preacher pronounces
> him saved and invites him back for the evening service to get
> baptized. He comes back, get's baptized and as he leaves the parking
> lot a 747 falls from the sky and smashes him. He did not have time to
> read one of Carl's posts about the trinity. Does he get to keep
> eternal life or does he go to the baptist hell?
I don't recall ever saying that understanding the
Trinity was necessary to be saved. In your story, it
is highly unlikely that Joe had opportunity to
completely understand the deeper things of theology by
the time that he "Accepted Jesus" However in this
situation, we will make certain assumptions,
1) The church Joe is in is a true Bible believeing,
Jesus the Son of God preaching church, so the message
he heard is probably correct!
2) Joe trully heard the message with his heart, and was
trully converted!
3) Joe comes back and gets babtized, which indicates a
willingness to obey, and a desire to live for God!
Under these circumstances, I have no problem believeing
that Joe was trully saved unto eternal life with Jesus
in Glory. He had heard the correct message about the
true Son of God, and though there has not been a great
maturing in his life, Joe has already produced the
fruit of obediance, which is a sign of the Holy Spirits
work! However only Jesus trully knows, and lucky for
Joe his judgement is not left up to us, but is
personally handled by Jesus!
Now if a few of the details had been different, then
our assurance would not have been so certain. For
example Joe is in a church noted for its unorthodox
doctrine on the person of Jesus. They do not believe
that Jesus is the only Begotten Son of God. He
probably would not have heard a salvation message to
begin with, and if there was a babtismal service that
evening, he would have been out bowling, since going to
evening service is for religious zealots. Now when the
747 lands on him later that evening, I would not be
taking any bets as to where Joe ends up.
>
> To get saved one does not confess Jesus as God. One confessed Jesus
> as Lord and believes that God raised Jesus from the dead. Any normal
> person who knows no religion or no Bible would see no trinity in the
> required confession and belief. The doctrine of the trinity is a
> status symbol ranted and raved about by the high class intellectual
> philosophers in the religious caste system. The average believer
> knows little about it. The average believer is more concerned about
> trying to be good and being nice to people. It is the ultra elitist
> liberal hyperreligious fundamentalist pharisitical philosopher
> pretender type that is gung ho about the trinity.:) What I am saying
> is that the average believer is not fanatical about the trinity
> because he knows there are weightier matters to be concerned with.
The average believer??? Who said anything about average
believers. We either believe, or we do not! It is
what and who we believe, not how much of it we believe,
that sets us apart as a believer! That the believer
understands the nuiances of the Trinity, is definitely
not the issue!
My son when he was three years old, knew that Jesus,
the Son of God, loved him and died for his sin, so that
he could be forgiven. He did not even know the word
"Trinity." So you are correct when you say it is not
needed inorder to be saved, but then that is not what I
have been saying! The issue of the Trinity, is the
issue of the Godhead, and who Jesus is, and my three
year old, knew that Jesus was the Son of God!
If you claim you are saved by the Blood of Jesus, and
do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God, then his
death would have no redemptive value at all! It is
because He is God's Son, that God received the Sin
offering that Jesus made on our behalf! If you have
accepted that Jesus, who is the Son of God, your sins
will be forgiven you.
Now part of the problem that also is apparent in your
presentation, is you speak of salvation, strickly in
terms of your former sins being forgiven you.
Salvation though is a process, which started long
before the moment of your accepting Jesus, and is
continued during the course of our life, unto eternity.
The only one worthy of operating this process, is the
eternal Co-existant Godhead. You may bow and scrape to
any number of other designated gods, but to no avail,
so it behooves you to be sure you are trusting the
correct God! The correct God is represented by the
Godhead, and is theologically described by the term
"Trinity!" If this term causes you grief, then you are
probably not in contact with the true Godhead of the
Scriptures!
To confess Jesus, as Lord, is to confess Him as God! To
believe that God raised Him from the dead, is to
recognize that He died in the first place! Some even
say He did not really die, but we believe that He
really died, in the flesh, and in the spirit!
Now being good and being nice is important, as long as
we are not trusting our ability to be good and nice, to
win points with God, that will offset our sins. The
average unbeliever usually figures that if he is good
and nice, God will not be so hard on him. In fact
Jesus had to die for all of us, no matter how good and
nice, no matter how "ultra elitist liberal
hyperreligious fundamentalist pharisitical philosopher
pretender type that is gung ho about the trinity" any
of us are! We all need to be redeemed, by the blood of
the Lamb of God!
I used the Mormon as an example because I am more
familiar with them than let's say the JW. The LDS
Church most definitely teaches that Jesus is the
brother of Satan. That all Mormons may not adhere to
this doctrine, only means they are unorthodox Mormons.
The LDS Church also teaches that you should not drink
coffee, and my Mom who was a Mormon, worked in a
Denny's, and would see the Bishops and Elders from her
own church come in and drink coffee, after teaching
earlier in the day, that they should not. I only point
this out because there is hypocrisy throughout
religion, where ever you find it! I also believe, that
some of these people could actually be saved in spite
of their unorthodox beliefs in regards to orthodox
Christianity. Luckily for them, like Joe above, God is
their Judge! He looks at their heart!
Our basis of fellowship with one another, is not in a
name such as Babtist, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, as
you point out. Our basis of fellowship is Jesus, the
Son of God who loved us and gave Himself for us! That
is why I can come to a NG like ACC, and find fellowship
with others of like Faith in Jesus! At the same time
though I must be very careful associating with just
anyone who claims to be a Christian. There are wolves
among the sheep! I cannot look at their heart, so I
look at the fruit they are producing as a byproduct of
the condition of their heart. If I find rotten fruit,
then I must suspect that something is wrong with their
heart. If I find good fruit, then we can sit down and
enjoy the fruit together!
Now just because someone adheres to a particular
doctrine does not mean they will produce good fruit!
There are a number here in the NG, who supposedly have
acceptable doctrine, and their fruit stinks, and is
sour. I tend to keep my distance from them, and there
is not much fellowship!
>
> Orthodox is probably the best proof available of wrong doctrines. All
> orthodox churches teach false docrines because they are orthodox. The
> orthodox follow established traditions of men and beliefs of men
> rather than the truth of the word of God. The trinity is an orthodox
> belief system invented by men and is a tradition of men. Every verse
> used by religionists to document a trinity can be refuted from the
> texts.
That you have an issue with orthodoxy is your problem,
it is not orthodoxy per se, but that men teach their
own doctrines as being orthodox. There is a big
difference. I have said before that I could careless
about using the word Trinity. Orthodoxy has nothing to
do with using a particular word or form of worship, but
it has everything to do with the Faith once delivered
to the Saints. Ours is to determine the latter, and
conform our lives to the teaching and example of Jesus!
Then we will be orthodox without even trying! Religion
is a matter of trying to be orthodox, which true
Christianity knows little about. Christianity is a
matter of living our Life in the Spirit and free from
the conformity to the ways of the world. Conformity to
the ways of the world is not orthodoxy!
> I am working on a study of the word spirit in the word of God
> and through it have picked up on over a hundred examples of where
> trinitarians have goofed up the text to support a trinitarian
> doctrine.
I will look forward to the results of your study!
>>
>>The Trinity is a theological tool that allow us to condense our verbal
>>recognition of who Jesus is as the only Begotten Son of God, and that
>>He is not a brother of Satan, or even an Angel, or even a good man.
>>Now I do not demand that anyone use the theological tool, though I
>>expect them to have the correct Christology, and I do not expect them
>>to use that word either. The word Trinity is not a magic incantation
>>for salvation or spirituality, though some use it that way! The
>>important thing is that a believer believe that Jesus is the Christ,
>>the Son of the Living God! Then if we believe in His redemptive act on
>>our behalf, then we are saved!
>
> It's a tool alright. A tool used by religious leaders to control and
> motivate and discriminate and promote hatred. If it is such a true
> doctrine, why is it taught with force? I understand what you are
> saying, but I also understand that you are contradicting yourself. You
> don't demand the theological tool but expect Christology which is the
> trinitarian belief system. You don't demand A but you expect A; is
> almost the same thing.
Christology is the study specifically of who Jesus
Christ is according to the word of God! Trinity is
more of an overview of the entire Godhead! Many who
claim to be Christians, never read the daily news other
than the sports and entertainment section! Many today
would not think of studying to show themselves
approved, a workmen that does not need to be ashamed.
Even here in this discussion, if you take all the
lurkers and active posters, in all the religious NGs,
not just Christian, you would have a pitiful few who
even think about the things they say they believe.
So to suggest that some of these average believers
should study Christology, must sound extremely naiive,
however this is the very thing I would suggest! This is
not a tool to control people, but to set them free!
Ignorance is the greatest tool in the hands of the
religious leaders, which keep the majority of the
believers coming to them inorder to know what to
believe. I take this is your point when you say you
left the Babtist church 30 years ago, and you don't
need someone thinking for you.
However, I also believe that God raises up Godly men to
use in the edification and encouragement of the Body.
The purpose of these men is not to maintain the system
of ignorance, which so often accompanies the religious
systems of the world. These men are not to garner to
themselves, the fat of the land, as the sons of the
prophets did, but to teach the people so that they can
stand on their own in Faith! Their own faith, not
something inherited from some son of a prophet!
>
> I believe human and divine exist in Jesus just as they both exist in
> me. Jesus is human with spirit in him that replaced the blood he shed
> ( the spirit was upon him until the blood was shed then in him when a
> vacancy existed). I am part human and part spirit (which is what the
> divine nature is) What is God" Spirit (literally), Holy (literally),
> Love (literally), and Light (figuratively). So the divine nature is
> what God is holy spirit and love which is what holy spirit the gift of
> God is.
This is probably a matter to be discussed more when you
get done with your study above. It should prove
interesting!
>>
>>
>>There are many who claim they believe in Jesus, and they would do as
>>well believeing in the Man in the Moon, and they would not be saved!
>>So it is imperative that when we say we are saved by Jesus, that we
>>are speaking of the correct Jesus.
>
> That's easy, we talk about the Father and the Son just like God did so
> that people won't get confused. People understand that Jesus Christ
> is the Son of God and that God is the Father. They go bonkers when
> they try to figure out the intellectual philosophical mumbo jumbo of
> the trinity.
Most folks have trouble calculating their taxes, but
that does not make any difference to the tax man! The
Tax man cometh! and so does Jesus!
As far as calculating the Trinity, there is no computer
big enough, fast enough, powerful enough to even come
close! But boy can we have fun trying!
>>
>>I would even go so far as to say I question much of the evangelistic
>>crusade type salvations where folks in an emotional moment crowd
>>around a platform, repeat a sinners prayer, and then it is announced
>>that they are now saved. They may be saved, but even according to
>>Billy Graham, less than 5% of his converts, supposedly continue the
>>walk of the narrow trail! Most of the seed is sown on hard ground,
>>but even that which is grown on shallow soil, springs up to apparent
>>life, and then whithers. I believe this is largely due to the
>>emphasis placed on repeating certain words in a particular form,
>>instead of a true belief in God, His redemptive Love, and our need for
>>a Savior. The proper seed bed takes a lot longer to prepare than a one-
>>night stand in an evangelistic crusade!
>
> I agree a 100%. How can people really believe what they do not
> understand? They go to a meeting where they are told Jesus saves and
> begin wondering if he saves coins or stamps and while they are day
> dreaming about that comes the part about confessing sins which they
> have to sit there and remember and can't do because its impossible to
> remember and confess every sin a person has committed in his life and
> then they are told to accept Jesus as their personal savior and they
> say sure why not. Rather than being told the need to confess the
> savior from sin as Lord, they are told to confess sins. rather than
> confessing Jesus as Lord they are told to accept him as a savior. How
> nutty can these money maker pep rallies get?
Yeah, but think of all the stamps they save!?! Then
of course they offer a savings on tapes and books if
you buy them the night of the revival! LOL
>>
>>OTOH, I also believe, that there are those who adamantly deny the
>>Trinity, who believe in the Blood of Christ the begotten Son of God,
>>for their Salvation, and can be accepted as Christians, based on their
>>testimony! They manifest the correct fruit, and they in particular,
>>love the Truth and the Brotherhood of Believers. They may have other
>>issues confused, but this does not exclude them from the Body of
>>Christ!
>
> I am glad to read that, except that I would give more credence to how
> they behave over their testimony. I have seen some people make up
> some real doozies to impress upon people that "they" are changing
> "their" lives by what God did for them. Know what I mean?
I commented on this earlier, and basically agree with
you! I have seen and heard some doozies! The fact is,
it is still in the fruit, and as far as I have ever
read, doozies are not a fruit of the Spirit! :)
JERRY
Again, like Carl, you are reading into the text to put there what you
want to believe.
Where in the bible does it say that belief in the Trinity is essential
for salvation? Show me chapter and verse, please.
JERRY
Yes, not "Believe in the Triune God, and you shall be saved!"
When you post the statements you have made below, you are simply
making an implication that is not supported by the text itself.
Jesus was a man relating to others as a man. When he said "suffer the
children to come unto me," he wasn't telling the people around him
that he was one in three. Likewise, when Jesus said "No one comes to
the Father but through me," he is not saying that you have to come
through the triune god to get to the triune god.
These are statements of belief in a Trinity that are not listed as
part of salvation, either by Jesus or by Paul.
JERRY
And the point that I have made is that, if it's not required by Jesus
for salvation, its' not important.
You can debate all you want whether your god is one god in three or
three gods in one (it's two mints, two mints, two mints in one!) but
none of it matters if Jesus didn't say it was important for salvation.
It's nothing more than someone using their religious beliefs to beat
someone else over the head until they agree with the one performing
the assault.
>
> The Trinity simply signifies the three members of the Godhead. I
> have
> said repeatedly that I could care less whether anyone uses the term
> Trinity, as long as they have the proper understanding of the
> Godhead. I totally agree with you that ALL three are needed in order
> to be saved.
JERRY
That's not what he said. Where does Jesus say that you need to
believe in the Trinity to be saved?
Where does Jesus say that you only enter the kingdom if you can answer
the quiz at the door: "Is there a Trinity, yes or no?" Answering
that yes, she was played by Carrie Anne Moss in the movie The Matrix
is the correct answer!
I don't really care much for these debates, as they are nothing but
"invisible friend" arguments, two people each trying to claim that
their "invisible friend" is the best one.
However, the Trinitarians in this debate have nothing to support their
claim that belief in the Trinity is important ACCORDING TO JESUS.
And therefore, its a moot point without value.
>
> If Jesus is not co-existant, co-equal with the Father, Son of God,
> then you do not have a Savior! His sacrificial death would be empty
> and meaningless!
JERRY
Nonsense. In fact, having a god "sacrifice" himself by dying (but not
really!) is really kind of a meaningless sacrifice, right? I mean,
the point of a "sacrifice" is that someone actually "gives up"
something.
Jesus, according to the biblical literalists, was born as god, lived
in human form BUT WAS REALLY GOD and died on a cross for mankinds
sins, but not really, because he didn't really die.
Therefore, where is the sacrifice?
The best you can hope to claim is that the Resurrection is proof that
Jesus is more than human, but the accounts of the Resurrection Morning
are so screwed up and incompatible that they can't really be true.
>
> If the Holy Spirit is not the third person of the Godhead, you do not
> have the Paraclete. He is the one who teaches us about Jesus!
JERRY
Horsehockey. You learn about Jesus from the accounts of his life,
provided they are true, which they really aren't.
You've learned about Jesus. Quick, how long was his ministry? Three
years, as according to John, or one year as according to the
synoptics?
If this is how you "learn about Jesus," then the paraclete must also
be as mythical as your Risen Savior.
> DORE
> The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead, the
> Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You need ALL three in order to be
> saved. You need the Son, to be forgiven of your sins.
JERRY
Citation, please? Show me WHERE in the bible Jesus says that belief
in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation. I have to admit, I've
read the bible pretty extensively and never found that verse ANYWHERE
in the bible. All I can tell is that someone decided there must be a
Trinity and now tells people that if you don't believe the same way
they do, you don't go to heaven.
So, don't read into the text, don't tell me what the text "means."
which is really nothing more than your interpretation of the text. l I
want you to show me the verse where Jesus says that belief in the
Trinity is a requirement for salvation.
The Son is the only
> way to the Father, which is the goal. The Holy Spirit is God's Spirit and
> power, indwelling in the believer to bring wisdom, knowledge, truth and the
> power of God to overcome sins, evil and grow into the perfection that God
> requires for any soul to enter heaven.
>
> "rogue" <rogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Amused by Jerry! He ask a supposedly sincere question! Why am I not
surprised to find out that he was less than sincere! Smile, seems
that Jerry is an insincere troll. I wonder if his nym was a dead give
away?
He comes into a Christian newsgroup, and then questions the nature of
orthodox Christianity, as if we are the ones who moved the road
signs. I wonder if I should telll him that he took a wrong turn
somewhere to end up here, or let him wander around in his stupor, lost
like a blind man in a maze! I gave him a sort of answer, and now he
is going to set us all straight on what the truth is. Sounds to me
like he has so much of it screwed up, that he never will find his way
out of the maze. Maybe he will run out of gas, or lose all the hot air
that keeps him going, up up and away!
Good bye Rogue, come back some other day when you are trully sincere
and searching for answers, instead of pretending like you already have
them all! Then we can play again! Until then, I know that God loves
you, and I will be praying for you!
THAT is not true. It's what you believe, that all. God cannot die. Jesus
died. If Jesus were eternal then there was NO sacrifice of death and the
trust of Jesus OF God to be resurrected. DUH
Bada Bing! They add to the message of salvation!
> Soggy, think about what you have just said,
Brother, you need to think about what I just said, maybe reread it.
I'm not talking about the working of the Godhead in the salvation process
but rather the simple faith in Christ that is required to be saved. We know,
as believers who have been students of God's word, that the Father calls,
the Spirit convicts, and Jesus saves. But the sinner must put his faith in
Christ. My story pretty much showed the err of adding to the Gospel of
Christ by claiming the sinner must first believe in the divinity of Christ
or the Holy Trinity. Please reread this and tell me what you think, I would
appreciate it very much.
