|
|
Post by OrthodoX on May 31, 2005 17:17:47 GMT -5
I have noticed that there are a number of my brothers and sisters in the urban culture who have a misunderstanding about the trinitarian nature of God. According the teaching of Christianity God is trinitarian in nature. This means he is:
1. The one and only God, creator of all things.
1+0=1
2. He is three persons: The Father, Son and Holy Spirit. All three of which are equal with the other.
1+1+1=3
This is seen clearly in the Bible as well as the historic christian orthodox creeds and confessions.
In Christ-
OrthodoX
|
|
SOLAFIDE
New Member
Thank God there's a God thats my God. MINE
Posts: 36
|
Post by SOLAFIDE on Jun 3, 2005 13:56:51 GMT -5
The Trinity is one of the most misconceptions among christians and nons. It seems like a contradiction cause first the Bible says there is one God. Then It says that there is a Trinity. We will never fully understand it but God will reveal His Word to us piece by peice...
PEACE
SMURF
|
|
|
|
Post by OrthodoX on Jun 3, 2005 16:38:14 GMT -5
The Trinity is one of the most misconceptions among christians and nons. It seems like a contradiction cause first the Bible says there is one God. Then It says that there is a Trinity. We will never fully understand it but God will reveal His Word to us piece by peice... PEACE SMURF Amen sis... You pretty much hit the nail on the head. Piece by piece.. The bible needs to be understood as a progressive revelation (see B.B. Warefield work on this topic). To say that the God has through the Bible progressively revealed his nature to us is to say the truth of God is like a napkin. This napkin is at first folded up nice a neat. But as time goes on, this napkin is slowly unfolded, until we have a full sized open napkin before us. The Bible begins by teaching us that there is only one God, this is one of the major objectives of the Old Testament. Israel was to be different than the other nations who worshipped many gods. The God of Israel alone is the true God. In the New Testament the napkin unfolds a little more, we see that this one God is three persons, seperate and distinct. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Now in the OT we see hints at this trinitarian nature as well. Like the three visitors to Abraham to discuss the fate of Sodom and Gommorah. The creation story, "Let US make man in OUR image", ect. I think one major problem with us today as to why the doctrine of the Trinity is so misunderstood, is that we have been trained to define our terms in the context of the enlightenment and not scripture. The bible does not define God in our terms...it begins by presupposing his existence and authority..."in the beginning God". God is not full y seen and revealed until he takes on a human body. Jesus is the face of God, the person of God for all to see and know. "You've seen me, you've seen the father." We stumble over not being able to comprehend God, and at times use that as an excuse for not believing in Him or for rejecting him...should not the fact that he is beyond our understanding cause us to bow before him in awe and wonder instead? A human rejecting God because he can't understand him is like the ant shaking his little leg at us because he can't understand us, though I bet that the ant better understands us than we understand God, or rather an ant is better able to comprehend us than we are able to fully comprehend God. Point is that the Bible teaches humanity that God is one God, the only true God, and this God's nature is trinitarian, and that this trinitarian God is finally revealed in Jesus Christ. In Christ, the revealed God- DoX |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 12, 2005 2:42:23 GMT -5
..this God's nature is trinitarian... I'd beg to differ ;D |
|
|
|
Post by OrthodoX on Jun 13, 2005 17:25:26 GMT -5
..this God's nature is trinitarian... I'd beg to differ ;D HHH- Then you differ with Christianity. The Church historically has always held to this view of God. See for example the Nicene Creed. OrthodoX |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 13, 2005 19:25:30 GMT -5
HHH- Then you differ with Christianity. The Church historically has always held to this view of God. See for example the Nicene Creed. OrthodoX Differ with christianity as defined by the Nicene Creed. But not with Christianity as defined by the scriptures. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by OrthodoX on Jun 13, 2005 19:42:25 GMT -5
