|
Trinity
Dec 28, 2004 13:25:26 GMT -5
Post by worthily on Dec 28, 2004 13:25:26 GMT -5
You are taking that verse out of context and trying to impose it on Enoch for Enoch is in the same lineage with Noah and you know this. You are digging yourself a bigger hole.
Btw, here is a verse that fits towards this thread, written by Paul:
Rom 5:5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 28, 2004 18:34:30 GMT -5
Post by Soulfyre on Dec 28, 2004 18:34:30 GMT -5
OK...I will be happy to establish a thread on canonicity of Enoch in which this particular issue may be discussed 'til the cows come home. You will find it under the Board, "What is the Bible?". As I cannot move threads without moving the topic itself, I will ask those participating in this continuing discussion to re-post as necessary, or simply resume where they left off at the new location. However, I am going to request that this particular thread be used to to discuss the Trinity. Thank you for your willing input. But, alas, all good things must come to an end (or be moved, for the sake of sanity, to an area more appropriate to the discussion). God bless and keep you, Matthew (soulfyre)
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 1:26:45 GMT -5
Post by fairbank on Dec 30, 2004 1:26:45 GMT -5
Melinda,
So glad those short bytes of information were so beneficial. It was equally so for me to write them. It was a reminder of the fact that although the Trinity is an immensely deep, even inexhaustable topic, ultimately it is simple as well.
It is wonderful to fathom that the entire Trinity is intimately involved with our creation and redemption, and even in our prayers. My youngest son once said, "I wish I could be two people so I could hug all of you." It is as though God has granted that wish for Himself, and he deeply and completely loves us in all three persons of the Trinity.
May the Lord bless and keep you always my sister!
Eric
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 7:41:41 GMT -5
Post by worthily on Dec 30, 2004 7:41:41 GMT -5
Would you guys mind if you give one scriptural reference where it depicts the distinct three in the Godhead as being at the very beginning of the creation of the earth? since that is the basic belief by most trinitarians.
Since you guys would like to question the merits of my faith i would like to return the favor.
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 16:54:26 GMT -5
Post by Kenny on Dec 30, 2004 16:54:26 GMT -5
Would you guys mind if you give one scriptural reference where it depicts the distinct three in the Godhead as being at the very beginning of the creation of the earth? since that is the basic belief by most trinitarians. Since you guys would like to question the merits of my faith i would like to return the favor. 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..." Now, does it say three? No, but does it say 2? No. Does it say 4? lol...get my point. Also, I do not believe they are attacking your faith, they are just stating their beliefs, posing questions, testing your "logic" , etc. I believe no one wants anyone to be insulted, etc. If they do, then they do not belong here. This is suppose to be for conversation, fellowship, and learning. Most of the topics on this forum do not interfere with a relationship with God and; therefore, are not that important. Nothing to get worked up about. So, with that said this topic either 1) needs to be locked or 2) a consensus brought forth that everyone is in it just to learn and share what the believe.
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 16:57:32 GMT -5
Post by worthily on Dec 30, 2004 16:57:32 GMT -5
Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make God in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air..."-----Kenny
That is a direct misquotation
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
please in the future do not misquote the scripture.
thanks
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 17:01:04 GMT -5
Post by Kenny on Dec 30, 2004 17:01:04 GMT -5
Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make God in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air..."-----Kenny That is a direct misquotation Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. please in the future do not misquote the scripture. thanks Ack! I'll fix it...lmbo - thinking of something else. sry Also, lighten up a bit...
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 17:11:14 GMT -5
Post by worthily on Dec 30, 2004 17:11:14 GMT -5
Kenny, you are not paying attention to the question and since you have not fulfilled the question given i will post it again so as to avoid straying from the question:
Would you guys mind if you give one scriptural reference where it depicts the distinct three in the Godhead as being at the very beginning of the creation of the earth? since that is the basic belief by most trinitarians.
Since you guys would like to question the merits of my faith i would like to return the favor.
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 20:12:56 GMT -5
Post by fairbank on Dec 30, 2004 20:12:56 GMT -5
Genesis 1:1-2 and John 1:1-3. Note that the first explicitly mentions the Spirit's presence at creation, while the second places the Son at creation. I know these are two different scripture citations, but the scriptures are ONE.
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 30, 2004 20:24:21 GMT -5
Post by worthily on Dec 30, 2004 20:24:21 GMT -5
those verses cited depict two at the beginning not three as specified within the question regarding Godhead.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
the first verse in John is referring to Jesus Christ of who He was in the beginning and who He was with but the second verse depicts another but in sameness of equality in authority with Jesus Christ.
Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
notice it says... which is IN the bosom of the Father...
here is an excerpt also from proverbs:
Pro 8:22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. Pro 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. Pro 8:24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Pro 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: Pro 8:26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. Pro 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: Pro 8:28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: Pro 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; Pro 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men. Pro 8:32 Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways. Pro 8:33 Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not. Pro 8:34 Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors. Pro 8:35 For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the LORD. Pro 8:36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.
here is another in reference to the beginning:
1Co 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. 1Co 8:7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
It is so plain yet you still dont discern, are you guys purposefully acting dense? Do you think its funny? How can you still say there was three in the Godhead at the beginning of creation? Notice that these are all in congruence with one another all within each depiction of the beginning. Notice there is no change within its connotations in reference to the beginning. With the evidence i presented, your evidence fails. So, the question has not yet been fulfilled so i ask again:
Would you guys mind if you give one scriptural reference where it depicts the distinct three in the Godhead as being at the very beginning of the creation of the earth? since that is the basic belief by most trinitarians.
Since you guys would like to question the merits of my faith i would like to return the favor.
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 31, 2004 1:55:19 GMT -5
Post by Soulfyre on Dec 31, 2004 1:55:19 GMT -5
Would you guys mind if you give one scriptural reference where it depicts the distinct three in the Godhead as being at the very beginning of the creation of the earth? since that is the basic belief by most trinitarians. Since you guys would like to question the merits of my faith i would like to return the favor. Easily asked, easily answered. There is none. The teaching of the Bible often referred to as the Trinity is a conclusion based on the whole counsel of scripture (that would be Old and New Testament as conventionally understood in the originally accepted sixty-six books). While I will elsewhere be going into more detail concerning what is known as "the progressive nature of revelation" [essentially, there is much that God revealed "progressively", such as His plan to save Gentiles, the nature of the Messiah, the Body of Christ, etc.], I mention it here by way of accuracy. Several verses either do not preclude this conclusion, or lend to this conclusion: 1) The use of "elohim" to refer to God in the Genesis 1 (YHWH elohim was not introduced until Genesis 2:4) allows for a sense of plurality. In Genesis 1:26, God uses plural pronouns to refer to Himself, saying "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness." Technically, this use of a plural form for a singular sense is referred to as the "emphatic plural" or the "plural of majesty" (the second is the more familiar designatiion). Jewish scholars of the Torah would argue that it does not, in an of itself, establish plurality. In this, they are correct. It allows for the concept, but would not, alone, require it. 2) The use of "echad" to describe the LORD God in the "shema" ("Shema yisrael, adonai elohenu, adonai echad"-"Hear, O Israel, the LORD your God is One LORD," or, more popularly, "Hear, O Israel, the LORD your God, the LORD is One", Deuteronomy 6:4) is interesting, because it can be used of a "complex" unity as opposed to a "monism". This would be similar to Jesus' prayer in John 17 in which he beseeches his Father to make his disciples, as well as those who come to believe in him through his disciples, "one". Again, like the use of "elohim", "echad" does not require this interpretation, and is generally taken in context to affirm monotheism (one God vs. many gods) and declare the singular uniqueness of God. But its choice allows the concept of a complex unity. As you will note, while neither of these usages indicate a plurality, a plurality is not precluded. A simliar line of argument may be found concerning the presence of the Holy Spirit at creation. 3) In Genesis 1:2, the writer (Moses) says "Now the earth was formless and empty, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." Again, this allows for, but does not require the conclusion that the Holy Spirit was present at creation and was distinct from God the Father, since the Jews do not consider the "Spirit of God" to be the Holy Spirit, but view "ruach" in its more poetic sense as the "breath" of God (cf. Job 33:4). This sense is retained in the statement in II Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is God-breathed...". Nevertheless, the phrase "ruach elohim" does not preclude understanding the Holy Spirit to be a separate and distinct person. At this point you may conclude that the Old Testament does not conclusively establish the doctrine of the Trinity. But there are many doctrines revealed by the New Testament that are only "foreshadowed", as it were, in the Old Testament. The identity of the Messiah as pre-existent, his attributes of both King and Suffering Servant, and his deity (among others), may be found in seminal form, as it were, in the Old Testament. These doctrines, however, are revealed at length in the New Testament. Certainly, one of the most direct allusions to Jesus as God, present at creation with the Father, is John 1. But is there a similar verse that indicates the presence of the Holy Spirit as a separate and distinct person in a relationship of complex unity we describe as the Trinity? No, there is not. Nevertheless, there is sufficient evidence in the New Testament that the Holy Spirit is recognized as a distinct person, co-equal with the Father and the Son in deity, that the case is not only persuasive, it established the Trinity as a foundational doctrine in the church. While several verses may be adduced, including