Thank you,
Tbc ...
>
> The Trinity simply signifies the three members of the Godhead. I
> have
> said repeatedly that I could care less whether anyone uses the term
> Trinity, as long as they have the proper understanding of the
> Godhead. I totally agree with you that ALL three are needed in order
> to be saved.
>
>
> If Jesus is not co-existant, co-equal with the Father, Son of God,
> then you do not have a Savior! His sacrificial death would be empty
> and meaningless!
Your letting this fight drag you off the mark my friend.
Show me from God's word where it states plainly
> Bada Bing! They add to the message of salvation!
FUNDY PROMO & SALES ADD ONS
The Promo is "Accept Jesus into your heart and get the free gift of
salvation. The End."
When you accept the Promo you get lumbered with the "Sales Add Ons"
- Join the church
- Join Bible Study
- Join Prayer meetings
- Join your "club" ... Men's Meeting or Women's meeting depending on your
gender (homosexuals and transgendered Christians not welcome)
- attend all regularly
- listen to the sermoan and obey ... or else
- pray regularly
- read your bible regularly
- pay your tithes
- pay your offerings
- pay your love gifts
- volunteer for unpaid work at the church
- evangelise others
- don't attend other churches, they aren't spiritual like we are
- don't associate with your former friends and family if they are not Trew
Kristyuns
- don't participate in art works that are not sanctioned by this church ...
bans may be applicable on certain books, films, music, dance ... check with
the pastor
- never disagree with your pastor, elders, deacons, or any member of a
ministry team ... they are infallible
- vote for conservative Right-wing politicians because the Left is satanic,
of the devil, demonic, nonChristian, antiChristian, secular humanist,
evilooshunist
- etc etc etc etc
Yawn .......
--
My Blog - MARK T - my thoughts on Christianity/ song covers & pics & links
http://www.blognow.com.au/strooth/
FUNDY FUNHOUSE -
http://fundamentalistfunhouse.blogspot.com/
- a resource on the current Fundamentalist Dark Age and Christian
fundamentalism.
My Soundclick Page - download my original songs in mp3 format
http://www.soundclick.com/marktindall
> Soggy, think about what you have just said,
>
> "The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead,
> the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and their interrelationship.
> You need ALL three in order to be saved. The Godhead is of supreme
> importhance! Certainly not just a molehill.
Soggy??? Molehill??? Certainly, my using the term"simply" is NOT referring
to the Godhead being simplistic whatsoever. The argument in the threads were
arguing about the term "trinity" and thus confused about it's verbiage
regarding the Godhead. Instead of placing so much emphasis on the term
"trinity", I was providing the concept that the term was referring to.
cont
> The Devil also has the false gifts of the spirit, especially speaking
> in tongues, and working signs and wonders! I spent time in Mexico,
> and saw and heard the witch doctors with their incantations as they
> cursed God and all those who served God! Yet then they would turn and
> speak to you just as sweet as can be, and call you brother! or sister!
>
I would like to clarify your point about the devil having the gifts of the
spirit, for HE DOES NOT have any part of the Holy Spirit in Him. His
pretense at tongues are NOT tongues at all, but gibberish used to deceive,
for the true gift of tongues, Satan cannot comprehend them. This too is
necessary to be saved, for it is a manifestation in the believer that the
Holy Spirit dwells within them, as well as the power to cast out evil
spirits, as well as denying Satan's temptations within oneself.
Now, I don't know what has corresponded between you and Glenn, however, I
don't quite understand your obsession with him. There are countless people
in these ng's who have false, twisted and erroneous interpretations and
belief systems, and are very hardheaded and steadfast in them. Glenn is
simply one of them. He has been traveling in these ng's for many years and I
have never seen any growth from him, so arguing with Glenn really
accomplishes nothing for he will never change his heart and mind. You can
provide absolute proof to Glenn and it has no affect, so don't let him get
to you. Plant your seeds were you can for whomever may benefit, but don't
expect much change from any of them. Your attempts at bringing truth to the
ignorant is noted and you will be rewarded accordingly and know that you are
doing the will of God and be satisfied with that.
"gatekeeper" <gatekeepe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186627273....@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
The Oneness between the Father and Son is a spiritual empowerment. Jesus
died in the flesh, but He too, never died, his physical body just ceased to
contain it's soul at the cross, but His soul and spirit is eternal and One
with the Father.
"Jude Alexander" <Ca...@thebayou.wet> wrote in message
news:%bHui.7656$2v5....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
The Holy Spirit, the Son and the Father are all three distinct individuals,
as well as one and the same persons for all are God.
"Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
news:r45lb39tt1djvp85h...@4ax.com...
> JERRY
> Citation, please? Show me WHERE in the bible Jesus says that belief
> in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation. I have to admit, I've
> read the bible pretty extensively and never found that verse ANYWHERE
> in the bible. All I can tell is that someone decided there must be a
> Trinity and now tells people that if you don't believe the same way
> they do, you don't go to heaven.
>
> So, don't read into the text, don't tell me what the text "means."
> which is really nothing more than your interpretation of the text. l I
> want you to show me the verse where Jesus says that belief in the
> Trinity is a requirement for salvation.
Jerry, let me ask you this. Is belief in God a requirement for salvation? Is
belief in Jesus Christ a requirement for salvation? Is belief in Jesus words
and commands a requirement for salvation? The answer is "YES" to all of
these questions. If the Father and Son are One and the Holy Spirit is the
Spirit of God, then all three are God, and thus believing in all three is a
requirement for salvation.
John 10:30
30 I and my Father are one.
KJV
Matt 28:19-20
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and,
lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
KJV
John 14:23-26
23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my
words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our
abode with him.
24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear
is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in
my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your
remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
KJV
If you are reading scripture and expect exact verbiage for a belief system,
instead of drinking in it's truths that you are simply skimming over the
Bible and have a superficial faith. The words of the gospels are to be
lived, experienced and imbedded in your heart and mind so that you walk
according to them.
"rogue" <rogu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186650726.5...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
JERRY
I did ask a sincere question. I am trying to make a point.
For months now (and before that, when John Wolf was posting) the
Trinitarians in the group have been saying that you aren't "saved"
unless you agree with them in their interpretation of text.
I ask the question because I want the Trinitarians to see that whether
or not their interpretation of the existence of God as three entities
is true or not, according to the text, it has no bearing on whether or
not someone is "saved."
One of the primary problems with religion is that its' not used to
bring people together. It's used as a club by one group to beat
another group with whom they disagree.
When religious people say they want love, what they really seem to
want is to make the "outsider" an "insider" by making that person like
themselves. There is no tolerance for those who are different, who
believe differently, and the viewpoint that one must believe in the
Trinity to be saved is just one example.
> gatekeeper
> He comes into a Christian newsgroup, and then questions the nature of
> orthodox Christianity, as if we are the ones who moved the road
> signs.
JERRY
First, it's a discussion group, whose topic is Christianity and
Christians. Since I am discussing those topics, I am in the right
place. However, your statement about "orthodox" does indicate that
you are likely politically conservative and I notice that those who
are politically conservative seem to think that free speech only
applies to THEIR speech, never to the speech of those who disagree
with them.
Second, if you read my posts, I don't question "the nature of
orthodox" Christianity with my question about where in the text Jesus
says you must believe in the Trinity to be saved. My own viewpoint is
that the bible cannot be the word of any deity, as it fails to be
historically accurate, fails on prophecy and the books in the bible
contradict each other on a fundamental level when discussing the same
event. Those are flaws that could not happen if the book were the
inspired product of a perfect deity who uses this "word" as a way to
reach out to his/her/its creation.
However, that personal belief is irrelevant to the issues and
questions I raise. If you are unable to answer them, all you have to
say, gatekeeper, is that "I believe what I want to believe in spite of
the fact that the text does not support me."
And then I understand you for what you are. ;-)
> gatekeeper
> I wonder if I should telll him that he took a wrong turn
> somewhere to end up here, or let him wander around in his stupor, lost
> like a blind man in a maze! I gave him a sort of answer, and now he
> is going to set us all straight on what the truth is. Sounds to me
> like he has so much of it screwed up, that he never will find his way
> out of the maze. Maybe he will run out of gas, or lose all the hot air
> that keeps him going, up up and away!
JERRY
Since I have debated Christian fundamentalists and political
conservatives in the forums of Usenet for over ten years now, that
seems unlikely. And, since I have sent many of them running away,
unable to answer the questions that I ask for that same amount of
time, it seems unlikely that your little off-topic rant will have much
effect.
> gatekeeper
> Good bye Rogue, come back some other day when you are trully sincere
> and searching for answers,
JERRY
I take it then, that you are unable to find a single verse in the
bible where either Jesus or Paul says that you MUST believe in the
Trinity to be saved?
Thank you so much for playing. By your response, you prove me
correct, but then I knew you would.
> gatekeeper
> instead of pretending like you already have
> them all! Then we can play again! Until then, I know that God loves
> you, and I will be praying for you!
JERRY
If I were pretending I wouldn't have told you my personal viewpoints.
And your inability to respond to the question posed shows me I
apparently have more of the answers than you. Since that appears to
be the fact, who do you think you can help, when the skeptic knows
more about your bible than you?
> DORE
> Jerry, let me ask you this. Is belief in God a requirement for salvation?
JERRY
That would be implied. You can't be "saved" if there is no deity to
provide "salvation" (which is really silly, since you are being saved
from the wrath of the being who allegedly "saves" you. Kind of like
being told by the Godfather than while he CAN have you "sleep" with
the fishes, he instead will let you go home and sleep with your wife.
Thanks a lot, Dad.)
> DORE
> Is belief in Jesus Christ a requirement for salvation?
JERRY
Again, that would be an implication. If you have to believe that
Jesus is the "Son of God" and that he died for your sins, then belief
in Jesus would be necessary.
> DORE
> Is belief in Jesus words and commands a requirement for salvation? The answer is "YES" to all of
> these questions.
JERRY
And here is where you get into trouble.
> DORE
> If the Father and Son are One and the Holy Spirit is the
> Spirit of God, then all three are God, and thus believing in all three is a
> requirement for salvation.
JERRY
This is the logical fallacy of the Non-Sequiter. None of your
previous statements about belief will lead you to the conclusion that
"Father and Son are One and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God."
This is something that has been claimed without evidence and the
difference between a Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian.
My viewpoint, which I have disclosed, is that IF Jesus DOES NOT SAY
that belief in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation, then
whether the bible god is Triune or not is irrelevant to the question
of salvation. Jesus tells you that you have to come to the Father
through HIM. If Jesus also says he and the Father are one, then
belief in Jesus is the same as belief in god but either way, belief in
Jesus as savior is the only thing that matters, not whether he is
triune.
To claim that you must believe in the Trinity to be saved is simply
nothing more than one group of Christians setting themselves up over
another group of Christians to make themselves feel superior.
>
> John 10:30
> 30 I and my Father are one.
> KJV
JERRY
Which does not mean "literally ONE entity" but that when you speak to
Jesus you also speak to God, as Jesus is God's representative.
>
> Matt 28:19-20
> 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
> Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
JERRY
Again, this does not say that all these entities are the same. But if
you want to take a very literal viewpoint of this part of the bible,
then you are in trouble:
MATTHEW 16 (KJV)
16:27
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his
angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
16:28
Verily I say unto you, THERE BE SOME STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT
TASTE OF DEATH, TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM.
That would indicate that the Second Coming was supposed to happen two
thousand years ago and that Jesus stood you up on prom night.
> DORE
> If you are reading scripture and expect exact verbiage for a belief system,
> instead of drinking in it's truths that you are simply skimming over the
> Bible and have a superficial faith.
JERRY
The problem with that is, it's too often a euphemism for "believe
first, rationalize later," as opposed to "read first, test to see if
it's true and then believe because the book has proven to be true."
Jerry, I will tell you what, you answer a question for
me, and then I will be glad to answer your questions
about the Trinity! I will even tell you the one
question I am going to ask you, and then you decide
whether you want to hear more from me! If you choose
not to answer, that can be the end of the discussion!
Now I will want a thorough, and thoughtful answer as
you have indicated you are capable of in your writing
above! No silly, half-ass quips, if you are serious
about your questions regarding the Trinity!
My question is, "What do you mean by being "saved" as
you have used it above in your question to me?"
rogue wrote:
> On Aug 9, 3:29 am, "Dore" <dorewilliam...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > "rogue" <rogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1186580076.5...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > Yet, it still doesn't answer the question: where in the bible does it
> > > say you must believe in the Trinity to be saved?
> >
> > > Where does Jesus say "you come to the Trinity through me, or you come
> > > to the Father through the Trinity or us or we or we are legion, etc
> > > etc."
> >
> > > Until you answer that question, you are making mountains out of
> > > insignificant molehills.
> >
> > > Until you answer that question, the reality (or not) of the Trinity is
> > > unimportant.
>
> > DORE
> > The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead, the
> > Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You need ALL three in order to be
> > saved. You need the Son, to be forgiven of your sins.
>
> JERRY
> Citation, please? Show me WHERE in the bible Jesus says that belief
> in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation.
It is impossible to know what ANYONE ever 'Said' over two thousand years ago.
Do you people ever THINK ?
EVERYTHING in your book was written by humans based on what they wanted to put
over- PERIOD
Your list is pretty much right on the mark, but, then again, can you "hep"
it but be anything except on the "mark?" :)
Did you actually and truly mentally absorb what I said? If there were no
REAL death of Jesus, then the SACRIFICE of having to face death and RELY ON
GOD (not Himself) to raise Him from the dead AND be the firstborn of the
resurrection is null and void.
> gatekeeper
> Jerry, I will tell you what, you answer a question for
> me, and then I will be glad to answer your questions
> about the Trinity! I will even tell you the one
> question I am going to ask you, and then you decide
> whether you want to hear more from me! If you choose
> not to answer, that can be the end of the discussion!
> Now I will want a thorough, and thoughtful answer as
> you have indicated you are capable of in your writing
> above! No silly, half-ass quips, if you are serious
> about your questions regarding the Trinity!
>
> My question is, "What do you mean by being "saved" as
> you have used it above in your question to me?"
>
JERRY
The same thing YOU mean when you say "saved." It means that one has
had their sins forgiven and are recognized by God to enter the Kingdom
of Heaven.
Now, the only question I have, and so far you have not answered it, is
where in the bible does it say belief in a Triune God is required to
be saved? Please, book, chapter and verse.
Thanks
Sorry Jerry, this is not an acceptable answer, since
you do not know what I mean when I say "Saved."
Then you continue to define the word saved, by
introducing other words which you have not defined! ie,
Sins
Forgiven
recognized
God
enter
Kingdom
Heaven
Now I am not asking you to define these to avoid
answering your question, but that inorder to answer you
completely we need to be sure we are on the same
wavelength! This is especially important, when you are
trying to understand the word Trinity, since it is a
very powerful descriptive word that incorporates a lot
of visual concepts!
So I must restate my question, what do you mean by,
"belief in a Triune God is required to be saved?" And
in particular the word "saved."
I am centered on this word, because I believe it is one
of the most misunderstood words in the Bible. Many use
it with out understanding it, but it is the stage or
platform which all the other concepts of redemption are
based on! If you do not understand this little word,
how can you possibly understand a word like the
Trinity, and all it entails!
GK,
I have been communicating with Jerry for quite some time and while he
and I have very different belief systems; he does know what "saved"
means and he does know sections of the Bible better than many
Christians that post to the groups. He is not a novice, so I would
not write off what he says without knowing for sure that he is wrong.
Jerry was (and still is as far as I am concerned) saved and a
fundamentalist who professed himself to be an atheist; but recently
has been calling himself an agnostic, and more recently a skeptic.
If you continue to be honest with him, he will give you good responses
which will reflect his honest views. He is a much more honorable man
than Carl. Jerry stands against hypocrites and hypocricy which is why
he has been asking Carl and those like Carl that came before Carl the
same question. Where does it say in the Bible that a person must
believe in the Trinity to be saved? Jerry has asked the same question
of all those who have presented themselves as hypocrites from Jason
Gastridge, to John Wolf, to Carl McCaskey and other pretenders in
between.
By the way, didn't Jerry already mention being saved from the wrath to
come? Hasn't he already defined what being saved means? I won't say
what sozo means so you can get your answer from Jerry. Just don't
underestimate Jerry Rogue who on occassion has demonstrated more
compassion and love than many of the Christians that post to the
newsgroups. Over the years I have come to think of him as a friend,
despite our theological differences. He has been and will continue to
be in my prayers. If he ever comes back to the Lord Jesus Christ; he
would be a wonderful ambassador.
Same goes for Carl who has the zeal; but lacks the knowledge and
wisdom that comes with obedience.
BB
Thank you. You explained it well.
The circle is a perfect square. See how easy it was to write that? I'm
going to believe it no matter what anybody sez....
>"Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
>news:r45lb39tt1djvp85h...@4ax.com...
>> Actually, the Holy Spirit is God (one of God's names or titles) and
>> holy spirit is the gift or agent of God. The problem is that Bible
>> editors added "the" and capitalized holy and spirit to make the gift
>> God so much that the average reader doesn't know what a passage is
>> talking about unless he cross checks it with the Greek. Here's the
>> easy way to understand the difference. The Holy Spirit has His
>> habitation in the heavens while holy spirit is at work on the earth in
>> the ages. The Holy Spirit is God the Giver while holy spirit is the
>> gift. More often than not when the Bible says the Holy Ghost (Spirit)
>> (God the Giver) the Greek reads (holy spirit) the gift (52 of 79
>> times, that's 58%).
>
>The Holy Spirit, the Son and the Father are all three distinct individuals,
>as well as one and the same persons for all are God.
