The importance of the doctrine of the Trinity

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> And Paul states that Timothy was saved even before becoming a Christian.

Just wondering, where does Paul state this in 2 Tim. 3:13-17?

Neal </font>[/QUOTE]Verse 15.

"And that from a babe thou hast known the sacred writings which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. "

It is shown that the OT writings that Timothy had been hearing from his infancy was CAPABLE of making him KNOW enough to have faith in Jesus, and be saved.

It is true too.

If we never saw any of those writings in the OT, we wouldn't be able to know that Jesus was the Messiah.

I used to have a bumpersticker on my car (it fell off) that said:

"Without the Old Testament, Jesus was just a really nice guy"

It was a response to the New Age 'New Testament only' Christians, the very liberal, type. (you probably know some).

God Bless

 

[AITB]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
Helen, AITB,

You said that if I say that Jesus is the Express image of His Father, that there are TWO GODS???

That's what it sounded like you were saying, to me.

What do you think the TRINITY is teaching?

That there is ONLY ONE???

Of course it teaches that there is only one God. I don't think, I know.

If the FATHER is GOD, and JESUS is the Express IMAGE of HIS FATHER, then JESUS IS GOD TOO!!!!

Then...what is your objection to the doctrine of the Trinity? Setting aside the Catholic stuff about Mary, I mean. What's your objection to the Nicene Creed?

Why is that so hard for you to see???

I can only see what you tell me. You said you don't believe the doctrine of the Trinity. I'm trying to understand what it is you don't believe about it. If I got that wrong, I'm open to being corrected. Just go for it and correct me...like I said, I only know what you tell me.

Why do I need to SAY the sky is blue for you to know that I can see that the sky is BLUE???

Because I only know what you tell me! On the one hand you are upset because you think I'm jumping to conclusions about what you believe. On the other hand you think I should know things about your beliefs without you telling me what they are. Those two positions contradict each other. So which is it? Do you want me to guess or are you willing to tell me? I'm trying to understand anything you post. Maybe you aren't being as clear as you think you are. Maybe what you believe is not as self-evident as you think.

I think I made myself QUITE clear that Jesus IS the WORD.

WHO IS THE WORD? GOD

I said HE IS LORD.

WHO IS THE LORD? GOD.

So what is your problem with what the Nicene Creed says about the Trinity? Or do you not have a problem with that?

You said you had no preconcieved ideas

YEAH RIGHT!???

I only know what you tell me, 3AM.

And going into capitals didn't add any clarity btw. But, if it made you feel better...

Anyway, please be specific about what part of the [Protestant] Trinity doctrine you disagree with.

Helen/AITB

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by AITB:

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
Helen, AITB,

You said that if I say that Jesus is the Express image of His Father, that there are TWO GODS???

That's what it sounded like you were saying, to me.

Col 1: 15. who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

What do you think the TRINITY is teaching?

That there is ONLY ONE???

Of course it teaches that there is only one God. I don't think, I know.

The Trinity DOES NOT teach that there is ONE God. It teaches there is 3 Persons who are ONE in mind, authority, and purpose and that they MAKE UP ONE God. That is different from ONE God.

If the FATHER is GOD, and JESUS is the Express IMAGE of HIS FATHER, then JESUS IS GOD TOO!!!!

Then...what is your objection to the doctrine of the Trinity? Setting aside the Catholic stuff about Mary, I mean. What's your objection to the Nicene Creed?



The Nicene Creed? Do you think the Nicene Creed describes the Trinity? That thing says there is ONE God, and it is the Father!!! ONE Lord, JESUS, and then calls the Holy Spirit LORD. It also says the Jesus was begotten before the world began (giving Him a beginning in Spirit), and that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Hmmmmm Again, do you think that the Nicene Creed supports the Trinity that YOU believe?

Why is that so hard for you to see???

I can only see what you tell me. You said you don't believe the doctrine of the Trinity. I'm trying to understand what it is you don't believe about it. If I got that wrong, I'm open to being corrected. Just go for it and correct me...like I said, I only know what you tell me.

Well, when I tell you, you need to actually read what I say. If you have studied the Bible for as long as you said you have, then you should know that the Bible says that the WORD is God. If I said that Jesus is the WORD, then you should see that as 'Jesus is God'.

Why do I need to SAY the sky is blue for you to know that I can see that the sky is BLUE???

