Jesus Christ

Originally posted by Jury
[b]"God is Trinity" ???

Let me first quote some commentary notes regarding how the Trinity doctrine was perceived and defined by various theologians.

This is quite long. So please, bear with me if you won't mind.

...we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity is Unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.

-Athanasian Creed
McClintock and Strong encyclopedia
__________

Catholic theologians today maintain that neither a trinity or a plurality of divine persons is taught or revealed explicitly in the Old Testament.

-Edmund J. Fortman
The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine of the Trinity
p. 290
__________

The word 'Trinity' does not appear in the New Testament; and the meanings of the words 'person' and 'nature' in the precise senses in which these words are used to bear the message of God, had to be carefully refined to bear that message rightly.

- Lowler Ronald, Donald Wuerl
The Teaching of Christ: A Catholic Catechism for Adults
p. 177
__________

The doctrine of the Trinity as commonly defined is not found in the Bible. For we assert that there are three persons in one God - a statement not found in Scripture.

Richard W. Chilson
Full Christianity: A Catholic Response to Fundamental Questions
p. 25
__________

This [the Trinity] is a mystery that no human mind can completely understand.

-William J. Cogan
A Catechism for Adults
p. 13

[color=darkblue]
...there is a general agreement among theologians that this dogma is a strict mystery...
... that reason alone ... cannot know it ... cannot positively demonstrate it.
[/B]

If you find it a mystery, that's your perrogative. I find it blindingly clear. Most of Christianity finds it blindingly clear.

Originally posted by Jury
[b]”Pre-existent Christ” ???

Assumptions such as these, to prove that Christ is God, rest on the premise that Christ is the One who appeared before Abraham, Moses, and others in the Old Testament. The event such as God appearing to these people seems that they saw God in the flesh as Jesus Christ (at least for others), even though it is never mentioned. However, as you yourself have pointed out, the true God is “invisible”, which means, as clarified by Christ Himself that God cannot be seen in His form (John 5:37, I Timothy 1:17)

The way God manifests Himself to man is by means of His power through the things that He made.
[/B]

You know, that brings up a very ammusing image. God creates a robot, a real one, like the people in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, who people see. Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and the seventy elders seeing a giant robot who sings to Moses, whilst doing those jerky movements,
"Come up to Me on the mountain and stay there so that I may give you the stone tablets with the law and commands I have written for their instruction." With the song lyrics from CCBB.

What you are saying that say a shadowy spymaster assassinated people in the dark, because we can see the dead body, if somebody says that they've seen him it could be true as you can see the corpse? Regardless of any hiding skills the spymaster uses on random people.

Originally posted by Jury
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities –
his eternal power and divine nature –
Have been clearly seen, being understood
From what has been made,
So that men are without excuse.”
Romans 1:20, NIV

The Bible, however, does not teach about Christ having pre-existence. Our Lord Jesus Christ did not exist during the time of the patriarchs and the prophets; He was not there before He was born (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:20-24). Hence, people who lived during the dispensation of the patriarchs could not have seen Christ in the flesh because the promise, or the God’s plan, concerning Christ was not yet fulfilled (Romans 1:2-3).

Since when did God make a promise about His plan concerning Christ?

So the LORD God said to the serpent:
‘Because you have done this,
You are cursed more than all cattle,
And more than every beast of the field; …
And I will put enmity Between You and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel!
Genesis 3:14-15, NKJV

And I will establish my covenant between me and thee
and thy seed after thee in their generations
for an everlasting covenant, to be God into thee,
and to thy seed after thee.
Genesis 17:7, KJV

And who is this seed?

Now to Abraham and his Seed
were the promises made. He saith not,
And to seeds, as of many; but as of one,
And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Galatians 3:16, KJV

Christ is the seed of Abraham. And God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham that God would be God unto Abraham and to his Seed. It means that the covenant stipulates that Abraham and his Seed shall deify God; God shall be God unto them, both to Abraham and his Seed, who is Jesus Christ. Far from being a God, Christ is someone who was destined to recognize the true God.

So there was no pre-existent Christ. There was no Christ prior to the fulfillment of the plan of God concerning Him. What was there with God in the beginning was the “Word” or the thought or the plan concerning Christ, not Christ Himself.

In the beginning was the Word.
And the Word was with God,
And the Word was God.
John 1:1, NKJV

And the Word was made flesh,
and dwelt among us,
(and we behold his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,)
full of grace and truth.
John 1:14, KJV

This is the fulfillment of the plan or the “word” of God concerning Christ – when the time had fully come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under law.