No Dore. I will try to explain this so that may better appreciate the
accuracy of the word of God. In the Greek "the holy spirit" would
read "to (article) pneuma (noun) hagion (adjective)" (the spirit
holy) because in Greek the article is put before the noun and the
adjective is put after the noun it modifies. In English the article
comes before the noun it modifies so the editors had to move the
adjective from behind the noun to the front of the noun after the
definite article. Hence, the correct way to translate "to pneuma
hagion" is "the holy spirit" where "holy" is an adjective and spirit
is a common noun; just like in the Greek.
However, the definite article when it occurs in the Greek before a
noun emphasizes the noun. For the sake of illustration, you could say
that putting the definite article before pneuma would require pneuma
to be spelled Pneuma; hence a change from common noun to proper noun
(but not in every case). Spirit with a capital "S" is God while
spirit without the capital letter is some other spirit of one of the
various kinds. So it is with the word God, which may be capitalized
or not capitalized dependent on whether it is used as a proper noun.
The definite article must agree in case, number, and gender with the
noun. This is called concord. The definite article is an obvious
indicator for identifying the syntactic (grammatical) relationships
between words.
When the editors add the definite article "the" without placing it in
italics; that is a fallacy of accent where they have added to the word
of God what God did not authorize them to add. The LITV corrected
this problem most of the time in connection with the word "sprit" by
placing "the" in italics. Other version editors which knew of the
problem failed to correct it in their versions.
The reason they add "the" is so that they can capitalize the words
"holy" and "spirit." This is also a fallacy of accent where
capitalization is used to change the part of speech and in effect
change the word of God by changing the sense of the words. They
change the adjective holy to a proper noun and the common noun spirit
to a proper noun which represents God the Giver.
You should understand that most version editors are Trinitarian. What
they do is Triniarianize passages so that their readers will think
what they want them to think.
This leads to the next fallacy of accent committed by the Trinitarian
editors. The word set "to pneuma to hagion" is the strongest form
because the definite article occurs before the noun pneuma and the
adjective hagion. In Greek adjectives are changed to nouns by putting
the definite article in front of them. Therefore, "to (article)
pneuma (noun) to (article) hagion (noun)" is the strongest form and
should be translated "the spirit the holy". What the translators did
was change the noun "holy" to an adjective, place it before spirit,
and then convert both holy and spirit to proper nouns while omitting
the second article. This fallacy of accent is an accent by omission
and a fallacy of accent by changing parts of speech.
The next fallacy of accent is translating neuter pronouns into
masculine pronouns with regard to spirit. Spirit is always neuter and
since concord requires that a noun and pronoun must agree in gender, a
neuter pronoun should always be selected; i.e, that or which; never
"he".
The next fallacy of accent has to do with the rendering of the Greek
preposition with the wrong English preposition. The two most common
fallacies are the rendering of the Greek "en" (in) as "with" and the
rendering of the Greek pronoun "ek" (of) as by. This is more
complicated; but goes like this. When the genitive preposition "ek"
occurs with the genitive form of pneuma; it should be translated "of"
to denote that spirit originated from within something else; usually
God where the word God is genitive masculine singular. In the case of
"en" which is always dative and is used with pneuma in the dative
case, the sense is "in" as in "inside" and should be translated "in"
instead of with. The following two examples will suffice.
Mat 3:11 KJV
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh
after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
The word "with" in both cases is from the Greek dative "en" which
means "in". Did John sprinkle baptize (with) or immerse baptize (in)?
Would Jesus sprinkle with spirit or immerse in spirit. All of the
veses connected with this one including the one in Mar and the two in
Acts are rendered "with" where they should read "in". Jesus did not
baptize people with God; but in spirit. There is no definite article
in the Greek before pneuma so the text shoudl read "baptize you with
holy spirit" (the gift of God, not God).
Mat 1:18 KJV
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother
Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found
with child of the Holy Ghost.
Again, the editors added the definite article which is not in the
Greek without placing it in italics and capitalized hol and spirit to
change them to proper nouns. In this case they correctly translated
"ek" as "of" (genitive case). Pneuma and hagion are also in the
genitive case. There are those who put this verse with Luke 1:35 and
claim that God had sex with the woman. They do this because "the Holy
Ghost" is God the giver so they read "God" when they see "the Holy
Ghost". The text should read "with child of holy spirit" which is the
operation of the gift of God in the creation.
Now look at how the NASB and LITV translate the same verse:
Mat 1:18 NASB
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had
been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to
be with child by the Holy Spirit.
Mat 1:18 LITV
And the birth of Jesus Christ was this way (for His mother Mary had
been betrothed to Joseph) before the coming together of them, she was
found having {babe} in womb by {the} Holy Spirit.
Here is the definition for "ek":
The preposition "ek" occurs only in the genitive case and denotes
motion from the interior. It is used of time, place, and origin. It
means out from, as distinguished from apo , which means off, or away
from. Ek marks the more immediate origin, while apo marks the more
remote origin; of expressing the intermediate meanings.
The preposition translated "by" is usually "dia" which means through
or "sun" which means proximity to. Sun giverns only the dative case
and is ruled out because pneuma is in the gentive. Dia governs the
genitive and accusative case, but not the dative. God was smart
enough to know that He had to genitive case prepositions that he could
use with spirit in the verse and chose "ek"; not "dia". Hence the KJV
is correct and the NASB and LITV are wrong. But notice that the LITV
did put "the" in italics while the KJV and NASB did not.
So, there you have it Dore. Trinitarians have been bamboozled for
centuries by incorrectly translated versions. Here is what is really
sad; all one has to do is read the verses in context and they can see
that "spirit" applies to the Giver or the gift. But people don't do
that. They see "the Holy Ghost" and assume that the version is
correct and end up believing wrong doctrine.
The Holy Spirit is God the Giver whose habitation is in the
heavenlies; not on the earth in the creation and the ages which is
contained by God. The holy spirit is the gift or agent of God at work
in the creation and the ages and is separate from and not equal to God
because it is smaller than God and able to fit into the creation
contained in God. All you got to do to see this is work the three
hundred plust usages of spirit in the New Covenant; or wait a few days
and I will publish all the verses showing how each shoudl be correctly
translated.
What I have told you is taught by Trinitarians. All I did was borrow
from what I learned from them and expand it beyond the 52 of 89 verses
to all the verses; and added the stuff about fallacies of accent.
God is the Father the Creator of time, the heavens and the earth and
all that is in them. Jesus Christ is the Son of God whose human body
was made when the woman became pregnant by the agent of God which is
holy spirit. Thirty years later, the Holy Spirit Who is God sent His
spirit like as a dove and it rested on Jesus. At that time God
announced that Jesus was His Son; not before that. The holy spirit is
the gift or agent of God that operates in the creation and the ages.
The three are not equal in size, in power, in authority, or form.
There is no such thing as a Trinity except in the imaginations of
men's minds. Every verse that a Trinitarian can use to prove a
Trinity I can show it does not by rightly dividing the word of truth.
I figure that God is a lot smarter than me. I figure that if God
wanted me to believe in a Trinity he would devote a section of
scripture to speaking about it. He did not because it is not.
Hopefully I didn't make any errors in the above which I did on the
fly. I will be much more careful when I prepare the final post on the
subject. I have studied this stuff for many years. I began my
studies as a Trinitarian and I use Trinitarians as my sources.
The real Trinitarians, the honest ones that don't teach you have to
believe in the Trinity to be saved; the real scholars who udnerstand
the Scriptures will tell you it is a matter of faith. The wannabe
Trinitarian warriors such as Carl, Weatherly, Wolf, Gastrich, and the
like have never really studied the subject from the word of God. They
have cherry picked their teachers and accepted only those bits of
information that tickle their ears that they think they can use as
weapons to hurt people. The real Trinitarians were and are men and
women that love God and God's people who strive to help others
understand and believe the word of God.
So, there you go. You have some food for thought. Accept it or
reject it. Nothing I said to you was disrespectful towards you.
BB
JERRY
Just what I say. You and other Trinitarians in the group are saying
that someone is not "saved," unless they believe in the Trinity. My
position is that, since the bible does not say that this belief is
required for salvation, you can argue the "true nature" of god all you
want, but there is nowhere in the bible where Jesus says it's required
to be saved.
>
> I am centered on this word, because I believe it is one
> of the most misunderstood words in the Bible. Many use
> it with out understanding it, but it is the stage or
> platform which all the other concepts of redemption are
> based on! If you do not understand this little word,
> how can you possibly understand a word like the
> Trinity, and all it entails!
JERRY
Besides being a former fundie myself?
Well, if you are looking to take it to the nth degree, then the phrase
would point to being "raptured," or protected by God. This leads
inevitably to Heaven but more immediately it saves you from God's
wrath on what is often referred to as Judgment Day. (Which is another
reason I think it's a dumb concept. You are praying to your God not
to destroy his creation just because he can. Kind of like Thanking
the Godfather for not making you sleep with the fishes, just because
he can.
Trinity is the concept that you have three gods, three gods, three
gods in one, that Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit are all one entity
and yet also three, a contradictory concept that christians have no
problem believing in.
The Trinity itself didn't come into being until much later past Jesus'
alleged teachings. In fact, I think the first mention of a Trinity
was like late second century or perhaps even later. To the early
Christians it was not even considered. Once it caught on though, it
became the basis for lots of invisible friend arguments that are of
little or no consequence. Like I said, you can argue all you want the
"true nature of God," as triune or not. The fact that Jesus didn't
set it as a prerequisite for being saved makes it an academic point.
Let the scholars argue it. It's not important in the overall scheme
of things.
If Jesus/God/HissySpit loves his creation and wants it to come unto
him, then their belief in Jesus as the Son of God who sacrificed his
life for theirs is sufficient. St. Peter won't be standing at the
gate with a one line quiz: "Is God a god of three in one or a god of
one?"
JERRY
Why, thank you, BB. I also consider you a friend, though a misguided
one. ;-) BTW, I won't be coming back. My beliefs (or lack thereof)
continue to evolve and change, but nowhere in there do I see a chance
that I would embrace the bible, a book I have shown to be wrong
numerous times and therefore not the inspired word of any deity. As I
told a friend, I am not sure if there is a deity out there, or if
everything started off from a big bang or that big bang was a creation
vehicle but one thing I am absolutely positive of is that the bible is
not the word of any god.
> On Aug 10, 6:22 pm, gatekeeper <gatekeeper.eastg...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 06:31:11 -0700, rogue wrote:
snip
>>
>> So I must restate my question, what do you mean by,
>> "belief in a Triune God is required to be saved?" And
>> in particular the word "saved."
>
> JERRY
> Just what I say. You and other Trinitarians in the group are saying
> that someone is not "saved," unless they believe in the Trinity.
No, I have not said this! If others have I cannot
speak for them. I only can speak for myself! Please do
not lump me together with them either!
> My position is that, since the bible does not say that this belief is
> required for salvation, you can argue the "true nature" of god all you
> want, but there is nowhere in the bible where Jesus says it's required
> to be saved.
This depends on what you mean by saved, hence this is
why I ask for your definition! Earlier when I said, I
sort of answered you, I was not making a serious
attempt to uncover your hidden agenda, or to share my
deepest thoughts on an important and controversial
subject! Truthfully I figured you are a troll, and I
was purposefully feeding the troll a very limited and
specific snack! A snack which was intended to make you
sick and throw up, which you promptly did!:(
I did not do this to be mean or spiteful, but to expose
your true intent, which led to my response in which I
said if you ask sincere questions, I would be willing
to answer, if you answered my mine! The fact that we
are still here should indicate to you a willingness on
my part to recognize your sincere interest!
I also recognize that as BB pointed out you have an
agenda, and a specific interest in the subject of the
Trinity in particular. The fact that you were a
fundementalist, and now have strayed from that
position, to where you are now, does not surprise me,
nor particularly disturb me!
You mention having been in the "group," which because
of the number of cross-posted groups in this thread,
does not really say much. I post primarily in ACC.
Where you are coming from is not so apparent, so I
should not make any specific assumptions. However I
have not seen you posting specifically in ACC, and so I
have no previous history with you to understand your
background of beliefs and academic interests and
intellectual activities!
On the basis of ACC, the assumption is that a person
posting has a sincere interest in, and a general
understanding of Christian doctrines. Now obviously
this is not always the case, but it is a starting
point. In this thread the starting point is even more
vague, hence my willingness to continue the
conversation if we are able to identify a mutually
acceptable starting point!
>>
>> I am centered on this word, because I believe it is one
>> of the most misunderstood words in the Bible. Many use
>> it with out understanding it, but it is the stage or
>> platform which all the other concepts of redemption are
>> based on! If you do not understand this little word,
>> how can you possibly understand a word like the
>> Trinity, and all it entails!
In your previous paragraph, you said, "My position is
that, since the bible does not say that this belief is
required for salvation, you can argue the "true nature"
of god all you want, but there is nowhere in the bible
where Jesus says it's required to be saved."
In this statement you make reference to the bible, but
then you also have said that you question using it as a
valid reference book! The question I have for you, is
if you do not believe that the bible is a valid
reference source, then why do you care what it says or
does not say about anything, and in particular the
Trinity!
Going even further, since the term Trinity is usually
used in a biblical or religious/theological discussion,
then why are you interested at all, other than a
general academic interest! It would be as if you are
interested in saving us from being misguided, from a
force or issue that does not really exist, except
outside of our own minds! IOTW, why are you on this
particular crusade to save believers from the
"crippling" affect of believing in the Trinity!
>
> JERRY
> Besides being a former fundie myself?
>
> Well, if you are looking to take it to the nth degree, then the phrase
> would point to being "raptured," or protected by God. This leads
> inevitably to Heaven but more immediately it saves you from God's
> wrath on what is often referred to as Judgment Day. (Which is another
> reason I think it's a dumb concept. You are praying to your God not
> to destroy his creation just because he can. Kind of like Thanking
> the Godfather for not making you sleep with the fishes, just because
> he can.
Now we are getting somewhere, thank you for clarifying
your position! In as much as you identify yourself as
a former fundie, that helps alot. Also you mention the
"rapture", saved from God's wrath, to Heaven, on
Judgement Day, in which God destroys his creation
because he can! These are as you indicated, very basic
fundementalist terms and ideas, when it comes to being
saved!
I should point out to you, since you do not know me,
that though I am definitely a believer, I am not looked
upon in ACC as a standard issue fundementalist, some
would even question whether I am even a believer. So
what I say here you do not need to expect to hear a
fundementalist position, or hold them resposible for
either. :)
Most folks, when they refer to being saved, they are
referring to the primary issue of having their sins
forgiven, and making it into heaven by the skin of
their teeth on judgement day, as you have described
above. Considering that I believe that the scriptures
say that he knows His sheep, and calls them by name,
and saves them, then I do not know that we have a whole
lot to do with becoming his sheep. We either are, or
are not, and what we believe about anything including
the Trinity has very little to do with being saved. On
this point I would probably have to agree with you, if
that is how you define being saved!
This is more a matter of what we are being saved from,
and our believing is only a sign that we are indeed the
sheep of God! Yes, we can claim that we are saved, and
even a small child can make this claim or Joe who just
believed, they are saved, and yet have very little
understanding of the deeper issues of our relationship
with God! Many live for years as believers, and never
get beyond this point! Like the children of Israel,
they have escaped from Egypt, to go around and around
and around the Sinai Desert, but never to enter the
Promised Land!
This brings me to what I mean by salvation, or being
saved. I see salvation as a process, which started
long before we chose to believe in God, brings us to
the point of making that choice, continues operating in
us and through us as we live our lives in the growing
knowledge of God, and then death and our eventual
reward in Heaven is a natural extension and expression
of that Life lived in the knowledge of God. This is a
matter of what we are saved to! This is being saved to
enter the Promised Land!
We are saved to having a living viable, vital
relationship with God on a daily basis, and in this
understanding of being saved, I believe it is centrally
important to understand the nature and relationship of
the Godhead, which the term Trinity has been developed
to briefly and effectively encapsulate that definition!
It is not absolutely important to use the term Trinity
even in this understanding of salvation. It is just a
tool, sort of like a jack is a tool we would use to
change a tire on the car. It is not that it cannot be
done without the jack, but it makes it much easier.
All tools, including theological tools, were developed
to facilitate completing a specific job.
Before the hammer, there were stones, etc. Before the
computer, we may have been trying to communicate using
smoke signals. Hopefully the puter has made things a
little easier. :)
However tools can be abused and used for the wrong
purpose, and because they are powerful, they can be
used powerfully to do damage. The word Trinity can be,
and has been powerfully abused, and typically by people
who should care, and know better. That does not meant
the tool is bad, anymore than because someone uses a
hammer or stone to bash in someones head, that all
hammers and stones are bad, and should be no longer
used, and infact rejected and destroyed.
>
> Trinity is the concept that you have three gods, three gods, three
> gods in one, that Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit are all one entity
> and yet also three, a contradictory concept that christians have no
> problem believing in.
>
> The Trinity itself didn't come into being until much later past Jesus'
> alleged teachings. In fact, I think the first mention of a Trinity
> was like late second century or perhaps even later. To the early
> Christians it was not even considered. Once it caught on though, it
> became the basis for lots of invisible friend arguments that are of
> little or no consequence. Like I said, you can argue all you want the
> "true nature of God," as triune or not. The fact that Jesus didn't
> set it as a prerequisite for being saved makes it an academic point.
> Let the scholars argue it. It's not important in the overall scheme
> of things.
Agreed, Jesus did not use the term, but that does not
mean that we should not use the term. Jesus did not
refer to jet airplanes either, and yet I seriously
doubt that you use an ox cart to go visit Aunt Tilly
who lives way across the country.
Actually the fact that traveling in jet airplanes has
caught on so much that airlines are more like Gray
Hound buses in the Sky these days, is a strong
indicator that ox cart travel is not all it is cracked
up to be. Similarly, the fact that the term Trinity
has caught on, is an endorsement of its use as a
powerful and effective theological tool!