Because I only know what you tell me! On the one hand you are upset because you think I'm jumping to conclusions about what you believe. On the other hand you think I should know things about your beliefs without you telling me what they are. Those two positions contradict each other. So which is it? Do you want me to guess or are you willing to tell me? I'm trying to understand anything you post. Maybe you aren't being as clear as you think you are. Maybe what you believe is not as self-evident as you think.

Well maybe you shouldn't make yourself out to be so knowlegable, and then I won't assume that you are going to know what I am talking about, so that I will know that I must explain everything to you in minute detail.

I think I made myself QUITE clear that Jesus IS the WORD. WHO IS THE WORD? GOD
I said HE IS LORD. WHO IS THE LORD? GOD.

So what is your problem with what the Nicene Creed says about the Trinity? Or do you not have a problem with that?

Depends. Are you talking about the WHOLE thing, or just the part about the Father and the Son?

You said you had no preconcieved ideas

YEAH RIGHT!???

I only know what you tell me, 3AM.

And going into capitals didn't add any clarity btw. But, if it made you feel better...

Anyway, please be specific about what part of the [Protestant] Trinity doctrine you disagree with.

Helen/AITB

Going into caps has NEVER added clarity to ANYTHING that someone posted. It is for EMPHASIS. That means, in your head when you are reading, imaging my voice being raised as I said it. It is YELLING.

I told you at the onset of this discussion that I really didn't want to get into this topic on this board. Do you remember the REASON that I gave?

God Bless

 

[AITB]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
The Trinity DOES NOT teach that there is ONE God. It teaches there is 3 Persons who are ONE in mind, authority, and purpose and that they MAKE UP ONE God. That is different from ONE God.

It teaches that there is one God.

Ask anyone who believes the doctrine. Read any statement of it.

The Nicene Creed? Do you think the Nicene Creed describes the Trinity? That thing says there is ONE God, and it is the Father!!! ONE Lord, JESUS, and then calls the Holy Spirit LORD. It also says the Jesus was begotten before the world began (giving Him a beginning in Spirit), and that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Hmmmmm Again, do you think that the Nicene Creed supports the Trinity that YOU believe?

Yes - or if not exactly, close enough for me.

I don't understand your parenthetical comment. Are you saying you object to what is said about Jesus because it gives Jesus a beginning, whereas Jesus has no beginning, being eternal?

I never thought that that wording gave Jesus a beginning that he doesn't have.

Well, when I tell you, you need to actually read what I say. If you have studied the Bible for as long as you said you have, then you should know that the Bible says that the WORD is God. If I said that Jesus is the WORD, then you should see that as 'Jesus is God'.

I'm sorry - I thought you were avoiding saying 'Jesus is God' because you didn't write it. I apologize if I made an unwarranted assumption about that.

Well maybe you shouldn't make yourself out to be so knowlegable

When did I do that?

, and then I won't assume that you are going to know what I am talking about, so that I will know that I must explain everything to you in minute detail.

Well, in my opinion the nature of the topic means more detail is required to understand exactly what someone does and doesn't object to, than perhaps with some other topics in theology.

AITB: So what is your problem with what the Nicene Creed says about the Trinity? Or do you not have a problem with that?

Depends. Are you talking about the WHOLE thing, or just the part about the Father and the Son?

Ummm...well, tying this in to what you wrote earlier in this post, can you explain your objection to what you think the Nicene Creed implies about Jesus being Spirit in the beginning?

Going into caps has NEVER added clarity to ANYTHING that someone posted. It is for EMPHASIS. That means, in your head when you are reading, imaging my voice being raised as I said it. It is YELLING.

Why are you yelling?

I told you at the onset of this discussion that I really didn't want to get into this topic on this board. Do you remember the REASON that I gave?

It was on the other thread but ok, let's see; you said:

I don't agree with the triniune god of the Catholic Trinity for several reasons.

We could go into it, but I am not going to try to convince anyone of what I have found. So it would be a pretty short discussion.

So unless you REALLY want to know, I'd rather not get into it here.

I do really want to know.

Don't you think your reasons not to discuss it here apply to anything discussed on this board?

Why discuss Catholic doctrine but not your own beliefs? What's the difference?

