Featured The Trinity

This is the "Other Christian Denominations" Forum. There are many "non-Baptist" doctrines that show up for this is the only place that they can post. The only question the administration has to decide is how far from "orthodoxy" is too far.
We have Catholics, Anglicans, Charismatics, Church of Christ, SDA and many others that pop in from time to time.

 

Another good example of an opportunity to be a witness for Christ.

Take advantage of that and straighten out the "weirdness."


God bless.

 

There are some deviant teachings that deserve addressing. Then there are others that should be recognized for what they are and be dismissed as ridiculous.

 

Maybe I am missing what you think is weird. Debate about the Deity of Christ and the Trinity is simply an ancient division, one which some would dogmatically say is a division between Christians and false teachers.

There are many groups which deny the Trinity, and our country has a history of those who deny these doctrines which establishes that even in what some consider a "Christian Nation," this division has been going on for centuries.

This would be, I would think, a topic that should receive immediate attention when it rises up.

But, that's just me.


God bless.

 

Greetings again SovereignGrace and Martin,

My understanding of the term “the Son of God” is most probably not the same as your assessments of this term. My understanding excludes the possibility that Jesus is also “God” (in the English sense of the word), or “God the Son”. In certain contexts the Hebrew words “Elohim” and “Yahweh” are used for Jesus.

My view of the term likeness may be different here. I believe he came in our sin-prone nature, but always overcame the lusts of the flesh, eye and pride of life. He is very much the same nature as us, but never sinned. A better translation is “sin’s flesh” or “flesh of sin” as the word “sinful” flesh can be misleading. .

My view of Genesis 1:26-27 and Psalm 8:5 included the Angels in the creation of man and Jesus. Yes, the creation of Jesus, hence the word “made”. I disagree with the JWs concerning Michael.

Martin, I was a bit disappointed with your response above. What I wrote was the following:

Even though I do not believe Jesus is God, you plucked the first phrase of my comment on John 10:30,36. You seem to ignore v36, which is Jesus’ answer to Jew’s accusing Jesus of making himself equal with God, and then you reaffirm their accusation by agreeing with the Jews. Yes they were hostile and bigoted, but you are agreeing with their wrong assessment. Please also note that v36 is also a summary of Jesus’ rebuttal of their accusation, when he speaks about the Judges being called Elohim, translated as "gods" in the KJV. I suggest you need to look carefully at ALL of John 10:30-36 before you use it as a Trinitarian proof-text.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

TrevorL,


The thing is this...Jesus is the Son of God as we both agree. Now, if Jesus is not God, then He is not eternal, meaning He was created sometime 'after' God. I believe that as long as God is, Jesus is, being God the Son.

 

Greetings again Martin,

The reason why I linked John 10:30 with John 10:36 is that I believe the two statements are essentially the same. The Jews objected to both as well as objecting to ALL that Jesus stated in John 10:30-36. Also you continue to use John 10:30 almost in isolation to support your understanding of the Trinity. Also you insist on latching onto the Jews’ response as proof that Jesus is claiming to be God or part of the Trinity. I would be willing to go through John 10:30-36 looking at each word, phrase, verse and overall teaching and meaning.

The High Priest is here objecting to Jesus claiming to be the Christ, the Son of the Blessed = the Son of God, and fulfilling Psalm 110:1 and then coming in judgement. There is no Trinity claim in what Jesus has stated. Again “I am” is not alluding to or quoting Exodus 3:14.

Again you insist on reading more into the “I am” and “I am he” verses. The soldiers were certainly shocked by Jesus’ statement, but I do not believe it is connected with Exodus 3:14. I have given my explanation of Exodus 3:14 as “I will be”.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good save one, even God. Mk 10:18

I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep. Jn 10:11

 

There are dozens! He will twist the obvious so to dismiss them one by one.

 

So when paul states tgo us that ALL the fulness of Dety dewells within Him, that the father called Him Lord, same term as used in OT for God, and that jesus claimed that he and the father are one, and the Jews knew that to mean that he was/is equally God as the father is, and John states that clearly to use in prologue, that they were all mistaken?

Hebrews commands that the angels of God were to worship Him as lord, how can anyone but God demand and get that worship?

 

Greetings kyredneck and Yeshua1 and Greetings again steaver and Martin,

Not much of a recommendation steaver, but nevertheless I will simply mention that Jesus rejected the praise of the rich young ruler, as it was inappropriate and wrong. To create a syllogism with “Good Master” and “the good shepherd” does not prove that Jesus was claiming to be God or God the Son.

Yes steaver, there are dozens, and I suggested to Martin on the other thread that the concept that Jesus is the good shepherd should also be compared with the fact that Jesus addresses God His Father as His Shepherd:
Psalm 23:1 (KJV): The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
I believe that Psalm 23, although a Psalm of David, reveals the mind (and in some instances the very words) of Christ during his pilgrimage and suffering. Yahweh as Jesus’ shepherd is the very basis of why Jesus is the good shepherd. Faith and trust is built upon discipleship. Jesus is also in some contexts a sheep and others the Lamb of God.