Jesus' reference to the Holy Spirit as the "Advocate" or "Comforter" (indicating a legal advocate in a court of law), the most vivid is through a verse that is oft quoted but little considered: the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19, where the risen Jesus Christ commands his disciples to baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Among the Jews, the "baptism for remission of sins", as was practiced by John the Baptizer, could only be done in the name of God, for, as the teachers of the Law were to later ask Jesus' rhetorically, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (cf. Mark 2:7b). That Jesus' instructed his disciples to use "in the name [singular] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," is uncontrovertable. The Father and the Son were clearly co-equal. Given the structure of the "formula", it is barely conceivable that the Holy Spirit would be the only part of the phrase to occupy a position as an "extension" of the previous two, as opposed to that of one who is equal to the other two in personhood, dignity, deity, and eternal existence. Much more can be written about this foundational doctrine of Christian belief, that was later to be stated emphatically by the Council of Nicea and became a watershed for establishing a dividing line between orthodoxy and heresy. But such a continued discussion is for a later post. At this point, to avoid continued fruitless wrangling on this subject, let me remind all readers that we have stated this in our "Statement of Belief". I wish this forum to be educational, but it is developed primarily to allow Christians who can, at a minimum, accept the Statement of Belief, to interact, encourage one another, pray for one another, admonish one another, and learn together about our Great and Glorious God, who is at once our Abba Father; the Son Jesus the Messiah, Our Risen Lord and Savior, Eternal High Priest, Judge and King; and Our Advocate, Comforter, Teacher, and the One who transforms our lives into the very Image of Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit. If you do not accept these basic beliefs, we will be happy to share our faith with you, but we will not engage in lengthy arguments. Membership is a courtesy we extend, but if it is abused, we will disallow your participation in the forum except as a guest. This is not a decision that I other the other Administrators and Moderators come to lightly, but deliberately, so that those who visit our site, or who are Christians new to the faith, may not be confused on what are generally considered foundational doctrines of the Christian faith. We genuinely hope that all who read this will out of courtesy adhere to this practice. God bless and keep you all, Matthew (soulfyre)
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 31, 2004 6:10:24 GMT -5
Post by worthily on Dec 31, 2004 6:10:24 GMT -5
At this point you may conclude that the Old Testament does not conclusively establish the doctrine of the Trinity--- matthew.
i believe i have presented and established the true meaning of the Godhead since the beginning and if you cannot let the scriptures "speak" for themselves for what you reveal is more out of conjecture than revealed testamony. i have aptly shown why we baptize in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. i cannot personally stop you if you want to pray and worship to the Holy Spirit as another God so after much to no avail i will conclude that you would rather for me to "wipe the sand beneath the bottom of my sandals". i will henceforward regard this matter mute and i will not present the truth of the matter in this thread again.
As you have summarized the rules of the belief system while in this forum are written expressly towards what agrees with you, i would also ask that you kindly respect with what agrees with me.
with kind regards,
worthily
|
|
|
Trinity
Dec 31, 2004 19:18:13 GMT -5
Post by Soulfyre on Dec 31, 2004 19:18:13 GMT -5
At this point you may conclude that the Old Testament does not conclusively establish the doctrine of the Trinity--- matthew. i believe i have presented and established the true meaning of the Godhead since the beginning and if you cannot let the scriptures "speak" for themselves for what you reveal is more out of conjecture than revealed testamony. i have aptly shown why we baptize in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. i cannot personally stop you if you want to pray and worship to the Holy Spirit as another God so after much to no avail i will conclude that you would rather for me to "wipe the sand beneath the bottom of my sandals". i will henceforward regard this matter mute and i will not present the truth of the matter in this thread again. As you have summarized the rules of the belief system while in this forum are written expressly towards what agrees with you, i would also ask that you kindly respect with what agrees with me. with kind regards, worthily I am not sure what you meant when you requested that I "kindly respect with what agrees with [you]." If you mean that we should no longer teach the doctrine of the Trinity on this site to avoid offending you, then I am afraid that I cannot meet your request. I believe that I am responsible to teach sound doctrine, and I believe your understanding of a "duality" rather than a "trinity" to be unsound. If you aer asking that I respect your right to believe as you wish, then I certainly will do that. I try to allow for discussion of various doctrines. I imagine there are issues upon which even the staff will politely disagree. And certainly, I expect spirited disagreement on some issues of authority with those who are Roman Catholic or Orthodox. But there are some issues conventionally considered foundational to the Christian faith that I will not debate at length. One of those is the Trinity. I am sorry that you feel as though you must "wipe the sand beneath the bottom of [your] sandals," for this is the activity that Jesus commanded of his disciples when their witness was rejected, and was an act of condemnation. We have not sought to condemn you. But if this is, in fact, the way that you feel, then perhaps we should together consider your participation in the forum. Even guests, as you know, are allowed to read the posts, and may participate on the "General" board. But it doesn't seem conducive to Christian unity to have one member "anathematize" the others. God bless and keep you, Matthew (soulfyre)
|
|