Three Gods or one? Explain the Trinity.

[tanakh]

Not really, as Jesus said, "to him who canst believe, all things are possible".

Do you believe that three persons could have always existed is possible? If you do then how can you say that the idea was beyond our comprehension since it obviously isn't beyond yours, that is if you believe it is possible.

IMO, once a person recognizes the reality of the mortal nature it would seem that the concept of an eternal nature would be naturally perceivable to the imagination.

Have you experienced eternity? To fully comprehend it you need to experience it.

 

[Absolutely]

Jay;"still makes no sense, there is no mention of Jesus creating all things in this passage"

LOL
You have to be blind or something.


John 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The word was with God from the beginning
All things made by the word


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.
15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
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

Jesus is the creator

Col 1
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Jesus as creator
Heb 2
9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

 

[CS1]

The Torah was written in Hebrew and some of the latter books in Aramaic. The Jews of the time was usually fluent in both Hebrew and whatever language they were dealing with. Hebrew for them was and always will be their first love and that is why even today they teach their children in Hebrew. Yeshua, being a Jew was taught in Hebrew and they red the scriptures in Hebrew, not Greek.

The first three books of the NT was most likely also written in Hebrew first before it was translated into Greek.

most likely does not mean they were we just don't know. what do know the Manuscripts are copies of what was written and it was Greek We do know the Old Testament was written inHebrew that we do know the first five Books known as the pentateuch

 

[jaybird88]

Amazing that you can not address the verses I posted or answer a basic kindergarten question.

there were 6 different points addressed in that post alone. what verse and what question?

 

[jaybird88]

LOL
You have to be blind or something.


John 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The word was with God from the beginning
All things made by the word


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.
15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
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

Jesus is the creator

Col 1
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Jesus as creator
Heb 2
9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

your not getting it. lets start over with some simple questions. you obviously think Jesus is the creator. so . .

if Jesus is the creator of all things, what did the Father do? Father meaning the one that Jesus says sent Him.

 

[Absolutely]

your not getting it. lets start over with some simple questions. you obviously think Jesus is the creator. so . .

if Jesus is the creator of all things, what did the Father do? Father meaning the one that Jesus says sent Him.

Blame it on the bible.
I am just a reporter.

 

[Absolutely]

there were 6 different points addressed in that post alone. what verse and what question?

Lots of sentences
One point.
The bible has Jesus as creator.

 

[Absolutely]

there were 6 different points addressed in that post alone. what verse and what question?

In your mind
Does this verse that says Jesus is the creator of all things not register?

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

 

[jaybird88]

Blame it on the bible.
I am just a reporter.

Lots of sentences
One point.
The bible has Jesus as creator.

ok? same question, if Jesus is the creator of all things, what did the Father do?

 

[jaybird88]

In your mind
Does this verse that says Jesus is the creator of all things not register?

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

addressed on post 78

 

[Absolutely]

your not getting it. lets start over with some simple questions. you obviously think Jesus is the creator. so . .

if Jesus is the creator of all things, what did the Father do? Father meaning the one that Jesus says sent Him.

I asked you a very basic,generic,non intrusve question taht a babe in Christ should be able to answer.
Asked you twice and with great effort you deflected and could not give a simple answer.

I have a couple rules for conversing.
One of which is honesty.
If that is too much to ask...we are done.

ok? same question, if Jesus is the creator of all things, what did the Father do?

What fathers do.
Enjoy watching their sons work.

Now learn how to answer as well as ask.

 

[Absolutely]

6 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.



Jay; "still makes no sense, there is no mention of Jesus creating all things in this passage "



LOL
Comprehension son.
Study harder....but getahold of some comprehension.

 

[biker]

You're right, these sources claim a lot of things.
What they are doing is taking aggregate data and applying it to an individual.
Them saying "most people of the day spoke Aramaic and didn't know Greek" would be like me saying "the average american salary today is $56,000...therefore that person across the street makes $56,000." I can't use data that describes the probable details of an ancient society and then use that as "evidence" that it was the case for the apostles. Who knows, maybe they were a special case. Maybe they learned Greek during the events of Acts. Maybe Paul taught Peter some Greek, and then Peter taught Mark some Greek. You can't make assumptions based off of what you don't know.
To be really honest, this is all a result of the Hebrew-roots cult. Its a bunch of ahistorical nonsense. It is at odds with the 6,000 manuscripts we have preserved today. It is is disagreement with the early church Father's and their comments about the authors of the NT.
AND....there are extraordinary mathematical properties in the structural design of the Greek in the Gospels....it simply could not have been invented or translated from another language. It has God's fingerprint all over it.

We did get off onto an altogether separate tangent from what we were actually discussing. And for arguments sake, whether the Greek was translated from the Aramaic or not, we know Greek is what most New Testaments have been translated from. So then, that brings us back to the point I was making. Whether it is Aramaic or Greek, they both claim the Holy Spirit was not personable by calling IT and THAT. Which brings me to the point of how did the English think IT and THAT equaled to HE-HIS-HIM? It makes absolutely no sense for those translators to ASSUME what they did. It's as if they completely IGNORED the Church Fathers all together.