Sadly there are those, who have used the tool to
hold-up and mug the unsuspecting passerby. Religion as
a whole is a powerful tool that has been abused
regardless of the Label attached. This is more a
commentary on the heart of man, than on the tool
itself!
Jesus did not use the Term specifically, nor the term
religion, but there was no doubt that He was familiar
with the root causes and issues regarding both! If we
are to say anything about Jesus, and these terms, let
us seek to hear what He had to say first!
>
> If Jesus/God/HissySpit loves his creation and wants it to come unto
> him, then their belief in Jesus as the Son of God who sacrificed his
> life for theirs is sufficient. St. Peter won't be standing at the
> gate with a one line quiz: "Is God a god of three in one or a god of
> one?"
You are again correct on this one! I agree, St. Peter
won't be standing at the Gate testing us, anymore than
he is testing us now about whether we know the correct
answers to some quiz. Some study their bibles like
they are cramming for a quiz tomorrow in which they
have to prove to God and man how religious and proper
they are.
I prefer to read my Bible, like a love letter from God,
who says He wants to meet me in a private place, where
we really can get to know each other, and appreciate
how He made us to have fellowship with Him!
Religion, is man reaching up to God, usually while
standing on the neck of those who are beneath us!
Christianity is God reaching down to man, usually while
we are on our knees, lifting up others to Him!
I appreciate the opportunity to sincerely share with
you, and to lift you up! If you have further
questions, or if I have not made myself clear, please
feel free to continue this conversation as you desire!
Thank you for this fine example of christian honesty. First you
tell him that you'll answer his question after he answers yours,
then when he does, suddenly you have twenty more. If you had any
integrity at all you'd either answer his question or admit that
you can't.
--
Greg
----
http://www.spencerbooksellers.com
greg00 -at- spencersoft -dot- com
> GK
> No, I have not said this! If others have I cannot
> speak for them. I only can speak for myself! Please do
> not lump me together with them either!
JERRY
You didn't post this?
> The Trinity simply signifies the three members of the Godhead. I
> have said repeatedly that I could care less whether anyone uses the term
> Trinity, as long as they have the proper understanding of the
> Godhead. I totally agree with you that ALL three are needed in order
> to be saved.
>
> > My position is that, since the bible does not say that this belief is
> > required for salvation, you can argue the "true nature" of god all you
> > want, but there is nowhere in the bible where Jesus says it's required
> > to be saved.
>
> This depends on what you mean by saved, hence this is
> why I ask for your definition! Earlier when I said, I
> sort of answered you, I was not making a serious
> attempt to uncover your hidden agenda,
JERRY
I have no hidden agenda. I am the most transparent person you are
likely to meet in Usenet. I'm not trying to save you from Satan or
even yourself. I have no belief in Hell, nor do I fear death, and
don't feel you should be afraid either.
> gk
> or to share my
> deepest thoughts on an important and controversial
> subject! Truthfully I figured you are a troll, and I
> was purposefully feeding the troll a very limited and
> specific snack! A snack which was intended to make you
> sick and throw up, which you promptly did!:(
JERRY
Actually, it looks to me like I simply responded to your non-issues
point by point to show they weren't valid. No angst, no anger, just
showing your argument/statements carried no weight.
I suppose since it's a text forum and there is no vocal inflection or
facial expression, you will read what you want to see into my post,
but trust me, I've dealt with far worse than you in my ten years on
Usenet.
> gk
> I did not do this to be mean or spiteful, but to expose
> your true intent, which led to my response in which I
> said if you ask sincere questions, I would be willing
> to answer, if you answered my mine! The fact that we
> are still here should indicate to you a willingness on
> my part to recognize your sincere interest!
JERRY
Well, remember the purpose. I have no "sincere interest" in someone
else's interpretation of a book I consider to be nothing more than
goatherder mythology. I am not going to convert to a Christian
viewpoint. I've both been there, done that and sacrificed the T-shirt
on the altar of fact.
I ask the question to expose the flaw in the viewpoint of the
Trinitarian: that only through belief in the Trinity is one "saved,"
regardless of how you want to define "saved."
It's no different than when I point out the contradiction between Paul
and Jesus where Paul says you are saved by grace/faith alone and Jesus
says that grace/faith is not enough, that you must do good works, and
extols his followers to give up all their earthly possessions and
follow him. When I find someone proselytizing in a newsgroup and
stating things that aren't true or contradict other statements in the
bible, I don't have a problem with pointing out the flaws in their
logic.
You can consider me a troll if you like. I certainly at times
considered you one. Being a troll is dependent on purpose, and your
response to me was quite troll-ish. However, even a troll can make a
valid point, and attacking me as a troll and not addressing the point
is simply attacking the messenger rather than the message. I asked a
valid question to make a point. It's a point that most Trinitarians
either miss as they attempt to rationalize their beliefs or ignore
altogether as I raise issues they can't answer without admitting that
there really is no textual support for their claims.
> gk
> I also recognize that as BB pointed out you have an
> agenda, and a specific interest in the subject of the
> Trinity in particular. The fact that you were a
> fundementalist, and now have strayed from that
> position, to where you are now, does not surprise me,
> nor particularly disturb me!
JERRY
It shouldn't, as no one bears any responsibility for that but me and
had I not read the bible, it wouldn't have happened, but I did, I have
and I can see the problems with the text. However, my "agenda" is not
to tell someone not to read the bible, but simply to quit using their
bible as a club for their prejudices. I hate stupidity masquerading
as godliness. I despise bullies.
> gk
> You mention having been in the "group," which because
> of the number of cross-posted groups in this thread,
> does not really say much.
JERRY
I also mentioned being a regular debater on Usenet for over ten years.
> gk
> I post primarily in ACC.
> Where you are coming from is not so apparent, so I
> should not make any specific assumptions. However I
> have not seen you posting specifically in ACC, and so I
> have no previous history with you to understand your
> background of beliefs and academic interests and
> intellectual activities!
JERRY
No, I respond to these posts from free.christians. It has a little
less traffic and I post usually via web browser through Google rather
than a newsreader. The downside is that Google lets you post to no
more than five groups. When I post something new, it's to ONE group,
the f.c group I just mentioned.
> gk
> On the basis of ACC, the assumption is that a person
> posting has a sincere interest in, and a general
> understanding of Christian doctrines. Now obviously
> this is not always the case, but it is a starting
> point. In this thread the starting point is even more
> vague, hence my willingness to continue the
> conversation if we are able to identify a mutually
> acceptable starting point!
JERRY
It's still a fallacious argument. A "christian newsgroup" in Usenet
is not for Christians only. It's a discussion group where the topic
is Christianity and Christians. My point regarding that still
stands. It's no different than the Christians who go to talk.origins
to argue Intelligent Design or argue theology in alt.atheism. They
are discussion groups. If you want to exclude someone from giving
their opinion, do it in your church. What I love about Usenet is that
it's the ultimate free speech forum.
Usenet is essentially nothing more than a global virtual "Speaker's
Corner" where everyone is free to post their viewpoints, argue,
debate, etc.
>
>
>
> >> I am centered on this word, because I believe it is one
> >> of the most misunderstood words in the Bible. Many use
> >> it with out understanding it, but it is the stage or
> >> platform which all the other concepts of redemption are
> >> based on! If you do not understand this little word,
> >> how can you possibly understand a word like the
> >> Trinity, and all it entails!
>
> In your previous paragraph, you said, "My position is
> that, since the bible does not say that this belief is
> required for salvation, you can argue the "true nature"
> of god all you want, but there is nowhere in the bible
> where Jesus says it's required to be saved."
> gk
> In this statement you make reference to the bible, but
> then you also have said that you question using it as a
> valid reference book!
JERRY
I use the bible because it's what Trinitarians are attempting to read
into to justify their statements to non-Trinitarians. If that's the
playground and I want to play, that's where I need to get my
information.
Does that mean I believe the bible to be historically accurate? Of
course not. Egyptologists tells us that slavery as depicted in the
bible didn't exist at the time of the Exodus story. Archaeology shows
that the walls of Jericho were already down when Joshua arrived
there. There is no doubt that the bible is not true historically. In
a country (Egypt) where we still have shopping lists saved from our
historical digs, there is no mention of the Israelites during the time
of the Exodus story. In an area of the Sinai where we have discovered
the remains of Roman encampments of only a few hundred people, we can
find no trace of the encampments of a few million during the 40 years
Wildnerness Wandering? Very, very difficult to believe.
Does it mean that I believe the bible to be true on prophecy? No.
King Nebuchadnezzar failed to take the island city of Tyre as
prophecied by Ezekiel in Ez chapter 26. Jesus failed to return during
the lifetimes of his disciples as he told them he would.
Do I find the bible to be consistent enough when multiple books
describe the same even to consider that those events happened? No,
the Resurrection morning account from the four gospels would dispel
any notion of the bible being truthful. Also, the discrepancies
between the book of John and the three synoptic gospels would be more
than enough to cast doubts on the mind of anyone who has actually read
them.
> gk
> The question I have for you, is
> if you do not believe that the bible is a valid
> reference source, then why do you care what it says or
> does not say about anything, and in particular the
> Trinity!
JERRY
Already asked and answered but to repeat: I don't like bullies and I
get tired of Trinitarians using their belief to say that a non-
Trinitarian is not "saved." It's a flaw to make such a statement when
the NT lays down what it takes to be "saved," according to Jesus and
Jesus doesn't mention belief in the Trinity as a requirement.
I've mentioned "invisible friend" arguments, where each person argues
that their invisible friend is better than the other persons. I find
that childish. When I debate, I tend to debate the major question:
if the bible is not true, how can it be the word of any deity? If the
bible is inspired by a perfect, omniscient and omnipotent deity who
sees the falling of a sparrow, who knows past, present and future, why
does the book contain so many errors, and not just copyist errors
which I would expect, but major problems within the text itself?
>
> Going even further, since the term Trinity is usually
> used in a biblical or religious/theological discussion,
> then why are you interested at all, other than a
> general academic interest! It would be as if you are
> interested in saving us from being misguided, from a
> force or issue that does not really exist, except
> outside of our own minds! IOTW, why are you on this
> particular crusade to save believers from the
> "crippling" affect of believing in the Trinity!
JERRY
Why do you care? It's a discussion forum and I find the personalities
and the discussion interesting. I am a citizen of a country that
guarantees free speech to it's citizens, though there are certain
citizens that would deny me that right. ;-)
JERRY
There are as many types of Christians as there are people who claim
the title. That's not what I am angling for. And, if you do believe
that you can be saved and not be a Trinitarian, then we have very
little on that subject to discuss.
JERRY
Then we probably don't have very much to discuss on the topic, as our
definition of "saved" doesn't really mesh, nor is yours the definition
of "saved" being thrown out by the fundamentalists and evangelicals
posting their hateful statements in f.c.
JERRY
Invalid metaphor: Jesus wouldn't be mentioning jet airplanes unless
they had something to do with being saved, which is allegedly what he
came to earth to facilitate.
Jesus came to earth to be the sacrifice, to be The Way The truth and
the Life and therefore, what Jesus has to say is very important to the
believer.
Which is why I take umbrage to those who insist that belief in the
Trinity as "essential doctrine" is a requirement for salvation.
As I've mentioned before, among Christians who want to hold "invisible
friend" discussions, it's a fun thing to knock about, though not a
major deal, but when you start telling people that they were wrong in
their beliefs, that they didn't get "saved" and won't be with God in
heaven at the end for eternal life because they don't accept your
particular foibles in interpretation of text, I get annoyed.
Like I said, it's simply a club for one believer to use to hit another
believer with. That makes the Trinitarians bullies, from my
experience in free.christians, and it makes me want to respond.
>
>
> Sadly there are those, who have used the tool to
> hold-up and mug the unsuspecting passerby. Religion as
> a whole is a powerful tool that has been abused
> regardless of the Label attached. This is more a
> commentary on the heart of man, than on the tool
> itself!
JERRY
At last, something we can agree on.
> gk
> Jesus did not use the Term specifically, nor the term
> religion, but there was no doubt that He was familiar
> with the root causes and issues regarding both! If we
> are to say anything about Jesus, and these terms, let
> us seek to hear what He had to say first!
JERRY
I seriously doubt that Jesus had any use for religion. I suspect he
was more interested in spirituality. He had no use for the Pharisees
in his day and exhorted his followers to pray privately not publicly.
He wanted their spiritual beliefs to be private and personal, not
something to aggrandize themselves to others.
>
>
>
> > If Jesus/God/HissySpit loves his creation and wants it to come unto
> > him, then their belief in Jesus as the Son of God who sacrificed his
> > life for theirs is sufficient. St. Peter won't be standing at the
> > gate with a one line quiz: "Is God a god of three in one or a god of
> > one?"
>
> You are again correct on this one! I agree, St. Peter
> won't be standing at the Gate testing us, anymore than
> he is testing us now about whether we know the correct
> answers to some quiz. Some study their bibles like
> they are cramming for a quiz tomorrow in which they
> have to prove to God and man how religious and proper
> they are.
>
> I prefer to read my Bible, like a love letter from God,
> who says He wants to meet me in a private place, where
> we really can get to know each other, and appreciate
> how He made us to have fellowship with Him!
JERRY
and, if it helps you through the dark nights of your soul, then I am
happy you have that to help you. However, it's not something that
most people need unless someone tells them they need it, in my
experience.
> gk
> Religion, is man reaching up to God, usually while
> standing on the neck of those who are beneath us!
JERRY
Certainly all religions I've seen.
>gk
> Christianity is God reaching down to man, usually while
> we are on our knees, lifting up others to Him!
JERRY
But then, the same can be said of any religion.
Hinduism is God or the Gods reaching down to man, usually while we are
on our knees, etc, etc
Islam is God reaching down to man, usually while we are on our knees,
yada, yada.
My wife tells me that prayer is you speaking to god. Meditation is
God speaking to you.
JERRY
BTW, did you ever get around to watching the movie "Serenity?" I keep
waiting to hear that you did so we can talk about it. You know that
it was voted best sci-fi movie of all time, recently, didn't you?
Even the Star Wars geeks liked it.
JERRY
Thanks, Greg, but the intercession isn't really necessary. Between my
posts and BB's he's decided to have a change of heart, apparently.
Thanks again for reading and posting your opinion, though, it's always
valued in an open forum.
you work at Spencers? I have to tell you I have gotten hooked on that
dark urban fantasy genre. These days I spend my time alternating
between Butcher's Harry Dresden books to Kim Harrison's Rachel Morgan
books. Some good stuff there.
Jerry, I have reread this a couple of times, and did not perceive any
other questions from you!
I appreciate the opportunity to get to know you, and will have a
better understanding of your perspective when we meet again!
Unless I hear otherwise from you, I feel that I was able to answer you
regarding what I believe and why, and you had opportunity to share
your perspective! I see no need to continue this thread at this
present time!
Jerry,
I sure did, twice.
It was excellent.
I didn't know the other stuff.
I wonder if there will be a sequel.
BB
Yuk! He should only sell King James Version Bibles, Concordances,
Lexicons, Interelinears, and books by Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity,
Michell Malcom, George Bush, Condi Rice, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Regan,
and books concerning Star Trek, Star Wars, Serenity, Stargate,
Battlestar Galactica, and CSI.:) This would attract classy people
with money to spend, help keep the trash out, and reduce losses from
bad liberal books, etc.
BB
>
> Carl, you are joking aren't you? If you aren't joking; what are you
> smoking, or snorting, or shooting up, or inhaling, or drinking? Your
> joking right? Please tell me you are joking or on drugs so I won't
> think you have gone completely bonkers.
>
Think "John Wolf"
What we have is a similar case in Carl
You waste your time arguing with some people
You are sometimes better off praying
===========
for example
Dear Lord
Please beam up Carl and put him in orbit round Betalgeuse
Lord , please ensure he is holding tightly onto John Weatherly and Little
Timmy Sutter when you beam him
Love and peace at last
Amen
JERRY
What I'm reading is that the movie didn't make enough money. It's got
quite the fan following, though. Cities across the US are doing
Serenity showings on big screens and putting the money toward
charities.
Hmm,
I don't read anything other than work stuff and the word and I don't
watch the news unless its something local, so I don't know what's
going on with Serenity.
BB
JERRY
That's ok, I get lots of good stuff, because I work on the Internet
all day long and have alerts set up on issues that are of interest to
me. They drop articles into my inbox to read, so I can keep up with
Joss Whedon (creator of "Firefly" and "Serenity," as well as "Buffy
the Vampire Slayer" and "Angel." I can also keep up with politics and
my beloved Denver Broncos. ;-) It's a wonder I get anything done.
Jerry,
You still overseas?
If you are, when you coming home? September?
I thought you were in the Air Force before.
Gad's I'm tired tonight. I've been at this desk all day working on my
expose to disprove the myth of the trinity. It will expose the tricks
the Bible editors have used for centuries to fool people. Right up
your alley, has to do with fallacies of accent. Then I just wasted an
hour or two answering part of Carl's stupid post. That guys is nuts.
He makes Gastrich and Wolf look like genuises.
I even found myself wishing that Wolf would pop back up to teach Carl
something, anything. I need some sleep.
Night.
Bob
Yep, still in Afghanistan. My first year would be up in less than a
month but I changed companies and signed a new deal with an American
company that will pay me more money, so I'm here now until next June.
I am coming home soon to visit though and will spend time not only
with the wife (and not nearly enough time with her) but also visiting
my parents, my kids and grandkids as well as my best friend, who is
going through a rough time at the moment. Then, the NEXT time I come
back, in late January, I will just stay in Indiana with the wife, have
our own quiet time with no hassles of meeting schedules.
I thought Carl was just a slightly more vocal version of
IKnowHimDoYou, who was really YM1 in disguise. Carl doesn't have a
lot of brains, which is why his work is all copy and paste, he's not
really capable of putting together his own thoughts or arguments.
Now, Wolfie really IS as dumb as he looks, or more so. Gastrich, on
the other hand, isn't really that stupid, just dishonest and lazy, and
arrogant in that he thinks he's smarter than everybody else just
because he's figured out how to fleece the faithful.
