|
|
|
First I would like to state that this website has been and is the most wonderful blessing to me. Thank you Michael Lane for following God's will for you and creating it. The discussions I create and become involved in make me question my beliefs and faith in a Godly atmosphere. I find I have been digging deeper into scripture than before to discuss these topics and it has helped solidify my faith; what a blessing, praise God.
The Trinity is a doctrine that I have always had trouble with. I do not currently subscribe to this doctrine.
It is my understanding that it was created at the council of Nicea by emperor Constantine and the attending bishops because of the differing opinions concerning the divinity of Jesus. Some believed that Jesus was only a man, some that He was only a God, some that He was both man and God; and all of them had scripture, gospels, and epistles to denounce the beliefs of the others. The Trinity was the solution found to unite these differing beliefs and it was agreed upon at Nicea. Once again let me state that this is my understanding of the creation of the Trinity doctrine.
I will not pretend to be a Bible scholar so I must admit that I have not read all of the scriptures which supposedly point to the Trinity; that was one of my reasons for creating this discussion to force myself to dig into the scriptures concerning this topic. I also will not pretend to be a Bible historian so I could very well be wrong concerning the creation of the doctrine. I also think that my understanding of the Trinity itself could be limited or confused, so I could simply be misunderstanding a biblical truth.
As such, I would appreciate discussion concerning:
The origins of the Trinity doctrine;
Scriptural references which state or imply the Trinity; and
Whether you believe that belief in the Trinity is essential for salvation.
(Personally I do not think that it is something that will effect salvation, but I could be wrong.)
|
|
|
|
1/3/2010 10:28:01 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite human mind using illustrations that can never encompass more than a fraction of God's glory. The word Trinity does not appear in the Bible, but the concept that Trinity is attempting to illuminate, can be seen. There is one God; God is One. The One God has a triune nature, eternally existing in three Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The three persons of the Godhead are co-equal and co-eternal. Genesis 1:26
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [and over all the creatures that move along the ground." (I'm going with the belief that the "our" does not refer to angels - God was not discussing us with angles, angles did not have a hand in making humans and we were not made in the image of angels) Isaiah 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.(Father & son as One!) Matthew 28:19
Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,Colossians 2:9
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form1 John 5:6-12
This is the one who came by water and blood - Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. We accept man's testimony, but God's testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. |
|
|
|
1/12/2010 6:39:55 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
I believe that this trinity idea really began from a concept that all religious Jews know and very likely this is what Jesus was teaching.
The concept is simple but has been misunderstood or intentionally distorted.
God is one, His chosen people are one, and His Torah (all His teachings) are one. But all three co-exist as one, they are one unit that work together as one.
This does not mean in any way that His chosen people or His Torah are equal to Him and are all together God. That is the mistake that was made.
Somewhere along the way, someone explained these words to mean that Jesus who is the 'chosen' of God, and the Torah which is a holy spirit of God, are in fact one with God. This eventually was labeled 'The trinity' and became the proof that jesus is God.
It sounds catchy but it's all wrong and against the will of God.
|
|
|
|
1/12/2010 7:07:01 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Colossians 1:15-16 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For in him all things were created in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, through him and for him all things have been created, REV "The firstborn of all creation.” This phrase refers to Christ being the firstfruits of those raised from the dead. See Colossians 1:18 and 1 Cor. 15:20. Colossians 2:9emphasis added For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form. for in him dwells all the fullness of the divine nature bodily, REV The Greek word used for deity here is theotes. Theotes literally means deity and Colossians 2:9 is the only time it appears in the NT. Deity is defined as: the rank or essential nature of a god http://www.merriam-webster.com/ "the essential nature of a god" or as translated in the REV "divine nature". The Greek word somatikos meaning bodily or physical is used in this text; it can mean in bodily form, if used as an adverb which it is not in this text. The NIV improperly translated somatikos. Isaiah 9:6For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. I gave my reasons for doubting this verse in the other discussion, suffice it to say I see this translated as "wonderful counselor, mighty hero, father(as in founder) everlasting, a leader of peace." Matthew 28:19Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
First I must point out that the capitalization of holy spirit in this text is incorrect. The Holy Spirit was simply, as wolfson can tell you, another name for God. When it is given as a gift to anyone, either OT or NT, it is "the holy spirit that dwells within you" or oneness with God. Now I have great concerns for Matthew 28:19 in reference to the book of Acts. In the book of Acts we see the apostles baptizing in the name of Jesus the Christ: see Acts 2:38, Acts 8:16, Acts 10:48, and Acts 19:5. I don't know about you but I find it hard to believe that the apostles disobeyed the risen Christ. They baptized in Jesus' name and then the baptized person, if they believed in and on Christ, could receive the gift of the holy spirit. It is my belief that Matthew 28:19 was altered to reflect the Trinity doctrine. Bless you Ryan 1 John 5:6-12 is proof in itself that the Trinity is a false doctrine. God and Jesus are shown here as separate. It does not say "the testimony God has given about Himself", it says "the testimony God has given about his Son". As to Genesis 1:26emphasis added Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, It is believed by some that God is in fact speaking to the heavenly court (angels). I have a different take on this scripture. I believe that God is talking to Himself, not as you believe Ryan, but as any authority of the time would refer to themselves. A king will say " we declare on this day" or " we will return to our blessed realm" or "let us depart". The plural is used to emphasize their authority, not to suggest they are a multiple entity. The scriptures you have presented here have not shown me the Trinity. I am inclined at present to agree with wolfson: It sounds catchy but it's all wrong and against the will of God. Perhaps you have other scriptures we can look at. Until then my friend, bless you and goodnight.
|
|
|
|
1/12/2010 10:20:54 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, I must be missing some nuances in your statements intended to refute Trinitarian thought because as I read your comments, they seem to be compatible with the doctrine. For example, you wrote: The Holy Spirit was simply, as wolfson can tell you, another name for God. A perfect fit - the Holy Spirit is God! I see no disagreement between your description and the concept of the Trinity. Regarding the deity of Jesus: Yes, Jesus is the Firstfruits mentioned in Colossians 1:15-16. I noticed you did not comment on the portion describing His Creator attributes. Sounds like God to me! As to Colossians 2:9, both translations we're looking at here are equally acceptable to Trinitarians - all fullness may be the operative phrase here. Of anyone said to have partaken of the divine nature, only Jesus is revealed to have all the fullness of the divine nature - or divinity - dwelling in His body. Jesus did claim to be God: John 8:58-59:
"‘I tell you the truth,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.” Jesus said He pre-existed Abraham and identified himself as "I am" - which was the same title used for God in Exodus 3:14. Due to this claim, the people sought to kill Him. John 10:30-33:
“‘I and the Father are one.’ Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, ‘I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?’ ‘We are not stoning you for any of these,’ replied the Jews, ‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.’”Again, the people wanted to kill Him because He was saying He is God. Only God is to be worshiped - Jesus accepted the worship of His disciples: John 20:27-29:
“Then He said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’ Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’"Matthew 14:32-33: “And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down. Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God.’”If Jesus did not believe He was God, He would have insisted His disciples practice what they already knew - only God can be so praised. Regarding Isaiah 9:6; I quickly took a look at the research posted on the web from scholars who provide detailed explanations for the translations of these Godly titles and for words like almah as virgin in Isaiah 7:14. There is rationale for these translations – beyond mistakes were made intentionally or unintentionally. Before you toss out Matthew 28:19 as a fraud because it doesn't fit your perspective, perhaps you could consider other rationale for accepting it. Baptizing in the name of Three does not imply anything about when the Spirit is received. Regarding your point about the separateness of God and Jesus, you wrote: Bless you Ryan 1 John 5:6-12 is proof in itself that the Trinity is a false doctrine.
God and Jesus are shown here as separate. It does not say "the testimony God has given about Himself", it says "the testimony God has given about his Son". Again, you're in agreement with the Trinity. Although Jesus is God, there is a distinction between the two. Earlier you had mentioned that the Holy Spirit is another name for God; here is a scripture in which God and the Holy Spirit are separate - but, we both agree They are the same: 1 Corinthians 2:9-10
“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him.” But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. Both of these scriptures are examples of the co-existing and co-equal components of the Trinity. I hope you're not correct with your generalization based on Genesis 1:26 in which you suggest God the Father is referring only to Himself, because it usually annoys me when I hear parents using pronouns incorrectly when talking to their children. I suppose you may be correct, but you stand at least an equal chance of being wrong. I still haven't seen a good explanation for the plural Hebrew names for God. Well MichealRix, although you closed your post with: I am inclined at present to agree with wolfson:
It sounds catchy but it's all wrong and against the will of God. I'm amused by how much you do agree with the concept of the Trinity and how your agreement may be the will of God because it is correct. It is amazing how we can see an issue so differently - and - similarly at the same time! |
|
|
|
1/13/2010 2:03:29 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan- I'm seeing a pattern in your thinking that shows you are unwilling to accept any truth that is not consistent with what you have been taught. You continue to bring proofs that aren't proofs.
These stories from the NT are simply a play on words and terms that have been distorted. This is an insult to Jesus.
I pray that God should open your eyes to see His truth!
|
|
|
|
1/13/2010 2:31:15 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, my brother in Christ, Allow me to clarify a few points from my previous post and answer your new evidence. A perfect fit - the Holy Spirit is God! I see no disagreement between your description and the concept of the Trinity. The holy spirit is not God. One of the names of God is Holy Spirit. Your logic is faulty my friend, only part of your Trinity argument is them being the same, the other is them being separate. Yes, Jesus is the Firstfruits mentioned in Colossians 1:15-16. I noticed you did not comment on the portion describing His Creator attributes. Sounds like God to me! Colossians 1:15-16 emphasis added He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For in him all things were created in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, through him and for him all things have been created, REV The phrase is using a limited sense of “all,” which is determined by the context. Suppose you have a plate of cookies, the statement "the kids ate all the cookies” doesn't imply the kids ate all the cookies in the world. The implied context was the cookies on the plate, and the kids had eaten all of them. This is a good example of “all” being used in a limited sense, and the Bible uses it that way too. For example, when Absalom was holding a council against his father, David, 2 Samuel 17:14 says that “all the men of Israel” agreed on advice. “All” the men of Israel were not there, but the verse means “all” who were there. Another example is Jeremiah 26:8, which says that “all the people” seized Jeremiah to put him to death, but the context makes it very clear that “all the people” were not even present, and people who came to the scene later wanted to release Jeremiah. An important figure of speech in Colossians 1:16 is called “encircling.” When this figure is used, it marks what is said as being completed in one complete circle…giving completeness of the statement that is made. With that in mind, note that the phrase “all things were created” occurs at the beginning and end of the verse, encircling the list of created things. The things that are “created” are not rocks, trees, birds and animals, because those things were created by God. These things, “thrones, powers, rulers and authorities,” are the powers and positions that were needed by Christ to run his Church, and were created by him for that purpose. The figure of speech known as “encircling” helps us to identify the proper context of “all things”that it is the narrower sense of the word “all,” and refers to the things needed to administer the Church. Jesus did claim to be God:Jesus said He pre-existed Abraham and identified himself as "I am" - which was the same title used for God in Exodus 3:14. Due to this claim, the people sought to kill Him. John 8:58-59: "‘I tell you the truth,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.” The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he” or some equivalent (“I am he”Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be”John 8:24 and 28.). It is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Jesus was speaking of himself as the messiah spoken of throughout the Old Testament. In order for your argument that Jesus’ “I am” statement in John 8:58 makes him God, his statement must be equivalent with God’s “I am” statement in Exodus 3:14. However, the two statements are very different. While the Greek phrase in John does mean “I am,” the Hebrew phrase in Exodus actually means “to be” or “to become.” In other words God is saying, “I will be what I will be.” Thus the “I am” in Exodus is actually a mistranslation of the Hebrew text, so the fact that Jesus said “I am” did not make him God. The argument that Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God is a fallacy. He did not physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the mind of God as God’s plan for the redemption of man. A careful reading of the context shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Verse 56 is accurately translated in the King James Version, which says: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.” This verse says that Abraham “saw” the day of the Christ, which is the day when Jesus conquerors the earth and sets up his kingdom. That would fit with what the book of Hebrews says about Abraham: “For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” ( Hebrews 11:10). Abraham looked for a city that is still future, yet the Bible says Abraham “saw” it. In what sense could Abraham have seen something that was future? Abraham “saw” the day of the Christ because God told him it was coming, and Abraham “saw” it by faith. Although Abraham saw the day of the Christ by faith, that day existed in the mind of God long before Abraham. Thus, in the context of God’s plan existing from the beginning, Jesus certainly was “before” Abraham. Christ was the plan of God for man’s redemption long before Abraham lived. As to John 10:30-33I and the Father are one.’ Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, ‘I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?’ ‘We are not stoning you for any of these,’ replied the Jews, ‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God If you read a little further you will see that Jesus did not say he was God, he said "Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?" John 10:36. Only God is to be worshiped - Jesus accepted the worship of His disciples: As to John 20:27-29 Jesus never referred to himself as “God” in the absolute sense, so what precedent then did Thomas have for calling Jesus “my God?” The Greek word theos, (“God” or “god”) has a broader meaning than is customary today. In the Greek language and in the culture of the day, “GOD” (all early manuscripts of the Bible were written in all capital letters) was a title applied to all kinds of authorities, including a Roman governor ( Acts 12:21-22), and the Devil ( 2 Corinthians 4:4). It was used of, or for, someone with divine authority. It was not limited to its absolute sense as a personal name for the supreme God as we use it today. Matthew 14:32-33And when they went up into the boat, the wind ceased. And those who were in the boat paid him homage, saying, “Of a truth you are the Son of God.”REV The Greek word used in the NIV for worshiped in this verse is proskyneo which means: to worship, pay homage, show reverence. It is frequently used to designate the custom of prostrating oneself before a person and kissing their feet or the hem of their garment; the Greeks did this before a divinity or something holy. It is to express in attitude or gesture one’s complete dependence on or submission to an authority figure. It is often used in the Septuagint as "to prostrate oneself". In most of our English translations the word “worship” is used of the worship of deity, but it was also used of bowing down before men of higher rank, which was an expected act of respect and deference at that time. Kings and nobles expected people to bow before them. This was also true of NT society, which was very hierarchical. Thus, it was expected at the time of Jesus that someone would bow down or prostrate themselves before a superior, especially someone such as a king. The idea of worship as deeply bowing or falling in prostration before a person of higher status has completely left modern English vocabulary so it no longer means to us what it did to them. Before you toss out Matthew 28:19 as a fraud because it doesn't fit your perspective, perhaps you could consider other rationale for accepting it. Baptizing in the name of Three does not imply anything about when the Spirit is received. So are you saying that the apostles disobeyed Jesus? 1 Corinthians 2:9-10Both of these scriptures are examples of the co-existing and co-equal components of the Trinity. But as it is written, Things that no eye has seen, and no ear has heard, and which have not come up into the heart of man, God prepared those things for those who love him. But God has revealed them to us through the spirit, for the spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.REV These verses do not suggest that your "separate yet equal Holy Spirit" searches the deep things of your "separate but equal Father" The gift of the holy spirit "god guidance within us" searches all things for us even the deep things of God. God prepared the revealing spirit, which understands all things to include the deep things of God Himself, for those who love Him. This text has nothing to do with your Trinity. I'm amused by how much you do agree with the concept of the Trinity and how your agreement may be the will of God because it is correct. I hope my above statements clarify how I still do not agree with the concept of the Trinity, nor do I believe that it is correct. You have, as of yet, not convinced me. Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/13/2010 10:14:18 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix- excellent response to Ryan! thank you.
|
|
|
|
1/14/2010 1:25:41 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
Thank you for praying that God will open my eyes to see His truth! I know I need that!
