Trinity or no trinity?

[neal4christ]

I am saying that He is not the Most High God.

Could one of the reasons you are denying Christ is God is because of your view that Michael is Jesus? After all, it fits that view much better if Jesus really is not God because then He could be a created angel, i.e. Michael.

Neal

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
DHK,

Why would I do that? I am not saying that Jesus is not 'God'.

I am saying that He is not the Most High God.

It is the same thing. When we speak of God, we speak of Jesus Christ, the God of the New Testament, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Most High God, the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the Word, the Everlasting One, "King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life;" He is God. There is only one God.

Isa.43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

There is only one God. That God is Jesus Christ.

Now go through the verses and demonstrate that Jesus Christ is not God. You have avoided this. My feeling is that you cannot do this, and this is why you so avoid these Scriptures, because they prove without any shadow of a doubt the deity of Christ, that He is God eternally--something which you deny. You refuse to look at the Scriptures. Why? What is bothering you?
DHK

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I am saying that He is not the Most High God.

Could one of the reasons you are denying Christ is God is because of your view that Michael is Jesus? After all, it fits that view much better if Jesus really is not God because then He could be a created angel, i.e. Michael.

Neal </font>[/QUOTE]No.

I am not really all that sure that the Michael thing is correct. It's not a FB of the SDA faith, and it really is more of an assumption, than a known fact. It isn't set in stone or anything, it is just something we believe is possible.

You know, my belief that Jesus is not the Most High God, is totally in line with Scripture. It has yet to have been shown that Jesus is the Most High God.



I will say again, since people seem to be forgetting that when I say 'God' I am referring to the Most High God. YHVH. I am not talking about the trinitarian view of God. Therefore you are thinking that I am saying that Jesus is like an Angel.

I am not saying that at all.

I believe that He is FULLY God, in that within Jesus all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily, but He is NOT the Most High God.

He is the SON of the Most High God.

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
[qb] DHK,

Why would I do that? I am not saying that Jesus is not 'God'.

I am saying that He is not the Most High God.

It is the same thing. When we speak of God, we speak of Jesus Christ, the God of the New Testament, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Most High God, the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the Word, the Everlasting One, "King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life;" He is God. There is only one God.

Isa.43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

There is only one God. That God is Jesus Christ.</font>[/QUOTE]Who was talking to Isaiah?
The statement that you just made denies the Father.

Now go through the verses and demonstrate that Jesus Christ is not God. You have avoided this. My feeling is that you cannot do this, and this is why you so avoid these Scriptures, because they prove without any shadow of a doubt the deity of Christ, that He is God eternally--something which you deny. You refuse to look at the Scriptures. Why? What is bothering you?

You!

I said it already, I am not trying to prove that Jesus is not God, I am showing why I believe that He is not The Most High God, and they are NOT the same. Jesus is NOT the Most High God.

If you feel so strongly that I am wrong, then why aren't YOU posting all the verses that say that Jesus IS the Most High God? What's bothering YOU?

God Bless

 

[neal4christ]

3AM,

Do you understand the difference between the ontological view of the Trinity and the economical view of it?

Again, we can't 'prove' our side and neither can you. You interpret Scripture differently than I do, so that is about as far as we will get. Again, much of the Scripture brought up here to me supports the Trinity. To you, it does not.

One thing I was wondering was what you mean when you say that Jesus is fully God, but not the Most High God. So now you have two Gods? I thought you accused trinitarians of having three. Is two any more in line with the first commandment than three?

Neal

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:

I said it already, I am not trying to prove that Jesus is not God, I am showing why I believe that He is not The Most High God, and they are NOT the same. Jesus is NOT the Most High God.

If you feel so strongly that I am wrong, then why aren't YOU posting all the verses that say that Jesus IS the Most High God? What's bothering YOU?

You're not getting it are you? And you are still avoiding those verses that frighten you!
I'll make it as clear as I can so you can understand it plainly:
I believe that in those verses:
"God" does refer to the "Most High God." There is only one God. If you do not believe that then you are like a Hindu--a polytheist, and Christ is just another god. No, Christ is God, the Most High God, not just another God. Prove to me throught those Scriptures that Christ is not the one and only God. Quit avoiding the question.