Carl intends well, but is a bit arrogant himself and kinda dumb.
Wolfie is just WAY dumb and very arrogant.
Documented lies and heresies from "Bible Bob" Sowle
August 11, 2007
"Fact. You quoted a section of Scripture which deals with turning a person
over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. Hence, you were preaching
that Glenn should be killed. The reason the person was to be turned over to
Satan was because he lusted after his fathers wife. Hence, since you were
talking about Glenn and citing those verses about Glenn you accusded [sic]
Glenn of sex with his fathers wife and declared Glenn worthy of death."
[Fiction. Actually a smear attempt by "Bible Bob." Reference the entry
entitled "A series showing intentional and admitted deception by "Bible
Bob"" which explains in detail how "Bible Bob" is attempting to mislead.]
"Carl McCasky [sic] has proven himself to be a deceiver on numerous
occassions [sic]. But this time in his attempt to deceive readers in his
post titled "There is no Biblical fellowship with someone who worships a
different God", Carl went way to far." [Please refer to the entry entitled
"A series showing intentional and admitted deception by "Bible Bob"" which
shows that the entry "Bible Bob" refers to was started by a person known on
Usenet as Žandy and that "Bible Bob" has recognized and admitted this fact
yet intentionally chooses to misrepresent it. Also it is interesting that
"Bible Bob" has started undertaking the misspelling of my name. It's not the
easiest one to remember how it is spelled so I will give him the benefit of
a doubt since his spelling is not perfect.]
"He [Carl] accused Glenn of committing fornication with his own mother, his
father's wife." [This is a fabrication by "Bible Bob" in a repeat of the
attempt he made before. Please refer to the entry entitled "A series showing
intentional and admitted deception by "Bible Bob"" to see again why this is
a false accusation.]
"Here is what Carl wrote:
I and other Christians have rejected Glenn's heresies and even though he has
been corrected by many Christians he still refuses to correct his errors
which leads we Christians to have nothing further to do with him (Romans
16:17; 1 Cor. 5:4-13;..." [Please note "Bible Bob" neglected to present my
COMPLETE quote. Again please refer to the entry entitled "A series showing
intentional and admitted deception by "Bible Bob"" and note that he leaves
off several passages I cite, the common theme being instructions to
Christians to have nothing to do with heretics and their heresies. "Bible
Bob" is resorting to misquoting and taking the partial quote out of context
to try to slander me.]
"Carl demands that Christians deliver Glenn to Satan for the destruction of
the flesh. Why? According to the context it is because Glenn had sex with
his father's wife.
What kind of "Christian" would make such a charge against another man? Would
any of you men charge another man with screwing his own mother? That is not
a "man" thing to do because normal men do not even think that way. And I
can't think of one woman who would do such a thing either." [I never made
any such demand. "Bible Bob" had to prooftext and take out all the other
Bible passages I cited where the common theme making my point is the
instruction to Christians not to have anything to do with heretics and their
heresies. The fact that he refuses to include the remaining passages shows a
marked lack of honesty and a serious intent of malice on his part.]
"Carl owes Glenn and all of us an apology. For Carl to demand Glenn's death
at the hand of Satan for fornication with his own mother is not an exercise
of free speech. It is a demon exercising Carl." [Since I never made any
such demand and since "Bible Bob" is misrepresenting what I posted, I do not
owe Glenn an apology. Actually for this evil exercise in deception from
"Bible Bob" he needs to beg for forgiveness.]
"You, yourself, Carl McCasky [sic], believe that works are necessary for
salvation and you are the Baptist Methodist cult I was specifically talking
about." [Another misrepresentation by "Bible Bob" since I do not nor ever
have believed that works are necessary for salvation. If anyone cares to
check, please do a Google search for my posts concerning salvation and you
will see that I espouse the Biblical teaching that salvation is by faith in
Jesus Christ as one's Lord and Savior and it is by God's grace that we
receive that salvation.]
---
August 10, 2007
After pointing out that "Bible Bob" really only cares about himself, "Bible
Bob" responds with "Nah, I care about rescuing you from the consequences
[sic] of sin." [Interesting wording. Is "Bible Bob" implying that he can
rescue me from the consequences of sin? Sure seems that way. But that's
something only Jesus Christ did for us when He was crucified for our sins.
Could this be a Freudian slip on "Bible Bob"'s part?]
Also on July 10, "Bible Bob" posted the following to me:
"Showing your true colors again, I see. Telling the big lies and sticking
to them in your best Third Reich style. You learned Hitler's Goebbels "tell
the big lie and stick to it well." Now that you have that under your belt,
maybe you can find to study the word of God."
Then two paragraphs later he demands:
"Prove one of your malicious slanderous claims, Carl. You can't. If you
could you would have posted the documentation fifty times."
[Reasonable individuals would consider accusing someone of being in the
"Third Reich" (a Nazi reference) is being quite malicious and slanderous as
well.]
---
August 10, 2007
"You [Carl] are about as "spiritual" as a three year old; except the three
year old wouldn't be evil like you [Carl]." [And "Bible Bob" doesn't
consider calling someone else evil not a malicious act when it is clearly
not true? I know I am sinful because I am not perfect but I am not evil.
Just another smear tactic by "Bible Bob."]
"When did I call a cult children of God?" ["Bible Bob" referred to Jehovah's
Witnesses and their parent organization as "children of God" on multiple
occasions. "Bible Bob" referred to Mormons and their parent organization as
"children of God" on multiple occasions.]
"Face it Carl, you are a hate monger and a messenger of Satan sent by Satan
to harm the children of God that you chose to speak evil of." [More
malicious slander from "Bible Bob" Sowle.]
---
August 9, 2007
"Carl, you are joking aren't you? If you aren't joking; what are you
smoking, or snorting, or shooting up, or inhaling, or drinking? Your joking
right? Please tell me you are joking or on drugs so I won't think you have
gone completely bonkers." [And right off, "Bible Bob" begins with the ad
hominem.]
"What kind of ego would come up with "The attempt to place the
responsibility on me for convincing you of the truth of the Biblical
doctrine of the Trinity that you already know, will not work." ? I never
placed any responsibility on you. Responsibility is delegated to those who
have the maturity, intellect, and stamina to handle the responsibility. Why
would I place responsibility on you when you have proven yourself to be
immature, lacking in knowledge of the Scriptures, and without the stamina
necessary to complete the task I might assign you." [Continuing in the same
post, "Bible Bob" continues with his ad hominem and commits his first act of
attempted deception. On several occasions, "Bible Bob" demanded I prove his
errors and prove where he has lied. I did so at first yet all he could do
was respond with variations of "you didn't prove anything." Therefore when
"Bible Bob" claims "I never placed any responsibility on you" he is lying.]
"I have not said the hogwash you said I said." [Well, the "hogwash"
appropriately enough, is documented in this text file and further examples
can be seen through a simple Google search on Usenet newsgroups. Again
"Bible Bob" is attempting to deceive.]
"I blame you for being arrogant, and hateful, and ignorant of the Scriptures
and for worshipping man gods." [More slander and attempted deception from
"Bible Bob."]
"I have been studing [sic] the trinity doctrine for thirty years and know it
better than you do which is why I am able to counter every one of your
wrongly divided presentations with truth from the word of God." [Actually
"Bible Bob" has only countered with prooftexting, erroneous definitions,
errors in Greek translations and grammar (some he made up himself that no
Greek scholars use) and intentional misrepresentations. He has denied many
essential doctrines of Biblical Christianity including, the Trinity, the
deity of Christ, salvation by grace via faith in Jesus and others. After
researching "Bible Bob"'s history on Usenet I discovered that many
Christians corrected his errors yet "Bible Bob" countered with falsehoods
and false teachings. "Bible Bob", as documented in this text file as well as
Usenet has been refuted numerous times yet pretends they never happened.
"Bible Bob" is in denial.]
"When you post one of your Joseph Smith posts and I see it is wrong; the
next article by your Joseph Smith will be ignored because he lost
credibility [sic] the first time." [I never posted any article by "Joseph
Smith." "Bible Bob" may be confusing an author I did reference to the
founder of the Mormon church.]
"Every time I try to communicate with you, you repond [sic] with Pope so and
so says so and so." [Again a clear and intentional misrepresentation on
"Bible Bob"'s part. I initially felt it appropriate to respond to him
directly but he kept claiming that my knowledge wasn't up to his level so I
deferred to folks like John Ankerberg, John MacArthur, John Wesley, Arthur
Pink and many other men of God who I knew were more knowledgeable than I
that had written refutation of the tired old heresies "Bible Bob" kept
espousing. In response, rather than addressing the gentlemen's points,
"Bible Bob" started accusing me of "man worship" {now he refers to my
"worship of man gods"} which is patently absurd and untrue. So rather than
address their points, "Bible Bob" engages in fallacies.]
"I know the word of God because I study the word of God rather than what men
say about the word of God. I have been careful to set myself under those
men and women who really love God and prove to me that they know God and
know God's word by their behavior and by rightly dividing the word of
truth." [Actually "Bible Bob" let it be known on more than one occasion that
he is self-taught and is subject to no one. Now he is flip-flopping?]
"You are blowing smoke, trying to be intellectual and philosophical so you
can look like a spiritual big shot. What you are really doing is showing
your lack of spirituality and loyalty to the systems of the world which are
under the control of the god of this world who is Satan.' [What is so ironic
and telling is that in this slander by "Bible Bob" he is in essence,
describing himself accurately.]
"All I want to do is learn and do the word of God and love God, the Lord
Jesus Christ, and God's people. I'm not here to argue or debate you.
Debating is a sin. Look it up." ["Debating is a sin"? If so, then why does
"Bible Bob" revel in it and attempt to lure others into vain and pointless
arguments? Is this an example of "Bible Bob"'s hypocrisy? He wants to learn?
Then why does he constantly exhibit an unteachable spirit? If he wants to do
the Word of God then why does he routinely engage in slander, malicious
words, vitriolic posts, ad hominem and other behaviors that clearly do not
represent the Word of God? I feel that he is, as he wrote in an earlier
paragraph, "trying to be intellectual and philosophical so [he] can look
like a spiritual big shot."]
"You just wannabe a big shot that people will worship they way you worship
your men gods." [More slanderous lies from "Bible Bob."]
"You were led down the wrong path by false teachers as you prove every time
you post one of their articles." [If one were to believe "Bible Bob" it is
"Bible Bob" and only "Bible Bob" that presents complete and total Biblical
truth and all others are false teachers. Remember "Bible Bob" keeps telling
people things like "You would be better off reading and following my
teachings than the teachings of the sects because mine are more accurate."
{June 30, 2007} A partial list of Christians I have cited materials include
Adam Clarke, Flavius Josephus, A.B. Bruce, John Calvin, John Ankerberg, John
MacArthur, John Wesley, James White, Walter Martin, Thomas Aquinas, Charles
Spurgeon, Arthur Pink, Ray Stedman, G.K. Chesterson, Jonathan Edwards,
Charles Finney, Matthew Henry, David Jeremiah, J. Vernon McGee, E.M. Bounds,
George Whitefield, Ron Rhodes, Robert Bowman Jr., John Bunyan, R.A. Torrey,
R.C. Sproul, Jerry Falwell, Ron Ritchie, John Weldon, Charles Stanley,
Oswald Chambers, Warren Doud, Scott Grant, Jay Hess, John Morehead, and
numerous others. However, "Bible Bob" declares all of them to be false
teachers even though he fails to show why they are false and he is true
especially when what "Bible Bob" teaches has been shown to be contrary to
scripture.]
"I learn very well from real teachers and from personal study and since I
have holy spirit in me it is possible to learn that way, too." [From "Bible
Bob"s own posts, the only real teacher according to "Bible Bob" is..."Bible
Bob." As to his claim that the "holy spirit" {interesting that he keeps
using lower case} is in him, if it were truly the Holy Spirit, he wouldn't
be spreading slander and lies the way he does as documented here and
elsewhere.]
"Thee [sic] is only one criterion for truth for me and that is the word of
God; not wrongly divided Bibles; but the word of God which you cannot relate
to because you don't know what it is. It's not the Bible, although the Bible
contains some of the word of God. Actually, it makes reference to all of it;
but twists the word of God into the doctrines of men. I will be posting
something on that soon." [Now this is a telling paragraph from "Bible Bob."
Here he is clearly claiming that the Bible contains only SOME of the word of
God. As he has claimed in the past, the translations we have today have been
twisted to support trinitarian doctrine. He keeps making this claim from
time to time with no proof whatsoever. This reminds me a lot of KJV-Only
extremists.]
"Just because you are a false teacher does not mean that I can't learn from
you. False teachers show me what not to learn and reveal the secrets behind
their false doctrines; not knowing that they are doing so." [Another
self-descriptive paragraph from "Bible Bob." Through his attempt at slander,
he ends up accurately describing himself.]
"Carl, you are the one who has made himself unteachable. You have to
believe what your bosses tell you to believe; money and power is at stake.
I don't have to worry about that because my boss spent time on a stake."
[More slander from "Bible Bob." It's also interesting that "Bible Bob"
rejects the Bible's teaching that Jesus was crucified on the cross and
embraces the Jehovah's Witnesses' claims that Jesus was killed on a stake.
Although "Bible Bob" denies being a Jehovah's Witness, he has supported just
about every false teaching a JW believes.]
"You must do what you man gods tell you to do because that is the Third
Reich way." [Here's "Bible Bob" commits more ad hominem falsely accusing me
of not only worshiping "man gods" but also throws in a Nazi reference for
added emphasis. Does this give evidence of the "holy spirit" {as "Bible Bob"
references with lower case} within him? Perhaps if what the "holy spirit" he
has is not THE Holy Spirit of the Bible. Furthermore, does "Bible Bob"'s
words here give evidence of the fruit of the Spirit? No reasonable person
can answer any other way than with a resounding "NO!"]
"You have exposed yourself as a fraud and an evil doer in this post and you
probably can't even see what you have done. That's really sad because you
are wasting what God could use." [Another self-descriptive paragraph from
"Bible Bob."]
---
August 9, 2007
"Satan is spirit and Jesus is still human; the man Jesus Christ the last
Adam with a human body animated by spirit rather than soul." [Where is this
taught in the Bible?]
"Actually, the Holy Spirit is God (one of God's names or titles) and holy
spirit is the gift or agent of God. The problem is that Bible editors added
"the" and capitalized holy and spirit to make the gift God so much that the
average reader doesn't know what a passage is talking about unless he cross
checks it with the Greek. Here's the easy way to understand the difference.
The Holy Spirit has His habitation in the heavens while holy spirit is at
work on the earth in the ages. The Holy Spirit is God the Giver while holy
spirit is the gift. More often than not when the Bible says the Holy Ghost
(Spirit) (God the Giver) the Greek reads (holy spirit) the gift (52 of 79
times, that's 58%)." ["Bible Bob" is claiming two separate holy spirits? One
capitalized and one not? More ungodly heresy from "Bible Bob." He's correct
when he says the "Holy Spirit" is God but in other posts he denies this
being part of the Trinity. This is an example of "Bible Bob" making claims
with no proof and exhibits poor understanding of Koine Greek.]
"You need to fess up to being a man god worshipper and purveryor [sic] of
false doctrines, false charges, and hatred of others." [More slander and ad
hominen from "Bible Bob."]
"By other cult groups you must be referring to the Baptists and Methodists
who believe in being saved by works." [There is no Baptist nor Methodist
denomination that believes in salvation by works.]
---
August 5, 2007
"I may think you [Carl] are a coward; but I did not say you [Carl] were a
coward." [Actually he has. For example on July 28, 2007 "Bible Bob" wrote "I
suspect that Carl's post targets me in his usual cowardly way." June 24,
2007: "You [Carl] have been to cowardly to try." There are other earlier
examples as well. However this shows another "Bible Bob" lie.]
"Once again I catch you [Carl] in Third Reich mode imitating Adolph Hitler
and Joseph Goebell with your tell the big lie and stick to it behavior. You
[Carl] did not see any dishonesty from me. The "we" in your [Carl] comment
must refer to a demon accomplice because no person in their right mind could
have saw what you [Carl] saw." [Now "Bible Bob" equates me with Nazism and
demonism as well. This is a desperation tactic common with people who have
lost the point.]
"You religious money grabbers are too arrogant and prideful to take the time
to help the poor or the needy. You want them big tithes and offerings and
have to use philosophy and intellect to woo your potential victims." [Here
"Bible Bob" makes a false accusation that I am desirous of money.]
---
A series showing intentional and admitted deception by "Bible Bob"
1) On July 27th, a Usenet poster using the nick Žandy posted an entry in
which he entitled "There is no Biblical fellowship with someone who worships
a different God"
2) On August 3, 2007 @ 12:13pm I responded to Žandy's post. In it I cited
seven passages from the Bible that have the common theme teaching that
Christians are to stay away from heretics and their heresies (Romans 16:17;
1 Cor. 5:4-13; 2 Thess 3:6, 14; 2 Tim. 3:5; Titus 3:10,11; 2 John 10).
3) At 9:40pm of August 3, 2007 "Bible Bob" responded but rather than address
all seven passages, he prooftexts 1 Cor. 5:4-13 to try to support his
attempted slander in a thread he began also at 9:40pm which he entitled
"Carl McCaskey Accuses Glenn of Having Sex With His Own Mother" which in of
itself is a false accusation on "Bible Bob"'s part. So "Bible Bob"
intentionally left off the context. A clear dishonest tactic. Also at the
very beginning of this thread, "Bible Bob" intentionally misrepresents again
when he wrote, "But this time in his attempt to deceive readers in his post
titled "There is no Biblical fellowship with someone who worships a
different God", Carl went way to far." As documented, the thread entitled
"There is no Biblical fellowship with someone who worships a different God"
was begun by Žandy, not myself. This is clear yet "Bible Bob" attempts to
mislead.