HHH- Then you differ with Christianity. The Church historically has always held to this view of God. See for example the Nicene Creed. OrthodoX Differ with christianity as defined by the Nicene Creed. But not with Christianity as defined by the scriptures. ;D HHH- We need to determine which creed we believe in. You have yours and I have mine. I choose to believe what the Church has affirmed for 2000 years. You might have some historical backing with the Arians, but thats about it. To deny the Trinity is heresy. It is un-biblical and therefore unorthodox. The creeds are the historic Christian Church's interpretation of the bible. To deny them is to stand against the Church. We can go further if you wish, but all of 2000 years of Church history, the history of the institution charged with preserving and handing down the teachings of Christ and his apostles by the power of the Holy Spirit, is against you. And TD Jakes or whatever oneness cat you follow. OrthodoX |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 14, 2005 13:15:31 GMT -5
Differ with christianity as defined by the Nicene Creed. But not with Christianity as defined by the scriptures. ;D HHH- We need to determine which creed we believe in. You have yours and I have mine. I choose to believe what the Church has affirmed for 2000 years. You might have some historical backing with the Arians, but thats about it. To deny the Trinity is heresy. It is un-biblical and therefore unorthodox. The creeds are the historic Christian Church's interpretation of the bible. To deny them is to stand against the Church. We can go further if you wish, but all of 2000 years of Church history, the history of the institution charged with preserving and handing down the teachings of Christ and his apostles by the power of the Holy Spirit, is against you. And TD Jakes or whatever oneness cat you follow. OrthodoX I don't have a creed, I just have scripture and that's what i believe in. So if your creed can not be sufficiently backed by scripture then to me it useless, null, and void. HHH P.S. I don't follow TD Jakes I follow scripture. And TD Jakes isn't really oneness. |
|
|
|
Post by OrthodoX on Jun 14, 2005 17:24:59 GMT -5
HHH- We need to determine which creed we believe in. You have yours and I have mine. I choose to believe what the Church has affirmed for 2000 years. You might have some historical backing with the Arians, but thats about it. To deny the Trinity is heresy. It is un-biblical and therefore unorthodox. The creeds are the historic Christian Church's interpretation of the bible. To deny them is to stand against the Church. We can go further if you wish, but all of 2000 years of Church history, the history of the institution charged with preserving and handing down the teachings of Christ and his apostles by the power of the Holy Spirit, is against you. And TD Jakes or whatever oneness cat you follow. OrthodoX I don't have a creed, I just have scripture and that's what i believe in. So if your creed can not be sufficiently backed by scripture then to me it useless, null, and void. HHH P.S. I don't follow TD Jakes I follow scripture. And TD Jakes isn't really oneness. Actually HHH, you do have a creed. A creed is an "I believe" statement. The word creed comes from the latin word 'credo' which simply means 'I believe'. The Bible admonishes us to have a sound confession. Your creeds, though unwritten,says,: "I don't believe that the Bible teaches that the nature of God is Trinitarian." My creed says in a nutshell: "I believe that the Bible teaches that the nature of God is Trinitarian- that God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit is all one together as God." My creed has been held by the Church for all of her history, yours has been held only by heretical factions. You may wonder why we don't stop the creed talk and jump into the scriptures? Because the burden of proof is on you. You must prove that the creeds, the Church's historic interpretations of the Bible are wrong. I am orthodox (pardon the pun) I believe that my Lord has preserved his truth for me to recieve from my Church and her creeds. You cannot interpret the Word of God differently than the Word of God itself prescribes. According to scripture we are to have creeds and trust the interpretation of those over us, as well as be Bereans. But being a Berean doesn't mean you throw out two thousand years of the Holy Spirit's work...geeze. Look check out this article I just wrote on my site...I am a little worn out at the moment...please read it and get back to me. www.totareformanda.org/index.php/archives/2005/06/14/defending-orthodoxy-pt-2/Grace and Peace- OrthodoX |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 14, 2005 23:31:34 GMT -5