I often say truth can only enter via God, but error can slip in from multiple sources.
I have heard about the Trinity my entire life, but mostly did not care to think about the concept. My parents and teachers always complained that I never accepted what I was taught - which is the opposite of your statement about me holding firm to what I was taught.
The Trinity is just a human attempt to understand, with our limited minds, the complexities of our awesome God. I'm pleased to have come to a point in my life where growing in my understanding of God is of paramount importance.
As one who has become a recent believer in the concept of the Trinity, I believe studying scripture (for me, that includes NT scripture) has led me to that belief, even though there are some teachings of mainstream Christianity that I do not currently have the ability to accept.
So, what else can I do but, with an open heart, continue to study and pray for God to open my eyes? I'm glad you'll join me in that pursuit!
|
|
|
|
1/14/2010 8:45:02 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
You are sincere, and that is what's most important in serving God. So, you're way ahead of most people. I'm sure that God will guide you on the right path. Just be careful to question everything that you're taught until there is no doubt left, but be careful to be honest in your evaluation .
I know with total certainty that the trinity theory was designed by man with a goal in mind, to convince all, that Jesus is God. This I know because I know as Jesus knew from where, exactly, this idea began. It's identical to the concept that I mentioned earlier. Jesus is the son because he was created by God (as we all were), but not God because God doesn't need any support from any creation. The holy spirit is the OT that he has given to us to lead us in His will. This holy spirit can permeate are lives if we allow it to enter properly.
The son and holy spirit are one with God in a descriptive nature, because they are satisfying the will of God.
The oneness of God does not exist with a sum total of parts. He is one in a way that does not allow anything to be attached to Him. He is totally unique and way beyond are understanding. Jesus may have been a unique man, but cannot possibly be connected to God in the way that the Trinity idea wants to suggest.
I pray for you that you should be able to see this truth through Gods' will.
|
|
|
|
1/14/2010 2:28:46 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, I'm not much of a scholar or intellectual. I guess the closest I've come to an intellectual is beating up a few in the past - apparently, not much rubbed off on me during the process though. However, one of the very cool things about studying God's Word is - extra IQ points are not necessarily an advantage, but yielding to the Holy Spirit means everything. I'm trying to go where God leads me, but my lack of understanding of the reasoning in your posts leaves me wondering if it's the brainpower I'm also lacking. For example, this statement of yours confused me: The holy spirit is not God. One of the names of God is Holy Spirit. I'm wondering if that would be the equivalent to either of the following: Ryan is not the man. One of the names of the man is Ryan. The man is not Ryan. One of the names of Ryan is the man. Although I'm sure my passport confirms my name and my gender, I don't understand how we can say the Holy Spirit is not God, but it is God's name? Unless ... you're going at it from the angle of one is not the being that is one's name - however, if there is one being who does fully live up to His name, its got to be God! If that is your rationale, I marvel all the more about Jesus identifying Himself in John 8:58-59 as "I Am" as in the same "I Am" in Exodus 3:14. I could go on at length about the "I Am" statements Jesus made but, for now I'll just say, I believe scripture fully supports that the reason the Pharisees wanted Jesus to be killed is because they believed Him to be blasphemous with this statement. There are plenty of explanations searchable on the web for the words chosen to translate the original texts into English - in the standard Trinitarian manner. Again, I'm not claiming to be a scholar but, I do understand the little bit I read of these explanations. So, what else can I do but go with what I do understand, as opposed to what I don’t get – specifically, your translating methods and notes. Which, brings me to "encircling" - that really made me dizzy! I love literary devices - and the ancient languages are brimming with charm. I re-read Colossians 1:15-16 like ten times and could not fathom how that all could possibly be a limited all – sometimes all does mean all - as in being inclusive of all the cookies, all the plates, all the children and all the whatever ... all things created in all of creation. Now you got that one line, the only one I can remember, from the children's song looping through my mind ... "The Lord Jesus made them alllllll!" I searched your REV Bible - and my very limited study led me to believe that it is not an all (both in the limited and all-inclusive sense of the word all) finished work yet, but nonetheless has drawn a fair share of scholarly criticism. My own criticism of the REV, from a very un-intellectual perspective is - it is being developed by a group that is starting with a firmly held premise, and they therefore are choosing translations which meet their interpretative demands. Of course, that is exactly what I, and standard Trinitarians, have been accused of doing. So, to be wisely discerning, before I'd accept any translating tips from the REV, I'd need to see it all (both in the limited and all-inclusive sense of the word all) finished and all (both in the limited and all-inclusive sense of the word all) vetted by multiple authorities. I'm sorry we have less agreement than I assumed yesterday but, at least we can agree to disagree today. However, we do both agree that prayer for others is better than dwelling on our disagreements! |
|
|
|
1/14/2010 3:45:16 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Ryan bless you my friend, prayer for others is much better than dwelling on our disagreements! That we can discuss this and still be friends and brothers in Christ is a blessing from God. Please excuse my somewhat technical responses, I felt they would help clarify my understanding of the text; forgive me. I will try to express my thoughts in less technical terms. So, what else can I do but go with what I do understand, as opposed to what I don’t get – specifically, your translating methods and notes. All the translations I use come from my concordance "The Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance" as the NIV version is currently my preferred Bible version. The reason I sometimes quote KJV or REV is to reveal a deeper understanding of what a word in the NIV means. The NIV is not a literal translation but an interpretive one; it takes the literal translation and tries to convey its meaning into what the translators believed would be more understandable phrases. As such, the true meanings of the scriptures can sometimes (either intentionally or accidentally) be misconstrued. I feel that by using several translations you can get a clearer picture of what the text actually says. I felt you seeing other translations would help you get a clearer picture too. I don't understand how we can say the Holy Spirit is not God, but it is God's name? To explain this I will need to give an example: my name is Michael DeWayne Rix. Michael, DeWayne, and Rix are not separate entities that make up one person, namely me. Dewayne as a separate yet equal entity is not me, it is just one of my names. The "holy spirit" is a gift given to us by God. "Holy Spirit" is not a separate but equal entity of God it is just one of His many names. If that is your rationale, I marvel all the more about Jesus identifying Himself in John 8:58-59 as "I Am" as in the same "I Am" in Exodus 3:14. Exodus 3:14emphasis added (New International Version)
God said to Moses, "I am who I am . [a] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.' "
Footnotes:
Exodus 3:14 [a]Or I will be what I will be This is a direct copy from BibleGateway.com. The reason for the footnote is the Hebrew word used here for "I am" haya which means: to be, become, happen. All three "I am" in this verse are a mistranslation of haya. It should read: God said to Moses, "I will be what I will be. This is what you say to the Israelites: 'I WILL BE has sent me to you.' " John 8:58emphasis added "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" Here a combination of two Greek words are used ego and eimi, when put together they are translated "I'm". The Hebrew and the Greek are not the same words. I believe scripture fully supports that the reason the Pharisees wanted Jesus to be killed is because they believed Him to be blasphemous with this statement. "They believed him to be" is the key phrase here. As you know the Pharisees and Sadducees often misunderstood Jesus, his teachings, and his methods. They thought him unclean because he associated with sinners, they thought him a drunk and a glutton, they thought he broke the sabbath. When he claimed that he would be seating on the right hand side of God they thought this the most horrendous blasphemy. Jesus' teachings and actions were done in public but as Jesus said seeing they will not see and hearing they will not here. Their misunderstanding of Jesus doesn't equate with them being correct. Which, brings me to "encircling" - that really made me dizzy! Think of it as parenthesis and that may help. My own criticism of the REV, from a very un-intellectual perspective is - it is being developed by a group that is starting with a firmly held premise, and they therefore are choosing translations which meet their interpretative demands. Of course, that is exactly what I, and standard Trinitarians, have been accused of doing. My friend all translations start with a firmly held premise, that's one of the problems with translation. The REV is a literal translation and yes it is a work in progress. They are seeking to compare every verse in the Bible with every other to insure there are no inconsistencies. And yes when there are more than one possible ways to translate a word or phrase they are (just as everyone else has, including Trinitarians) opting for the translation which best suits their doctrinal beliefs. But as I said above having more than one translation helps to grasp the full meaning of a verse. Again I apologize for the confusion my clarification caused you; if any of the other responses I gave in that post confused you let me know and I will try to put them into layman terms. Goodnight my friend and peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/14/2010 10:05:46 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
Your explanations are very good. Perhaps it would simplify things to explain that the holy spirit is really only a description of God, more than a name. The truth is that all names we attach to God are in fact only descriptions. We usually say that names in the OT are describing the essence of the one with the name, but when it comes to God no name can accurately describe Him; Firstly because He is way beyond are understanding and secondly, no one name could describe all His facets.
For example, one name He has is explained to mean that He has always been in existence, in past present and future.
Another name He has is explained to mean that He is creator and controller of all forces in the world. But no name describes Him in essence of His being. That is impossible for us to grasp.
The holy spirit is also a simplified description for us to appreciate His greatness, but in no way is it a part of His being.
|
|
|
|
1/15/2010 1:58:11 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, We both agree the NIV is a usable translation and others also are helpful. However, the more I think about the REV, the more convinced I am that it should avoided as spurious. At a glance, it appears that one of the main purposes of this translation is to prove - by creatively and selectively translating words - the authors' belief that Jesus is not God. A related goal of this text is to gravitate toward the harmonizing of world religions - at least by making the Christian Bible and its radical concepts less offensive to others. Scholars with an agenda can toss out individual scriptures like Matthew 28:19 and twist the meaning of any others that don’t fit their conclusion - however, I re-affirm my belief that the sum total of the NT attests to the divinity of Jesus. The NT closes with descriptions in Revelations of all worshipping Jesus. As Jesus instructed in Matthew 28:19, and as His early disciples obeyed, we continue to baptize people in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit! |
|
|
|
1/15/2010 7:17:22 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Brother Ryan, Scholars with an agenda can toss out individual scriptures like Matthew 28:19 and twist the meaning of any others that don’t fit their conclusion My friend have you not done so with the scriptures you gave me above. The Trinitarians have done so with some of the OT and most of the NT scriptures. The Trinity was not a doctrine taught in the Bible, it was decided on by men at the Council of Nicea. Then they searched the Bible for scriptures to support it. Almost everyone (and I stress almost) views the scriptures through their own rose colored glasses, that is one of the problems with the doctrines of men which are not clearly written in the Bible. Let me give you an example of how pulling scriptures like Matthew 28:19 out of biblical context can be damaging. It is written in the NT that "Judas hanged himself", it is also written in the NT "go and do likewise"; I put them together and I have what I can call biblical truth "Judas hanged himself go and do likewise". When a scripture clearly disagrees with the majority of scripture it must be examined to understand its meaning. I re-affirm my belief that the sum total of the NT attests to the divinity of Jesus. The NT closes with descriptions in Revelations of all worshipping Jesus. I agree with you, the NT does attest to Jesus' divinity: his divine nature; I believe on this with all my heart, I just don't take the divine nature of Jesus and use it to assume he is God. The OT attests to Moses', Elijah's, and David's divinity, their divine nature, but they were not God. And yes all will worship Jesus as King. As I explained before we place a different meaning on worship now a days than they did in the past. Kings were worthy of worship as the word worship itself means; they were not worthy of worship as it relates to God. Praise God! All will worship Jesus as our King! As Jesus instructed in Matthew 28:19, and as His early disciples obeyed, we continue to baptize people in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit! Many churches today (not all) do baptize in this manner; these being churches which believe they are following God's word. I showed you with the verses in Acts Jesus' early disciples did not baptize in this way; however, I would like to revisit Matthew 28:19 using strictly the NIV; as I believe I have come to an understanding concerning this text on baptizing which does not conflict with my views concerning the Trinity. (New International Version) Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Footnotes: Matthew 28:19 [a]Or into; see Acts 8:16; 19:5; Romans 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13; 10:2 and Gal. 3:27. This is an exact quote pulled from BibleGateway.com. I would also like to point out that the REV translation is almost identical: Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the holy spirit, Lets look at Acts 14-17 as it appears in the NIV. emphasis added When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. Here we see here the apostles baptized in the name of Jesus, the holy spirit is something that comes upon you; but how? Either as a direct gift from God or through prayer and the laying on of hands. Jesus said: "If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"Luke 11:13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father.John 14:13 Let us look at the word baptize. Baptize, or baptizo in the Greek, means to wash. Your are being cleansed of your impurities, your sins. Baptizing in the name of Three does not imply anything about when the Spirit is received. I agree and submit to you that these three cleansing are separate and accomplished in different ways. " Baptize them in the name of the Father" This one is somewhat harder to find; it could be the baptism of John for repentance (which was done in water) though I doubt it because John said that Jesus would come after him and baptize with the fire of the holy spirit. It could possibly be tied into the baptism into Christ: 1 Peter 3:21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you alsonot the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, However, I believe that the cleansing in the name of the Father is the confession and repentance of sins as in Psalm 51Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love; according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions. Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin. For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you are proved right when you speak and justified when you judge. Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Surely you desire truth in the inner parts; you teach me wisdom in the inmost place. Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow. Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones you have crushed rejoice. Hide your face from my sins and blot out all my iniquity. Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Psalm 51:1-10 " Baptize them in the name of the Son" Acts 10:46-48Then Peter said, "Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. We see here that cleansing in the name of the Son was done in water (what we traditionally call baptizing). This also shows that the holy spirit is not given through the baptism of water. " Baptize them in the name of the holy spirit" As discussed above this cleansing is either a gift freely given by God or done through prayer to God directly, or in Jesus' name with the laying on of hands. I believe that this description of Matthew 28:19 is in keeping with scripture as a whole and does not conflict with the methods the apostles used as shown in the book of Acts. Our current tradition of baptism tries to combines the cleansing of confession and repentance of sins, with the cleansing of Christ, and with the invoking of the holy spirit. I do not see the harm in this but it is not biblically correct as those baptized today do not consistently receive forgiveness of sins nor the gift of the holy spirit through this baptism; I am sure you will agree with me that this is true. Wow, we could devote one whole discussion just to this one verse. Well it is very late (2am here) and I really need to get some sleep. Peace be with you brother Ryan. |
|
|
|
1/16/2010 12:06:49 AM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, My friend I thought I would provide you with a sample of the scriptures that the Trinitarians toss out in order to assert their agenda. emphasis added Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? Mark 13:32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. John 5:19Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. John 20:17 Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. 1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. Ephesians 4:4-6 There is one body and one Spiritjust as you were called to one hope when you were called one Lord, one faith, one baptism;one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. Hebrews 5:7-8 During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 1 Peter 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, I will note that 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Hebrews 1:2 have made me re-think Jesus' existence, as God's first creation, from the beginning. In fact Jesus' statement in John 8:58 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" ego translates to "I" and eimi translates to "be", as such it was translated "I am"; it should be noted that "I am" here is implying "I exist". Given these three texts I am open to the idea that Jesus (though not as the man we know) has existed since his initial creation by God and that Jesus was the servant and/or tool that brought God's creation into existence. Well my brother I hope you are enjoying your Sunday; peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/17/2010 12:09:01 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
This statement "Before Abraham was born, I am", probably was referring to the idea that the orthodox Jew knows; which is ,that before the world was created by God, He (God) already chose the name for Mashiach.