Anyway thanks for your response

Helen/AITB

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by AITB:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
The Trinity DOES NOT teach that there is ONE God. It teaches there is 3 Persons who are ONE in mind, authority, and purpose and that they MAKE UP ONE God. That is different from ONE God

I don't agree with the triniune god of the Catholic Trinity for several reasons.

We could go into it, but I am not going to try to convince anyone of what I have found. So it would be a pretty short discussion.

So unless you REALLY want to know, I'd rather not get into it here.

I do really want to know.

Don't you think your reasons not to discuss it here apply to anything discussed on this board?

Why discuss Catholic doctrine but not your own beliefs? What's the difference?

Anyway thanks for your response

Helen/AITB </font>

3AM, I would like to know this also. I've yet to understand the doctrine of the Trinity. So, maybe you have some light to shed.

Anxiously waiting for your reply!

MEE

 

[AITB]

I have a general comment to those who give "I don't understand the doctrine of the Trinity/it doesn't make sense" as a reason to reject it...

Do you understand everything else in theology?

I mean, do you understand how people will be happy in heaven who have loved ones in hell? Do you understand how God can either only choose some to be saved or watch others go to hell through not choosing Him (depending on your theology)? Do you understand why God doesn't answer prayers that would seem to be in His will?

My point is - aren't there lots of things in theology that you don't fully understand?

I would have thought so (but maybe I'm wrong)...I would have thought that everyone here has certain issues regarding which they say "I don't understand it but I trust God".

I would be very interested to hear anyone's comments about the Trinity who has the rest of theology figured out . Meanwhile I am happy to hear from the rest of you

And, 3AM, if you don't want to discuss your own beliefs/objections regarding the Trinity then obviously you don't have to. I rdon't really need to know what you believe, do I? I'm always curious when someone rejects what I consider to be foundational Christian doctrine; I'm always curious about what they specifically object to. If you feel I have picked on you or misrepresented you I'm sorry. But I also think you're mistaken if you think it's not a big deal when someone says "I'm a Christian and I don't believe in the doctrine of the Trinity". To most Bible-believing Christians, it would be - at least in my experience.

Helen/AITB

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by AITB:
I have a general comment to those who give "I don't understand the doctrine of the Trinity/it doesn't make sense" as a reason to reject it...

Helen/AITB

Not sure exactly to whom this was directed, if any one person in particular, but I am just interested in what 3AM's veiw is, of her belief, in the Godhead.

From what I read, it looks as though it is the same as the doctrine of the Catholic church.

I'm just curious, that's all!

Really, I just like to veiw what others believe.

MEE

 

[neal4christ]

It is shown that the OT writings that Timothy had been hearing from his infancy was CAPABLE of making him KNOW enough to have faith in Jesus, and be saved.

I agree totally with you. But Paul does not say in verse 15 "Timothy, your were saved before you came to know Christ." It said that the scriptures were able to make him wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. That verse, nor any others, say anything about Timothy already being saved before coming to faith in Christ Jesus. I am just pointing out that a statement was made that is not true, or at least is not addressed. It seems clear that Timothy came to salvation by coming to faith in Christ Jesus, and the scriptures helped give him the knowledge to come to that faith.

Neal

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> It is shown that the OT writings that Timothy had been hearing from his infancy was CAPABLE of making him KNOW enough to have faith in Jesus, and be saved.

I agree totally with you. But Paul does not say in verse 15 "Timothy, your were saved before you came to know Christ." It said that the scriptures were able to make him wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. That verse, nor any others, say anything about Timothy already being saved before coming to faith in Christ Jesus. I am just pointing out that a statement was made that is not true, or at least is not addressed. It seems clear that Timothy came to salvation by coming to faith in Christ Jesus, and the scriptures helped give him the knowledge to come to that faith.

Neal </font>[/QUOTE]Ok,
So let me ask you a question that will hopefully help you see what Bob was getting at.

Timothy COULD have been saved WAY before he ever met Jesus, due to the fact that he ALREADY had faith, in a coming Messiah, based on his knowledge of the OT.

Do you see that? The people in the OT didn't even know the name 'Jesus' (well as far as the Messiah is concerned anyhow).

They ALSO didn't know of any 'trinity'.

The point Bob was making (I think) was that if OT believers didn't believe it, it would be safe to say that the Salvation of NT believers does not hinge on believing it.

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by AITB:
It teaches that there is one God.