Actually HHH, you do have a creed. A creed is an "I believe" statement. The word creed comes from the latin word 'credo' which simply means 'I believe'. The Bible admonishes us to have a sound confession. Your creeds, though unwritten,says,: "I don't believe that the Bible teaches that the nature of God is Trinitarian." My creed says in a nutshell: "I believe that the Bible teaches that the nature of God is Trinitarian- that God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit is all one together as God." My creed has been held by the Church for all of her history, yours has been held only by heretical factions. You may wonder why we don't stop the creed talk and jump into the scriptures? Because the burden of proof is on you. You must prove that the creeds, the Church's historic interpretations of the Bible are wrong. I am orthodox (pardon the pun) I believe that my Lord has preserved his truth for me to recieve from my Church and her creeds. You cannot interpret the Word of God differently than the Word of God itself prescribes. According to scripture we are to have creeds and trust the interpretation of those over us, as well as be Bereans. But being a Berean doesn't mean you throw out two thousand years of the Holy Spirit's work...geeze. Look check out this article I just wrote on my site...I am a little worn out at the moment...please read it and get back to me. www.totareformanda.org/index.php/archives/2005/06/14/defending-orthodoxy-pt-2/Grace and Peace- OrthodoX Ok, cool. well in that case. I don't have a creed outside of scripture, or anything that doesn't agree therewith. BTW, i read the article. Nice work. i read about some of those "heretical" factions and none of them quite believe what i believe ;D but what i've learned from this types of discussions is that it's easier to lump someone with another group. but anyway. Now, you say that your creed has been "HELD" by the "CHURCH". Now according to one of your creeds you posted that was "CATHOLIC" church. I'm not catholic, I'm Christian ;D. I too believe that GOD presevered his truth. And all of it is in the Bible. Now you said the burden of proof is on me, but you're severely mistaken. Since I've told you that my creed is the ORIGINAL work (the bible), and i don't see in the ORIGINAL work things stated in your paraphased version(creeds); then the burden is on you to solicit the ORIGINAL and give examples to prove your paraphrase. holla GOD Bless |
|
|
|
Post by the answer on Jun 15, 2005 2:23:01 GMT -5
hhh
How would you explain the baptism of Jesus?
1. The voice from heaven ( The Father)
2. Jesus in the water ( The Son)
3. The dove decends on Jesus ( The Spirit)
I see this as a clear showing of the trinity.
How do u see this passage according to your view?
Chea
|
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jun 15, 2005 10:57:11 GMT -5
Now remember HHH that before the ROMAN catholic church jacked everything up, there was the Catholic church which was sound and developing its church. All Catholic means is UNIVERSAL. The Church had to distinguish itself from the Gnostic heretics and therefore formulated the Apostles Creed from the SCRIPTURES so that everyone who affirmed it woud be recognized as in the TRUE church of God the CATHOLIC/UNIVERSAL in contrast to the Gnostics. nawmean Right, and thats what the Creeds, teach that which is in the bible. The Creeds are a summary of Biblical doctrine. Well, what he means is the burden is on you to show that the Church has been wrong for 2000 yrs. |
|
|
|
Post by OrthodoX on Jun 15, 2005 11:18:07 GMT -5
Ok, cool. well in that case. I don't have a creed outside of scripture, or anything that doesn't agree therewith. BTW, i read the article. Nice work. i read about some of those "heretical" factions and none of them quite believe what i believe ;D but what i've learned from this types of discussions is that it's easier to lump someone with another group. but anyway. Now, you say that your creed has been "HELD" by the "CHURCH". Now according to one of your creeds you posted that was "CATHOLIC" church. I'm not catholic, I'm Christian ;D. I too believe that GOD presevered his truth. And all of it is in the Bible. Now you said the burden of proof is on me, but you're severely mistaken. Since I've told you that my creed is the ORIGINAL work (the bible), and i don't see in the ORIGINAL work things stated in your paraphased version(creeds); then the burden is on you to solicit the ORIGINAL and give examples to prove your paraphrase. holla GOD Bless HHH- I am glad you enjoyed my article, but you obviously disagree. In my article I demonstrated that the Bible (your solo creed ;D) commands us to have a sound, UNIFIED interpretation of the Christ's teachings and that of his apostles. To say "I have no creed but scripture" is to go against scripture!!  