Since Jesus was convinced that he was Mashiach, so he implied that he was before Abraham.
There is no indication that Jesus was any tool for creation.
I see from these quotes above, in the NT, that it is clear that Jesus never implied in any way that he is God; and therefore, the trinity concept as well has no backing.
I would like to know where it says in the NT, that Jesus said clearly, that he will return in the future to save the whole world.
Perhaps that too has no basis even in the NT?
|
|
|
|
1/17/2010 1:05:04 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
This statement "Before Abraham was born, I am", probably was referring to the idea that the orthodox Jew knows; which is ,that before the world was created by God, He (God) already chose the name for Mashiach...There is no indication that Jesus was any tool for creation. I agree with you wolfson, but I am open to the idea(as in I will except evidence if it is given). I would like to know where it says in the NT, that Jesus said clearly, that he will return in the future to save the whole world.
Perhaps that too has no basis even in the NT? We can explore that; I will create a new discussion called "Jesus' return". There we will look into this question of yours.
|
|
|
|
1/17/2010 7:43:33 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
Toss these scriptures out? NEVER!
These beloved verses you cited are essential to the development of the Trinity concept!
|
|
|
|
1/18/2010 7:21:11 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Yesterday, due to a hilarious chain of events, I strolled into church late, just as the congregation was singing:
"Holy, Holy, Holy; merciful and mighty God in Three Persons. Blessed Trinity!"
My mind, which had been racing, tripping and leaping with laughter, suddenly came to a crescendo of single awareness and marvel at the profundity of those lines.
I'm sure everyone else got the "Holy, Holy, Holy" reference from Revelation 4, the first time they heard the song. Yesterday, the ton of bricks fell hardest on the late-comer.
|
|
|
|
1/18/2010 7:52:02 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
You are interpreting these verses the way you want to understand them, not the way they are meant to be read. You have been taught a way of thinking that is faulty and proven incorrect from many verses in the NT. I hope you will allow yourself to see the truth.
Start again, and think about it with an open mind.
May God be with you!
|
|
|
|
1/18/2010 7:52:35 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, I look to God to correct my thinking each day - I know I must remain on a perpetual journey toward a better understanding of God. I seek, and only value His truth! We believe God teaches us from the NT. With God as my teacher, I see the triune nature of our One God in the above mentioned verses. In fact, all the verses that speak to who God is, from the OT and the NT, do harmonize. The concept of the Trinity is a human attempt to describe the complexities of an indescribable God - by using ALL of His Word to describe Him. You and MichaelRix have written many statements about the Holy Spirit that are completely compatible with Trinitarian thought. However, you both demonstrate you do not fully understand what is taught as the doctrine of the Trinity. Again, this is a classic case in which one does not have to agree with this doctrine. But, to truly disagree with it, one must first accurately understand with what one is disagreeing - or you are, in actuality, only disagreeing with your interpretation of the Trinity. I respect your right to disagree with the Trinity. Presently though, you and MichaelRix find disagreement with what you think the Trinity is because your misunderstanding of the concept does not allow you to see how these verses support the rendering of the doctrine. Through the ages, God has continued to cry out, "How long will my people reject me?" Due to His love for His people, and in desperation for our estrangement to end, God decided to redeem His people to Himself, by Himself. And hence, we have one of the most often recited verses in Christianity: John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. |
|
|
|
1/18/2010 8:33:45 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Late last night, through insomnia and praying to understand God, I happened on an illustration of the Trinity from Douglas Wilson. Here is my synopsis of his thoughts based on one verse: Ephesians 2:18
For through Him (Jesus) we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.We are traveling to a certain destination, (God the Father). The way of access is the road (God the Son) to that destination. The means by which we travel is the car (God the Spirit). We come to the Father through the Son by the Spirit. Amen! |
|
|
|
1/18/2010 8:44:05 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
There's nothing wrong with coming to God by using the road and the car; But the road is not God and the car is not God.
It's also not necessary and very wrong to compare Jesus to God in any way. Jesus can be a connection to God only in the sense that he shows us the way and gives us direction.
This is not what they mean when they talk of Trinity. They try to claim that Jesus is an equal part of God and this is wrong.
I have to stop now. Be well.
|
|
|
|
1/18/2010 9:46:43 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
I respect your right to disagree with the Trinity. Presently though, you and MichaelRix find disagreement with what you think the Trinity is because your misunderstanding of the concept does not allow you to see how these verses support the rendering of the doctrine. Ryan, Please explain your understanding of the trinity in detail so that your above statements can be clear. Thank you my brother.
|
|
|
|
1/18/2010 10:04:46 AM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, This is what my understanding of the trinity is and where it comes from. In 325, the First Council of Nicaea established the doctrine of the Trinity as orthodoxy and adopted the Nicene Creed, which described Christ as "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father"...The Confession of the Council of Nicaea said little about the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius (c 293–373) in the last decades of his life. He both defended and refined the Nicene formula. ...According to the Athanasian Creed, each of these three divine persons is said to be eternal, each almighty, none greater or less than another, each God, and yet together being but one God, (wikipedia.org) The Athanasian Creed (which specifically defines the trinity) can be read in its entirety here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm Here's my problem: The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate...The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal...So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. Numbers 23:19 God cannot be a man, Jesus was a man; Jesus is not God Acts 3:13 The God of our fathers glorified His servant Jesus; Jesus is not God, he is His servant. 1 Corinthians 8:6 There is one God, the Father. Jesus is not the Father; Jesus is not God. 1 Timothy 2:5 One God and one mediator between God Jesus; Jesus is not God, he is His mediator. Hebrews 2:9 Jesus was made lower than the angels. God was not made nor can He be lower than the angels; Jesus is not God. Hebrews 5:7-8 Jesus prayed and learned obedience, God has no need to pray to Himself nor learn obedience; Jesus is not God. 1 Peter 1:3 and John 20:17 God was Jesus' God hence Jesus answers to a higher Authority, God doesn't; Jesus is not God. I await your understanding of the trinity brother. Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/18/2010 11:12:59 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
Well said! I am pleased by these words in your post.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 12:45:59 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
When Wolfson613 started the discussion Did Jesus Claim to be God? and then you later started this one about the Trinity, I had no interest in joining these discussions.
However, at the same time, I was praying for opportunities to tell people about Jesus. After a couple days of no one showing up in my personal life to tell about Jesus, it finally dawned on me that God had answered my prayer.
Therefore, I'm grateful for the opportunity to participate in these discussions. I prefer to talk, or paint that picture of Jesus but, writing is good too. At times, I have lots of spare time to write and at other times, time is scarce. I'd just like you to know, I will respond to you, as soon as time allows.
Describing God and Jesus are such broad subjects that can take an abundance of time to cover them well - and then God is constantly providing new insights.
You understand the mechanics of the Trinity. But, I say you do not fully understand the Trinity because to prove that Jesus is not God, you use the same verses we'd use to show Jesus' relationship to God, which supports our concept of the Trinity. I'd like to respond to all of the verses you mentioned and provide additional scripture for you to consider.
All, in time.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 10:41:06 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
MichaelRix, It is clearly evident that you and I are not speaking about the same Jesus. Your Jesus was a man sent from God. My Jesus is God who became man. Your original question regarding the Trinity included this question:
Whether you believe that belief in the Trinity is essential for salvation.
My first thought was NO, believing in the Trinity has absolutely no impact on salvation. I'm well aware that the word Trinity does not appear in the Bible but, I believe the Trinity concept is well supported throughout the Bible. Prior to reading your beliefs about Jesus, I may have been prone to describing salvation as the gift given to whoever accepts Jesus' sacrifice for their sins. Now, I'd be more cautious to also include knowing and accepting Jesus as Lord. God demands a blood penalty for sin. If Jesus was just a man, Jesus' death paid for His own sins. We believe that Jesus is our sin atonement, our Savior, because He is God the Son; therefore the shedding of His blood was sufficient to pay the penalty God demands for all of our sins. Here is a passage to support my belief: 1 John 1:9
This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.
Salvation is a matter for God to decide - I won't presume to know who is saved. However, these verses, among others, indicate that the term Son of God, as supported by the phrase one and only, set Jesus apart from the rest of God's children. So, I'd say that unless you know the Savior, God's Son, you do not have salvation. Any human savior could not have paid for your sins or mine. I'd like to spend some length providing scriptures that define the one and only Savior - God's Son. |
|
|
|
1/19/2010 10:50:50 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Your proof only comes from the NT, not the OT and even from there you are ignoring all the contradictions that are all over.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 11:00:22 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
I believe no contradictions of scriptures exist within the OT.
I believe the same about the NT.
Also, I believe no contradictions exist between OT verses and NT verses.
The lack of contradiction between the OT and NT is one reason we believe the NT is the inspired word of God equal to the OT.
However, there are many contradictions in the way people interpret scripture in both the OT and NT.
I did notice how much you like MichaelRix's NT proofs when they support your beliefs!
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 11:14:08 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Ryan my friend, God demands a blood penalty for sin. If Jesus was just a man, Jesus' death paid for His own sins. We believe that Jesus is our sin atonement, our Savior, because He is God the Son; therefore the shedding of His blood was sufficient to pay the penalty God demands for all of our sins. I, unlike wolfson, believe that Jesus is the begotten Son of God. I believe in Luke 1:35 that God impregnated Mary through His spirit with His pure seed. As such Jesus is the holy one that can die for our sins Isaiah 53. While this union makes Jesus divine he is still just a man and he faced the temptations that we do. Ryan, I do not want to offend you brother but I must say: Many christians believe as you do, many believe as I do; however, I do not try to isolate you and your beliefs by stating "We believe Jesus was God's Son, not God", I merely state my beliefs. I am sure this was unintentional on you part and I would appreciate it if in the future you simply assert your beliefs. 1 John 1:9 emphasis added This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. these verses, among others, indicate that the term Son of God, as supported by the phrase one and only, set Jesus apart from the rest of God's children. I agree with you, Jesus as the Son of God is set apart from the rest of God's children. Once again, being God's Son does not make him God any more than my sons are I. You understand the mechanics of the Trinity. But, I say you do not fully understand the Trinity because to prove that Jesus is not God, you use the same verses we'd use to show Jesus' relationship to God, which supports our concept of the Trinity. I'd like to respond to all of the verses you mentioned and provide additional scripture for you to consider.
All, in time. Thank you my friend I look forward to it. Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/19/2010 11:40:12 AM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
When using "we" I was referring to those who believe in the Trinity.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 12:03:56 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Some places Jesus is called son of man and other places is called son of God. That is an example of contradiction.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 12:08:17 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
I can see how you'd view that as a contradiction. Trinitarians say Jesus is fully God and fully human - so no contradiction.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 12:43:00 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
1/19/2010 12:50:46 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Some places Jesus is called son of man and other places is called son of God. That is an example of contradiction. Wolfson my friend, "son of man" is a phrase from the old testament which means "human being"; "son of God" is also a phrase from the old testament which denotes "God's children"; "the only Son of God" is a new testament phrase which means "God's literal Son". It is possible for God's literal Son to be a human being. I too see no contradiction here. Ryan, Where we disagree - I'm guessing - is over passages like: Colossians 1:15-16 Yes, we disagree concerning these scriptures meanings; I can however, see where you get your interpretation from when viewing these two verses in their context. Colossians 1:13-20 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.NIV Similar to the title Alpha & Omega used in Revelations - we believe that Jesus always existed. Revelation 1:8"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty." I am assuming you have a red letter bible as I do. ( wolfson, a red letter bible puts all the things christians believe Jesus actually said in red print) The problem with this scripture is that there is no reason from the context to insinuate that this is in fact Jesus speaking; It could in fact be God (as I see Him). Revelation 21:6He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. Interestingly enough red letter bibles attribute this to God not Jesus. Revelation 22:13I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. Here again this could be God (as I understand Him), the only reason this could be attributed to Jesus is because later in this dialog verse 16 begins with "I, Jesus, have sent..." now while I myself have stated that the Greek has no punctuation it is interesting that although verses 12-16 are attributed to Jesus in red letter bibles verse 12 begins with a parenthesis, verse 14 begins with a parenthesis, and verse 16 begins with a parenthesis. I would be interested in the Trinitarian reasons for attributing Rev. 1:8 and 22:13 to Jesus while 21:6 is given to God. He is the rock of salvation that David wrote of: Psalm 62:2 Psalm 62:1-2My soul finds rest in God alone;
my salvation comes from him.