Ask anyone who believes the doctrine. Read any statement of it.

It teaches that there is One God and then there is this little thingy called a COLON---&gt; : Which then describes this 'One God' as being 3 Persons. THAT is not ONE God. That is 3 Persons making up a 'Trinity' that is coeternal, coequal, and ONE in mind, authority and 'essense'. A unity of 3 hypostases.

Yes - or if not exactly, close enough for me.

I don't understand your parenthetical comment. Are you saying you object to what is said about Jesus because it gives Jesus a beginning, whereas Jesus has no beginning, being eternal?

I never thought that that wording gave Jesus a beginning that he doesn't have.

Ok, firstly, you would support a statement that doesn't describe your beliefs EXACTLY?
The statement that Jesus was begotten of the Father before the world was made gives Him a spiritual beginning. He HAD a bodily beginning, in the INCARNATION. The incarnation was a DIVINE person putting on flesh. THAT was His only 'beginning'. Their statement gives Him the 'begotten' status from BEFORE He was begotten. If He was begotten before He was incarnated, then He had a beginning. Another 'mystery' right?

I'm sorry - I thought you were avoiding saying 'Jesus is God' because you didn't write it. I apologize if I made an unwarranted assumption about that.

Thank you, it was, and now that we have THAT cleared up, let's move past it.

When did I do that?

Oh, you know, the whole 'I've been studying it for 18 years' comment?

Well, in my opinion the nature of the topic means more detail is required to understand exactly what someone does and doesn't object to, than perhaps with some other topics in theology.

Your responses have been far too speculative in nature. If you don't understand something, just ask a question. Don't suggest possible answers that I 'may or may not' say. That will avoid alot of confusion.

Why are you yelling?

Because. You didn't seem to be listening.

It was on the other thread but ok, let's see; you said:

"I don't agree with the triniune god of the Catholic Trinity for several reasons.

We could go into it, but I am not going to try to convince anyone of what I have found. So it would be a pretty short discussion.

So unless you REALLY want to know, I'd rather not get into it here."

I do really want to know.

Don't you think your reasons not to discuss it here apply to anything discussed on this board?

Sure. And don't you think it is my right if I don't want to discuss it?

I didn't want to just IGNORE your questioning my statement, but then I didn't really want to discuss it either. But here we are.

Why discuss Catholic doctrine but not your own beliefs? What's the difference?

UH, because I want to LEARN something. Me telling other people what I believe about something doesn't help me learn. As you can see, trying to explain to someone how the enigmatic doctrine of the trinity is false, and that I have an understanding of the Godhead that is most likely new to the people here, is not only provocative to most, but in some here even offensive.

I want to learn which doctrines are shared between the CC and Protestants. That's all. No alterior motive.

Like I said, I am not going to TRY to convince anyone.

Please do refrain from 'suggesting' things that I 'may or may not' believe.

Things will stay kosher if you can do that for me.

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

MEE,

Firstly, could you show me what I said that makes you think I agree with the Catholic doctrine of Trinity?

Also, you are Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal (is that right?) and they don't believe in the Catholic Trinity either (right?).

Could you just give me a quick run down of what you guys DO believe in regards to the Godhead?

God Bless

 

[MEE]

Edited:

 

[AITB]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
AITB: It teaches that there is one God.

Ask anyone who believes the doctrine. Read any statement of it. It teaches that there is One God and then there is this little thingy called a COLON---&gt; : Which then describes this 'One God' as being 3 Persons. THAT is not ONE God. That is 3 Persons making up a 'Trinity' that is coeternal, coequal, and ONE in mind, authority and 'essense'. A unity of 3 hypostases.

Ok, I understand your position on this particular point, although I don't agree with it, so I'll move on.

AITB: Yes - or if not exactly, close enough for me.

I don't understand your parenthetical comment. Are you saying you object to what is said about Jesus because it gives Jesus a beginning, whereas Jesus has no beginning, being eternal?

I never thought that that wording gave Jesus a beginning that he doesn't have.Ok, firstly, you would support a statement that doesn't describe your beliefs EXACTLY?

I may agree with it exactly but I added that disclaimer because it's been a couple of years since I was looking at the Nicene Creed and what it says about the Trinity in detail.