 

[SolaScriptura in 2003]

3AM, you are a Jehovah's Witness whether you realize it or not, because you say that the Father is the most High God and Jesus is a lesser God of some sort. That's blasphemy!

(Rom 9:5) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

The word "blessed" there is not a verb but an adjective; therefore, it cannot mean that God blessed Him forever but must mean that He is "God blessed for ever."

[ April 07, 2003, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura in 2003 ]

 

[AITB]

Originally posted by SolaScriptura in 2003:
3AM, you are a Jehovah's Witness whether you realize it or not, because you say that the Father is the most High God and Jesus is a lesser God of some sort.

I agree that believing that YHWH is God the Father only and Jesus is not YHWH are Jehovah's Witness doctrines.

However, the JWs believe all kinds of things that I don't think 3AM believes.

I think she believes in grace more than they do, for example and I don't think she believes exactly the same as they do about Jesus. I doubt very much she believes that most of the NT was written to only 144,000 people and the rest of people who believe in God fall in some 'other category' who will live on earth forever rather than perish, but who will not attain heaven. Her approach to Scripture is entirely different to theirs; she is not part of an institution with their own translation who tells you what every verse means - her beliefs are from her own study of the Scriptures. And so on...

Although I probably shouldn't speak for her...

But, it's not correct (nor is it respectful or reasonable, in my opinion) to call someone a JW just because one of their beliefs happens to match what the JWs believe.

(Rom 9:5) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

The word "blessed" there is not a verb but an adjective; therefore, it cannot mean that God blessed Him forever but must mean that He is "God blessed for ever."

The translation of that verse is somewhat controversial, as I understand it. The RSV, for example, doesn't link God and Christ in its rendering of it:

Romans 9:5 [...] to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.

I think the clear verse is John 1:1. No wonder the JWs had to add 'a' in their translation, to make it 'the Word was a god'.

Helen/AITB

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by AITB:

However, the JWs believe all kinds of things that I don't think 3AM believes.

I think she believes in grace more than they do, for example and I don't think she believes exactly the same as they do about Jesus.

I don't think that is what Sola was pointing out. He was pointing to one of their major beliefs that 3AM seems to agree with--a denial of the deity of Christ to the extent that the only logical conclusion would be that there must be two god: a greater one, and a lesser one.

Here are some quotes from 3AM:

John 1:18. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
If Jesus is God, then John is a liar, because HE HIMSELF saw Jesus (April 7, 4:37 A,M)

Her explanation of John 1:1, that “the Word was God.”
“In the beginning (before He proceeded forth) He was with God, and was God, because He had yet to proceed forth from God. Once He proceeded forth from God, He was His Son. 'TODAY have I begotten thee'. AND THEN He put on flesh and dwelt among us! As a completely separated person from His Father, and DIED, something that GOD CANNOT DO.” (same post as above)

 

[hrhema]

Sola: You spoke of Jesus being born before creation and the first born of Creation.
Well, if you are born you are created. YOu and I and everyone else was created by our parents.
A first born would be a first child. Jesus was God's first born son. Thus he was created.

3 Angels Mom: Hang in there. You are doing a great job.

The Trinitarian doctrine was created by the RCC. They will tell you in a heart beat that this is true and they will also tell Protestants that they may think they have come out from us but they have not until they quit teaching Catholic doctrines all together.

 

[hrhema]

Sola: You spoke of Jesus being born before creation and the first born of Creation.
Well, if you are born you are created. YOu and I and everyone else was created by our parents.
A first born would be a first child. Jesus was God's first born son. Thus he was created.

3 Angels Mom: Hang in there. You are doing a great job.

The Trinitarian doctrine was created by the RCC. They will tell you in a heart beat that this is true and they will also tell Protestants that they may think they have come out from us but they have not until they quit teaching Catholic doctrines all together.