He alone is my rock and my salvation;
he is my fortress, I will never be shaken. I am guessing that you interpret this as Jesus coming from God as our means of salvation, so in your interpretation do you see Psalm 62:1-2 saying something along these lines? My soul finds rest in God alone;
my salvation comes from him.
Jesus alone is my rock and my salvation;
Jesus is my fortress, I will never be shaken. If this is the case I am most interested as to what brings about such a belief. Well all this must wait until your future posts concerning these things. Until then, Peace be with you Ryan.
|
|
|
|
1/19/2010 9:34:57 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, In response to your last post: There is one God; Jesus is God - that is why Alpha & Omega are used for Jesus and God in Revelations and that is why David spoke of God being the Rock of Salvation (he did not know the name of Jesus). Although you have your own interpretation of the following passage, I must mention it again because it dovetails with the Alpha & Omega title and the Rock of Salvation that was known in the OT: John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood. This also fits nicely with the wording of: Colossians 1:13-20
For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. |
|
|
|
1/20/2010 5:55:53 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
1/20/2010 9:13:01 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
1/20/2010 9:16:22 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
I pray that God should open your eyes to see the truth.
The mediator is not God,or else he is not a mediator.
He is also a man, not god.
There is no sense to say- he is all man and all God. He can't be both at the same time, that is an illusion.
|
|
|
|
1/20/2010 9:28:11 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, I understand and appreciate your concern over this matter. Obviously, you want God to be worshiped appropriately and do not want to see people commit blasphemy. I also appreciate your prayers for God to open my eyes. Until God should grant greater understanding, I remain within my current belief that God loves humanity so much, He was willing to make a huge, personal sacrifice to reconcile us to Him. I recall you did not agree with my analogy of God as the destination and Jesus as the car that provides access to the destination. I'd like to try to illuminate why we think we need Jesus to provide access or be our Mediator. As you know, the law requires a blood sacrifice to atone for sin. We are all guilty of sin and that sin separates us from God. Also, in the temple there was a very thick curtain that separated the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place. Only the High Priest could enter the Most Holy Place once per year, while the people were completely cut off from entry. Christians can see the cross on which Jesus shed His blood to be analogous to putting the blood of an unblemished lamp on the sides and tops of the door frame – which was necessary to escape death at the first Passover. We believe Jesus died on the 14th of Nisan, and at the moment of His death, the curtain in the temple supernaturally ripped in two, from top to bottom ( Matthew 27:51). Because Jesus lived a sinless life, His blood pays the penalty for all sin and by it, we escape death. That is why we refer to Jesus as our Mediator - the giving of His perfect life removes our sin and provides us personal access to God. |
|
|
|
1/20/2010 2:16:26 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Brother Ryan, Let's take a closer look at John 1:1 by first looking again at the NIV translation. emphasis added In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This is the Greek transliteration of John 1:1 from the original Greek which the NT was written: emphasis added en arche en ho logos kai ho logos en pros ton theon kai theos en ho logos. This is the literal English translation: emphasis added In beginning was this word and this word was with him god and god was this word. Now we take the literal and change it to proper English: emphasis added In the beginning was the word and the word was with the god and a god was the word. Now I agree that the phrase "the word" should be capitalized because a god was the word, hence his title. "the god" should be capitalized as it obviously is talking about God. As such here is "my translation" of John 1:1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word. I do not know why modern translators did not differentiate between "the god" and "a god" or why they reversed the last phrase around. 1 Corinthians 8:6emphasis added yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. Firstly, this text is clear the Father is the one God, Jesus is the one Lord. If Jesus was god this would have been a perfect opportunity to say something like: there is one God the Father and the Son. All things came from the Father and He is who we live for All things came through Jesus and we live through him. We came from God through Jesus, and we live for God through Jesus. This does not equate Jesus with God; do not confuse the water with the cup. 1 Timothy 2:3-6emphasis added This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men - the testimony given in its proper time. God is our savior, Jesus is the vessel of our salvation, again do not confuse the water with the cup. Jesus cannot be God if he mediates between God and man. Mediate: acting through an intervening agency. A mediator is a third party which intervenes between two or more other parties, in this case God and man. In order to mediate he cannot be the God nor can he be a regular man because all men sin and God abhors sin. Jesus can mediate as a third party because he is holy, divine, and pure: he is the Son of God; as such, he is not a regular man, he is the height of purity and righteousness (hence his divinity) that a man can obtain. He is somewhere between what God is and what man is. Do not let my differing interpretations and beliefs dissuade your sharing the word as you see it. Please continue with your scriptural references to the trinity my friend. Peace be with you brother Ryan. |
|
|
|
1/20/2010 10:49:21 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
A mediator is not a sacrifice, but rather a go-between two parties, as MichaelRix explained. His purpose is simply to relay info. in an acceptable manner for all involved. Jesus could be thought of as this mediator but not thought to be, God himself; That just doesn't work here.
These ideas that Jesus was a passover offering and his blood gives us forgiveness is a nice thought, but has no support from the OT; Therefore I must reject it.
The NT as I mentioned earlier has no significance for me concerning truth about God and his will.
I see clearly that the way of christian thought is to first draw all conclusions from the NT, and after everything is clear from there, then to look into the OT and find how everything seems to fit like a glove. This method will only work for someone who has been trained to believe that the NT has divine meaning.
I certainly don't believe that and will never follow this method. therefore, it's unlikely that we will be able to agree on the facts concerning Jesus.
But I do appreciate that you try to convey your thoughts as best that you can.
I don't see too much more purpose in my continuing the discussion, because I know now that there really are no proofs in the OT for someone who doesn't begin by first thinking that Jesus was our Mashiach and savior.
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 1:08:36 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
How is atonement made for your sins?
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 5:48:44 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
Atonement for sin is given by God when a person first admits his guilt and has regret for what he did; Then after accepting within himself to refrain from the sin in the future, God will give atonement.
Certain sins require a punishment that the person will receive, before being totally atoned.
When there was a temple, there were certain sacrifices that could be brought which would be required, in order to receive full atonement.
The passover sacrifice was Not for atonement. This is a mistake of the Christian religion.
Anyway, the death of Jesus certainly would not help anyone that sins afterwords, that is also a mistake.
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 8:40:13 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Are you, Wolfson613, obligated to obey the whole Law of God? God commanded a system of offerings starting with Adam - offerings were prescribed for the forgiveness of sin and for fellowship with God. God established His covenant with Israel in Exodus – prior to the building of the Temple. This covenant was ratified with blood (Exodus 24:8). Where in God's Word do you see that you are not obligated to have a blood offering to atone for your sins just because the physical Temple does not exist today? Leviticus 16:34 "This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites."God often repeated, throughout the OT, the sentiment in the above verse regarding sin offerings and the Day of Atonement. My fear for you is that no appropriate atonement has been made for your sins - and this leaves you in violation of the Law and separated from God. If separated from God, how can one know His will and obey Him? |
|
|
|
1/21/2010 9:22:07 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
Look at Leviticus 17:3,4. After the Temple was destroyed there is no ability for us to sacrifice because all sacrifices can only take place in the Temple grounds.
Therefore, God accepts our repentance without the sacrifice that was normally required.
True, that sins create a separation from God on various levels; but God still accepts our repentance even without the sacrifice, since we have no choice in the matter. When the Temple will be restored the obligation will return to offer the sacrifice properly.
Anyway, as I mentioned above, the death of Jesus does not and cannot atone for sins that are done after his death; This is a fallacy, and an attempt to justify his death for all mankind.
NO where in the OT does it say that forgiveness of sin comes from believing in Jesus: This idea originated from the NT, which is not part of Gods' command to any nation of the world.
There is allot of wishful thinking in the christian belief that has no basis other than the NT.
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:08:21 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
Please know I'm not presuming to judge your relationship with God - since your relationship with God is only between the two of you, my thoughts carry no importance.
However, just as you have been concerned that I'm blasphemous, I worry about people who are encumbered with sin and don't have a clear way out.
I don't understand a whole lot about the law - however, all of the instruction that occurred in Leviticus happened before the construction of the Temple. Moses offered sacrifices at the foot of Mt. Sinai. The tabernacle discussed in Leviticus was just a tent - no?
If you want to be obedient, you can make a tent - all the instructions are laid out in the OT. Obedience to God does not require a physical temple!
God demands sacrifice and those who do not obey His commands are cut off from Him. A good portion of the OT is about God's punishment for His people's disobedience and God's pleading for His people to return to Him.
Since God demands sacrifices - He will provide a way for His people to be obedient!
Also - I'm aware that Passover and Atonement are two separate Feasts occurring in different seasons. But, the beautiful symbolism runs parallel.
Passover, pictures coming out of sin (Egypt), with the blood of the lamb picturing the Death Angel passing over your house because this symbol signifies you belong to God.
Atonement means we can be at one with God, because a sacrifice has been paid to cover our sins.
You've mentioned a couple of times that I stubbornly stick to the things I've been taught. I understand where your coming from, but I don't identify with that sentiment. I'm generally disagreeable with most of what is trying to be taught to me.
For example, last week in church the Pastor said, "Turn to the person next to you and tell them they are a sinner". I would not do it because I don't believe it is true. The Pastor then went on to say that whoever says they do not sin is a liar and therefore a sinner and we all probably sin each day.
Now, I know a thing or two about sin. I believe God is providing assistance to me to recognize and remove sin in my life. Rather than sinning once per day, I would guess that I probably sin on an average much closer to once per hour.
Jesus teaches a magnified version of the Ten Commandments. For example, not only are we prohibited from committing murder and adultery - we believe the intent of the law also forbids us from hating and lusting - because they are the emotions that lead to the actions of murder and adultery.
Jesus expounded on the Law to identify that mostly sin occurs in the heart - even when we put on an outward show of obedience to the law, our hearts can be harboring a load of deadly sin.
That is why I would say I sin much too often - I don't consider myself to be a murder or adulterer - but the heart can be desperately wicked. So, although I do sin, as I mentioned above, I do not consider myself to be a sinner.
I know all my sin has been atoned for, I know I have increasing fellowship with God because the appropriate offerings have been made for me. I would like this to be true for you too!
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:34:28 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
If you want to believe that Jesus was your sacrifice that freed you from sin, don't let me stand in your way.
Personally, I don't buy into that system. Repentance is a personal issue and everyone has their own account.
Sacrifice is part of it , but what we can't do, we are not held responsible for.
Jesus taught what he knew from the OT, and he did not invent new laws; But unfortunately allot of the messages from him got confused.
I know you mean well, and that's good, because God likes sincerity, even if there are mistakes.
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 2:32:55 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, You said: Repentance is a personal issue and everyone has their own account. Deciding whether to repent may be a personal issue but in the OT, God clearly states what He expects! God tells you that you must repent and what sacrifices you must offer for atonement. God also repeatedly asks you, Wolfson613, why you will not repent and offer the appropriate sacrifices so that you can be right with Him. Your answer to God must be better than: Repentance is a personal issue and everyone has their own account.Your answer to God's commands and His pleading to come to Him can only be the answer that He prescribes! Only a blood sacrifice can bring you atonement with God! Today, you are being called to atonement! |
|
|
|
1/21/2010 2:55:53 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Oh yeah: Where in the OT does God give us permission for anything like your comment: but what we can't do, we are not held responsible for.And, where does God say you can't offer sacrifices anywhere, as long as it is within the camp of Israel? The Fathers offered sacrifices everywhere from Ur to Mt. Ararat to Mt. Sinai. When the Jews returned from captivity they immediately re-built an alter to begin offering sacrifices to God. If the people desired to perform repentance an obedience they would re-build alters. To know God is to obey God. God demands sin and fellowship offerings from you. |
|
|
|
1/21/2010 3:11:22 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
My brothers, It seems that this discussion has gotten a little heated and off subject. Let us consider what Paul wrote in Romans 8:28; wolfson although this is a NT text I am sure you will see God's truth in it. And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. Even so brothers, let us remember to love our neighbor. |
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:23:58 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
These ideas that Jesus was a passover offering and his blood gives us forgiveness is a nice thought, but has no support from the OT; Therefore I must reject it. When God sent the destroyer (an agent of His wrath) throughout Egypt he passed by the houses that had lamb's blood painted on them; they were covered by the blood, thereby saving those inside from the wrath of God. The holy one of Isaiah 53 takes upon himself the transgressions and the punishment that goes with it; you can be covered by his blood, there by saving those who are covered from the wrath of God: God's wrath passes you over because of his blood: This is OT teaching and doctrine. Jesus' blood does not give us forgiveness anymore than the blood given as an offering gives us forgiveness; it pays the penalty for the sin, thereby opening the way to forgiveness: Confession of and repentance from sins. Now back to the trinity.
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:24:56 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
Matthew 11:27emphasis added "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. As a side note to our discussion I would like to state that capitalization, or the lack there of, in scripture is misleading. In the passage "whom the Son chooses to reveal him" him is referring to God, why is it not capitalized? Anyway back on topic, if Jesus was in fact God (the Son) being co-equal with God (the Father) why would the Father need to commit anything to the Son. Being God Jesus would all ready posses all authority and would not need it to be given to him. Many scriptures state that Jesus was granted, or given, or committed all things by the Father; hence these are things which Jesus did not originally posses.