We know for a fact that the Church Fathers, Ignatius and Polycarp, were direct Disciples of John the Beloved Disciple and they believe this:

God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels,
........... begat Him, emitting Him
........... along with His own wisdom before all things.

but the wisdom [Spirit in this instance is Sophia] of God which was in Him, and
........... His holy Word which was always present with Him.

Can we assume the Apostle John taught them this?


And if this is what the Beloved John taught, why are we trying to make the Holy Spirit a person over bad translation?

Are we calling the Disciple John a LIAR?

 

[jaybird88]

I asked you a very basic,generic,non intrusve question taht a babe in Christ should be able to answer.
Asked you twice and with great effort you deflected and could not give a simple answer.

I have a couple rules for conversing.
One of which is honesty.
If that is too much to ask...we are done.

your not getting the answer you want to hear, thats not my fault

6 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

through Him, Jesus, all things were created, i agree, but to me it does not mean Jesus alone created all this.

What fathers do.
Enjoy watching their sons work.

this is where your idea breaks down, to teach people the Father had no part in creation is not very wise. it contridicts scripture. your cherry picking little passages to try and puzzle peice this thing together and when you do this it leaves you with egg on your face, like i demonstrated with Peter in the garden which you didnt seem to understand.

1 Corinthians 8:6
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.

all reality as we know it came from the Father but your idea says different.

 

[Diakonos]

We did get off onto an altogether separate tangent from what we were actually discussing. And for arguments sake, whether the Greek was translated from the Aramaic or not, we know Greek is what most New Testaments have been translated from. So then, that brings us back to the point I was making. Whether it is Aramaic or Greek, they both claim the Holy Spirit was not personable by calling IT and THAT. Which brings me to the point of how did the English think IT and THAT equaled to HE-HIS-HIM? It makes absolutely no sense for those translators to ASSUME what they did. It's as if they completely IGNORED the Church Fathers all together.



We know for a fact that the Church Fathers, Ignatius and Polycarp, were direct Disciples of John the Beloved Disciple and they believe this:

God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels,
........... begat Him, emitting Him
........... along with His own wisdom before all things.

but the wisdom [Spirit in this instance is Sophia] of God which was in Him, and
........... His holy Word which was always present with Him.

Can we assume the Apostle John taught them this?


And if this is what the Beloved John taught, why are we trying to make the Holy Spirit a person over bad translation?

Are we calling the Disciple John a LIAR?

I can prove that the Holy Spirit

We did get off onto an altogether separate tangent from what we were actually discussing. And for arguments sake, whether the Greek was translated from the Aramaic or not, we know Greek is what most New Testaments have been translated from. So then, that brings us back to the point I was making. Whether it is Aramaic or Greek, they both claim the Holy Spirit was not personable by calling IT and THAT. Which brings me to the point of how did the English think IT and THAT equaled to HE-HIS-HIM? It makes absolutely no sense for those translators to ASSUME what they did. It's as if they completely IGNORED the Church Fathers all together.



We know for a fact that the Church Fathers, Ignatius and Polycarp, were direct Disciples of John the Beloved Disciple and they believe this:

God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels,
........... begat Him, emitting Him
........... along with His own wisdom before all things.

but the wisdom [Spirit in this instance is Sophia] of God which was in Him, and
........... His holy Word which was always present with Him.

Can we assume the Apostle John taught them this?


And if this is what the Beloved John taught, why are we trying to make the Holy Spirit a person over bad translation?

Are we calling the Disciple John a LIAR?

I already showed you from Scripture in post #125 that the Holy Spirit is a person.
Is that not enough to convince you?

I have more

 

[biker]

I can prove that the Holy Spirit

I already showed you from Scripture in post #125 that the Holy Spirit is a person.
Is that not enough to convince you?

I have more

No, you showed me what the KJV explains what the Holy Spirit is.
But if the KJV does not align with what the Apostle John taught his own Disciples, why are we not accepting that?
It makes sense to me since John was there when Jesus taught in person to believe him over the KJV.
So, why are we believing false translation?

 

[biker]

Do you think the KJV translated Bible is more truthful than what the Beloved Disciple John taught to his own Disciples?

 

[Diakonos]

No, you showed me what the KJV explains what the Holy Spirit is.
But if the KJV does not align with what the Apostle John taught his own Disciples, why are we not accepting that?
It makes sense to me since John was there when Jesus taught in person to believe him over the KJV.
So, why are we believing false translation?

FWI, I'm using the NASB, which uses different manuscripts than the KJV. I'm not here promoting KJV.

 

[Diakonos]

@biker

Please answer me this:

"Today, if you would hear His voice,
8 Do not harden your hearts, as at Meribah,
As in the day of Massah in the wilderness,
9 “When your fathers tested Me,
They tried Me, though they had seen My work.
10 “For forty years I loathed that generation,
And said they are a people who err in their heart,
And they do not know My ways.
11 “Therefore I swore in My anger,
Truly they shall not enter into My rest.”"
-Psalm 95:7-11

Who is speaking in this verse?

 

[biker]

FWI, I'm using the NASB, which uses different manuscripts than the KJV. I'm not here promoting KJV.

OK then it's still English that was translated from the Greek.

So let me ask it this way:
Do you think the NASB, translated Bible is more truthful than what the Beloved Disciple John taught to his own Disciples?