He was chosen before the creation of the world,
but was revealed in this last times for your sake.
I Peter 1:20, NIV

But when the time had fully come,
God sent his Son,
Born of a woman,
Born under law.
Galatians 4:4, NIV [/B]

I have repetedly said that there's a God in heaven even whilst Jesus was on earth. Jesus is trying to get people to worship God, and should therefore deify him. Besides, recognising God wasn't his main act. Dieing and taking all mankind's sins (if mankind asks of course. It's optional) was the epitome of his performance. What you say doesn't add anything to your argument, as I can fight off all attacks whilst you cannot.

Plus, could you use a modern bible version? A, not many, choose one and quote that alone. I don't want you cherrypicking versions that support your argument closest, as that is wrong.

I have repetedly said that there's a God in heaven even whilst Jesus was on earth.

as I can fight off all attacks whilst you cannot

Plus, could you use a modern bible version? A, not many, choose one and quote that alone. I don't want you cherrypicking versions that support your argument closest, as that is wrong

Anyway, very nice Philosophies Ytaker. 🙄 It would be better if you answer me with Biblical backups next time. 🙂

Originally posted by Ytaker
Are you quoting a verse that says God is One? Father= Mastermind
Son=carrying out plan part forgiveness(God does his own dirty work)Holy Spirit equals plan interaction with the love of God.

Yes, as according to the good idea in the bible, he was with him before the world. Onto your attempt to push my metaphor off the cliff...

Actually they are. We say things like "the Sun's heat..." or "The Sun's Rays" in things like www.eere.energy.gov/RE/solar.html "...solar power technologies use reflective materials such as mirrors to concentrate the sun's energy". The sunlight is "the sun's energy".

Back to you later on this one when I re-read my posts and remember my philosophising.

Yes, sunlight is "sun's energy" but not the sun itself. 🙄

Originally posted by Ytaker
Or to be more precise, you have found various quotes that say how it is a mystery. I disagree. This is not because I am either more stupid or less stupid than the average guy on the street (I am a bit, but that's besides the point). It is because I have read long talks by people like Dr Gary Collins. I have philosophy that trumps your "tis a mystery" quotes. If you want to bend me with a pious persons words, they must explain why it is a mystery. Otherwise, there’s no point.

If you find it a mystery, that's your perrogative. I find it blindingly clear. Most of Christianity finds it blindingly clear.

Trinity is a mystery ACCORDING to the Trinitarians themselves. 🙄

to ask it as a bystander on the outside of this chrisitian dispute,
if god and jesus are the same why did jesus claim to be the son of god

I think its very much like with Zeus and HErcules actually it reminds me a lot of a polytheistic religion. I mean theers nothing wrong with that but for some reason christians belive they are a monotheistic religion, so whatever.

k how bout this one from Colossians 1:15-20

15Christ is exactly like God, who cannot be seen. He is the firstborn Son, superior to all creation. 16Everything was created by him, everything in heaven and on earth, everything seen and unseen, including all forces and powers, and all rulers and authorities. All things were created by God's Son, and everything was made for him.
17God's Son was before all else, and by him everything is held together. 18He is the head of his body, which is the church. He is the very beginning, the first to be raised from death, so that he would be above all others.
19God himself was pleased to live fully in his Son 20And God was pleased for him to make peace by sacrificing his blood on the cross, so that all begins in heaven and on earth would be brough back to God.

and this one - Colossians 2:9
9God lives fully in Christ

15 Yes, Christ is like God (not in the sense that He is also invisible)... but He is the image of the invisible God. (Not the God Himself)... By virtue of God's pronouncement or plan regarding Jesus Christ in the beginning, Christ is considered the firstborn of all creations.

16 By Christ, through Him, and for Him, everything was made. But the Creator remains one... it is God. God made everything in the glory of Jesus.

17 Christ is before all things... because He was already planned by God in the beginning.

18 Yes, Christ is the head of His Church.

19 Yes, God pleased to live fully in His Son. (meaning God is another person who lived in the other person). But not literally... God lived in His Son in the sense that He also lives in all of His people. Yet, Christ's case was different. He was God's Son and God chose Him to do what God commanded Him to do.

20 And God really pleased Him when He gave up His life for His Church.

Now, did the verses viewed God and Jesus one and the same person? 🙄

🙂

The origin and evolution of the doctrine on Christ’s alleged deity

No man has ever lived in this world and touched the lives of so great a number of people than our Lord Jesus Christ. His life has always been a great source of inspiration and hope to humanity. Countless people have placed their faith in Him and are looking forward to His second coming when he will reward His servants with eternal bliss in His Father’s heavenly abode.
But our recognition of Him ought to be in accordance with what the Bible prescribes. Anything beyond this would go against the expressed will of God.