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:26:32 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
John 17:1-16emphasis added After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed[a]: "Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you[b]. For you granted him authority[c] over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him[d]. Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God[e], and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent[f]. I have brought you glory on earth by completing the work you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began[g]. "I have revealed you to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word[h]. Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you[i]. For I gave them the words you gave me[j] and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you[k], and they believed that you sent me[l]. I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours[m]. All I have is yours, and all you have is mine[n]. And glory has come to me through them. I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your namethe name you gave me[o]so that they may be one as we are one. While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me[p]. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled. "I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them. I have given them your word[q] and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you[r] take them out of the world but that you protect[s] them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not
|
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:27:48 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
a] he looked toward heaven and prayed As I have stated before God has no need to pray to Himself. b] Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you God does not need to glorify Himself. c] you granted him authority God granted Jesus authority; Jesus did not have it, it was given to him by The Authority. d] those you have given him Again these people were given to Jesus by The Authority. e] that they may know you, the only true God Here Jesus himself confesses (as he so often did) the God is the only true God, and that he is other than God; hence "you" f] Jesus Christ, whom you have sent This does not say Jesus Christ, who is God incarnate. Again Jesus is identifying himself as other than God. g] Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began First it is important to note that if Jesus literally existed and was glorified before the world began he would not need God to glorify him in His presence, so how do we explain this? Take 2 Timothy 1:9 which says that each Christian was given grace “before the beginning of time,” no one tries to prove that we were actually alive with God back then. Everyone acknowledges that we were “in the mind of God,” i.e., in God’s foreknowledge. The same is true of Jesus Christ. His glory was “with the Father” before the world began, and here in John he prayed that it would come into manifestation. h] They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word Here again we see Jesus identifying himself as other than God and being given something from The Authority. How silly is it to think that God would give something He all ready has to Himself! i] everything you have given me comes from you Again Jesus is other than God and everything he has comes from God. j] I gave them the words you gave me And again. k] I came from you And again. l] you sent me Again. m] I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours God has no need to pray to Himself, and Jesus acknowledges that everything is God's though God has given it to him. n] All I have is yours, and all you have is mine This is Jesus acknowledging once again that God has given all things to him. o],[p] the name you gave me... by that name you gave me All things come from God and are given to Jesus. q] I have given them your word Again Jesus is saying he is other than God. r] My prayer is not that you God doesn't pray to Himself. s] but that you protect Nor would God need to ask Himself to protect others. Here we see consistently that Jesus believed he was, other than God, subservient to God, granted authority by God, and God's servant on earth. |
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:29:07 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
I am assuming, brother Ryan, that you have an explanation for how this scripture actually supports the trinity. If so I am eager to here it, if not I await another post from you. Peace be with you and remember what 1 Corinthians 13:7-8 says about love: It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. |
|
|
|
1/21/2010 10:32:48 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
I am pleased at your approach and honesty in this matter.
God be with you!
|
|
|
|
1/22/2010 12:43:46 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
Apparently, I did not explain myself well enough. When I said that 'repentance is a personal issue', I meant that each person must repent, and cannot rely on human or animal sacrifice alone to release him from sin and punishment. Even the sin offering in the Temple did not remove guilt unless there was repentance that was done prior to it.
Concerning the place of sacrifice, I gave you one quote from Leviticus 17:3,4. There it says that all sacrifices must be brought and offered only at the entrance of the designated meeting place of God. When the Jews were in the desert, that place was the Tent that traveled with them. Eventually, the place was moved to, where the Temple was built in Jerusalem by King Solomon.
This is a command found many times in the OT, stating that all offerings must be done only in that designated area.
There were times, before the Temple was built, in which offerings were allowed anywhere; But after the Temple was built, the law was changed, by God himself.
See if you can find any source in the OT that allowed a sacrifice outside of the Temple area, after the Temple was built.
Concerning my statement that we are not responsible for what we can't do, you can see Devarim 22:25-27. There the girl who was raped in the field, away from the city, is free from guilt because the situation was out of her control. We are taught, that in every situation that is out of our control, God does not hold us responsible.
This would include the fact that we are unable to bring the sin offering today, until the Temple will be rebuilt.
|
|
|
|
1/22/2010 1:30:56 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
Jesus summarized the law and the writings of the prophets with the sentiment that we must love God and our neighbor with all of our heart.
Many Christians believe that in order to love God and their fellow man they must tell people that they have a "sin problem". Of course, this is done in full recognition that we - myself and all Christians included - sin and fall short of what God expects from us.
We tell people about the sin problem in hopes they will seek repentance and receive forgiveness for their sins - which pleases God. We believe this affords them access to God and facilitates the receiving of all the extraordinary blessings God promised throughout the OT & NT.
I agree with your explanation that all must come to a place of continuous repentance. Repentance necessitates obedience. The point I was attempting to make is God determines all terms of repentance and obedience.
I believe God does demand a blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin and to be reconciled to Him. Please identify the scriptures that state offerings can only be made at the rebuilt temple; I would like to examine them.
I agree that our merciful God doesn’t hold people accountable for things that are out of their control. However, I can only find a reference to sacrifices required within the camp of Israel. Regardless, I believe that just as God provided a way for Abraham at the time he was about to sacrifice Isaac, God continually provides a way for sacrifice that covers His people today.
God made fantastic promises to love and rejoice over Israel and salvation is mentioned throughout the OT. What do you make of those promises?
Have they been fulfilled already, or are they for a future date?
Do the pertain to each individual or are they meant for Israel only as a whole?
Is salvation just saving us from troubles during an earthly life, or is there more to it?
|
|
|
|
1/22/2010 7:30:51 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Hey MichaelRix,
There's no heat here at my house. I imagine the same is true with Wolfson613.
I find your assumption of "heat" in my posts to be as oddly misinterpreted as your rendering of scripture.
Although the above statement is sincere, it is said with a light-hearted jest that expresses my amusement, which occurs in the absence of anger.
When engaging in a debate, I consider that respecting the adult status of others includes a presumption of their ability to handle pointed questions and bold statements. Wolfson613 has demonstrated he has the convictions and faculties to withstand any challenge and to levy counter challenges.
Throughout the past couple of weeks, I have been praying for you and Wolfson613 with a genuine affection that excludes any malevolence.
|
|
|
|
1/22/2010 7:37:07 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Bless you Ryan, I find your assumption of "heat" in my posts to be as oddly misinterpreted as your rendering of scripture. Statements like this one are what I am referring to when I say "heated". Ask yourself: Was this statement necessary? Are disrespectful comments like this your idea of a "light-hearted jest"? Do you believe that your amusement excuses being rude? Is this love? Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/22/2010 9:07:15 AM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, I've stated we have an obvious difference of opinions - it should come as no surprise to you that I find you writings to be both odd and misinterpretations. Not that it has any bearing on whose opinions are correct - but, you must understand that the vast majority of Christians feel that you have misinterpreted the scriptures from Isaiah to Revelation - and are professing a different Jesus than the one we know. I'm sure you agree my right to express that opinion is equal to your right to express yours. However, I do not see why you feel a difference of opinion - even on this supremely important topic - must mean I am angry and rude. In expressing myself, in my own style, I bear you no ill will. A quick thought before I have to run: As I read all your comments, I feel you are doing more to explain the relationship between God the Father and Jesus within the Trinity than you are disproving the Trinity. Yes, Jesus was in all ways under the authority of God. Jesus humbled himself and became flesh - was made lower than the angles - to sacrifice Himself for us. His sacrifice pays the penalty for our sins because He was completely obedient to God - if he had not been tempted in all things and found to be 100 percent righteous, His blood would be of no benefit to us. As our High Priest, Jesus continues to pray for us. Why? I do not know; except, I wonder if in this case, prayer for us is Jesus having us on His mind. Look at these four verses and notice how the Holy Spirit and Jesus are doing the same work for us: Romans 8:26
In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.Romans 8:27
And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will. Romans 8:34
Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who diedmore than that, who was raised to lifeis at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.Hebrews 7:25
Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.Awhile back I wanted to comment on the theme of Jesus as Servant, but I guess I got side tracked. Philippians 2:5-11 (New King James Version)
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.Salvation is a very personal issue to God, He gave of Himself to redeem His people. Jesus came as a servant, but at some point, everyone will confess that Jesus is Lord! |
|
|
|
1/22/2010 9:31:40 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Hey MichaelRix,
I'd really like to give you an apology and make amends.
I'm sorry my words were found to be offensive. I assure you that was not my intention and that I will strive to maintain positive intentions in the future.
In my personal life, I highly value and enjoy my friends who challenge me the most through disagreement. I also have a quirky manner of expressing my self and I should be more aware that does not play well to all and is especially hard to read in a discussion post.
I agree with you that it is best to pursue peace - so, onward & upward!
|
|
|
|
1/22/2010 12:06:22 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Brother Ryan, Thank you for your apology and forgive me for being blunt with you; as you said: onward & upward! In reference to Romans 8:26-27 you may find my response an admission of the trinity, though it is not. The "Spirit” in these verses is not the holy spirit, it is Jesus; just as he is “the Spirit” who speaks in Revelation chapter 2. When Jesus was resurrected, his body was still flesh and bone ( Luke 24:39), but it was spiritually empowered. 1 Corinthians 15:44-46 says Jesus was raised “a spiritual body.” When he first appeared to his disciples they thought he was a spirit, a pneuma ( Luke 24:37), but he denied that, and had them touch his body to feel his flesh. Nevertheless, because Jesus’ new body was spiritually empowered, Jesus is called “the Spirit” in many places in the NT. These include Acts 2:4; 10:19; Romans 8:16, 26, 27; 2 Corinthians 3:17, 18; Revelation 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 14:13; 22:17. Philippians 2:5-11 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form[a] of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped , but made himself nothing, taking the form[a] of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to deatheven death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. [a]The NIV translates this as "very nature" but does note in the footnotes that it can also be "the form". The KJV translated it as the form. The word used here is morphe which meaning is one of great dispute among trinitarians. However it is defined as the outward appearance; the image of God. This definition of morphe is supported in Mark 16:12 which tells us that Jesus appeared “in a different form ( morphe)” to these two men so that they did not recognize him. Jesus did not have a different “essential nature” when he appeared to the two disciples, he simply had a different outward appearance. The Jews translating the Septuagint used morphe several times, and it always referred to the outward appearance. Job says, “A spirit glided past my face, and the hair on my body stood on end. It stopped, but I could not tell what it was. A form ( morphe) stood before my eyes, and I heard a hushed voice ( Job 4:15-16). There is no question here that morphe refers to the outward appearance. " did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" This is a very powerful argument against the trinity. If Jesus were God in any way, it wouldn't make sense to say that he did not “grasp” at equality with God because no one grasps at equality with himself. It only makes sense to compliment someone for not seeking equality when he is not equal. but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to deathThe verse is not saying Christ gave up his “Godhood” at his incarnation nor was it saying his God-nature was willing to “hide” so that his man-nature can show itself. Rather, it is saying something else. Scripture says Jesus was the “image of God” ( 2 Cor. 4:4), and Jesus himself testified that if one had seen him, he had seen the Father. Saying that Christ was in the “form” (outward appearance) of God is simply stating that truth in another way. Unlike Adam, who grasped at being like God ( Gen. 3:5), Jesus, the last Adam, “emptied himself” of all his reputation and the things due him as the true child of the King. He lived just as other men lived. He humbled himself to the Word and will of God. He lived by “It is written” and the commands of his Father. He never claimed superiority to others, but instead called himself “the son of man,” which, in the Aramaic language he spoke, meant “a man.” He trusted God and became obedient, even to his painful and shameful death on the cross. The Philippian Church had problems within their assembly. Paul addressed their “selfish ambition” ( Philippians 1:15; 2:3) and “vain conceit” ( Philippians 2:3), arguing and lack of consideration for others ( Philippians 2:4, 14) and a need for humility, purity and blamelessness ( Philippians 2:3, 15). Paul, in his wisdom, wrote an exhortation to the believers in Philippi: “Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus”. He then went on to show how Christ Jesus did not grasp at equality with God, but was completely humble, and as a result God “highly exalted him.” The example of Jesus Christ is one we should all as christians follow. We do not need to make sure people notice us or know who we are. We should simply serve in obedience and humility, assured that God will one day reward us for our deeds. For other scriptures which disprove the trinity consider: Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 1 Corinthians 11:3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Galatians 4:4 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 1 John 4:14-15 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. Colossians 1:13 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, I eagerly await your next post with scriptures supporting the trinity. Peace be with you and God bless you. |
|
|
|
1/22/2010 11:02:47 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
In Leviticus 17:3-9, it is clearly stated that all sacrifices must be offered only in their proper place which is at the entrance to the Holy Tent in the desert (or at the entrance to the Temple when it was built in Jerusalem). This is the courtyard area which stood in front of those places, and an alter was there where the animal parts were burnt and blood was sprinkled on this alter.
Any sacrifice that was offered out of this area after the Temple was built was punishable with death and God himself would bring on this death to the guilty person at an early age. This is all clear from those scriptures and nothing was changed afterwords. Therefore it is impossible for us today to offer these sacrifices.
concerning your other questions, all those promises from God to bring us much blessing and salvation will only come to it's full fruition after the coming of Mashiach (who will be a descendant of King David), and the building of the final Temple in Jerusalem on the same spot that it stood previously.
Until then The Jewish nation is in a state of distance from God due to the many sins that block us from a close relationship with God.
Mashiach will come and lead us back to the right road to please God according to His will.
This will benefit the whole world and all nations will receive blessing from God if they accept His authority and rule throughout the world.
Those who appose God and His Mashiach upon arrival will be punished, and many will die. Those who remain until the end will be holy people and benefit from all the good that God wants so much to bestow on us.