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
3AM,

Do you understand the difference between the ontological view of the Trinity and the economical view of it?

No.

Again, we can't 'prove' our side and neither can you. You interpret Scripture differently than I do, so that is about as far as we will get. Again, much of the Scripture brought up here to me supports the Trinity. To you, it does not.

I totally agree. That is why I think that each of us should be fully pursuaded in our own minds, by the Holy Spirit (as opposed to what other men have told us) and the Word of God.

One thing I was wondering was what you mean when you say that Jesus is fully God, but not the Most High God. So now you have two Gods? I thought you accused trinitarians of having three. Is two any more in line with the first commandment than three?

If the Bible says that there is One God, and that God is the Most High God, and then it calls Jesus 'The Son of the Most High God', there is no question in my mind that Jesus IS NOT that ONE God. He is however 'God' in the term of the word 'Theos', and that word in the Greek is applied to others, not just God and Jesus. He is not a 'lesser' God, He is the Image of the Invisible God. He is 'God' (Theos) in the sense that He has been GIVEN all authority BY God and has the 'fulness' (the Spirit) of God in Him. I think it is actually that verse that helps in the support of the Oneness doctrine because they feel that it explains the 'manefestation' of God in human form. I do not attempt to assert that I have this all figured out, but what I do have figured out is that there is no DIRECT evidence that Jesus IS THAT ONE GOD.

I do not deny His diety. Nor do I deny that He is fully God (in the sense previously explained), but there is ample evidence placing Him as the SON of the Most High God, as opposed to actually BEING the Most High God.

God Bless

 

[neal4christ]

He is however 'God' in the term of the word 'Theos', and that word in the Greek is applied to others, not just God and Jesus.

Could you please tell me what others?

but what I do have figured out is that there is no DIRECT evidence that Jesus IS THAT ONE GOD.

If Jesus is not that ONE God, then Jesus is not God, plain and simple. Or if you assert He is a separate God than the Most High, then you have two Gods, thus breaking the first commandment. It really is not that hard, but you are making it 10x more complicated. Either He is the Most High God or not, nothing else when it comes to God. If He is created, He is not God. God by definition has no beginning or creation. If He is merely a vessel in which God dwelt while on earth, you have other problems. First Jesus would not be God, but merely a jar of clay, just another human, and it makes no sense we would call Him Lord. That is for God alone, not a man. Second, who was Jesus praying to while on earth? If He was the Father revealed in the flesh, it was just a farce all the times He prayed to His father.

As for the ontological understanding of God it is understood that the Trinity shares the same being, essence. All three are the same essence. In the ontological view, the Three are One.

~~~~~~Father
~~~~~/******\
~~~~/********\*******John 10:30, "I
~~~/*Essence***\******and the Father
~~/***shared****\*****are one."
~/**************\
Son---------Holy Spirit