The statement that Jesus was begotten of the Father before the world was made gives Him a spiritual beginning. He HAD a bodily beginning, in the INCARNATION. The incarnation was a DIVINE person putting on flesh. THAT was His only 'beginning'. Their statement gives Him the 'begotten' status from BEFORE He was begotten. If He was begotten before He was incarnated, then He had a beginning. Another 'mystery' right?

Are you saying you consider Jesus to have been 'begotten' at a point in time, which is the point in time when he was incarnated? Please note that I am asking for clarification, not assuming, so I can avoid misrepresenting you.

I understand begotten differently, if that is how you understand it; and I think how I understand it is how the Nicene Creed intends it. I understand the Creed to be saying that Jesus has been always been begotten of the Father; I understand begotten not to be an event happening at a point in time but to be an eternal ongoing description of the relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son which opposes the heresy that Jesus was 'created' by God and 'before all worlds' emphasizes that there was not a time when Jesus was not begotten, that we can point to.

AITB: When did I do that?Oh, you know, the whole 'I've been studying it for 18 years' comment?

If you go back and read my comment in context you will see a) that it was a response to a comment of yours about how long you've read the Bible and how long you've studied it and b) that the very next thing I said was that length of time studying doesn't necessarily mean anything. Which was a bit foolish of me if what I was trying to do was impress you by how long I've studied...

AITB: Well, in my opinion the nature of the topic means more detail is required to understand exactly what someone does and doesn't object to, than perhaps with some other topics in theology.Your responses have been far too speculative in nature. If you don't understand something, just ask a question. Don't suggest possible answers that I 'may or may not' say. That will avoid alot of confusion.

I tried to ask questions and not assume, up above, in this post.

AITB: Don't you think your reasons not to discuss it here apply to anything discussed on this board?Sure. And don't you think it is my right if I don't want to discuss it?

I agree!

I didn't want to just IGNORE your questioning my statement, but then I didn't really want to discuss it either. But here we are.

Indeed.

AITB: Why discuss Catholic doctrine but not your own beliefs? What's the difference?UH, because I want to LEARN something. Me telling other people what I believe about something doesn't help me learn.

Well, it might lead to it if it transpires that you misunderstand some doctrine that other Christians believe and then someone can explain it to you so you understand it better.

As you can see, trying to explain to someone how the enigmatic doctrine of the trinity is false, and that I have an understanding of the Godhead that is most likely new to the people here, is not only provocative to most, but in some here even offensive.

It doesn't offend me. You were the one yelling.

Please do refrain from 'suggesting' things that I 'may or may not' believe.

Things will stay kosher if you can do that for me.

I'll do my best.

Helen/AITB

 

[SolaScriptura in 2003]

If I am reading this right, we all believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are God. Even so, some say that there is One God consisting of 3 Persons (Trinity) while others say that there is One God consisting of 3 "manifestations" of One Person. Who is right? John answers this question in the passages where Jesus speaks of the coming of the Paraclete (Comforter) who is the Holy Spirit (Spirit of Truth).

John 14:16 "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; {17} even the Spirit of truth;"

John 14:26 "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."

John 15:26 "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me."

John 16:7 "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

Firstly, Jesus says "I will pray the Father." Who will he pray to? Another Person or another "manifestation" of Himself?

Secondly, He says "he shall give you ANOTHER Comforter." Who will give you this Comforter? The Father! But He calls the Father "HE" not "I." Also, He says "another Comforter" showing that the Comforter is ANOTHER PERSON.

Thirdly, the Comforter will be sent by the Father in Jesus' name. So, we have one Person (the Comforter) being sent BY another Person (the Father) IN the name of another Person (Jesus).

Fourthly, "he shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." NOT I will bring to your remembrance what I said, but He will bring to your remembrance what I said.

Fifthly, "He shall testify of me." NOT I shall testify of myself, but He shall testify of me - thus there are 2 Persons, the Testifier and the one being testified of.

Sixthly, "I go away: because if I don't go away, the Comforter will not come." If Jesus were the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost all in one Person, then he would be the Comforter, as well as the Son and Father -- then He would not have to go away for the Comforter to come, nor would the Comforter need to come because He would already be with them since He would be Jesus! But in that He says He must leave for the Comforter to come, He shows that He is another Person.