These ideas are consistent with what Jesus taught the world. The main difference of opinion between us is the thought that Jesus must be the Mashiach and the thought that any laws of the OT might change at that time.
|
|
|
|
1/23/2010 11:20:07 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Here are a few more scriptures for you to consider my friend. 1 John 4:12 No one has ever seen God; 1 Timothy 1:17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:15-16 which God will bring about in his own time, God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. 1 Corinthians 3:22-23 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas That is, Peter or the world or life or death or the present or the future all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he has put everything under his feet. Now when it says that everything has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all. Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/23/2010 9:58:34 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, I have found an explanation of the trinity that I understand better, and my pastor and Michael Lane are to be thanked for that. My pastor offered the explanation that the trinity is like H2O: whether water, ice, or vapor it is still H2O. This sort of made sense to me so I went to the bookstore,having heard of C.S. Lewis' Christian writings from Michael Lane, and found C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity". There is an excellent explanation and description of the trinity written in plain terms in that work. It certainly opened my mind further to the possibility of the trinity. As you have not yet supplied me with your understanding of the trinity, I will be filtering the scriptures you have all ready given me, and the ones I have given you, through Lewis description. For as you know biblical deception can come from many sources and scripture warns us of this: 2 Timothy 4:3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 2 Corinthians 11:3But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. Acts 20:29-30I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. Peace be with you brother Ryan. |
|
|
|
1/24/2010 7:30:16 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, Hallelujah! I'm very happy you found a description of the Trinity that makes sense to you! And, I guess I owe you another apology. Due to the way you came on so authoritatively, I assumed you had a firmly held belief on the topic - I did not realize you were seeking clarity. I'm glad you have a Pastor who can give you guidance and you've found some literature that is helpful. I mentioned that I felt you did not understand the concept, but took for granted you had heard several models of the Trinity depicted - since you stated you have roots in the Baptist church. At times, I've wondered if you were arguing for or against the Trinity! Several times you cited verses that affirm that there is only one God. I agree - you can't have the Trinity without that truth! Next you successfully used many verses to point out distinctions between God and Jesus. Good job - no Trinity doctrine exists unless you can distinguish the discrete roles of Father and Son! Although you have used verses depicting the Holy Spirit in the same manner Trinitarians do, you also baffled me with your explanation of the couple verses I mentioned regarding the Holy Spirit. Actually baffled runs into being mortified of your interpretations of some of these verses so I'll decline to bring up other scriptures which mention the Holy Spirit acting independently (within the Trinity, of course). So, I'll just stick with your earlier descriptions of the Holy Spirit, and say - score three for the Trinity! 2 Corinthians 13:14
May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you MichaelRix! |
|
|
|
1/25/2010 5:46:57 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Also, here are a few thoughts for you to consider while researching this subject: I'm glad you mentioned 1 Timothy 6:15-16! That is a powerful title used for God in that verse: King of Kings and Lord of Lords! That's the same title used to identify Jesus - twice - in Revelations: Revelation 17:14
They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords and King of kingsand with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers."Revelation 19:16
On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.The scripture you supplied is so generous in mentioning our One God and the the title of Jesus in the same breath - it is certainly worthy of being repeated: 1 Timothy 6:15-16
which God will bring about in his own time, God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. When you mentioned: 1 John 4:12
No one has ever seen God; Of course, I thought of: John 14:6-7
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." All praises to God our King of Kings and Lord of Lords! |
|
|
|
1/25/2010 5:53:35 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
It won't prove anything more than the fact that there were followers that mislead themselves into believing that their Jesus was truly God.
This mistake has happened to many followers of great figures in the course of history.
They misinterpreted the meaning of their leaders intentions and as I said earlier, blew things way out of proportion.
Jesus himself says things that are figurative not literal, ie: "I am the light and the life" "only through me can you know God".
He is saying a simple idea, that if you want to come close to God and please Him, then follow my teaching and you will learn the way.
I'll tell you the truth, if you want to know what Jesus really meant, you will never find it through the NT, because the writings of these followers are misleading, inaccurate, distorted, and intentionally trying to create a cult thinking.
That was not the original intention of Jesus; It's way off mark, and the trinity idea was an offshoot of the same distortion.
|
|
|
|
1/25/2010 7:10:44 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, We all agree God is faithful and God is just. We may not agree on how He is faithful and just. God made a covenant with Israel which was ratified by blood. I believe God would be faithful to Israel in the keeping of that covenant. I believe God's sense of justice demands that blood pay the penalty for sin. You've stated that Israel is not bound to offering sacrifices because the temple does not now exist. You also offered a scriptural reference indicating God does not hold a person accountable for something which is beyond their control. I've found more than a couple references where God exacts penalty on people when they accidentally sin or indirectly cause harm to another. One example is the law prescribing a penalty for accidentally eating an offering in Leviticus 22:14. However, I think a more poignant example is given in Exodus 21:28-32. If, in an unexpected event, a bull kills someone, the owner of the bull suffers the financial loss of the bull. However, if the owner had any foreknowledge of the bull's predisposition toward goring, the bull and the owner are to be killed. Whether the goring was an accident or whether the event was due to negligence on the part of the owner, the owner pays for the accident. This may be an obscure example but I find it has bearing on Israel's situation of having no temple in which to offer sacrifices. Whose fault is it that no temple exists today? If God had not found fault with Israel, the temple would still be standing and sacrifices could be offered. Due to the negligence of Israel, they have no sin offering to take before God, yet the penalty for their sin remains. As for the instructions for offerings in Leviticus 17 - these were delivered during a time when there was an absence of the temple. Israel once again finds herself in the desert without a temple. So, where is the camp of Israel? Just like in this passage from Leviticus, I'd say it is anywhere the people of Israel are wandering. Israel may be wandering without a temple; however, God never moves - He still expects the appropriate sacrifice. God knew people would sin, He made provisions to forgive their sins within the covenant He made with them. God continually begged His beloved Israel to return to Him. After so much heartbreak, eventually God charged Israel with breaking the covenant that would have forgiven their sins ( Isaiah 24:5). God decided He must establish a new and better, covenant with His people, one that would never be broken ( Jeremiah 31:31-32). God finds a new covenant necessary because Israel would not listen to the prophets He sent ( Nehemiah 9:26) and continued in their disobedience. You have gone as far as to say Jesus may have had the soul of the Messiah - although you maintain we have misread His words and intentions. Could He be a prophet from God to whom Israel should listen? I'm certainly not knowledgeable about Israel and the law - so please forgive me if I've said anything amiss. However, I know that God is forever faithful in providing Israel with a way to have their sins paid for and restored to fellowship with Him. I believe that Jesus came bringing the good news of the new covenant which includes forgiveness for sin and fellowship with God. |
|
|
|
1/25/2010 7:15:31 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
Jesus perhaps hoped and intended to be the Mashiach, to lead the way back, for all to come close to God and satisfy his will; With the hope that the end of days would be reached and the new covenant spoken of, so often, by the prophets would happen in his time. But it did not happen, and this is obvious to all, since people still refuse to accept God and continue to sin.
You ask, 'was Jesus a prophet'? This is not at all clear or provable. He certainly held himself in great esteem and was convinced that God loved him dearly. He attempted to lead the people in the way that he knew, to be pleasing, to God.
But, in fact, he may have slipped and fell off course. Perhaps this is truly what led to his death. Or maybe, he was misjudged and abused, as Joseph was by his brothers.
I don't think that we can know the answer to this question until God finally sends his Mashiach.
In any case the NT is not an accurate rendering of what Jesus meant to teach; And in some ways these followers of his, turned the religion into Idol worship.
Your thinking on the matter of blood sacrifice for atonement and responsibility for accidents, is a mix of ideas which you have much confusion about. You are also mixing in your feelings and wants to issues that are simply Torah law.
If you desire to know why your comparisons from Leviticus and Exodus are not comparable I would be happy to explain another time.
|
|
|
|
1/25/2010 8:05:14 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
I'll take you word on the inappropriateness of comparing laws between Exodus & Leviticus.
However, whose fault is it that no temple exists and appropriate sacrifices can't be offered for Israel?
Is it Israel's fault or is it God's fault?
I can't believe it is no one's fault or that it is God's fault.
I also can't fathom God would leave His people - for even a day - with no way to have their sins forgiven and to be redeemed to Himself - given that He loves His people and His justice demands a blood sacrifice.
So, what happens to you if you die, prior to the coming of Mashiach and prior to the appropriate offerings are made on your behalf?
|
|
|
|
1/25/2010 1:02:51 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
It's clear from the many prophesies, that the sins of the Jewish people is what caused the destruction of the Temple and of course God is not at fault.
But this idea of yours that justice demands a blood sacrifice is your own idea that you drilled into yourself, probably based on the NT.
God does not need our blood sacrifice in order to forgive our sins. He is merciful and accepts what we are able to do in the situation that we are in, as I mentioned before.
The primary prerequisite to be forgiven is to admit guilt and accept upon oneself to change for the better; This is all we can do today and God accepts this.
He wants us to merit the rebuilding of the Temple, but is patient with us; But there is a cutoff point and only God can decide when we will be forced to change or suffer the consequences.
Anyway, the idea that Jesus was our offering in place of us will not free anyone from sin after the death of Jesus; The same way that a sin offering only helped the person who stopped sinning before the sacrifice. A new sin after the sacrifice, required a new sin offering.
So, the whole comparison to a sin offering is not accurate.
|
|
|
|
1/25/2010 1:53:39 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, Hallelujah!
I'm very happy you found a description of the Trinity that makes sense to you!
And, I guess I owe you another apology. Due to the way you came on so authoritatively, I assumed you had a firmly held belief on the topic - I did not realize you were seeking clarity. I'm glad you have a Pastor who can give you guidance and you've found some literature that is helpful. I was not seeking clarity and have a firmly held belief, but as my initial post stated I am not a biblical scholar and am open to the idea that I may be missing scriptural truth. Please do not misunderstand me, I found an explanation that I understand better, but this does not mean that I accept it; that will take comparing my new understanding to scripture. I will sum up Lewis' description to see if it is compatible with yours; I stress that this is a summation of my understanding of his words. He starts by stating "like begets like"; a beaver cannot beget a lion, a beaver begets a beaver, a man begets a man, a god begets a god, and God begets God. Lewis then explained that to understand a three-personal God think of a three-dimensional object like a cube. In one dimension you have a line, in two dimensions you have lines which create figures, and three dimensions you have figures which create objects. Each dimension keeps the traits of the ones beneath it but combines them into new complexities; a cube is after all six squares. Then Lewis gave a practical illustration of the trinity. When you pray to God, your goal is to get closer to Him. As a christian you know that God is also the impulse inside of you to pray to Him, and that Christ (the physical embodiment of God) is where true knowledge of God comes from and he is standing beside you helping you to pray. God is the goal, the motive power, and the road or bridge along which you are being pushed to that goal. Is this comparable with your understanding and belief of the trinity? |
|
|
|
1/25/2010 9:35:32 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
God is one- This means not three; and not a combination of parts totaling one. He is one as one could be. Not like a human or any creation that has limbs all connected to become one.
This is not a 'one' that is connected physically or spiritually, rather conceptually.
Since we can't really know God, it's not realistic to think that we understand how these concepts of 'Holy Spirit, and children of God, connect with God Himself.
The title 'trinity' was invented by followers of Jesus with an agenda of convincing all that Jesus is no less 'god' than God Himself.
That is why the religion does not reflect the teaching of Jesus himself, and has been changed into a form of idol worship.
Jesus himself said that these things would happen and warned his people to beware.
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 12:37:27 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
I definitely enjoy and agree with Lewis' depiction of the Trinity!
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 6:42:50 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Wolfson613, Isaiah 59:20
"The Redeemer will come to Zion, to those in Jacob who repent of their sins," declares the LORD. Those who have been redeemed by a Redeemer need only do as you say - ask for forgiveness and strive to do right. However, the Jews are waiting for their Redeemer and still need the offerings pictured in the Feast of Atonement to be reconciled to God. Meanwhile, God continues to ask them how long they'll continue to ignore His law. God could have chosen to fill as many pages as contained in the OT with stories of my sinful folly while following the logic of “just say your sorry and try to do better” while remaining separated from God with the distance growing. However, God decided not to write about me specifically (or at least not by name) and instead blessed us with the history of hundreds of years of Israel refusing to obey His commands, apologizing, rationalizing, approximating, generalizing, forgetting - and drifting farther. Theoretically, I suppose the Israelites could have gone on - sinning - indefinitely and would have remained under God's full blessing, provision and protection had they just continued - offering appropriate sacrifices. Sadly, they usually decided no, they did not need to give God what He demands. After all the time, space and detail given to record God's intentions related to sacrifice - where, in scripture, do we find any inclination that sacrifice is not really important or required by God? You admitted that the absence of the temple is a punishment for Israel not obeying God. Israel disobeyed by rejecting God's Sabbaths and neglecting sacrifices. One cannot take that disobedience and add on top of the punishment more disobedience - specifically refuting the necessity of blood sacrifice - and conclude God understands and accepts are intentions. Rather, God promises more punishment for more disobedience. God clearly, and at great length, states there is a penalty for sin. He mercifully offers a plan for Atonement – our decision is to either accept or reject His plan. Only full obedience gets rewarded while any shade of disobedience is punished. You mentioned, "there is a cutoff point" determined by God. At some place and time, God gives an eternal reward or a final punishment. |
|
|
|
1/26/2010 6:48:50 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
I don't believe that we will get very far in this discussion because we are starting with opposite ways of thinking.
I wrote several times that the NT will not affect my thinking and explained also the reason; It is not reliable and not the accurate teaching of Jesus.
You are completely sold on it and every time you try to make a point in the OT you have first drawn your conclusions from the NT.
This causes you to read the OT in a distorted way.
If you want to believe these things, don't let me get in your way.
I won't accept ideas that are false and thinking that God requires blood to forgive- is just not right.
Your last quote from Isaiah is referring to the end of days when the Mashiach will come and redeem those who repent.
Jews don't have any issue about needing a blood sacrifice;
That was invented in the NT.
The sin offering is only from animal and only in the required spot (the Temple mount) and only when we have this ability to fulfill these requirements.
You don't need to repeat your ideas about blood from Jesus; it doesn't speak to me; It speaks to the believers of the NT.
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 7:46:47 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
Please provide some scriptural references - that would help me understand your point of view, would be useful in evaluating my own faith and most importantly, it would help me understand what God expects.
