Featured The Trinity

Trevor says he is not a JW. He does declare the same translational errors as do the JWs.

 

Consider:

2 Thessalonians 2

King James Version (KJV)

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;


Does it matter if Paul is saying that the believers he wrote to should not be concerned that the Rapture has occurred (the coming of Christ specifically in regards to our gathering to Him), not to let others trouble then that the Day of the Lord is at hand?

I would suggest that v.3 is saying that the Day of the Lord (which is distinctly different from what Paul taught concerning the Rapture, as well as what Christ taught concerning the Second Coming) will not come until after Antichrist is revealed.

The point is this: "You know the Day of the Lord hasn't occurred, you know your not in the Tribulation...because Antichrist has not been revealed."

Verse 1 beseeches them by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering to Him. In other words...you would have been Raptured before that time, why are you worried that you are in the Tribulation, that the Second Coming is at hand?

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?


I think it does make a difference, lol.

Okay, were getting pretty far from the topic now. Great topic for a thread, though.


God bless.

 

Well, we have to recognize that there are translational issues that have to be dealt with. Best to just deal with them.

This...


2 Thessalonians 2

King James Version (KJV)

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.


...is a translational issue.

As far as the translational errors of Trevor, if he presented them, then I hope I dealt with them, lol.

Perhaps you could give me a few examples of these?

And I will check back, maybe tomorrow, just popped back in for a few minutes.


God bless.

 

Not sure I follow your concerns brother. Christ is the Lord, so whether it says day of Christ or day of the Lord seems to me one in the same.

 

Well he already went through the "I ams" with you. A favorite of the JWs which Trevor also agrees with them on is John chapter one which clearly states Jesus Christ is God.

As far as translational issues goes, I find no translation issues in the KJV (which is my #1 go to) that would cast doubt on any established doctrine concerning salvation by grace through faith alone, OSAS or the Trinity. Just to mention a few.

 

Greetings again steaver, Darrell and SovereignGrace,

The following is a quick response to the many Posts that you have made since my last Posting.

I have already discussed John 5 with Darrell and I have come to a different conclusion. I believe that in John 5 and John 10:30-36 that Jesus answers their wrong assessment and accusation.

I am still surprised that Baptists deny baptism. I do not have the Spirit as a direct infusion. My spiritual mind is as a result of imbibing the Word of God, and allowing its transforming power to transform both my thoughts and actions.

If you refer to the picture I attempted to draw at the top of Page 4, it is God that came down in the form of the Holy Spirit, it was the Son of God that was conceived and dwelt amongst us, it was Jesus that ascended to sit at the right hand of God the Father. This is called God has visited us, God with us, a Theophany.

I am not willing to get into a detailed discussion on this, as it is mainly between you and steaver. But my situation is that on one occasion in my youth when I was depressed I encountered a street preacher, and I do not know now fully what he said, but he did call upon the few in his audience to commit themselves to Christ. I did step forward, and he did some talking or blessing, but that was that. I never saw him and his associates again. I felt no rush of the Holy Spirit, and my problems became worse. Things changed for better a year or two later when my sister seeing my distress invited me to a Young People’s Bible study class, and this started some progress. I was not baptised in water until about 4 years later, but again no conscious feeling of Spirit infusion, but simply a gradual growth and commitment to the things of God. I think I mentioned to you steaver once before that there is a difference of outlook between Luther and modern Evangelicals, concerning the Holy Spirit within.

It is very important to seek to give the glory to God the Father, and also to His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. I am prepared to continue to question the Trinity as it is not taught in the Scriptures. The Scriptures teach that there is one God the Father, and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

I have repeatedly rejected both JW doctrine and the NWT. I have never seen any JW info on the “I Am” passages. My presentation of these was from using Strongs to find each “I am” and then taking each passage, one at a time trying to determine each one from its context. I disagree with the JWs on John 1 and the wrong JW translation of John 1.

Darrell, regarding Genesis 17, 18, Exodus 3 I still believe that the Theophany in each case is An Angel. There is an error in my editing, but I do not seem to be able to fix this. My answer to your mulberry question is:
Fruit is in Spring, so you will have to wait 6 months or visit Australia in the next two weeks.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

We didn't really discuss the "I am" issue, that is not really what I see as a productive debate concerning the Trinity. John 1 can be looked at for far greater meaning in regards to the Deity of Christ.