4) On August 4, 2007 @ 1:03pm I point out "Bible Bob"'s error where he
wrongly attributes the origin of the thread "There is no Biblical fellowship
with someone who worships a different God" with the following: "If "Bible
Bob" wasn't so blinded with hatred he would have noticed the "Re:" in front
of the title indicating that I was responding to a thread started by someone
else."
5) However at 8:17pm of the same date, "Bible Bob" admits he recognized the
indicator but chose to ignore it. "I noticed the "Re" when I went to cut and
paste the subject into the post but chose not to use it." This shows "Bible
Bob" knew it was a thread started by someone else, admitted he did noticed
the "Re:" but chose to intentionally discard it. This shows clear motive to
deceive.
---
July 14, 2007
"You [Carl] have miserably failed to provide any scriptural evidence that
proves the Bible teaches the doctrine of the Trinity. You [Carl] have
provided, however, evidence that proves you [Carl] are a pagan who worships
the god people. Simply put - you [Carl] are a polytheist." [Once again
"Bible Bob" lies since I have provided clear evidence that the Bible teaches
the doctrine of the Trinity so "Bible Bob" can only lie about it and attempt
to smear me by falsely accusing me of being a polytheist implying that
Trinitarians are polytheists which is intellectually dishonest.]
"Trinity doctrine is not found in the word of God. Trinitarians did falsify
passages in the versions to make it look like a trinity exists." ["Bible
Bob" still denies the Trinity and then attempts to falsely claim that
Trinitarians falsified scripture to support it in a similar fashion as the
Watchtower Bible And Tract Society did to promote their heretical agenda.
However Trinitarians did not do as "Bible Bob" asserts. He provides no
evidence, just a smear attempt with no substantiation.]
In the same post I correctly say the following, "The Bible also includes
many verses that show that Jesus is also God, and that the Holy Ghost is
also God."
"Bible Bob" responds with "No it does not. The Englist [sic] versions have
been infused with fallacies of accent to mislead people into believing
trinitarian doctrine." [Another false accusation with no evidence. "Bible
Bob" creates this out of whole cloth.]
How "Bible Bob" responds with a quote from the New King James Version:
"Maybe if you stopped using a kiddie [sic] Bible"
---
July 12, 2007
"Carl is not man (or Christian enough) enough to answer me directly because
he knows he would be proven wrong" [Actually "Bible Bob" is trying and has
been trying to lure me into vain arguments through provocative means. Since
Titus 3:9-11 teaches that I should not bother with heretics like "Bible Bob"
I'm not biting.]
---
July 11, 2007
"It was trinitarians who came up with tdhe [sic] Giver and the gift
doctrine." [A clear falsehood from "Bible Bob."]
"Bible Bob"'s opinion of John Wesley:
"The late Mr [sic] Wesley sure had a problem with his scruples."
---
July 10, 2007
"What a pathetic bunch of lies! Is this guy nuts? You are nuts for posting
such trash." [This in response to a post where I presented a sermon by a
Baptist minister. "Bible Bob" lacks the self-control and gentleness called
for by the Bible which he claims to follow.]
July 9, 2007
"It is Trinitarians that think Jesus is an angel." [Again "Bible Bob"
perpetuates this intentional misrepresentation.]
July 8, 2007
"There is no difference between a Baptist and a Jehovah's Witness"
[Theologically speaking, there are plenty of differences between the Baptist
denomination and the Jehovah's Witnesses cult. "Bible Bob" is being
dishonest here as well.]
"You and Carl are both false teachers as the false doctrines you preach
prove. You and Carl attempt to deceive by saying that what I teach is false
doctrine. But neither of you has substantiated from the word of God that
the doctrine I teach is false. The best you can come up with is the
argument "false teacher John MacArthur (or some other well known false
teacher from your cult) says such and such is true doctrine and since you
(BB) disagree with my (JW) man-god, you are a false teacher". You cannot
document from the word of God that what I teach is false. You rely on the
words of false teachers that you parrot for your authority." [What are the
"false doctrines" "Bible Bob" claims I teach? Salvation by the Grace of God
through faith in Jesus Christ. That Jesus Christ is God manifest in flesh.
That the Trinity is a Biblically sound doctrine. That Jesus always has been
and was not a created being. Please note the lack of the fruit of the Spirit
in the words of "Bible Bob" here. His insults and false accusations. I can
only speak for myself. I have substantiated all the doctrines I mentioned
earlier from the Word of God but "Bible Bob" summarily dismissed them all
with shoddy self-taught (as he has freely admitted) scholarship. A Google
search in Usenet groups will attest to this. As I rapidly discovered, "Bible
Bob" then began accusing me of having no formal Biblical training and not
knowing what I was talking about so I decided to present articles and
sermons from well-established Christian theologians and scholars who
presented the same orthodoxy that I had which effectively refuted "Bible
Bob." And as you can see, rather than rebut what those people had written,
"Bible Bob" declares that I am "worshipping men" and that they are my "man
gods." This is yet another example of how "Bible Bob" uses smear tactics
when his heresies have been thoroughly and effectively refuted.]
"both of you say I teach false doctrine but never state what the doctrine is
that I teach" [Again, this is yet a blatant lie. His denial of the Trinity,
his denial of the deity of Jesus, his unBiblical method of salvation, his
claim that Jesus was crucified on a stake and not the cross (a Jehovah's
Witness false doctrine as well) and merely some of the false doctrines that
I and several others have stated. This is yet another example of the denial
technique "Bible Bob" routinely utilizes. I and many others have addressed
specific false doctrines of "Bible Bob"'s yet "Bible Bob" denies anyone has.
This is "Bible Bob" being intentionally being obtuse and dishonest.]
"You [Carl] promote hatred against the brethren in your antidenominational
posts." [I have never done any such thing. This is a "Bible Bob" smear
attempt.]
"You [Carl] quote and promote your man gods." [I have never done any such
thing. This is a "Bible Bob" smear attempt.]
"It does not matter what you say Carl." [Now "Bible Bob" finally admits that
he rejects anything and everything I present.]
"Flee spiritual fornication which is idolatry." [Another false accusation
from "Bible Bob." Here he accuses me of "spiritual fornication" without
evidence and without merit.]
"Stop worshipping yourself and your men gods and their doctrines and worship
the one true God and follow His Son Jesus Christ." [Here "Bible Bob" accuses
me of worshipping myself and "men gods" when I have done neither.
Furthermore he implies that I haven't been worshipping God when I have. Also
the wording of his accusation follows "Bible Bob"'s denial of the deity of
Jesus Christ which is Biblical doctrine.]
---
July 7, 2007
"Trinitarians do teach that Jesus was an angel; so stop lying about it."
[This lie of "Bible Bob"'s is so patently absurd it becomes almost
laughable. It merely further proves "Bible Bob"'s intellectual dishonesty.]
"True I am intelligent enough to reject the false doctrines of the trinity."
["Bible Bob" admits to heresy.]
"I am the guy that has been proving to you and others that Jesus Christ did
not exist until he was born except in the foreknowledge of God." ["Bible
Bob" admits that he denies Jesus Christ's infinite nature. Another heretical
stance.]
"God says that I am right and that you are wrong." ["Bible Bob" claiming
divine knowledge? A new revelation? Jehovah God does not tell a heretic like
"Bible Bob" that he is right when "Bible Bob" denies Biblical truth.]
"I am the Christian and you are the pretender." ["Bible Bob" now arrogantly
claims to know who is Christian and who isn't although "Bible Bob" has been
shown by his own words to teach heresy. Furthermore note how "Bible Bob"
refers to himself as "the Christian" not "a Christian" but "THE Christian"
as if he is the only one.]
"You [Carl] are the one that manifests the most contempt for others and the
contempt and hatred that you [Carl] manifest in your posts makes your points
moot." [I have contempt for the lies and heresies from false teachers like,
and including, "Bible Bob" but I have presented nor have hatred towards
them. I feel pity for them. This is another "Bible Bob" lie.]
---
On July 1, 2007 I posted the following:
"Why is it that so many people on Usenet, believers and unbelievers alike,
allege that you are arrogant and self centered and dishonest? Is it because
there is a conspiracy to destroy you and your ministry? Is it because
everybody is out to get you? Or is it because both believers and
unbelievers "see" arrogance and self centeredness and dishonesty in what you
say and do?"
A certain individual wrote this on Usenet in accusation of another. It's
amazing that is applied perfectly to himself. Can you guess who originally
wrote the words above?
On July 2, 2007 "Bible Bob" posted:
"Nope. Not me."
The words actually did come from "Bible Bob" in his attempt to smear someone
else. However when you read the comments:
"Why is it that so many people on Usenet, believers and unbelievers alike,
allege that you are arrogant and self centered and dishonest? Is it because
there is a conspiracy to destroy you and your ministry? Is it because
everybody is out to get you? Or is it because both believers and
unbelievers "see" arrogance and self centeredness and dishonesty in what you
say and do?"
it is strikingly apt that it applies so strongly TO "Bible Bob" as evidenced
by his posts. And so many people, myself included, see so much arrogance,
self-centeredness and dishonesty in what "Bible Bob" says and does on
Usenet.
---
July 1, 2007
"If memory serves me right it has been people like Jason Gastridge, John
Wolf, John Weatherly, Carl McCasky [sic], and checker - all hyperreligious
fundamentalist religionists - that post anti child of God posts under the
pretense of defending right doctrines [sic] which are really false
doctrines."
"Why is it that members of the Baptist cult and the Methodist cult attack
the Jewhovah's [sic] Witness cult?" ["Bible Bob" refers to Christian
denominations {Methodists and Baptists} as cults.]
"What kind of fruit are they producing by attacking the children of God?"
[NOTE: Here "Bible Bob" refers to Jehovah's Witnesses as "children of God"
yet earlier in the same post he calls them a "cult."]
"Of late I have been reading some of Carl's posts by some of his man gods."
[NOTE: "man gods"? "Bible Bob" false accuses me of worshipping man.]
---
June 30, 2007
"You [Carl] make allegations, but are unable to provide the evidence to
support those allegations." [Actually I did and have provided specific proof
in the form of prior posts from "Bible Bob" and when confronted with them,
he either denied them or ignored them. So chalk this up as another lie of
"Bible Bob"'s.]
"You [Carl] are a carnal follower of Christ." [A slanderous falsehood on
"Bible Bob"'s part and one that shows his lack of the fruit of the Spirit
within him.]
"To date you [Carl] have not been able to find once false doctrine taught by
me ["Bible Bob"] that you can prove to be false." [Actually "Bible Bob" has
been proven to be teaching falsely on several items including, but not
limited to, the Trinity (which "Bible Bob" denies even though it is taught
in the Bible), the deity of Christ (which "Bible Bob" denies even though it
is taught in the Bible), the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ (which
"Bible Bob" denies even though it is taught in the Bible), the infinite
nature of Jesus Christ (which "Bible Bob" denies even though it is taught in
the Bible), and others. And I am not the only Christian who has proven
"Bible Bob" to be wrong and teaching falsely.]
"You would be better off reading and following my teachings than the
teachings of the sects because mine are more accurate." [Ahhh...the "Church
Of Bible Bob" is, according to "Bible Bob" more accurate than denominations
that adhere to Biblical orthodoxy. No thanks. Heretics like "Bible Bob" tend
to exhibit such arrogant behavior.]
"Jesus was crucified on a stake" [This is an old WTBTS false teaching that
has been extensively refuted by Biblical evidence as well as archaeological,
historical and medical evidence yet here's "Bible Bob" proclaiming this
tired old heresy.]
"Over half of your Baptist doctrines came from the Roman Catholic Church."
[An unfounded and historically false statement from "Bible Bob."]
"Everyone knows that Jesus Christ was not crucified on a cross and everyone
knows that church steeples are phallic symbles [sic] and that church bells
are used to wake up the gods from sleep." ["Bible Bob" comes up with the
most ridiculous heresies.]
"Name the "Christians" that have found Bible Bob's teachings to be
unBiblical and then post one; just one, of those teachings that you say are
unBiblical." ["Bible Bob" made this demand while ignoring the numerous
Christian theologians I cited dating as far back at the early Church fathers
in the 1st century A.D. who taught the Trinity. He made this demand while
ignoring the numerous Christian theologians I cited dating as far back at
the early Church fathers in the 1st century A.D. who taught the deity of
Jesus Christ. He made this demand while ignoring the numerous theologians
who taught salvation by grace through faith and not by works. All three
doctrines denied by "Bible Bob."]
---
June 26, 2007
"Yes you [Carl] do worship men as you [sic] posts prove." [Here "Bible Bob"
accuses me of worshipping men rather than God. This is a lie on "Bible
Bob"'s part.]
---
June 13, 2007
"I ["Bible Bob"] have lots of religious education." [Doubtful. To this day
"Bible Bob" has presented no verifiable documentation of such "religious
education."]
June 28, 2007
"Can you [Carl] name one Christian that Bible Bob has attacked" [Myself for
one. But "Bible Bob" doesn't consider me a Christian since he arrogantly and
falsely labels me otherwise. However I don't have to prove myself to "Bible
Bob" and I know my faith is in Jesus Christ who is my Lord and Savior. I am
Christian and there's nothing "Bible Bob" nor anyone else can do about it.
However "Bible Bob" hates when he's proven wrong by Christians. Some other
better known Christians that "Bible Bob" has attacked: John Wesley - J.
Vernon McGee - David Jeremiah - Billy Graham - John MacArthur - Jerry
Falwell - . Some lesser known Christians that "Bible Bob" has attacked:
Kevin Hall - Randy Ray - David Brooks - and millions upon millions of
Methodists and Baptists for "Bible Bob" has deemed them all nonChristians
and cultists. This is the arrogant hatred "Bible Bob" exhibits as well as
his dishonesty.]
"Can you [Carl] provide evidence from the word of God that God has given you
authority to attack Christians who are members of the Jehovah's Witness
group that you do not know or who have not corresponded with you?" [Please
note "Bible Bob" calls Methodists and Baptists cultists yet calls Jehovah's
Witnesses "Christians." This shows the level of dishonesty and deceit from
"Bible Bob" that can only be considered satanic in nature. Furthermore I
have not attacked Jehovah's Witnesses. This is yet another proved "Bible
Bob" lie. What I have done is shown on several occasions the heresies, false
prophecies and false doctrines of the Watchtower Bible And Tract Society,
the Jehovah's Witnesses' parent organization. The WTBTS has deceived
countless people during their existence. I have shared information showing
the WTBTS' deceit.]
"Carl, you are one who teaches salvation by works." [I have never taught
such a doctrine. "Bible Bob" lies.]
"You [Carl] are an arrogant man worshipping hater of the chidlren [sic] of
God." [More "Bible Bob" lies. I do not nor ever have worshipped man and do
not hate children of God. However as shown from his own words, "Bible Bob"
routinely calls "Christians" cultists and nonChristians "children of God."
This can only be taken as satanic deception on "Bible Bob"'s part.]
"We are justified by the faith of Jesus Christ; not our faith." [Another
heresy from "Bible Bob." He denies that we are saved by our faith in Jesus
Christ even though that's what the Bible, taken in totality, clearly
teaches. "Bible Bob" teaches that the faith OF Jesus Christ, whom "Bible
Bob" denies as being God and only a man CREATED by God, is what saves us.
That's not taught in the Bible but it is taught by the "Church of Bible Bob"
where heresies flourish. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ was faithful
but "Bible Bob" twists it into something it's not.]
---
June 11, 2007
"I do not respect your cowardly behavior of hiding behind the words of men
and elevating the words of men above the word of God." [I have never
elevated the words of men above the Word of God. This is a clear lie on
"Bible Bob"'s part and an attempt to slander me. What I have done is cite
various Christian theologians, ministers and other learned men of God in
refutation of "Bible Bob"'s heresies and in response, "Bible Bob" lies and
slanders. The Christian people I cited effectively and thoroughly refuted
"Bible Bob" time and time again using the Bible as the source. Therefore,
"Bible Bob" was refuted by the Word of God.]
"You [Carl] are a fake and a fraud offering for Scripture the words and
doctrines of men." [I have never attempted to offer the words and doctrines
of men as a substitute for Holy Scripture. This is another slanderous lie by
"Bible Bob" that shows the lack of the fruit of the Holy Spirit in his
heart.]
"I will not honor an honest attempt with sarcasm or criticism." [However
that's mostly what "Bible Bob" responds with: sarcasm and criticism. Another
"Bible Bob" lie.]
---
June 2, 2007
"You [Carl] do NOT believe in the Trinity." ["Bible Bob" now tries to claim
I don't believe something even though I have publicly stated that I do and
even provided plenty of Biblical evidence. I even provided evidence as shown
by many Christian theologians.]
"You [Carl] cannot prove from the rightly divided word of God that a Trinity
exists because you do NOT know how to search, understand, and expound the
Scriptures." ["Bible Bob" makes this patently false accusation after I did
prove from the rightly divided Word of God that the (not "a") Trinity exists
and is taught in the Bible.]
"I have simply asked you to provide proof of the Trinity in YOUR own words
from the Scriptures. You [Carl] have not been able to so [sic] so."
[Actually I have on several occasions and a simple Google search in Usenet
newsgroups proves that but "Bible Bob" takes his routine tact of denial.
"Bible Bob" was and is unable to refute the Biblical evidence as presented
by myself as well as dozens of other Christians so "Bible Bob" both denies
in a dishonest manner as well as twists scripture using his
pseudo-scholarship which also has been shown to be lacking. But although his
pseudo-scholarship is lacking and has been shown as such, "Bible Bob" keeps
denying that anyone has proven the Trinity to be Biblically sound doctrine
when the fact of the matter is that many people have. But the eyes, ears and
heart of the heretic (like "Bible Bob") are closed to the truth of the
Scriptures.]