For both of us, our starting and ending points should both be the Word of God.
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 8:02:23 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Wolfson613,
When we first communicated, I prayed (and continue to do so) for understanding and promised to change my beliefs when shown to be in error.
Perhaps one of the best ways to show a Christian the error of their faith is to point out scriptural references indicating blood is not required to atone for sin.
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 8:21:06 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
You can begin with your last quote from Isaiah. That quote and all quotes which refer to the coming of Mashiach are speaking only of the time when the world will be forced to accept God once and for all.
This did not happen yet, so he has not been here, and we are still waiting for him.
To insist that jesus is Mashiach and he will return has no proof in the OT. Jews have no reason to feel that anything is missing by not accepting Jesus. Had Jesus been successful in completing the Job of Mashiach then all would have accepted him including the Jews; But since he failed (in the Jewish outlook) he has no more significance; We are still waiting for the promise of God to send Mashiach; and no Jew thinks that it will be Jesus.
Jews don't believe that the blood of Jesus accomplished anything other than to punish him for his sins; and you can't really prove otherwise from the OT.
Christians want to believe all that is written in the NT about Jesus and will claim that all references of Mashiach in the OT refer to him.
But to be honest, that is simply wishful thinking.
God told the Jews what He wanted them to know through the OT; So, there's no reason to expect them to think much of the NT.
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 8:31:19 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
The only place that I know of that God asked for a human sacrifice was when He asked Abraham to sacrifice Issac; But even then it was only a test of loyalty and God stopped him before he actually did it.
In the OT in several places God expresses His disliking of those people who offered human sacrifices, and states clearly that He never asked for such a thing.
If you want, I will refer you to these scriptures later. I don't have the time right now.
|
|
|
|
1/26/2010 8:41:57 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, I have been researching early Christian teachings, those after the NT text and before the advent of the trinity doctrine, and have come across several letters from the early church fathers. Here is a quote from one such letter written by Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 110 A.D). I have learned that certain of the ministers of Satan have wished to disturb you, some of them asserting that Jesus was born [only] in appearance, was crucified in appearance, and died in appearance, others that He is not the Son the Creator, and others that He is Himself God over all. (To the Tarsians, II). |
|
|
|
1/26/2010 12:27:12 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, Yes, we agree, human sacrifices are detestable. I'm aware of God's hatred for human sacrifice. I think all the scriptures about sacrifices seem gory. But, all I can see is that God demands blood sacrifice. I guess I could understand your decision to reject Jesus based on concluding He does not meet OT descriptions of the Messiah. However, I just can't understand how you conclude that sacrifice is not important and required by God. Christians use the chapter of Isaiah 53 as a basis for believing that Jesus is the Messiah - with the description of a lamb being slaughtered to take away the sins of the people. The prophet Isaiah said, the Messiah would be rejected (53:3) and slaughtered like a lamb (53:7) killed for the sins of the people (53:8) and His life is a guilt offering (53:10) that justifies many (53:11) Isaiah 53 1 Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. 3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. 4 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. 5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. 6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. 8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. 9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. 10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand. 11 After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. |
|
|
|
1/26/2010 12:49:46 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
Please tell me how you understand the words "he will see his offspring and prolong his days" in the verse above, and explain how this applied to Jesus. After your response I will comment more on the scripture in Isaiah 53.
Concerning Gods' wants; sacrifice is important and required by God. But this has rules and God is more interested in our following the rules, rather than giving the blood.
When he commands the sacrifice, we are punished if we don't bring it; But when we can't bring it, He will punish us if we try to bring it in the wrong way, time or place. We don't invent the rules according to our wants or desires.
Jesus' death can be seen as a redemption of our sins, if he was in fact on that holy level mentioned above. Did he fit that description? you won't find the answer in the OT.
There were many many great people throughout the history that died in similar ways and can be assumed to fit these descriptions just as well. The OT does not single out Jesus as the one it's referring to.
|
|
|
|
1/27/2010 5:11:21 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, You are the successor of centuries of scholarly wisdom in researching the holy scriptures; I only have a couple years of minimal exposure to some of the writings of the prophets. I have not researched a learned Christian explanation of the meaning of "he will see his offspring and prolong his days". Off the top of my head I would say this coincides with our NT teachings that Jesus is the first-fruits (another reference going back to a holy feast of God; Leviticus 23) of many to come - His life gives life to many. As for "prolong His days" - I assume that concurs with OT ( Isaiah 9:7) and NT prophesies about His Kingdom being an eternal Kingdom. I realize you believe Jesus died and is gone; however, we believe He established His Kingdom within our hearts and reigns continuously while preparing His people for His kingdom. At that point you've mentioned the Messiah will appear, we believe Jesus will return to earth to rebuild the temple and everyone will know He is the Messiah. Forgive me for belaboring my thoughts about sacrifice but, although you have taught me something vital, there is still much I do not understand. You have shown me where God commands that sacrifices must be offered only in the correct place - thank you for that! However, you have not addressed my thoughts regarding Leviticus 17 occurring before a temple was built, therefore all those instructions for offering sacrifices in the appropriate location do not require a temple for obedience. Obedience to God's command for sacrifice can be accomplished anywhere the camp of Israel happens to be. Unless you can lead me to some proof that sacrifice must only occur in the Temple - to the exclusion of the camp of Israel - what else can I do but remain with my current inclination that Israel continues to block themselves from a fuller blessing of God because they are in disobedience regarding required sacrifices. I'm eager to hear your thoughts on Isaiah 53! |
|
|
|
1/27/2010 7:16:49 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
The scripture seems to refer to the children of the one, who is compared to the lamb. How can this refer to Jesus who never had children?
And "prolong his days" seems to refer to his days, not his Kingdom.
Your explanation is changing the most obvious reading in order to be consistent with the agenda of using this scripture for Jesus.
Are you being honest in your understanding, or feel a need to interpret according to your wants?
Concerning Leviticus, the Tent in the desert while they traveled, had the exact same holiness as the Temple built in Jerusalem. All sacrifices done in the desert where also done only in the courtyard in front of the Tent and never out of that area, even within the camp of Israel. There cannot be sacrifices brought in the camp of Israel, but only in the designated Holy area in front of the Temple which can only be built on the Temple mount. This is our understanding which will never change and we have no problem with this thinking.
|
|
|
|
1/27/2010 8:04:06 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, I almost forgot - I did not respond to your last paragraph of your first post today: Jesus' death can be seen as a redemption of our sins, if he was in fact on that holy level mentioned above. Did he fit that description? you won't find the answer in the OT. There were many many great people throughout the history that died in similar ways and can be assumed to fit these descriptions just as well. The OT does not single out Jesus as the one it's referring to. Christians claim that Jesus fulfilled 300 OT prophesies - you can search this claim and examine each of the prophesies to see how accurate the claim is - if you'd like to do so. However, a statement you made earlier caused me to wonder if a proof of the true Messiah would be that He must be rejected by the Jewish religious leaders. Yesterday, you wrote: Had Jesus been successful in completing the Job of Mashiach then all would have accepted him including the Jews As the prophet Zechariah is foretelling the coming of the Messiah, we find this verse: Zechariah 12:10
"And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.I know you'll have different feelings about the meaning, but we see it as those (including the Jews) who rejected Jesus at the time of His crucifixion will recognize Him upon His return to earth. |
|
|
|
1/27/2010 8:16:49 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
To be honest you must admit that all these scriptures in the OT never say who it refers to. Your imagination can allow you to assume it refers to Jesus but again, this is hopeful, wishful thinking.
Mashiach is not a contest of who can fulfill the most prophesies; Rather, he is the one that finishes the Job that God sent him to do.
Since Jesus never finished successfully, he has lost all credibility in the eyes of the Jew.
You can believe that he will return, but that won't interest a Jew until it would happen; And no Jew believes it will happen.
Jews are very skeptical about any claims of anyone that he is the Mashiach, and this caution is sensibly justified.
This quote that you bring from Zechariah brings us into a new realm in this whole discussion which I have to save for another time.
|
|
|
|
1/27/2010 9:21:15 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson613, I'm sure we all agree that who the Messiah is - is for God to decide. You are absolutely right - the OT does not specifically name Jesus as the Messiah. Wishful thinking won't make Jesus the Messiah either. I understand why the Jews reject Jesus; your words make sense. Even the mathematical probability that Jesus could be the Messiah (assuming that all 300 OT prophesies fit the life of Jesus) does not make Jesus the Messiah. Jesus quoted Psalm 118:21-23 to point out that it was prophesied that the religious establishment would reject Him. God has chided Israel for killing His prophets, rejecting His word and distancing themselves from Him with sin, so it’s easy for me to imagine the Jews are likely to be wrong regarding Jesus too. But, the Jews rejection of Jesus does not make Him the Messiah (even though I conclude that is a positive sign). Christians already seem hopelessly strange to you, so I know this will also sound very strange, but I believe that knowing the identity of the Messiah is really a work God does in one's heart. Those who believe they have entered into a new covenant ( Jeremiah 31:31-33) with God see the pieces of evidence come together and are convicted by the power coming from God. That is why I asked you to pray at the beginning of our discussion - your Rabbis know the scriptures well and have a pat answer for everything. Only God can speak into your heart and cause you to see the OT prophesies pointing to Jesus. You may feel that is wishful thinking on my part - but I say my wishful thinking and your heart are both in God's hands! |
|
|
|
1/27/2010 2:33:18 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Wolfson, Ryan, When messiah comes, whether the return of Jesus (as I believe) or the coming of another, we will all know the truth. Forgive me for being blunt but, by now it should be plain to both of you what your separate beliefs are and that you are not going to sway the other toward your belief. If your goal is to sway the other I think it is time you each concede. If however your goal is to simply discuss Jesus' claim as messiah might I suggest you open a new discussion thread to do so. I will add that I do not think that will help either of you do anything more than solidify your own separate beliefs; but, sometimes that is a good thing. Ryan, During my studies of the trinity I have come across the doctrine of incarnation and have realized that most, if not all, of my problems with believing the trinity through scripture are actually problems with the incarnation. The doctrine of the incarnation deals primarily with the relationship between Jesus and God. If you would, please look over this webpage concerning the incarnation and tell me what you think about it. http://geneva.rutgers.edu/src/christianity/incarnation.htmlAlso if you know of any good references for the incarnation please share them with me. Peace be with you both. |
|
|
|
1/27/2010 9:31:15 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
You are now being honest by admitting that christens only know jesus is the Mashiach because they feel it in their hearts.
All proofs and references from the OT are emotional not intellectual.
Now, you must be careful that your heart is being honest with you and know that your feelings are not being influenced by the currents around you. When the people around you are all convinced of something, the feelings become strong and there is a bond between all that are together on the same idea.
Idol worship works the same way. So, if you don't have an absolute certainty that you are feeling, honestly, you should always stay aware of the fact that you may have been fooled.
I will admit to you that since God allowed the Christian thought to become so widespread, there is a good chance that Jesus was deserving of all that good publicity; But I don't know that he was in fact supposed to be Mashiach.
There were many important concepts that Jesus taught correctly to the world. these are OT concepts, and God wanted them to become known in the whole world in order to pave the way for the final days when a Mashiach will arrive to finish the job.
Your quote from Psalm 118, was said by King David when his life was in danger and can apply to many people in such a situation, such as Joseph who was mistreated by his brothers.
I will now begin a separate discussion about Joseph since I believe that if there is any connection with Jesus to a Mashiach , then it is connected to what the Jews call Mashiach the son of Joseph, and not King David.
You will be surprised to learn things about him that are not well known but very insightful.
|
|
|
|
1/28/2010 1:37:15 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, One of many aspects of this discussion that have been helpful to me and directly related to the incarnation and the Trinity was a reminder from Wolfson613 that God hates human sacrifice. There are an abundant number of examples where God expresses His great displeasure with this evil practice. Yet, we see God's foretelling of the Messiah in Isaiah 53:1-12 includes the description of how He would be slaughtered like a lamb to atone for the sins of His people. To me, that speaks volumes about the super-nature of the Messiah! |
|
|
|
1/28/2010 8:05:23 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
Wolfson613, Psalm 98:3
He has remembered his love and his faithfulness to the house of Israel; all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.There were two reasons why I mentioned the importance of the heart in my last post yesterday. The first reason is God is a God of tremendous love - the heart is of paramount importance to Him! Throughout the OT, God elaborates on His great and eternal love for Israel. That is a love for a nation that is equally felt for each individual. Since God is not a respecter of persons, He loves Wolfson613 as much as he loves King David. As an outpouring of God's love for you, He has taught you what He expects from you: Deuteronomy 10:12
And now, O Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to observe the LORD's commands and decrees that I am giving you today for your own good?You have demonstrated, with your words, that obeying and honoring God are important to you. God gave the Jews a few symbols to prove they belong to Him. Circumcision, one of those symbols, is also important to Christians. Our scriptures talk about outward bodily signs having little value if they don't produce a real change on the inside - or specifically, in the heart. Therefore, we talk about circumcision of the heart as God cutting away our rebellious nature and thereby allowing us to feel and respond to His love. In the same way, the phylacteries you mentioned earlier, may be of no value to the person, if they don't produce a change inside of the person. Only God can see the man's heart and know if His words have changed the heart for the better. You said: You are now being honest by admitting that christens only know jesus is the Mashiach because they feel it in their hearts. In a crucial way, I completely agree with your statement; however, I also think you did not understand my point. Many people who the world supposes to be Christians are really not Christians. There are many who say Jesus is the Messiah and can offer whatever OT or NT proofs they may have learned. But, their knowledge, however factual or misguided it may be, means nothing - unless God has convicted their heart. God first starts convicting our hearts about our sin and how that sin separates us from Him. God shows us that His love for us is calling us to Him and He has a plan for redemption. I believe the OT does prove that Jesus is the Messiah. However, coming to that conclusion is a process. Throughout these discussions, I purposefully did not look up the "standard" Christian answers for your questions or to express my beliefs because - God desires a relationship over a religion. It doesn't matter what the leaders of my Church teach - or how your Rabbis interpret the Holy Scriptures - God wants to teach us directly into our hearts! These religious figures cannot make you or me love and obey God - that is a personal happening between us, individually, and our Creator. Because Israel had a difficult time loving and obeying God, He promised to make a new covenant with them - one that is written in their hearts! Jeremiah 31:31-33 31 "The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 32 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to [a] them, [b] " declares the LORD. 33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. Do the Jews believe this day has come - or is it a yet future event? Christians believe God has begun that new covenant - and God is writing His law in our hearts. When you acknowledged the sins of Israel separate them from God and gave some acknowledgement of atoning sacrifice being important to God - my wishful thinking kicked in and I hoped today is the day for God to make a new covenant with you. No worries here though - God's love for you endures forever: 1 Kings 8:23
and said: "O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth belowyou who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way.... and if not today, your day will come: Zechariah 2:10-11
"Shout and be glad, O Daughter of Zion. For I am coming, and I will live among you," declares the LORD. "Many nations will be joined with the LORD in that day and will become my people. I will live among you and you will know that the LORD Almighty has sent me to you. |
|
|
|
1/28/2010 8:16:04 AM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan,
All references in the OT about a new covenant with Israel are referring to the time when Mashiach has completed his job. The Temple will be rebuilt, sacrifices will begin again, the Kingdom of David will be in control, the Sanhedrin will be the judges, and all Israel will be forced to serve God exactly according to His will. The whole world will bow to God and serve Him. When these things have happened, we will have reconnected with God in a way that is considered a new covenant.