What the Bible teaches about Christ

“But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did.”
John 8:40

“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,”
I Timothy 2:5

“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him as you yourselves know. This man was handed to you over by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.”
Acts 2:22-23

Christ clearly stated that He is a man who has told the truth which He heard from God. That there is God from whom Christ heard the truth is just a proof that Christ is different from God.
The only Mediator between God and men is a man and not another god. Apostle Peter declared that Jesus of Nazareth was a man attested by God. That Christ was conceived and born of a woman is expressly stated in the Gospel of Christ according to Matthew (Mt.1:18,20). Therefore, the claim that Christ is God contradicts what the apostles taught. Likewise, to introduce Christ as God contradicts the very statement of God that He is neither man nor a son of man (Numbers 23:19). God neither allows man to become God like Him nor does He allow Himself to be both God and man (Ezekiel 28:2, Hosea 11:9). Christ’s being a man proves that He is not God. And the apostles were unanimous in this regard. This is the truth that early Christians adhered to.
Thus, the original teaching concerning Christ as recorded in the Bible is that He is a man.

The early warning

As long as the apostles were alive to defend the true faith, the teaching on Christ was held in check. As early as their time, the apostles warned about the possible deviation from the original teaching concerning Christ.

“I am afraid that your minds will be corrupted and that you will abandon your full and pure devotion to Christ – in the same way that Eve was deceived by the snake’s clever lies. For you gladly tolerate anyone who comes to you and preaches a different Jesus, not the one we preached; and you accept a spirit and a gospel completely different from the Spirit and gospel you received from us.”
II Corinthians 11:3-4,

“My dear friends, do not believe all who claim to have the Spirit, but test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God. For many false prophets have gone out everywhere. This is how you will be able to know whether it is God’s Spirit: anyone who acknowledges that Jesus Christ came as a human being has the Spirit who comes from God. But anyone who denies this about Jesus does not have the Spirit from God. The spirit that he has is from the Enemy of Christ; you heard that it would come, and now it is here in the world already.”
I John 4:1-3

“Watch out for the false leaders – and there are many of them around – who don’t believe that Jesus Christ came to earth as a human being with a body like ours. Such people are against the truth and against Christ.”
II John 1:7

During the times of the apostles, there were people who were easily taken away from the true teaching taught by Christ and His apostles. They denied the humanity of Jesus Christ. According to Apostle John, these people are against the truth and against Christ or anti-Christ.

“When we read Paul’s Letter to the church at Corinth, it becomes clear that many problems faced the church within its own membership.
“Paul’s other letters also reveal controversies and power-struggles in the midst of encouragement and growth… Some people tried to mix Christian and non-Christian religious beliefs. The first letter of John speaks of those who once belonged to the Christian community but had now departed. They denied the true humanity of Jesus Christ.”
- Tim Dowley
Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity
p. 73

While some apostles were still alive, some Christians departed from the truth by denying the humanity of Jesus Christ. Thus, Apostle John in his letter addressed these people. He gave a warning to the Christians, lest they would be misled. But after the death of the apostles, a new doctrine on Christ evolved – that Christ is God.

The formalization of the dogma

“Like its worship, the faith of the Church underwent some development, and, in fact, its chief dogma, belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ, was not defined until the Council of Nicaea in 325.”
- Thomas Bokenkotter
A Concise History of the Catholic Church
pp. 58-59

“The earliest time known at which Jesus was deified was, after the New Testament writers, in the letters of Ignatius, at the beginning of the second century.”
- Augustus Hopkins Strong
Systematic Theology
p. 305

The doctrine on the deity of Christ was defined only when the Council of Nicaea convened in the fourth century – over 200 years after the Bible had been completed; all the apostles were already dead at that time. Even prior to the formalization of the Christ-is-God doctrine, there were people already upholding this doctrine, Ignatius of Antioch, a bishop, was the one who introduced the teaching that Christ is God. This doctrine did not originate from the apostles. The warning of Apostle Paul concerning the teaching of different Jesus, thus, started to be realized. But did this teaching readily gain acceptance among the people? Were there no objections to this doctrinal innovation?

“The very fact that as late as the fourth century there were those within Christianity who, despite their acceptance of the Epistles of Paul and the Gospel of John, still argued against the divinity of the preexistent Christ shows that there was nothing in these writings which could be taken as conclusive evidence of a belief on the part of Paul and John that the preexistent Christ was God in the literal sense of term.”
- Harry Austryn Wolfson
The Philosophy of the Church Fathers
Vol. I, pp. 306-307

The point of conflict

In spite of several objections to the Christ-is-God doctrine, how did this become pervasive in “Christendom”? What circumstances gave rise to this teaching? How long did it take for this doctrine to be declared by the Church as official?