The KJV or Matthew’s parallel passage does not readily support your conjecture about the verb to be in its various forms:
Matthew 26:63-64 (KJV): 63 But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. 64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Perhaps you forgot my Post where I listed a large number of the “I AM” passages in John in the heaven/hell at death thread. Predominantly there is a theme where Jesus is claiming “I am he”, that is “the Christ”. I also believe that Exodus 3:14 should be translated “I will be”. John 8:58 is not a direct quote or allusion to the LXX of Exodus 3:14. As you claim to have some Greek understanding (you keep on saying ego eimi etc), you should check the LXX of Exodus 3:14. The English translation of the LXX is significantly different to the English in the KJV of Exodus 3:14. I prefer Tyndale’s translation and the margins of the RV and RSV.

Your response Yeshua1 is a (rough) weaving together of a number of passages and Trinitarian concepts. I will not answer them one by one as steaver suggested. I have already responded to John 10:30, but as this is one of the most popular Trinitarian proof-texts, I will give a further brief response. To clarify, Jesus by claiming that God is His Father “my Father” is simply saying that he is the Son of God, and he also says that he is one with God his Father. The same type of unity is expressed between God the Father and Jesus, and Jesus and the disciples in John 17. It has nothing to do with the definition in the Trinitarian Athanasian Creed of the Apostate Church. Rather the Bible teaches that there is One God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is The Son of God.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Brother Darrel,

I do not think the Baptistboard should permit posters on the board who reject the doctrine that Jesus is God on the basis of 2 John 1:9-11 "9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God...

10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

 

I don't see how one can be born again, which means having the Spirit of Jesus Christ joined within you as one new creation, and not understand this makes Him omnipresent. Not to mention Jesus is the Eternal Life that dwells in you. He is Eternal, that makes Him God.

 

I disagree with you, Brother. If they ban all of them, how can they learn?

 

Be careful with how you make a judgment like this Brother. I used to hold to a view very close to his. We are saved by grace and not knowledge.

However, if he never comes to the truth that Jesus is in fact God, then you may be right. But I once viewed Jesus solely as the Son of God, yet NOT God, and I was still His. He used the word as I viewed it reading other people's views and showed me the vileness of my view of His Son. Thankfully, He showed me the truth.

 

Greetings again Martin,

As time permits, usually each day, I look at forum topics that I am currently involved with, or even simply interested in without participating. There does not seem to be much additional matter on this thread today, except the possibility that I will be banned, or simply asked to desist because of my “wrong” doctrine. I do not want to be a large frog croaking in a small pond. Neither do I want to continually repeat the same matter.

Nevertheless I had been giving some thought to some of the material that was mentioned yesterday, and I decided to add this without much comment. Martin, you are persistent with your NT “I AM” passages. I decided to finally check what I was partly aware of, that the LXX of Exodus 3:14 is different to the KJV. Here is a version of the LXX from my electronic resources:
Exodus 3:14 (LXX): καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς πρὸς Μωυσῆν Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν, καὶ εἶπεν Οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ Ὁ ὢν ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶς.

Please note that my printed copy of the LXX is slightly different from my electronic LXX, shown above, but most probably not in the essential detail. The following is the English translation from the printed copy. I have not supplied the printed copy of the LXX for Exodus 3:14, and as I am hopeless with Greek except for a long process starting with Strongs.
Exodus 3:14 (English Translation from LXX): And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.

Please note the significant difference between the LXX and the KJV, especially the last phrases, THE BEING has sent me to you and I AM hath sent me unto you.:
Exodus 3:14 (KJV): And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Trevor. Do you really believe God would make this so complicated that the average joe would have to rely upon Greek and Hebrew manuscrips in order to learn the scriptures? Once upon a time the RCC controlled the manuscripts and the people had to listen to their dogmas. Don't you believe it was an act of God to put the scriptures into the ordinary Christians hands? I believe God guided the Greek and Hebrew scholars to translated the Word for us joes into English. I believe the plain reading of the English is what we are to use to understand what God has revealed into us. Your beliefs are out of bounce and quite frankly you force the Word to be read differently than I believe God intended. JW's, Mormons, SDA's all came centuries after the English translations were totally accepted as infallible in doctrinal truths. So God left us go on believing that He is Three for some 1600 years and then comes along these fringe sects and try to rewrite what has been already settled. Why? I believe ye kick against the pricks.

 

In view would be fellowship with darkness, which stands in stark contrast to evangelistic efforts.

Paul is he greatest example of going unto the unbelievers for the purpose of "disputing" with them, and we should follow that pattern. Just as we should follow the teaching to excommunicate from a congregation those who sin and hold to false doctrine and damnable heresies.

But BaptistBoard is not a fellowship of worship and tight community of like minded believers all holding to the same doctrine...it is a Christian Doctrinal Discussion Forum intended for that very purpose.

Banning people because they are erroneous in their understanding would mean that everyone would have to be banned, thus defeating the purpose this Forum was designed to fulfill.

So I have to agree with the member that pointed out salvation is not a result of knowledge, it is a response to the Gospel in obedience to the Gospel. Men are usually saved in a pretty ignorant state. They know enough to know to know they are sinners, and Christ is the remedy.


God bless.