However, in the economical view, the Three are Three distinct persons. The economical view has more to do with functionality, their roles.

~~~~~~~~The Father Plans
~~~~~~~~~~~/******\
~~~~~~~~~~/********\******John 14:28, "My
~~~~~~~~~/**********\*****Father is greater
~~~~~~~~/****GOD*****\****than I."
~~~~~~~/**************\
~~~~~~~---------------------
The Son Does^^^^^^^^^The Holy Spirit Reveals

This picture, the ontological and economical view together, fits well and can be seen in marriage. It was what I was getting at in that man and woman are equal. When we are married, we become one. But we are still two separate persons. Would you say one is not necessary for the marriage? I would think not, because then there would be no marriage. Man and woman are the same ontologically, they have the same essence in that they are both created in the image of God. However, economically, they have different functional roles. But when they are joined, one is not less than the other because both are needed for the union, but they are both separate and have different roles.

This is just the view that I am coming from. I don't ask you to accept it, but that is how I understand it.

Neal

P.S. Sorry for the messy pictures, when it posts it cuts out all my whitespace!!!!

[ April 08, 2003, 04:12 PM: Message edited by: neal4christ ]

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by AITB:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
That's all well and good, but you said that Jesus is 'the Jehovah of the OT'. That is a Oneness doctrine. That Jesus is simply another manefestation of God. That Jehovah in the OT BECAME Jesus in the NT era.

'Jesus is the Jehovah of the OT' is not a Oneness doctrine actually; it's simply another way of saying 'Jesus is God'.

If we said 'Jesus is the God the Father', that would be Oneness doctrine.

When you read 'Jesus is Jehovah' I think you equate that with 'Jesus is God the Father' because you define Jehovah as God the Father.

But we Trinitarians don't, so when we say say "Jesus is Jehovah" that is not the same as saying "Jesus is God the Father".

And as I and DHK have said in other posts, when Jesus says "I am" in John's gospel we understand him to be implying "I am Jehovah".

Helen/AITB </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry, missed this one!

So then you apply a pluralistic view to the name YHVH?

I have only seen this in the Trinitarian view. The only name for God that I have EVER heard of having a pluralistic view is God in Genesis, Elohiym.

Why do you feel that YHVH is a pluralistic name?

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by SolaScriptura in 2003:
[QB] 3AM, you are a Jehovah's Witness whether you realize it or not, because you say that the Father is the most High God and Jesus is a lesser God of some sort. That's blasphemy!

Well, if you can quote me saying that Jesus is a 'lesser God', then by all means grab your torch and pitchfork! And, I am NOT a JW. There are SO many doctrines that they submit as fact, that are totally not in agreement with the whole of Scripture!

(Rom 9:5) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

The word "blessed" there is not a verb but an adjective; therefore, it cannot mean that God blessed Him forever but must mean that He is "God blessed for ever."

AND then in the NEXT verse, we see: 6. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
ONCE again, identifying Jesus as the Word of God. And confirming that it was NOT calling Jesus God in verse 5, but saying that He was blessed forever BY God. Which IS ALSO said in 2 Corinthians 11: 31. "The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not." And, the greatness of that blessing is passed on to those of us who are IN Christ, Ephesians 1: 2. Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. 3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

There is a clear distinction in both of those verses as to WHO is doing the blessing, and who is being blessed.

2 Corinthians 1: 1. Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia:
2. Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3. Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
4. Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God.

God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of mercies, and of all comfort.

Didn't call Jesus God.

And, again, we see a clear distinction that there are two 'people' in this equation. God the Father, and His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

God Bless

 

[DHK]

BTW, 3AM, Why do you still avoid those verses that I posted for you (now at the bottom of page 6) that demonstrate that Christ is an eternal being without origin, and thus the Most High God. They answer your questions for you. This is about the fourth time I have asked you to give a response to those verses. Why do you fail to do so?
DHK

 

[3AngelsMom]

Neal,

Put periods in the spaces and it won't cut it out:

.......O........
....\..|../.....
.....\.|./......
......\|/.......
.......|........


At least it looks like it will work in this box!

 

[3AngelsMom]

DHK,
It isn't your questions I am avoiding, it is you!

I don't see any point it discussing this with you if you are going to keep saying that I am doing something that I am not, and keep saying that I am saying something that I am not!

God Bless

 

[neal4christ]

Neal,

Put periods in the spaces and it won't cut it out:

Thanks, 3AM, why didn't I think of that?

I will change it when I can because now when I go to edit my post, half of it is missing in the edit screen. This is really starting to tick me off!

Neal

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
DHK,
It isn't your questions I am avoiding, it is you!

I don't see any point it discussing this with you if you are going to keep saying that I am doing something that I am not, and keep saying that I am saying something that I am not!

God Bless

It is the Scripture that you avoid. I simply posted Scripture. That is all. You will not address that Scripture because it demonstrates the deity of Jesus Christ in such a way that Christ is the Most High God. The evidence is irrefutable. One can only conclude that by your refusal to deal with the Word of God that you disbelieve the Word of God. It is there. Accept it and believe it. Or deny it and admit to all that you are an unbeliever. What will you do with Scripture 3AM? We all wait your response.
DHK