As far as translations, the KJV is my preferred translation, but there are translational issues I see. They are not many, but, I am not going to say there are none. There are places which call the Spirit "it" rather than He, and while this steps into an interpretational matter, both translational and interpretational matters have to be considered, and for me, when I debate with those who are trying to support an erroneous view based on these issues, I am going to recognize whatever might have a valid element. If I say there are no interpretational or translational issues, then I am not going to be able to actually address the heart of the argument my antagonist presents. That is the core issue, after all, and they will use that to maintain a justified position. Most of these issues can be answered in the context of the very passage itself. That is what I find 98% of the time.

As to 2 Thessalonians 2, as I said, I do see an importance to whether Paul is distinguishing between the Rapture and the Day of the Lord, as they are two separate events, but, it's not something I usually mention unless someone tries to use the passage to teach one resurrection. It is a little difficult to absorb, but, it fits into the grander framework of resurrection, a worthy discussion all around.

God bless.

 

Hello Trevor, just going to respond to what hasn't already been discussed (which I see as not productive because the same arguments are presented and there has been no response to my posts) and what is relevant to myself.

Who said Baptists deny baptism? lol

As a Baptist I recognize several baptisms referred to in Scripture, and to name a few, there are the baptisms (washings) associated with the (Covenant of) Law, there are Baptisms of Identification (i.e., with Moses, John the Baptist, with Christ, with suffering, with judgment), there is Christian Baptism (which is a Baptism of Identification with (Christ)), and there is the most important Baptism, which is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, which is the Baptism by which believers are simultaneously baptized into Christ via the Eternal Indwelling of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

This takes place at the time of salvation, and is not an event which is visibly or physically witnessed, as some of our Charismatic Brethren believe.

Nor does it take place at the time of Christian Baptism, which is a ceremonial representation of the spiritual event. This baptism is performed by men, whereas the Baptism with the Holy Ghost has only One Baptizer, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ.

We know this because it is written:

Matthew 3:11-12

King James Version (KJV)

11 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:

12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.


I will start the thread I referred to earlier, and hope you will join in.

The conception of Christ refers only to the body created by God in the womb of Mary.

I have posted several passages which show the Son's pre-existence, yet you have responded to none of them.

You just aren't really ready for this discussion, my friend, and it is just my hope that one day you will be.

It's not really a discussion when you simply talk at people and ignore what they have said. Not saying to be rude, just pointing it out, and the truth is I understand your reticence to address the points made.

In Genesis 18, you will not change the fact that it is Jehovah God speaking to, and in the very presenvce of...Abraham. To deny this you deny the very Scripture.

I will just comment that the indwelling of God is a spiritual event, not something witnessed by men:


John 3:7-8

King James Version (KJV)

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.


Keep in mind that it is the wind in view, which no one sees. We could argue we "feel" the wind, or hear the wind, but that is not the point the Lord is making. The point is that just as the wind had no ready understanding in that day, even so being born of God has no ready understanding. We can understand the result, but we cannot say how it comes about.

The evidence of salvation can be seen, just as the evidence of wind's appearance can be:


Hebrews 11

King James Version (KJV)

11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Well, your dogmatic claim that "it's not in there" stands in line with your necessity to address the Scripture presented that is offered to show that it is. At the very least, you need to recognize the Deity of Christ, which is rather clear.

Christ states "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last," which covers both Old And New Testament passages in which it is clear that God is speaking.

I will say this, though, there is nothing wrong with being skeptical about doctrines we don't yet understand. That is just part of the learning process. The Bereans were skeptical, lol.

Glad to hear it. Thanks for clarifying that point. I too have been called that which I am not, Calvinist, Arminian, Dispensationalist, Charismatic, and a few things not really acceptable for public view, lol.

Then you believe Jehovah is an Angel?

That is Who comes to Abraham. The Scriptures cannot be broken.

I think you are confusing this with passages concerning the Angel of the Lord. Angel speaks of a messenger, and a Christophany need not be denied as a passage where the Messenger is the SOn of God, and, God Himself. There is a distinction between God in His Eternality and God ministering in physical form, as well as spiritual, among men.

It's not clear what needs to be fixed, but, I wish I could come visit you in Australia, my friend, and enjoy a few mulberries and enjoy the scenery.

I wouldn't mind seeing New Zealand, either. Beautiful country. And I love the accent.

And the weird animals, lol.

So are you on the coast or interior?


God bless.

 

I will start the thread on baptism.

God bless.

 

You base your doctrine of the trinity on experience and not on the Word? It is because you had a bad experience with some unknown street preacher who could have had any strange doctrine, and you were depressed at the time. But because you "didn't experience any "emotional feeling" you deny the trinity, not because of what the Word of God says??