“The problem of the relationship between God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ became an acute problem in the Church soon after the cessation of persecution. In Western Europe, Tertullian for example, insisted upon the unity of essence in three personalities as the correct interpretation of the Trinity. Hence, the dispute centered in the (Catholic) Church has always had to fight Unitarian conceptions of Christ…
“In 318 or 319, Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria, discussed with his presbyters ‘The Unity of the Trinity’. One of the presbyters, Arius an ascetic scholar and popular preacher, attacked the sermon because he believed that it failed to uphold a distinction among the persons in Godhead… Arius, who was backed by Eusebius of Nicomedia (to be distinguished from Eusebius of Caesarea) and a minority of those present, insisted that Christ had not existed from all eternity but had a beginning by the creative act of God prior to time. He believed that Christ was of a different (heteros) essence or substance than the Father. Because of the virtue of His life and His obedience to God’s will, Christ was to be considered divine. But Arius believed that Christ was a being, created out of nothing, subordinate to the Father and of a different essence from the Father. To Arius He was divine but not deity.”
- Earle E. Cairns
Christianity Through the Centuries
pp. 142-143

“The controversy became so bitter that Alexander had Arius condemned by a synod. Arius fled to the friendly palace of Eusebius, the bishop of Nicomedia… since the dispute centered in Asia Minor, it threatened the unity of the Empire as well as that of the Church.”
- Ibid., p. 143

The emperor’s intervention

When the controversy regarding the nature of Christ became serious, the unity of the empire and of the Catholic Church was threatened. This prompted no less than the roman emperor to intervene. He attempted to resolve the conflict by convening a council of bishops.

“The emperor therefore stepped into the controversy and extended invitations for a great council to be held at Nicaea (325).”
- Bernard Lohse
A Short History of Christian Doctrine
p. 51

“The first emperor to become a Christian, Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology. In the controversy over the doctrine of Trinity he saw nothing more than unnecessary bickering of theologians, which might best be avoided by eschewing all speculation and by living together in love and harmony. At the same time Constantine was concerned about keeping or restoring ecclesiastical peace. After all, the Church had an important service to perform in his empire.”
- Ibid.

The emperor’s intervention over this doctrinal dispute was simply not right. How could an emperor who knew nothing of theological issues being discussed solve such a delicate problem?
Constantine was only concerned about keeping or restoring peace and unity and the important role that the Catholic Church would have in his empire. Thus, whether or not the disputing officials of the Church agree on Christ’s alleged deity or on His humanity was of no bearing to Constantine as long as they would settle to only one stand that could promote unity.

The Council of Nicaea

So, what did Constantine do to influence the bishops who convened so that his interests and wishes would be served well?

“For the first time in its history, Christianity in the Roman Empire was no longer the persecuted religion… From a purely external point of view the change in the situation was evident to the bishops in the fact that they no longer needed to move about secretly nor did they have to use the normal means of travel to visit one another. They now had the privilege of coming to the council by means of transportation provided by the state, i.e., means which were intended for use by ranking state officials. At Nicaea the emperor provided lodging for the bishops in his palace. It was there, too, that the discussions took place, and in the presence of the emperor at that… It is understandable if the bishops showed their gratitude by generous efforts to oblige the emperor.
“In the course of the long discussions which now took place at Nicaea the emperor intervened personally several times.”
- Ibid.
pp. 51-52

“The Council could not agree and after two years, impatient at the delay, the Emperor Constantine appeared and addressed the assembly, ordering them to agree on the divinity of Christ (how could the emperor claim the divinity if the Savior’s was denied?).”
Challenge of a Liberal Faith
p. 60

The hospitable accommodation granted to the bishops by no less than the emperor himself was enough to influence their decision on the issue. In fact, they could not help but yield to the demands of the emperor as an expression of their gratitude for all the favors they had enjoyed during the meeting. Thus, when the decision was to be called for, it was the emperor’s will that prevailed.
Finally, in 325 AD, the council concluded with the decision in response to the order of the emperor. From then on, Christ has been recognized by the Catholic Church as God.

“Thus, for example, it was not until 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea, that the Church defined for us that it was an article of faith that Jesus is truly God.”
- Rev. Clement H. Crock
Discourses on the Apostles’ Creed
p. 206

The Council fails to resolve the dispute

The issue on what the Catholic Church, the official religion of the Roman Empire, must stand for concerning Christ might had been settled, but the disputes and arguments over the issue on Christ’s alleged deity did not stop. Rather, the council was hit by more serious attacks.