As I explained in my article, a creed is an "I believe" statement. The Bible cannot be a man made creed...it is God's Holy and perfect Revelation to humanity...the Bible is God's "I Believe" statement.  It is our duty as his people and by the illumination of the Holy Spirit, to rightly interpret and teach what God has revealed. He has ordained the "community of faith" to be the context within which the Bible is interpreted. And this community has, by the direction of the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus, drafted Creeds, to help us understand scripture. The Creeds are the Christian community's, "I Believe" statements about what the Bible teaches. DoX |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 15, 2005 13:37:43 GMT -5
hhh How would you explain the baptism of Jesus? 1. The voice from heaven ( The Father)2. Jesus in the water ( The Son)3. The dove decends on Jesus ( The Spirit)I see this as a clear showing of the trinity. How do u see this passage according to your view? Chea sigh.. i've been through this so many times on HHZ, Holy Culture etc you should be able to quote my answers by heart. start another thread if you want ANOTHER explination. |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 15, 2005 13:52:40 GMT -5
Ok, cool. well in that case. I don't have a creed outside of scripture, or anything that doesn't agree therewith. BTW, i read the article. Nice work. i read about some of those "heretical" factions and none of them quite believe what i believe ;D but what i've learned from this types of discussions is that it's easier to lump someone with another group. but anyway. Now, you say that your creed has been "HELD" by the "CHURCH". Now according to one of your creeds you posted that was "CATHOLIC" church. I'm not catholic, I'm Christian ;D. I too believe that GOD presevered his truth. And all of it is in the Bible. Now you said the burden of proof is on me, but you're severely mistaken. Since I've told you that my creed is the ORIGINAL work (the bible), and i don't see in the ORIGINAL work things stated in your paraphased version(creeds); then the burden is on you to solicit the ORIGINAL and give examples to prove your paraphrase. holla GOD Bless HHH- I am glad you enjoyed my article, but you obviously disagree. In my article I demonstrated that the Bible (your solo creed ;D) commands us to have a sound, UNIFIED interpretation of the Christ's teachings and that of his apostles. To say "I have no creed but scripture" is to go against scripture!! As I explained in my article, a creed is an "I believe" statement. The Bible cannot be a man made creed...it is God's Holy and perfect Revelation to humanity...the Bible is God's "I Believe" statement. It is our duty as his people and by the illumination of the Holy Spirit, to rightly interpret and teach what God has revealed. He has ordained the "community of faith" to be the context within which the Bible is interpreted. And this community has, by the direction of the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus, drafted Creeds, to help us understand scripture. The Creeds are the Christian community's, "I Believe" statements about what the Bible teaches. DoX you said that sounds like a circular arguement. Now if you think about it. The REAL apostles creed is the new testament. Because when Jesus and the apostles referred to "SCRIPTURE" they were talking about the Tanakah. So if your so-called "apostles creed" doesn't line up with the "Holy Spirit Illumination" of the actually apostles then there's a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 15, 2005 14:04:07 GMT -5
i know what catholic means man. but your explination sounds just like the catholics'.  Supposedly, but if they don't line up with the BIBLE then there's a problem. The BIBLE is the measuring stick, not the creed. True. I don't think that the "CHURCH" is wrong. People IN the church may have been wrong; church LEADERS may have been wrong. But never the CHURCH itself. ;D So as i said before, if your creeds can't be verified by scripture saying the same, then they are void. HHH |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jun 15, 2005 14:04:47 GMT -5
As I explained in my article, a creed is an "I believe" statement. The Bible cannot be a man made creed...it is God's Holy and perfect Revelation to humanity...the Bible is God's "I Believe" statement.