One doesn't base doctrine on experience. Our doctrine comes from God's Word. One of the primary beliefs of Baptists is that "The Bible is the sole authority in all areas of faith and doctrine." Experience, if one has it all, is purely incidental. Some are very emotional; some have very little emotions. That doesn't affect their doctrine.

Consider others.
Benny Hinn often relies on "experience." He believes that during the time between the death and resurrection Jesus went down to hell and made a bargain with the devil. That, in his view, is part of the teaching of the atonement. Does his experience win over Bible teaching?

William Branham teaches that Eve had sexual relations with the serpent and that is what constituted the Fall and is the real reason that each of us have an "Adamic nature."
He also claims that he had power in his hands. When they vibrated something like electricity flowed out of them. And when he layed them on people they were healed. He was one of the original leaders in the Pentecostal Movement, and introduced many errors. Experience led him. The people that follow him today do not read their Bibles, they listen to his tapes.

There are some that say they have been to heaven and hell and back again, and therefore they know of the reality of Hell. Is that how we know hell is real, or is it because the Bible teaches it to be true?

Does experience trump doctrine taught in the Bible?
If so, then my experience is that I don't feel like getting out of bed in the morning. What happens if I give into my feelings (my experience)?
I get fired from work!

 

And there you have it. The entire ministry of Jesus Christ is to usher in the Kingdom of God, the New Covenant, Regeneration, the New Heart, Holy Spirit indwellment, Christ in You, the New Creation, Born Again, Born of God.

It is SPIRITUAL Trevor. NOT mental. You have missed the entire NT Gospel. You can study those scriptures til the cows come home, even follow the good deeds exhorted, but if you have not the Spirit of Christ "infused" into your spirit, you are lost. "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:" Ro 8:16. NOT the thoughts of the mind!!!

 

Greetings again Darrell, DHK and steaver,

I feel very confident concerning the “I am” passages as I presented them as well as the fact that John 8:58 is not quoting Exodus 3:14 as this passage is better translated as “I will be” or Tyndale’s “I wilbe”.

My comment came from previous contact with steaver where he gave me the impression that water baptism was almost an optional extra. The position of my fellowship is that water baptism is the appointed means of identifying with the death and resurrection of Christ.
Acts 8:5,12 (KJV): 5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Belief motivates a person to become baptised. We do not believe that the Spirit inhabits us after belief in the same way as you suggest.

First of all I do not want to be pedantic, but I recommend you check whether “Jehovah” is a good representation of the YHWH Name. I recommend the introduction to Rotherham’s translation as one possible help. Such a suggestion by me may help steaver to stop accusing me of being a JW, as they will not wear such a change, seeing that Judge Rutherford was “inspired” to select the title JW for their movement. I do not believe that God the Father left his throne and appeared to Abraham. I believe it was an Angel who represented God and thus God placed His Name upon him.
Exodus 23:20-21 (KJV): 20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

I have been blessed to live 160 km north of Sydney, in Newcastle, 5 km from the best beach, 1 km from the best lake, on 2 acres, but in the midst of the suburbs and near a good shopping centre. The greatest blessing is to be 5km from our meeting where we have a healthy fellowship of like minds.

No, that is not what I was trying to convey, sorry for the confusion. If anything the street preacher did have an impact, but the experience was not sufficient to fully set my steps on a better path. One major factor at that time was that I was a compulsive gambler and I would blow my wages soon after receiving them. Looking back on my life I can never say I had a third voice within, but consider any real progress was only when I listened to the Word of God and meditated therein. I am more conscious of God’s guiding hand through circumstances of life, for example Joseph Addison’s Hymn:
When in the slippery paths of youth, With heedless steps I ran,
Thine arm unseen conveyed me safe, And led me up to man.
Even we have adapted his hymn and enjoy singing our version. We have four stanzas against his original thirteen. I do not have a Baptist Hymnal, but have Hymns A&M and an Australian CofE Hymn Book.

My views on the “One God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God” were taught to me from the age of Under 8. Only later did we get warned that the Churches had this strange doctrine of the Trinity, One in Three, Three in One. It is only in later years that I have set myself the task of answering some of the Trinity “proof-texts”. But ask Darrell and steaver, they think I have done a very poor job of this, and also ignore their favourite passages such as “Alpha and Omega”. So my answer to the rest of your Post, my belief is firmly based on the Bible and not my feelings.