“The Council of Nicaea was convened in A.D. 325 to settle the dispute… The decision of the Council did not terminate the controversy, but was rather only the beginning of it. A settlement forced upon the Church by the strong hand of the emperor could not satisfy and was also of uncertain duration. It made the determination of the Christian faith dependent on imperial caprice and even on court intrigues.”
- Louis Berkhof
The History of Christian Doctrines
pp. 86-87

“The Council of Nicaea set many precedents. The Emperor called it, influenced its decision-making and used his civil power to give its decrees virtually the status of imperial law. The Council introduced a new kind of orthodoxy, which for the first time gave non-biblical terms critical importance. The Creed’s own form of expression was influenced by the heresy it outlawed.
“Nicaea was followed by more than half a century of discord and disorder in the Eastern Church, which at times spilled over into the west.”
- Tim Dowley
Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity
p. 160

It has now become obvious that what Catholics and Protestants uphold concerning Christ’s deity is an unsettled controversy. Christ did not teach this teaching – neither did His apostles. Thus, this teaching must be rejected.
The teaching that Christ is God is not the original teaching; rather it is a manmade doctrine and, thus, is worthless in the sight of God.

“In vain do they worship me, teaching human precepts as doctrines.”
Matthew 15:9

..

The admonition of the apostles

Having been forewarned of the surge of the false teachers who would teach a false Jesus, a true Christian must be vigilant that he may not be led astray.

“So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.”
II Thessalonians 2:15

Jesus Christ is a man. Nowhere in the Bible can be found that He is God. Christ is not and never been the true God. He is the Son of God, the Savior, the head of the Church, the Mediator, the Lord, and everything that God made Him to be, but He is a man. The true Christ is a man, not a God. This is the original doctrine upheld by the early Christians, not the dogma formulated by the bishops of the Catholic Church and formalized at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.
For a true Christian, nothing can be more important than to uphold the true words of God that serve as a firm foundation upon which he is anchored. Such is the characteristic that he should possess for him to become firm and steadfast.

“Then we shall no longer be children, carried by the waves and blown about by every shifting wind of the teaching of deceitful people, who lead others into error by the tricks they invent.”
Ephesians 4:14
.

yes they do you just interpret them in some nonsensical way.

No, it didn't. 🙂 Youjust understood it the way you want it to be. 🙂

God doesn't live in you, anyway, does He? 🙄

Well if he would live in every human he would live in em, he doesn't though cause he doesn't ****ing exist. But anyway these passages you can interpret as you please and with that God could be Jesus or Jesus could be another god or whatver.

Now, I know.. you didn't get the passage. Thank you for sharing your view on the passage. 🙂

Now, I know.. you make your **** about the bible up. Thank you for the blasphemy. 🙂

Blasphemy? Oh, at least you care for blasphemy. Err.. you know what it means? I thought you're an atheist or whatever. 🙄

Well I am and atheist an I know what god means too, so whatever. 🙄
Oh and I don'T care for it but you do.

Originally posted by Jury
Funny, though 🙂 and to summarize your posts... you are saying that God and Jesus are two distinct, different persons... not one and the same... and these two are both Gods.

Oh, that's good. Sounds cliche already. 🙄

Actually, I emphasized the versions I used... because it would only mean that I can use any versions... not just focusing on one... for all constitutes one and the same spiritual thoughts. That's what the Bible meant to "comparing spiritual things with spiritual". Using different versions doesn't necessarily mean I'm selecting which one is better... as what I said... no translations can be considered perfect and nothing can be considered poor.

Anyway, very nice Philosophies Ytaker. 🙄 It would be better if you answer me with Biblical backups next time. 🙂

Just pointing out that I have a decent answer to questions, whilst you often speak nonsense.

That shows a very poor understanding of humanity. We can translate things badly, and we can also translate things in mysterious ways. The KJV has been found to be unfaithful to the Greek, and was done an age ago, when the English language had more Thys and Thees. If you use it it seems likely that when there's another verse that has a slightly different meaning

Originally posted by Jury
Yes, sunlight is "sun's energy" but not the sun itself. 🙄

Only a conscious being can have things that aren't itself being put into the possessive. Think of these examples.

The lion's pack ripped apart it's prey

Because Eiffel protected his workers with guardrails, screens and movable staging, only one man died

The mountain's mineral content is igneous as it is a volcano.

The Sun's Mercury orbited it

Consider the bottom one where I put in a possessive for something else with an inanimate object. It doesn't work. You can only use the possessive for living beings. Therefore, they must be talking about part of the sun.

At the request of my sister (who is commandeering the computer) I will put out several smilies.

💃 💃 💃 💃 💃 💃 💃 💃