"You [Carl] wouldn't make a good pimple on a disciples hindside." ["Bible
Bob" once again shows he is wont to throw out insults even though he claims
to be someone who knows Scripture better than anyone else. Interesting that
he regularly ignores what it teaches. This example of "Bible Bob"'s routine
usage of insults shows the lack of gentleness, kindness, peace,
self-control, etc. that God instructs Christians to exhibit. Insults are not
the fruit from a good tree. "But you, man of God, flee from all this, and
pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness." (1
Timothy 6:11)]
"Trinitarians edited the King James Version of the Bible." [Earlier in the
post this quote came from "Bible Bob" demands that I "prove your statements"
yet "Bible Bob" throws out this false statement as if it becomes true
because "Bible Bob" said so. He made this claim before and since always with
no substantiation even when pressed.]
"Trinitarians have to believe [sic] the Trinity because it makes them
money." [Same post. Equally unfounded and ridiculous.]
"Carl, get your head out of your butt" [Same post. No gentleness as called
for by God.]
---
June 1, 2007
Recently "Bible Bob" wrote the following concerning the Biblical doctrine of
the Holy Trinity:
BB> It is not mentioned in the Bible. Trinitarians have added words
BB> to the versions, mistranslated the versions, and twisted
BB> passages from the versions but have not been able to document
BB> a Trinity from the word of God.
[Please note "Bible Bob"'s accusations with no evidence.]
---
February 22, 2007
"I'm not one of those drunks from the bar that you can lure out of the bar
and into the alley where you can gut them for a few bucks for your crack
habit." [This one wasn't aimed at me but it deserved to be included to
illustrate the insulting, vitriolic and contemptible nature of "Bible Bob."]
"Over the years I have repeatedly proven you to be a mental eunuch in the
fields of science, history, philosophy, politics, religion, and common
sense." [Same post. More bile. And an incredible condescending arrogance.]
"You are a mental midget in the arena of intellect and end up trodden under
my feet every time you enter the arena with me." [Same post. More grandiose
arrogance.]
"You ought to be ashamed of yourself mommies boy." [Same post. Interesting
lack of maturity coming from someone who brags of having such an intellect.
His words like these lacking intellect contradict his claim of high
intellect.]
---
February 20, 2007
"I posted it to the groups that Steve Winter's posts to cause I wanted to."
["Bible Bob" objects when I post to multiple groups but justified
multiple-group postings with explanations like this one. "Bible Bob"'s
hypocrisy shows.]
---
May 13, 2006
"I ["Bible Bob"] thought I ["Bible Bob"] was good at hyperbole" [When "Bible
Bob" is caught in a lie, he tends to claim he was using "hyperbole."]
---
February 6, 2006
"I have never "claimed" to be a teacher. I demonstrate what I am by my
words and by my deeds. You can not find a post anywhere where I have
claimed to be anything. I do not believe in using titles and you know that.
I have never claimed to be a teacher on a newsgroup. I have and do teach;
but all believers are supposed to do that." [Actually, as I have found and
documented in this text file, "Bible Bob" has indeed claimed to be a
teacher.]
---
August 31, 2005
"The only evidence of the trinity are the vain imaginations of men." ["Bible
Bob" ignores the Biblical evidence presented to him on numerous occasions.
To support his denials, he has to resort to very bad exegesis and
self-taught (as he freely admits) Greek which has been shown to be shoddy.
However when his errors are shown and corrected, "Bible Bob" resorts to ad
hominem attack and denials.]
"You censored my comments by snipping the relevant context. That is not
honest and leads one to believe that you have a controlling nature that
requires you to have your way regardless of whether you are right or wrong."
[This was not aimed at me but shows a huge amount of hypocrisy on "Bible
Bob"'s part because he has a long history of selectively editing others'
comments in his replies just as he is accusing another of doing. In fact, if
one does a Google search on Usenet of "Bible Bob"'s posts, one will discover
that "Bible Bob" has "a controlling nature that requires [Bible Bob] to have
[his] way regardless of whether [he is] right or wrong." And when "Bible
Bob" is shown to be wrong, he gets extremely selective in his editing.]
"First of all Paul was talking about the Jews who were peeping Toms; not
Christians." [This is "Bible Bob"'s response to Galatians 2:4. Peeping Toms?
I have never heard anyone other than "Bible Bob" claim that Galatians 2:4
("And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in
privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they
might bring us into bondage") refers to "peeping Toms." Maybe "Bible Bob"
also believes the passage refers to sado-masochism because it refers to
"bondage." Ridiculous. According to Strong's the Greek word used in the
passage "kataskopeo" (kat-as-kop-eh'-o) means to be a sentinel, i.e. to
inspect insidiously: and in the King James Bible is translated as "to spy
out." {Source: New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded
Greek-Hebrew Dictionary}]
---
August 31, 2005
[An example of "Bible Bob"'s weak exegesis.]
>This is NOT a Biblical assertion you
>are making. The prrof [sic] DOES need to
>be asserted.
>1 Peter 3:15
>but in your hearts regard Christ the
>Lord as holy, always being prepared
>to make a defense to anyone who asks
>you for a reason for the hope that is
>in you;
"Aren't we having fun. Same word "apologia;" and if you read the verse it is
talking about an "answer" to someone who asks a question. And the question
is about the hope that is in you; not whether the word of God is truth."
[Webster's Dictionary defines "apologia" {from when we get the word
"apologetics"} as "a defense especially of one's opinions, position, or
actions" -- Strong's Greek Dictionary defines it as an "answer (for self)"
The person was trying to point out to "Bible Bob" that apologetics includes
defending the truth of the Scriptures while "Bible Bob" took an opposing
view. The defenses of Christianity by the primitive fathers are called
apologies {Adam Clarke's Commentary on 1 Peter 3:15} and their defenses of
the Christian religion were examples of early Christian apologetics (see
Acts 22:1) therefore "Bible Bob" is offbase on this point in claiming that 1
Peter 3:15 is limited in scope as he asserts.]
"Are you saying that God should not be condoned because He is Polytheist?
Are you saying that Jesus Christ should not be condoned because he is
polytheist?" ["Bible Bob" claiming God is polytheistic? "Bible Bob" claiming
Jesus is polytheistic? For those who don't know polytheism is the belief in
or worship of more than one god. In this statement "Bible Bob" is claiming
Jehovah God and Jesus Christ both believe in, or maintain a plurality of
gods. This is so patently absurd and unBiblical as to completely make "Bible
Bob"'s positions to be highly suspect to any rational, reasonable
Christian.]
"The trinity is anti-Christian and pro-Satan. Well, isn't it? God says there
is only One True God and Satan says there are other One True God's." ["Bible
Bob" implies that Trinitarians believe that there are other gods when the
fact shows such an implication to be false. But "Bible Bob" routinely
intentionally misrepresents the beliefs of those who oppose his beliefs in
order to try to bolster his reputation and position. Unfortunately for
"Bible Bob" such intentional misrepresentations only prove a dishonest
nature on "Bible Bob"'s part.]
"You can not prove the trinity from the Word of God (or Bible if correctly
translated and read in context). Talk to your theologians, they will tell
you that I am right and you are wrong." [Same post. Many people have proven
the Trinity from the Word of God (correctly translated, taken in context AND
using the Bible in totality). Furthermore, thousands upon thousands of
Christian theologians over the centuries starting with the early Christian
church fathers who taught the Trinity and referenced the Trinity in their
writings as far back as the middle of the 1st century A.D. So the
overwhelming majority of Christian theologians {and the Bible} say "Bible
Bob" is wrong and the Trinity (and therefore Trinitarians) are right. But
"Bible Bob" will simply deny this {and has denied this} when the fact is
pointed out to him.]
Yes, one needs to the believe the only true God who sent Jesus, and also in
Jesus who is not the only true God who sent Jesus, and also one must submit
the holy spirit of the only true God. This does not mean that that there are
three persons in the only true God who sent Jesus. Such an idea has to be
added to and read into what is stated in the scriptures.
>
> John 10:30
> 30 I and my Father are one.
> KJV
There is nothing here that indicates that Jesus was saying that he and his
God are one God. Such an idea has to be added to, and read into what Jesus
said.
http://godandson.reslight.net/john-10-30.html
> Matt 28:19-20
> 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of
> the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
> 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
> and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
> KJV
Still nothing about three persons in one God. The thought has to be added to
what is stated, although there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus did not
state the words of verse 19 as we have received them.
http://godandson.reslight.net/matt-28-19.html
In service of Jesus and his God,
Ronald
> John 14:23-26
> 23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my
> words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make
> our abode with him.
> 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye
> hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
> 25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
> 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send
> in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your
> remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
> KJV
Still nothing at all about three persons in one God. One had to add that
thought, and then read that thought into what Jesus said.
God uses his holy spirit to aid Christians to an understanding of his word.
Before one can can comprehend and appreciate God's purposes for the church
and the blessings of all the families of the earth through the church, one
must have received the holy spirit in order to obtain such an understanding.
All truths pertaining to Christ, his atoning sacrifice for the believer and
the unbeliever, and the restoration of all things, God revealed to his
apostles by means of his holy spirit. It is the apostles especially that
these truths were revealed to. (John 14:26; 16:4-13; Galatians 1:12;
Ephesians 3:5; 2 Timothy 2:2) Christians today have these truths available
in the writings of the Bible itself. (Ephesians 3:3-12; Colossians 1:25,26;
1 John 4:6) One has to, however, walk after the spirit in order to
understand the spiritual things revealed in the scriptures. The natural man,
being by nature children of wrath (Ephesians 2:3), who walk by the flesh,
not the unseen things of the spirit (Romans 8:4; 2 Corinthians 4:18; 10:3; 2
Peter 2:10), cannot appreciatively understand these matters not yet seen
except by the eye of faith. (Mark 4:11; 1 Corinthians 2:7-10; Hebrews 11:1)
God's holy spirit is likened to God's finger (as the power of God). (Matthew
12:28; Luke 11:20) As the revealment of truth, the holy spirit appears to
likened to God's "mouth". (1 Kings 8:24; 2 Chronicles 6:4; 36:12,21; Ezra
1:1; Isaiah 1:20; 40:5; 45:23; 48:3; 58:14; 62:2; Jeremiah 9:12,20; Ezekiel
33:7; Micah 4:4; Matthew 4:4; Mark 12:36; Acts 1:17; 28:25; Hebrews 3:7;
9:8; 10:15,16; 2 Peter 1:21) Even true Christians who have received God's
spirit, however, can fall short of walking fully in the spirit, may offend
the holy spirit of God -- the mouth of God, in effect speaking or acting in
disobedience to the mouth of Yahweh (1 Kings 13:21; Ephesians 4:30), so that
on some matters their minds are carnal. (1 Corinthians 3:1,3,4; James 4:4; 2
Peter 3:17) Thus, while the writings in the New Testament, as they were
originally written, do have the truths promised by Jesus, yet very few
Christians are able to comprehend these truths. Why? Because there was an
apostasy, a falling away, from the pure truth, which had already begun in
even while the apostles were still alive. Partly due to this apostasy and
its blinding influences, Jesus spoke, concerning his return, that there
would various degrees of faithfulness and knowledge amongst his servants,
and he asked the question: "The Son of Man having come, shall he find the
faith upon the earth?" (Young's Literal Translation). -- Luke 12:42-48;
18:8.
The holy spirit sent by God through Jesus revealed to the apostles that
there would be a falling away. (Matthew 13:24-30; Acts 20:29,30; 2
Thessalonians 2:1-12; 1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 4:3,4) This falling away
had already begun in the first century, with some receiving a different
spirit and preaching "another Jesus"; the apostasy was restrained for only a
short while. (2 Thessalonians 2:7; 1 John 2:18,19; 2 Corinthians 11:4) After
the apostles died, and without their spiritual influence and guidance, the
apostasy spread rapidly throughout the Christian community, leading
eventually to the development of the "Man of Sin", or more correctly
"Lawless Man", or "Illegal Man", a great religious system unauthorized by
Jesus. The leaders of this religious system claimed that they, also, had the
apostolic spirit so as to have the authority to add to God's Word, or even
overide the Word of God. Eventually, no man could work, spread the truth,
because of the foretold darkness. (John 9:4) The Hebraic usage of the words
EL and ELOHIM seemed to be no longer understood very well by these leaders,
for they claimed that if Jesus was called THEOS, and since the Bible says
that there is only one true THEOS, then Jesus had to be only ture THEOS. The
failure, of course, was in not understanding that the Hebraic background
offers more than one shade of meaning to the words from which the Greek
THEOS was translated. This we have discussed in our study on the Hebraic
Usage of the Words for God.* With this spirit of error in mind, the writings
of the apostles were totally reinterpreted to accommodate the error, and
many of the Hellenic Jewish philosophies were adapted and added to and
blended in with the New Testament, even as the Jews had already done with
the Old Testament. Satan, the deceiver, has used the doctrines of men as a
means to hinder the work of the holy spirit from producing a understanding
of the full Gospel*** message that is presented in the scriptures. As long
as one looks at the scriptures through the trinitarian (or oneness)
spectacles, he is not sufficiently submitting himself to the spirit of truth
as revealed in the Bible, and will be hindered from its full
understanding.**
==========
*Online at:
http://godandson.reslight.net/hebraictitles.html
**See:
Understanding Kingdom Mysteries at:
http://studies.reslight.net/mysteries.html
***See:
http://atonement.reslight.net
In service of Jesus and his God,
Ronald
Spiritual eternal life exists as well as physical death. The death of the
body of Christ was STILL a sacrifice for He was tortured and crucified. The
sacrifice was NOT to face death but to physically go through physical death.
Then of course the body raised back from physical death is STILL
resurrection, which was defeating death. Your logic makes no sense at all.
"Jude Alexander" <Ca...@thebayou.wet> wrote in message
news:P9Zui.10655$Ug2....@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
You don't have to believe anything because it really doesn't matter to
anyone but yourself of what you believe, because only you will face of the
consequences of that choice. There are countless people who don't believe
the truth, but that doesn't make it any less true.
"Jude Alexander" <Ca...@thebayou.wet> wrote in message
news:8i0vi.2222$eO1....@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
Bob, you may know Greek and punctuation and the like, but I KNOW God, I KNOW
the Holy Spirit, I know what they do, who they are and I know them both
intimately and closely for I experience them constantly. When people write
things down and translate them, especially in ancient time, they are NOT
concerned with exact punctuation and mistakes are made, sometimes comma's,
etc., when translated, are missed or misappropriated and if you get into
that much detail, instead of into the meat of the message, you don't
understand anything at all. So let me tell you through experience, having
met face to face with God AND the Holy Spirit, having BOTH the Father and
the Holy Spirit indwell in me, and become One with them, having experienced
both countless times in many scenarios and power that ALL THREE are ONE and
ALL THREE are GOD and all three are necessary for salvation. Like I said,
you need the Son to have the opportunity to be forgiven of your sins, you
need the Father, for to be with Him in heaven is the goal and you need the
Holy Spirit for He is the power, knowledge, wisdom and truth of GOD. You
cannot be saved without any one of them for then you would be missing a
vital element of salvation. I don't understand how you can possibly think
you don't need one of them to be saved? How can you be saved WITHOUT the
knowledge, power and wisdom that the Holy Spirit brings for knowledge of
sin, humility, repentance, as well as the power of self control to resist
the devil and overcome him? How can you be saved without the Son, because
then you would have NO forgiveness of sin, and thus would die in your sins
and how can you be saved without the Father for He is the One that
everything is for? And how can you believe that any One of them is NOT GOD,
when everything they say, think, and do can be nothing short of God?
"Bible Bob" <bibl...@saintly.com> wrote in message
news:11cpb353p2blbgt4a...@4ax.com...
No this is the difference between someone who has experienced the power,
wisdom, knowledge and truth of God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit
and one who is shallow and superficial in their faith, knowing only the
words but never experiencing God personally, closely and intimately.
cont
>
> My viewpoint, which I have disclosed, is that IF Jesus DOES NOT SAY
> that belief in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation, then
> whether the bible god is Triune or not is irrelevant to the question
> of salvation. Jesus tells you that you have to come to the Father
> through HIM. If Jesus also says he and the Father are one, then
> belief in Jesus is the same as belief in god but either way, belief in
> Jesus as savior is the only thing that matters, not whether he is
> triune.
JUST believing in Jesus is the only thing that matters??? Clearly you have
NO respect, knowledge, wisdom or experience with the Father nor the Holy
Spirit or you wouldn't say such a ridiculous thing. Everything Jesus taught
was FOR the Father and said so, for HE placed the Father first and foremost
in everything and ergo, you should to. Jesus is the WAY TO the Father and
thus if you believe IN Jesus, then you would certainly believe in the things
He said, but clearly you don't even care what Jesus said as if it has no
value to you. Clearly stating that anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit
will NEVER be forgiven, and that anyone who blasphemes the Father and the
Son, can be forgiven, this clearly reveals the high respect, adoration and
awe that Jesus has for the Holy Spirit. I cannot believe that you place so
little value in the Father and the Holy Spirit. And if you don't believe
that the Father, Holy Spirit and Son are ONE GOD, then you don't know the
Son, or any of them, ergo, you really don't believe in the Son at all.
cont
> To claim that you must believe in the Trinity to be saved is simply
> nothing more than one group of Christians setting themselves up over
> another group of Christians to make themselves feel superior.
It's not about superiority, but about TRUTH!
>> John 10:30
>> 30 I and my Father are one.
>> KJV
>
> JERRY
> Which does not mean "literally ONE entity" but that when you speak to
> Jesus you also speak to God, as Jesus is God's representative.
Yes, it does mean ONE entity, for God has the power and ability to be One
with the Son, one entity, as well as separate individuals, for that is what
makes Him God, nothing is impossible, or do you limit God through you own
human understanding?
cont
>> Matt 28:19-20
>> 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of
>> the
>> Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
>
> JERRY
> Again, this does not say that all these entities are the same. But if
> you want to take a very literal viewpoint of this part of the bible,
> then you are in trouble:
>
Well, if one must be baptized to be saved, and if it is commanded to be
baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, then belief
in all three, as the ONE GOD, who provides all truths, all power, all
wisdom, all knowledge and path to heaven, is essential for baptism as well
as salvation.
cont
> MATTHEW 16 (KJV)
> 16:27
> For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his
> angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
>
> 16:28
> Verily I say unto you, THERE BE SOME STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT
> TASTE OF DEATH, TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM.