John 16:13 "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come"

LASTLY, the Spirit of Truth, the Comforter would not speak of Himself but of Jesus. IF Jesus were the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost all in one Person, then He would be the Comforter and would NOT be able to say "the Comforter will not speak of Himself but of me" for if they were the same Person then speaking of himself would also be speaking of me!

Add to all this 1 John 5:7, and the ABSOLUTE FACT OF THE TRINITY IS ESTABLISHED. The question was asked "Can a person be a Christian and not believe in the Trinity?" Well, a person cannot thoughtfully read the Gospel of John and not believe the Trinity! Not unless they are lying to themselves.

I do not believe one can have sound teaching in a church body that denies the Trinity, because any other teaching takes away from the sacrifice of the cross.

I must agree with Chemnitz. Why would one speak out of a cloud in approval of one's self? Why would one descend upon one's self? Why or how would/could a person be His own Father and own Son at the same time? Why would the Father introduce Himself into the world as His son??? How can one be begotten and unbegotten at the same time? How can one be unbegotten, yet begotten by himself, yet also proceeding from Himself, and yet eternally in His own bossom???????? Without the doctrine of the Trinity, God becomes the author of confusion, not to mention a liar.

[ March 18, 2003, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura in 2003 ]

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
MEE,

...you are Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal (is that right?) and they don't believe in the Catholic Trinity either (right?).

**That is correct!

Could you just give me a quick run down of what you guys DO believe in regards to the Godhead?

God Bless

Well, I can try. It's hard to explain something as beautiful, as the Godhead in just a few short word.

I have a link that explains it very well, but I couldn't get it to work, on this board.

1 Tim. 3:16 says it very well, for just a quick run down.

16) And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God (Jesus) was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

In other words, God came to Earth, in the form of a man, through the bloodline of David. God was to save His people, from their sins. Sin can't be forgiven without the shedding of blood.

Since God was a Spirit and without blood, He had to take upon Himself a body in order to be able to shed His blood for the sins of mankind.

After all of this was accomplished, He was received up into glory in order to come unto us in the form of the Holy Spirit.

I wish the link would have worked. It explains the Godhead extremely well.

MEE

 

[AITB]

MEE, I'm sorry you couldn't get the link to work. Usually if you put it in this format it will work:
{url=http://www.whatever-it-is/}some words describing the page{/url}

but use square instead of curly parentheses and put the actual url of your page and some words descriptive of the actual page.

When Jesus prayed - in the Garden of Gethsemane or anywhere else - who was he praying to? I think I understand what you believe except for that part.

Helen/AITB

 

[AITB]

3AM, I just found the other thread you started about the Trinity. In it you posted this post on March 3:

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
Here is what the SDA Fundamental Beliefs are for the Trinity.

2. The Trinity:
There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, above all, and ever present. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His self-revelation. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. (Deut. 6:4; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 14:7.)


3. The Father:
God the eternal Father is the Creator, Source, Sustainer, and Sovereign of all creation. He is just and holy, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. The qualities and powers exhibited in the Son and the Holy Spirit are also revelations of the Father. (Gen. 1:1; Rev. 4:11; 1 Cor. 15:28; John 3:16; 1 John 4:8; 1 Tim. 1:17; Ex. 34:6, 7; John 14:9.)

4. The Son:
God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God's power and was attested as God's promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things. (John 1:1-3, 14; Col. 1:15-19; John 10:30; 14:9; Rom. 6:23; 2 Cor. 5:17-19; John 5:22; Luke 1:35; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:9-18; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4; Heb. 8:1, 2; John 14:1-3.)

5. The Holy Spirit:
God the eternal Spirit was active with the Father and the Son in Creation, incarnation, and redemption. He inspired the writers of Scripture. He filled Christ's life with power. He draws and convicts human beings; and those who respond He renews and transforms into the image of God. Sent by the Father and the Son to be always with His children, He extends spiritual gifts to the church, empowers it to bear witness to Christ, and in harmony with the Scriptures leads it into all truth. (Gen. 1:1, 2; Luke 1:35; 4:18; Acts 10:38; 2 Peter 1:21; 2 Cor. 3:18; Eph. 4:11, 12; Acts 1:8; John 14:16-18, 26; 15:26, 27; 16:7-13.)

I agree with all of that.

Do you still agree with all of it?

Helen/AITB

 

[DHK]

Here is one of the best descriptions of the trinity that I know of written by a friend of mine.