I accept that this is our difference of perspective. I believe in justification by faith and it is this faith that grows and takes possession of our heart and mind and actions and leads us throughout life.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

As I said, this is not a very productive argument to debate, because it does not have the impact on either side that I think both sides think it should. Whether you see it as "I am" or "I will be," both of which are equally true as God is (the Only) Eternal, the debate doesn't end there.

It is not until you address all proof-texts (and that is not used in a negative sense, by the way) and can reasonably reconcile them to your views (and I speak of both sides) should one be confident in that Doctrinal Position. Those who lightly embrace a dogmatic position on both sides based on weak Scriptural support do a disservice to God, in my view.

There is always the danger of exaggerating an argument. An example would be, for instance, those trying to deny an exaggerated veneration of Mary can sometimes come across as almost despising Mary.

Christian Baptism is commanded to the Disciples as part of their ministry. In that culture a baptism of association identified the one being baptized with the person or subject they were baptized in the name of. John's baptism was a baptism of repentance, and when those coming were baptized it was a public profession of something that had already taken place...repentance. If you read the passages you will see that the baptism did not make one repent, and this is why John rebukes the Pharisees...because their lives did not show fruit of repentance.

Same thing in the case of Christian Baptism: being baptized does not make on to be in Christ, it is an associative ceremony that speaks of what has already happened.

And going to break this up, Trevor, to make it easier to respond to, as well as try to keep the differing issues separated.


Continued...

 

It's a moot point.

If we are going to be specific then we need to put it in it's original form. I get a kick out of those that make a big deal out of this. But the truth is, God is known by many names, and no-one has a claim to having it right. So if one wants to make a big deal out of it, that's their thing. Me...I'm more interested in the issue at hand. If you looked at the link you would see they have Yehovah as the transliteration, yet I choose Jehovah. The reason is that is just what I am used to, and you know...I don't think the Lord minds, lol.

So you recommend something here that takes us away from the issue at hand, and that is, despite whether you think Jehovah is a good representation or not, what we can say is that it was God meeting with Abraham. You cannot change that, thus, to take a side trail rather than keeping the course should be something that stands out to you.

I recommend staying away from commentaries as much as possible. God can and will teach us if we allow Him too. And particularly stay away from issues which lead one away from core issues.

Neither do I. God was on His Throne, yet God was served lunch by Abraham. And at the same time, Trevor...God was still ministering in the hearts of men all over the world.

Most will acknowledge that God is Omnipresent, yet stumble at the thought of God, Who is Spirit, manifesting in flesh and appearing to/dwelling with man, all the while maintain the same ministry He has always accomplished by His Spirit and in His Eternal Sovereignty.

As mentioned before, we are hindered by our temporal mindset which has a tendency to equate God to ourselves. The fact is that if we just understand that our "reality" is to the eternal about as shadowy television is to our reality. In other words, when God enters into our realm He leaves His, and we must recognize that difference. It might be likened to man entering into the sea. A good comparison might be having an aquarium set up on a bookshelf, and understanding that the fish in that aquarium cannot leave that environment, walk into the kitchen, and fix themselves a cup of tea.

So God was on His Throne, being served lunch by Abraham in the physical body that would have been required, and yet still ministering by His Spirit to men around the world.

And have to pause, the forum has slowed down and need to open another page.


Continued...

 

This Messenger can be seen here...

1 Corinthians 10

King James Version (KJV)

1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

...as well.


Exodus 13:21

King James Version (KJV)

21 And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:


Does not the Scripture testify of Who it was that led them? That provided for them?

But the bottom line is that we can see that Scripture itself tells us that it was Jehovah, and when the other two "men" get up and leave...they are listed as Angels.

Too cool, my friend. I would like to live in such a place one day. May never happen here, though, lol.

You actually state the reason, I believe, that this sewing went unattended...

Exactly.

This is the primary means of growth for all of us, and many will starve themselves in their walk with Christ.

Agreed.

Not so strange when we begin to become more familiar with the broader scope of the Testimony of Scripture.

And I would suggest that the bias infused into you through these "warnings" may be impeding your study. If we have already set our minds to a position and then go into Scripture to prove that, rather than careful exegesis, we will limit ourselves to our own teachings, because we have replaced our Teacher with ourselves.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical, I'll give any atheist a run for his money any day in that department, but, in our skepticism we have to be honest in our findings. Indoctrination is not just something others do to us, it can be self-inflicted.

You are missing the reality of the situation, Trevor...you're not "answering" them.

You have evaded the proof-texts I have used.

I can't speak about your discussions with others, only those I have sought to have with you. It's going to be difficult to "answer" those things which have no answer, only recognition of the Scripture.