>
> That would indicate that the Second Coming was supposed to happen two
> thousand years ago and that Jesus stood you up on prom night.
>
No, it doesn't because you don't understand the meaning of the words. Not
tasting death means spiritual death, but would continually be resurrected
back on earth for every generation until the second coming. I provided this
verse because it clearly states that the Son and the Father are the same,
since He comes in the Father's glory.
cont
> JERRY
> The problem with that is, it's too often a euphemism for "believe
> first, rationalize later," as opposed to "read first, test to see if
> it's true and then believe because the book has proven to be true."
Then you are reading scripture as the heathens do for you rely on logic
rather than faith, rather than allowing God to reveal the truth to you,
therefore you will be wrong in most stances because you interpret with a
carnal mind, rather than a spiritual one.
"rogue" <rogu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186725153.8...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 10, 6:01 am, "Dore" <dorewilliam...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> "rogue" <rogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1186650726.5...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > JERRY
>> > Citation, please? Show me WHERE in the bible Jesus says that belief
>> > in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation. I have to admit, I've
>> > read the bible pretty extensively and never found that verse ANYWHERE
>> > in the bible. All I can tell is that someone decided there must be a
>> > Trinity and now tells people that if you don't believe the same way
>> > they do, you don't go to heaven.
>>
>> > So, don't read into the text, don't tell me what the text "means."
>> > which is really nothing more than your interpretation of the text. l I
>> > want you to show me the verse where Jesus says that belief in the
>> > Trinity is a requirement for salvation.
>
>> DORE
>> Jerry, let me ask you this. Is belief in God a requirement for salvation?
>
> JERRY
> That would be implied. You can't be "saved" if there is no deity to
> provide "salvation" (which is really silly, since you are being saved
> from the wrath of the being who allegedly "saves" you. Kind of like
> being told by the Godfather than while he CAN have you "sleep" with
> the fishes, he instead will let you go home and sleep with your wife.
> Thanks a lot, Dad.)
>
>> DORE
>> Is belief in Jesus Christ a requirement for salvation?
>
> JERRY
> Again, that would be an implication. If you have to believe that
> Jesus is the "Son of God" and that he died for your sins, then belief
> in Jesus would be necessary.
>
>> DORE
>> Is belief in Jesus words and commands a requirement for salvation? The
>> answer is "YES" to all of
>> these questions.
>
> JERRY
> And here is where you get into trouble.
>
>> DORE
>> If the Father and Son are One and the Holy Spirit is the
>> Spirit of God, then all three are God, and thus believing in all three is
>> a
>> requirement for salvation.
>
> JERRY
> This is the logical fallacy of the Non-Sequiter. None of your
> previous statements about belief will lead you to the conclusion that
> "Father and Son are One and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God."
> This is something that has been claimed without evidence and the
> difference between a Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian.
>
> My viewpoint, which I have disclosed, is that IF Jesus DOES NOT SAY
> that belief in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation, then
> whether the bible god is Triune or not is irrelevant to the question
> of salvation. Jesus tells you that you have to come to the Father
> through HIM. If Jesus also says he and the Father are one, then
> belief in Jesus is the same as belief in god but either way, belief in
> Jesus as savior is the only thing that matters, not whether he is
> triune.
>
> To claim that you must believe in the Trinity to be saved is simply
> nothing more than one group of Christians setting themselves up over
> another group of Christians to make themselves feel superior.
>>
>> John 10:30
>> 30 I and my Father are one.
>> KJV
>
> JERRY
> Which does not mean "literally ONE entity" but that when you speak to
> Jesus you also speak to God, as Jesus is God's representative.
>>
>> Matt 28:19-20
>> 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of
>> the
>> Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
>
> JERRY
> Again, this does not say that all these entities are the same. But if
> you want to take a very literal viewpoint of this part of the bible,
> then you are in trouble:
>
> MATTHEW 16 (KJV)
> 16:27
> For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his
> angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
>
> 16:28
> Verily I say unto you, THERE BE SOME STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT
> TASTE OF DEATH, TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM.
>
> That would indicate that the Second Coming was supposed to happen two
> thousand years ago and that Jesus stood you up on prom night.
>
>
>
>> DORE
>> If you are reading scripture and expect exact verbiage for a belief
>> system,
>> instead of drinking in it's truths that you are simply skimming over the
>> Bible and have a superficial faith.
>
> JERRY
> The problem with that is, it's too often a euphemism for "believe
> first, rationalize later," as opposed to "read first, test to see if
> it's true and then believe because the book has proven to be true."
>
>
So, according to you, 2,000 years ago people had NO language, no alphabet,
no ability to write things down and record them?
cont
>
> EVERYTHING in your book was written by humans based on what they wanted to
> put
> over- PERIOD
>
Everything in the Bible was written by humans who knew God, walked with God,
experienced God or recorded the lives and messages of those who did.
"bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:46BC32B4...@netvigator.com...
>
>
> rogue wrote:
>
>> On Aug 9, 3:29 am, "Dore" <dorewilliam...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> > "rogue" <rogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >
>> > news:1186580076.5...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > > Yet, it still doesn't answer the question: where in the bible does
>> > > it
>> > > say you must believe in the Trinity to be saved?
>> >
>> > > Where does Jesus say "you come to the Trinity through me, or you come
>> > > to the Father through the Trinity or us or we or we are legion, etc
>> > > etc."
>> >
>> > > Until you answer that question, you are making mountains out of
>> > > insignificant molehills.
>> >
>> > > Until you answer that question, the reality (or not) of the Trinity
>> > > is
>> > > unimportant.
>>
>> > DORE
>> > The term "trinity" simply signifies the three members of the Godhead,
>> > the
>> > Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You need ALL three in order to be
>> > saved. You need the Son, to be forgiven of your sins.
>>
>> JERRY
>> Citation, please? Show me WHERE in the bible Jesus says that belief
>> in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation.
>
> It is impossible to know what ANYONE ever 'Said' over two thousand years
> ago.
>
> Do you people ever THINK ?
>
> EVERYTHING in your book was written by humans based on what they wanted to
> put
> over- PERIOD
>
>> I have to admit, I've
>> read the bible pretty extensively and never found that verse ANYWHERE
>> in the bible. All I can tell is that someone decided there must be a
>> Trinity and now tells people that if you don't believe the same way
>> they do, you don't go to heaven.
>>
>> So, don't read into the text, don't tell me what the text "means."
>> which is really nothing more than your interpretation of the text. l I
>> want you to show me the verse where Jesus says that belief in the
>> Trinity is a requirement for salvation.
>>
>> The Son is the only
>> > way to the Father, which is the goal. The Holy Spirit is God's Spirit
>> > and
>> > power, indwelling in the believer to bring wisdom, knowledge, truth and
>> > the
>> > power of God to overcome sins, evil and grow into the perfection that
>> > God
>> > requires for any soul to enter heaven.
>> >
>> > "rogue" <rogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >
>> > news:1186580076.5...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > > On Aug 8, 4:52 am, "Carl" <sai...@nettally.com> wrote:
>> > >> Definitely an excellent article from Doctors Ankerberg and Weldon.
>> >
>> > > JERRY
>> > > Yet, it still doesn't answer the question: where in the bible does
>> > > it
RE-READ it again! To have the faith of Jesus for God to resurrect Him, he
would have to have a REAL DEATH!
I believe in the circle that is a perfect square, and I'm not going to budge
no matter what anybody sez...
I already know that what people may believe doesn't necessarily make it so.
I believe 8 year old understand that concept.
Do you have epilepsy or any brain disorder? This is a real question and not
making fun.
> DORE
> No this is the difference between someone who has experienced the power,
> wisdom, knowledge and truth of God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit
> and one who is shallow and superficial in their faith, knowing only the
> words but never experiencing God personally, closely and intimately.
JERRY
Your argument is the same one offered by the Muslim who "has
experienced the power, wisdom, knowledge and truth of God," Dore. By
trying to introduce your feelings as evidence you validate every other
religion as well as your own. They are all equal in validity in that
argument.
And, you are wrong. I was a fundamentalist. I believed just as you
do, until I read the bible and when I read it, found it didn't make
sense. Further reading and research showed me why it wasn't valid as
the "word" of a deity.
>
> cont
>
>
>
> > My viewpoint, which I have disclosed, is that IF Jesus DOES NOT SAY
> > that belief in the Trinity is a requirement for salvation, then
> > whether the bible god is Triune or not is irrelevant to the question
> > of salvation. Jesus tells you that you have to come to the Father
> > through HIM. If Jesus also says he and the Father are one, then
> > belief in Jesus is the same as belief in god but either way, belief in
> > Jesus as savior is the only thing that matters, not whether he is
> > triune.
> DORE
> JUST believing in Jesus is the only thing that matters???
JERRY
Did Jesus say "WE are the way, the truth and the Life and No One comes
to the Father but through US? Did Jesus teach of a Triune god? Are
you aware that the concept of the Triune god doesn't exist from the
First century but was added considerably later?
> DORE
> Clearly you have
> NO respect, knowledge, wisdom or experience with the Father nor the Holy
> Spirit or you wouldn't say such a ridiculous thing.
JERRY
Clearly, Logic, reason and rationality are foreign concepts to you or
you wouldn't say such a ridiculous thing.
> DORE
> Everything Jesus taught
> was FOR the Father and said so, for HE placed the Father first and foremost
> in everything and ergo, you should to. Jesus is the WAY TO the Father and
> thus if you believe IN Jesus, then you would certainly believe in the things
JERRY
And yet, he didn't say that you went to the Father-Son-Holy Spirit
through him, did he? Therefore, the concept of the Trinity isn't
required for salvation.
> DORE
> He said, but clearly you don't even care what Jesus said as if it has no
> value to you.
JERRY
Only from the viewpoint that I can use it to show you don't know your
religion or your bible as well as you think you do.
> DORE
> Clearly stating that anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit
> will NEVER be forgiven, and that anyone who blasphemes the Father and the
> Son, can be forgiven, this clearly reveals the high respect, adoration and
> awe that Jesus has for the Holy Spirit. I cannot believe that you place so
> little value in the Father and the Holy Spirit.
JERRY
Just as much value as I place in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny,
Dore. However, that's not why I am here or why you entered into this
discussion.
I asked a simple question. My position is very simple.
"Where does Jesus say in the text that you must believe in the Trinity
or the Triune god to be saved?" Chapter and verse.
While the concept of a Trinity is kind of a fun thing to discuss among
your fundy friends, if Jesus doesn't make it a requirement for
salvation, then it's not very important. To claim that it's required
to be saved is to elevate your opinion above everyone else's,
including Jesus' and say that YOU are the arbiter of who is saved and
goes to Heaven.
> DORE
> And if you don't believe
> that the Father, Holy Spirit and Son are ONE GOD, then you don't know the
> Son, or any of them, ergo, you really don't believe in the Son at all.
JERRY
Please show in the bible where Jesus says that belief in the Trinity
is required for salvation. Chapter and verse, please. You want me to
take you seriously? We play in the bible, not the vast wasteland of
the playground of your opinion. Your opinion carries no more weight
than anyone else's in this or any other forum.
So, please show me in the TEXT, Dore, where Jesus makes it a
requirement to be saved.
t
>
> > To claim that you must believe in the Trinity to be saved is simply
> > nothing more than one group of Christians setting themselves up over
> > another group of Christians to make themselves feel superior.
> DORE
> It's not about superiority, but about TRUTH!
JERRY
So is my question. Where does Jesus say it's a requirement for
Salvation?
>
> >> John 10:30
> >> 30 I and my Father are one.
> >> KJV
>
> > JERRY
> > Which does not mean "literally ONE entity" but that when you speak to
> > Jesus you also speak to God, as Jesus is God's representative.
>
> Yes, it does mean ONE entity, for God has the power and ability to be One
> with the Son, one entity, as well as separate individuals, for that is what
> makes Him God, nothing is impossible, or do you limit God through you own
> human understanding?
>
> cont
>
> >> Matt 28:19-20
> >> 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of
> >> the
> >> Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
>
> > JERRY
> > Again, this does not say that all these entities are the same. But if
> > you want to take a very literal viewpoint of this part of the bible,
> > then you are in trouble:
> DORE
> Well, if one must be baptized to be saved, and if it is commanded to be
> baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, then belief
> in all three, as the ONE GOD, who provides all truths, all power, all
> wisdom, all knowledge and path to heaven, is essential for baptism as well
> as salvation.
JERRY
Matt 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what
good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none
good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
commandments.
19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder,
Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not
bear false witness,
19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself.
19:20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from
my youth up: what lack I yet?
19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that
thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in
heaven: and come and follow me.
19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away
sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
JERRY
Here was a perfect example: Where does Jesus say that you MUST
believe in the Trinity to be saved? Jesus tells someone what they
must do and he tells them to keep the commandments.
Is there a commandment to believe in a Trinity, Dore?
>
> cont
>
> > MATTHEW 16 (KJV)
> > 16:27
> > For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his
> > angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
>
> > 16:28
> > Verily I say unto you, THERE BE SOME STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT
> > TASTE OF DEATH, TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM.
>
> > That would indicate that the Second Coming was supposed to happen two
> > thousand years ago and that Jesus stood you up on prom night.
> DORE
> No, it doesn't because you don't understand the meaning of the words. Not
> tasting death means spiritual death, but would continually be resurrected
> back on earth for every generation until the second coming.
JERRY
So, are you a Christian who believes in reincarnation, Dore? Is that
also fundie doctrine now?
> DORE
> I provided this
> verse because it clearly states that the Son and the Father are the same,
> since He comes in the Father's glory.
JERRY
He doesn't say they're the same, that's simply you projecting. And I
just posted verses that indicate that Jesus didn't feel the Trinity
was necessary for salvation. Now, prove me wrong.
>
>
> > JERRY
> > The problem with that is, it's too often a euphemism for "believe
> > first, rationalize later," as opposed to "read first, test to see if
> > it's true and then believe because the book has proven to be true."
>
> Then you are reading scripture as the heathens do for you rely on logic
> rather than faith, rather than allowing God to reveal the truth to you,
> therefore you will be wrong in most stances because you interpret with a
> carnal mind, rather than a spiritual one.
JERRY
And you are a perfect example of one who believes first, rationalize
later, such as your statement above about "spiritual death" which
isn't what he says. You also rationalize that because Jesus comes in
the Glory of his Father that it means the two are one.
> RE-READ it again! To have the faith of Jesus for God to resurrect Him, he
> would have to have a REAL DEATH!
So what is a "REAL DEATH"? Are you saying that no one has ever died on the
earth and all of these funerals, car accidents, heart attacks, cancer deaths
etc are not death at all? If it isn't death, what is it?
So if the government decides to crucify you, torture you, beat you, whip
you, spit on you and abuse you in all manners until you die because of your
religion, that you haven't suffered death or sacrificed anything?
"Jude Alexander" <Ca...@thebayou.wet> wrote in message
news:y0Ovi.5648$uh7....@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude Alexander" <Ca...@thebayou.wet> wrote in message
news:i2Ovi.5650$uh7....@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
It makes perfect sense to me and I can see God throughout it's pages. I
guess that is the difference between someone who has NOT obeyed the words of
the gospel to receive the Holy Spirit of truth, like you, and someone who is
full of the Holy Spirit of truth, as I am. The actual words of God are found
in the Bible, but yes, there are some things that are the opinion, beliefs
and concepts of the writer, for example Paul's works, Solomon's works etc.
cont
JERRY
> Did Jesus say "WE are the way, the truth and the Life and No One comes
> to the Father but through US? Did Jesus teach of a Triune god? Are
> you aware that the concept of the Triune god doesn't exist from the
> First century but was added considerably later?
Yes, Jesus taught of a triune God. Throughout the gospels the concept of a
three person Godhead is manifest through all of the things that Jesus said.
And how do YOU know when any part of it was added or written? If Jesus spoke
of the Father, Himself and the Holy Spirit as GOD, then it was NOT added
later, but recorded when the words of Christ were written.
cont
> JERRY
> And yet, he didn't say that you went to the Father-Son-Holy Spirit
> through him, did he? Therefore, the concept of the Trinity isn't
> required for salvation.
Of course He did. He said that he was One with the Father, (John 10:30) and
that if you saw Him, then you saw the Father.(John14;9-11) He said that He
would send the Comforter, the Spirit of truth, and in the next line, He said
that HE would come and not leave you comfortless, implying that HE was that
same Holy Spirit. (John 14:17-18)
cont
>> DORE
>> Clearly stating that anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit
>> will NEVER be forgiven, and that anyone who blasphemes the Father and the
>> Son, can be forgiven, this clearly reveals the high respect, adoration
>> and
>> awe that Jesus has for the Holy Spirit. I cannot believe that you place
>> so
>> little value in the Father and the Holy Spirit.
>
> JERRY
> Just as much value as I place in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny,
> Dore. However, that's not why I am here or why you entered into this
> discussion.
If you place as much value in the Father and the Holy Spirit as you do Santa
Claus and the Easter Bunny, then you are a blasphemer of both and a devil
from hell and since that is revealed, this discussion is over for you
understand nothing of God, for darkness reigns in you.
"rogue" <rogu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186971570....@l22g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
Well YOU claimed it was one kind of death and not another. It doesn't
matter what kind of death, it HAD to be death or it was a scam. If you can't
understand that low grade logic, what else can I say.
I believe in the circle that is a perfect square and no body can convince
otherwise.
>
> So if the government decides to crucify you, torture you, beat you, whip
> you, spit on you and abuse you in all manners until you die because of
> your religion, that you haven't suffered death or sacrificed anything?
This has nothing to do with what we're talking about and what we're talking
about is the LEGITIMACY of Jesus's sacrifice.