"Biblical Christianity teaches that there is only one God. This truth is affirmed again and again in the Bible [Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 45:5; 1 Corinthians 8:4; 1 Timothy 2:5]. The Bible teaches that God is an infinite being Who has no comparison or likeness [Isaiah 40:18,25]. He is an infinite being, Who can only be known by the revelation which He gives of Himself. In John 1:1,2, this infinite God reveals that He unites in the substance of His being a second infinite, eternal Almighty Person, one Whose eternal name is “the Word” [John 1:1; Revelation 19:13]. Being one in substance with God, He also is God. But He is not a second God. In the substance of His being the one true God unites two Infinite, Eternal Almighty Persons. These Persons are co-equal and co-eternal. Both are God, but being of one substance, there is only one God. This is a mystery [Colossians 2:2], which finite persons cannot fully understand . To fully understand it one would also have to be infinite.

This second Person, God-the-Word, Whom the infinite God unites with Himself in the substance of His being, is also most definitely an infinite Person. Because He is infinite, He can be known only by revelation. No man fully knows Him. He is known in the reality of His Person only by God Jehovah [Matthew 11:27]. The Scriptures were given by God to give revelation about this second Person Who is also called God. Those who reject the testimony which God Jehovah has given by the third Person Who is united in the substance of God, God-the-Holy-Spirit, are guilty of blasphemously calling God a liar [1 John 5:10]. Those who teach something about Him which the Scriptures do no teach are, in reality, blasphemously claiming to have greater knowledge than the infinite God.

In further revelation of Himself, the infinite God reveals that there is a third Person united in the substance of God. This third person is called the Holy Spirit [Matthew 28:19], or the Spirit of truth [John 14:17]. We know that He is one in substance with God because He is called the eternal Spirit [Hebrews 9:14]. Only God is eternal, and since there is only one God, He also must be one in substance with the other persons Who are also called God. So important is this third Person Who is one in substance with God, that blasphemy against Him will never be forgiven [Matthew 12:31,32]. Even denying that He is one in substance with the other two Persons Who are named God may be blasphemy against Him. Further, since He is the One Who moved the writers of the Bible, including the Gospels [John 14:26] to record what they wrote [Acts 28:25; 2 Peter 1:21], rejection and denial of these may also be blasphemy against Him [Hebrews 10:29]. Those who deny the truth of the Scriptures should beware lest they blaspheme the Holy Spirit, Who, through the Scriptures offer them grace, the undeserved favor of God through Christ’s death as a substitute in their place [1 Peter 3:18]. Rejection of the message of Christ’s death for sinners is rejection of the message declared by God, the Holy Spirit, in the Scriptures. Rejection of it will bring awful consequences and condemnation [Hebrews 10:26-31]."

DHK

 

[neal4christ]

Timothy COULD have been saved WAY before he ever met Jesus, due to the fact that he ALREADY had faith, in a coming Messiah, based on his knowledge of the OT.

Do you see that? The people in the OT didn't even know the name 'Jesus' (well as far as the Messiah is concerned anyhow).

They ALSO didn't know of any 'trinity'.

The point Bob was making (I think) was that if OT believers didn't believe it, it would be safe to say that the Salvation of NT believers does not hinge on believing it.

I am not arguing or even debating you because I agree someone does not have to understand the trinity to be saved. I do think they have to acknowledge Christ as Lord. My whole point is that Bob made a misleading or even false statement. Paul DID NOT say Timothy was saved before he came to Christ. He said that the Scriptures equipped him, but that does not mean he was saved. The OT saints are a whole different story as to the amount revealed to them. Christ had already been to earth and died and resurrected and ascended at Timothy's time. However, the basic thing I am pointing out is that Bob's statement is not true as it stands, period. Paul did not say Timothy was saved before he came to Christ. He did say that the Scriptures made him wise for salvation by faith in Christ Jesus. His salvation came with his faith in Christ Jesus, not his knowledge of the Scriptures. There are many who 'know' the Scriptures that are not saved. There is a difference, and I was just pointing out that Bob's statement as it stands is not accurate.

Neal

 

[DHK]

A person in this day and age cannot be saved unless they believe that Jesus Christ is God. You can "receive Jesus as your Saviour," but if your "Jesus" is not the Jesus of the Bible, you are not saved. The Jesus of the Bible is God incarnate.
DHK