The Christian way of thinking is purely emotional based on their belief in the NT. When Mashiach arrives we will begin to live in reality and Gods' will is what we all will follow.
His will, I am convinced, is going to surprise all; The Jews, the Christians, the Moslems and certainly the rest of the world.
In other words, we will all discover that we were all making some mistakes, even though we were all pursuing His will.
|
|
|
|
1/28/2010 8:57:47 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Ryan, As I promised I am going to revisit the scriptures both of us have provided thus far. I thought about it and decided that it may be best if I do so in posts so here goes. Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [and over all the creatures that move along the ground." My initial response to this was "The plural is used to emphasize authority", I also mentioned that some believe, as wolfson does, that God was talking to the angels in His court. I have spent sometime thinking on this and I am no longer sure of either. To suggest that God was speaking to angels also suggests that they share an equality of substance with God; also it suggests that they had a hand in our creation, which they did not according to scripture. As to an emphasis of authority I think that the phrase "We will create" sounds more like a singular speaking with plurality about oneself toward others than "Let us". Isaiah 9:6For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. I still stand by my response of the translation "wonderful counselor, mighty hero, father(as in founder) everlasting, a leader of peace." Mostly because Jesus was never referred to as "Mighty God" or "Everlasting Father". You mentioned research posted on the web from scholars who provide detailed explanations for the translations of these Godly titles; would you provide me with the links? Matthew 28:19Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, I called the "Holy Spirit" a gift and described it as "the holy spirit that dwells within you" or oneness with God. Now that I understand the trinity better I can see why you believed we were in agreement and in this regard I think we are. However, the only baptisms the apostles performed in scripture were water baptisms in Jesus' name. Perhaps research will ferret out the meaning of this. More to follow, until then Peace be with you Ryan. |
|
|
|
1/28/2010 9:40:22 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
God spoke to His angels and included them in creation only to teach us humility. He dd not need them and all creation only came through His Godly powers. God sends angels to perform tasks but all abilities and strengths come through God Himself.
The soul of every human is from God and is, in certain ways ,a part of God, this is the reason and cause of confusion about Jesus. If his soul was on a very high level, then he may seem to those around him , to be himself Godly. This does not make him God, just close to God in the sense that he is very similar, in comparison to others around him.
The definition of God must include the fact that He is all powerful and needs no assistance or permission from another source to act.
Jesus does not fit this in any way, and was certainly not God in any way.
|
|
|
|
1/29/2010 12:57:28 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson, God spoke to His angels and included them in creation only to teach us humility. This statement is not, as far as I am aware, scripturally based; is this another oral tradition or do you base it on scriptural references? Ryan, Colossians 2:9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form Here I gave the definition of deity from merriam-webster.com: the rank or essential nature of a god. I have thought about your response "Of anyone said to have partaken of the divine nature, only Jesus is revealed to have all the fullness of the divine nature - or divinity - dwelling in His body" and agree with it; however, I still don't think that this text is referring to Jesus as God, but as a vessel for God's nature. But since my statement is in agreement with the incarnation teaching I will have to concede to the fact that this text can point to the belief of the trinity. I will point out that this scripture taken in context suggests that we as Christians also partake of this fullness. Colossians 2:8-10See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority I whole-heartedly admit that this does not say we enjoy "all of the fullness". More to follow; Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/29/2010 11:40:06 AM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
1 John 5:6-12This is the one who came by water and blood - Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. We accept man's testimony, but God's testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. I have thought long about this passage and I believe you were suggesting that John is equating the Spirit with God, which is something I agreed with but in a different way than you. Looking at this passage with Lewis' description in mind I can sort of see the relationship suggested by those who belief in the trinity. It then brought to mind the baptism of Jesus depicted in Matthew 3:16-17, As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." and the holy spirit coming at Pentecost in Acts 2:1-4, When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. and I am starting to understand where the idea of separateness between God and the holy spirit comes from. So I thought of wolfson's statement about the holy spirit: Perhaps it would simplify things to explain that the holy spirit is really only a description of God, more than a name. and I thought of the oneness of two; for surely the Spirit of God that descended as a dove was not our Father God, because it was the Father's voice which spoke from heaven. But it was God for it was His Spirit. More to follow, Peace be with you.
|
|
|
|
1/29/2010 10:33:42 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
Hello again Ryan my brother, shall we continue? Colossians 1:15-16 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. I said this referred to Christ being the firstfruits of those raised from the dead but now I am not so sure. I have been taking some of your scriptural references and responding to them without considering the context in which they are written. Looking at Colossians 1:15-20 shows that Paul was not referring to Jesus as the first fruits in verse 15 but in verse 18. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. It is clear from this passage that Paul taught that Jesus was in fact the first thing born in creation and that this is separate from him being the first born from the dead. Paul mirrors this statement in 1 Corinthians 15:20. But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. John also refers to Jesus in this manner in Revelation 1:5. Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. I found some thought provoking scriptures which make me question my position in regards to the trinity. 2 Peter 1:1-2Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours: Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. Here Peter states that Jesus is our God and Savior and yet separates them when referring to the knowledge of them. Titus 2:13-14while we wait for the blessed hopethe glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good. Here we find Paul calling Jesus our Great God and Savior. Matthew 23:33-34"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. Here we find Jesus functioning as God, for only God sends prophets. Jeremiah 23:5-6"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness. Messiah will be called "JEHOVAH-TSIDKENU" not "the Lord our righteousness". He will be called God! Hebrews 1:5-10For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father"? Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son"? And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him." In speaking of the angels he says, "He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire." But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy." He also says, "In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. This is conflicting for God refers to Jesus as God and yet proclaims that He is Jesus' God. Perhaps you can shed some light on this for me. Hebrews 1:1-3In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. Here I see an analogy that I was thinking of when reading Lewis' description of the trinity and I believe it is a good illustration as to the relationship between the three: Think of the trinity in terms of a sun; God is the sun. The Father is the burning gas, the Son is the light emanating from the burning gas, the Spirit is the warmth emanating from the light. If there was no warmth or light the burning gas would not be a sun. More to follow until then Peace be with you. |
|
|
|
1/31/2010 12:11:01 AM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
Concerning God including angels in His running of the world to show humility, you will see another example in 1 Kings 22:19-23.
|
|
|
|
1/31/2010 12:20:03 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
The NT will confuse anyone that does not realize that the different authors had different views about Jessus. Some wanted people to think that he was God in a human form. Some wanted people to think that he was a son of God but actually like God with similar powers. But some were willing to present Jesus to be a human (son of man) and settle with giving him a high level of prophesy.
All these Views were their personal opinions and did not reflect the whole truth. If you believe that the NT is divine then you will never come to a final distinct understanding of Gods' will, because you have been swayed to believe the beliefs of these authors.
This is the reason that the church and Christianity finds so many different approaches to Jesus.
Jesus was certainly a man, just as any great man in history was only a man. Moses was a man, Adam was a man, and mashiach will be a man. There is only one God, who never takes on any human form; And any thought otherwise will steer you off course of knowing the truth.
|
|
|
|
1/31/2010 3:11:54 AM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
Wolfson, Concerning God including angels in His running of the world to show humility, you will see another example in 1 Kings 22:19-23. Running the city and building the city are two different things. Do not confuse my thought processes with acceptance; I am merely seeing the other side of the coin clearer now. However, if scripture and reason compel me to actually flip the coin over than I will. |
|
|
|
1/31/2010 7:40:57 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
I have taken a closer look at 2 Peter 1:1 and find the NIV translation misleading. Here is the text in its original Greek: S?µ?? ??t??? d????? ?a? ?p?st???? ??s?? ???st?? t??? ?s?t?µ???µ?? ?a???s?? p?st?? ?? d??a??s??? t?? ?e?? ?µ?? ?a? s?t??????s?? ???st??, Greek transliteration: sumeon petros doulos kai apostolos iesou christou tois isotimon emin lachousin pistin en dikaiosune tou theou emon kai soteros iesou christou Literal English translation: simon peter servant and apostle jesus christ to equally precious with us who have received faith in righteousness of god of us and savior jesus christ Reading the literal English gives us a different meaning: "Simon Peter, servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those like us, who have received faith in righteousness of the God of us and the savior Jesus Christ" |
|
|
|
1/31/2010 9:05:11 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
MichaelRix, For deep contemplation: Today, I came across this quote from Frederick Buechner: “God does not need the Creation in order to have something to love because within himself love happens.” After reading that, "God is Love" ( 1 John 4:16) came to mind. I agree with Buechner - the creation does not shape the Creator. Love existed before the creation; so what did God love before the creation? I say the answer is within the Trinity. Here's a companion verse: Titus 3:4-7
But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. |
|
|
|
2/1/2010 1:47:55 PM
by Ryan,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Ryan, Wolfson,
Thank you for your comments, insight, and scriptural references concerning this topic; they have truly been a blessing.
God has place understanding in my heart and this is it: His nature is beyond my knowledge and any attempt to gain such knowledge will only result in speculation; as such, I should concentrate on serving Him through His Son.
Please feel free to continue this discussion without me; again thank you!
Peace be with you.
|
|
|
|
2/2/2010 12:22:07 PM
by MichaelRix,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/2/2009
|
|
|
|
MichaelRix,
Well said! Thank you and all the best in your pursuit of the truth of God.
|
|
|
|
2/2/2010 1:04:04 PM
by wolfson613,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 12/29/2009
|
|
|
|
I think it is fair to say that much of what we believe about the Trinity is interpretive in nature and needs to be understood from that perspective. The scriptures never give a definition to the concept of the Trinity except in the gospels and that definition is very simple. Baptize in the name (authority) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. It doesn't take the concept of the Trinity any further there. In other areas of the New Testament there are some other scriptures where you could infer some concepts about Jesus as divine or deity and the person of the Holy Spirit but that does not mean that the scriptures are giving us some cryptic picture of the Trinity that we are meant to decipher. In other words you can see the Trinity as One God in three persons, but neither the Father not the Son necessarily define themselves that way. There are a lot of scripture references that can be interpreted as saying that the trinity is to be seen in a certain way but there are other scriptures that indicate other ways of looking at this picture. If we have read at least the New Testament we have seen them. I don't want to try to reference them here. Most times whatever scripture you find to justify your argument there will be another that can be used to contradict that same argument. Still with all this said I think it is very important not to downplay the concept of the Trinity because it plays a role in the scriptures and that being said we must give it the Spirit led attention it deserves. It is both a beautiful picture of the awesome work of God in our lives and a mystery, not to be solved, but to find our joy in because it is through this picture that God does his glorious work in us. By the Divine will of the Father through the teachings and life work of the Son by the power and comfort of the Holy Spirit. Have to stop now. My break is over :) God Bless
|
|
|
|
4/11/2012 12:11:16 PM
by joecr53,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 4/11/2012
|
|
|
|
Joecr53,
Welcome to Delve Into Jesus! Thanks for joining the discussion, and for offering such a thoughtful comment. The original discussion is a few years old now (time flies!) so I don't know if we can entice any of the original participants or some newer members to re-engage, but either way, I appreciated reading your thoughts on the subject.
|
|
|
|
4/11/2012 5:53:19 PM
by Michael Lane,
Executive Director, Delve Christian Ministries
|
|
|
|
God does take on Human form it was revealed in Isaiah a number of times. Let us never limit the power of God and His abilities. He is I Am
|
|
|
|
4/12/2012 3:00:57 AM
by chris_sims1981,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 10/11/2011
|
|
|
|
This is one discussion that I almost afraid to get into. There are plenty of scriptures that speak of God as existing as three persons, or personages, if you will. Some have attempted to explain this by saying that God acted at different times in one of those. I find this difficult because Jesus talked very much about his Father in heaven, and in th book of Revelation the One on the throne and Jesus are both there, Jesus only one who could tell us all about the nature of God the Father. The story of the prodigal son to me is the absolute description of what we need to know about God the Father.
I don't know any way whatsoever how we humans can fully understand all this. I do not want to be like John Calvin, who stood by and watched a man be burned at the stake. THAT IS HISTORY! When Jehovah Witnesses come to my door, I do not by any means agree with tham, but I have no desire to kill them.
Some wag has said about the Trinity, that if you don't believe it, you will go to hell, but if you try to explain it, you will go crazy. I am not even going to latch on to that. It seems to me at times that the gospel writers of the New Testament did not fully understand what we still don't understand. All I know is, I accept Jesus' testimony about himself, about God the Father, why he came into the world to save a lost world, and what he taught us. HE TAUGHT US THAT HIS OWN WORD WOULD LIVE FOREVER . I don't hear much about that!
|
|
|
|
7/27/2012 10:01:23 AM
by stilllearning,
Member of Delve into Jesus since 6/24/2012
|
Please
login to add a comment
|
|