Good. So I believe what God Believes.
commands us to have a sound, UNIFIED interpretation
Good so 50 million Chinese folks are unified on eating rice. So what? And besides, whether Hus was Orthodox or not, he REJECTED UNIFICATION and thereby falls to your own reasoning as UNORTHODOX!
Of couse I love the convienience of you getting to determin WHO is Orthodox and WHO is not. Funny that a Baptist would go to Gentry for a reassuring hug!
Quite convienient too that you reject 1500 yrs of Church History where the Church was UNITED on including the Apocrypha.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is really the stupidest thing I think I have ever heard, that Scripture is Gods Creed, and now I have to go and make up my own Creed that will come out different than His Creed, yet you reject at least 7 of the Creeds where people did just what you have said they need to do, create their own Creed. Yet at the same time you have not made YOUR own Creed, you have borrowed someone elses, and that is ok. But, it is not ok for me to borrow Gods Creed! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL THIS IS THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD!!!!
But telling it is that to get in the Tree House of Orthodoxy I have to borrow a MANS CREED, but I am found offensive if I bring Gods Creed. Hmmmm lets see, God did say He laid a stumbling block in Zion didn't He? Go figure.
|
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jun 15, 2005 14:28:46 GMT -5
As I explained in my article, a creed is an "I believe" statement. The Bible cannot be a man made creed...it is God's Holy and perfect Revelation to humanity...the Bible is God's "I Believe" statement. Good. So I believe what God Believes. commands us to have a sound, UNIFIED interpretation Good so 50 million Chinese folks are unified on eating rice. So what? And besides, whether Hus was Orthodox or not, he REJECTED UNIFICATION and thereby falls to your own reasoning as UNORTHODOX! Of couse I love the convienience of you getting to determin WHO is Orthodox and WHO is not. Funny that a Baptist would go to Gentry for a reassuring hug! Quite convienient too that you reject 1500 yrs of Church History where the Church was UNITED on including the Apocrypha. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is really the stupidest thing I think I have ever heard, that Scripture is Gods Creed, and now I have to go and make up my own Creed that will come out different than His Creed, yet you reject at least 7 of the Creeds where people did just what you have said they need to do, create their own Creed. Yet at the same time you have not made YOUR own Creed, you have borrowed someone elses, and that is ok. But, it is not ok for me to borrow Gods Creed! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL THIS IS THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD!!!! But telling it is that to get in the Tree House of Orthodoxy I have to borrow a MANS CREED, but I am found offensive if I bring Gods Creed. Hmmmm lets see, God did say He laid a stumbling block in Zion didn't He? Go figure. rrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiighhhhhhhhhht  |
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jun 15, 2005 14:35:27 GMT -5
i know what catholic means man. but your explination sounds just like the catholics'. Hmmm, really? how if I may ask? AMEN! to that bro. The thing is that the creeds have been found to line up perfectly with the bible for 2000yrs. May you please define Church for us? I don't think you realize what you just said, no offense. AGAIN a holy AMEN from me. Again The creeds ARE NOT the final authority the Scripts are and the creed POINT us back to Scripture. |
|
|
|
Post by HIPHOPHEAD on Jun 15, 2005 14:45:55 GMT -5
Your words: "All Catholic means is UNIVERSAL. The Church had to distinguish itself from the Gnostic heretics and therefore formulated the Apostles Creed from the SCRIPTURES so that everyone who affirmed it woud be recognized as in the TRUE church of God the CATHOLIC/UNIVERSAL in contrast to the Gnostics. nawmean" <<< This is pretty much what i hear most catholics say.
Yes they have. They have been found correct by those who support it. ;D
the body of believers as a whole. and i doubt that they took a vote of every member to see if they agreed with the creed ;D
they supposedly point back to scripture. yet as i said, i still ask to be pointed to SCRIPTURE that supports certain parts of the creed. (specifically trinity). ;D
|
|