It was God, not an Angel, that said "I am the First and the Last."

It was God that said "I am the Alpha and Omega...the First and the Last. I am He that was dead and is alive forever more."

Can God die?

Only when He takes on the flesh of man and dies in their stead.

And that is precisely what Paul speaks about in regards to the pre-existing Son of God.

That is precisely what Christ speaks about when He speaks of His glory before the world was formed...


John 17

King James Version (KJV)

5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.


You have quite a lot of the Testimony of the Word of God to "answer," my friend, and you have not begun yet.

Is that not the case?

Glad to hear it. But I will just say you have confessed that you were warned about the Trinity. And anytime we receive instruction from those we hold in leadership, we tend to heed those warnings.

There are some warnings I was taught that I have had to set aside.

And the Mediator is the Word of God.

Would you agree?

And that should be our goal, to see the faith of others...grow.

My hope is that your faith in Christ will grow, and this because you learn the absolute Sovereignty of God in your salvation.


God bless.

 

Darrell your post have been very informative with sound exegesis. If I didn't already understand the Trinity and was searching for truth I would be convinced from the scriptures with your leading. Excellent Job!! I believe Trevor has revealed the core issue that shapes his position on the Trinity. I once set out to prove to myself that OSAS was a deception of the devil. It took me about two years of intense study, prayer, commentaries, crying out to God that I wanted to know the truth! God gave me peace, I had to submit to His Word. And you know what was at the core of my stubbornness? Seeing how so many Christians lived as the world. And this is why God lead me into the study of "born again". I believe Trevor has based his endeavor to answer the Trinity on the warning he received as a child. Rather than seek the truth, he has set his heart to defend the warning.

 

Trevor, I am interested in what the "warning" entailed? Did they tell you these Trinitarians were unsaved? What was the warning? So what if a church believed Jesus is God? What did they tell you that meant? Did they tell you there were consequences for believing and worshipping Jesus as God? Curious....

 

Greetings again Darrell and steaver,

The problem I face is that if you do not agree with some of my explanations on easier aspects of the subject, then it is difficult for me to progress and answer some of the more difficult aspects.

If you had agreed that the Judges could represent God and thus be called by his title “God”, then you would possibly accept that the Angel(s) also represent God, rather than having God Himself appearing in some form independent of any representative.

(and dies as their representative). Yes it is God the Father that speaks in Isaiah, and it is the multitudinous Son of Man that speaks in Revelation 1. Yes God the Father is revealed in and through this Son of Man. And it was Jesus, and not God the Father that died.

My answer to this is the following and notice the past tense:
Psalm 8:5 (KJV): For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

It was simply stated that some believed the Trinity and we were simply instructed that the Bible clearly teaches that there is One God the Father and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. We were then given a few simple proof-texts, for example Deuteronomy 6:4 and 1 Corinthians 8:6.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

TrevorL,

Do you believe Jesus was created? A yes or no will suffice. Thanks.

 

But I have addressed your explanations, Trevor. All I ask is you do the same. This is better, though.

I never said the "judges represented God," Trevor, but that this designation simply refers to a place of power. If you simply quoted me you would never have made this statement, and we wouldn't be trekking over the same ground. And if you mean that I should have agreed...why would you think that?

The Psalm does not equate them to God, nor does it deny the fact that they are men, for they will die like men, which is not something that applies to God in His eternality.

It is erroneously imposing into the Scripture that these men represented God in the manner the Son of God did in the incarnation. It is a bit syllogistic, and surely you can recognize that?

Major premise: God uses men and Angels to represent Himself on earth;

Minor premise: He did that with Christ;

Conclusion: Christ was just a man Who represented God on earth, but, like the other men and Angels He used, Jesus was not God.

And that is a false conclusion which is weak in it's reasoning, because that is not the only passage of Scripture we have dealt with.

An Angel is a messenger, so we see instances when God utilizes Angels to speak to men.

But that does not change the fact that it was Jehovah Who appears to Abraham.

Not three men, not three Angels, but the Lord and two Angels. The context makes that clear.

So Who was this...

Genesis 3:8

King James Version (KJV)

8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden.


...?

Was God physically in the Garden? Is this the same God Who created the earth?

So here are a few passages to consider again:


John 1

King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.


14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


Clearly a reference to Christ, the Son of the Living God.



Colossians 1:12-17

King James Version (KJV)

12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.


Clearly a reference to Christ, the Son of the Living God.


Ephesians 3:8-9

King James Version (KJV)

8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:



Clearly a reference to Christ, the Son of the Living God.


Continued...