------------------------------------------
Ubenedictus: now u are
speaking hypothetically, so i
will answer in the same
fashion. If GBJ can "create" me
to have the fullness of his
nature then yes i would be
equal to him.
------------------------------------------

Still in line with having Gej
fullness. Can any trinitarian help him out of this Dilemma and answer the question below with respect to Col2:9.

1 Then what will make you say
that GEJ is greater than you since
you have his fullness? Jn14:28

2 what do you think will make
you to still be considered as his
subject when he has given you all
powers to restore Nigeria back to
him. 1Cor15:27-28.

Pls straight to the point answer is
needed. No beating about the
bush.

@frosbel...Who said Adam and Eve were one physical flesh? All that I was saying is that persons can be one in one context or sense, and at the sametime be more than one in another or different context or sense. Do I have to spell that simple thing out to you.

@Boomark...What is Gej?

frosbel:

Lastpage , sorry this is where we differ, GOD never had a spiritual SON.

His SON came into being when conceived by MARY and eventually born as a MAN.

are u trying to say that Jesus didn't exist before He was born by Mary?

frosbel:

Col 1:19 - For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell,

'pleased do dwell in '. God was pleased to fully dwell in his Son without measure because of his perfect obedience.

[size=15pt]You cannot have GOD dwelling in GOD.[/size]

Colossians 2:9- For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily

as above, GOD cannot dwell in GOD because he is GOD. Rather we see that GOD dwells in his SON fully through the Spirit.

Come off it bro, ''you cannot have God dwell in God but you can have your spirit and soul dwell in your body to form your existance'' and yet you deny the existance of the Godhead even when it's staring at your face?
Are you kidding me

joe4christ:

Come off it bro, ''you cannot have God dwell in God but you can have your spirit and soul dwell in your body to form your existance'' and yet you deny the existance of the Godhead even when it's staring at your face?
Are you kidding me

what !

So God has a spirit and soul ?

Sir, you cannot go on defending the indefensible, no matter how to try to twist the mathematics, 3 = 3 , not ONE.

Stop insulting the intelligence of the sheep.

frosbel:

what !

So God has a spirit and soul ?

Sir, you cannot go on defending the indefensible, no matter how to try to twist the mathematics, 3 = 3 , not ONE.

Stop insulting the intelligence of the sheep.

[size=15pt]But 1+1 which equals 1 according to God in conscerning marraige is what
Did i hear u say wrong mathematical equation
Hahahaha somebody has got to be kidding me indeed! [/size]

@frosbel...On Col 1:19 John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible, "For it pleased the Father,.... The phrase, "the Father", is not in the original text, but is rightly supplied; since he is expressly mentioned in the context, as he who makes the saints meet to be partakers of the heavenly glory; who deliver, them from the power and dominion of sin, and translates them into the kingdom of his dear Son; and who, by Christ, reconciles all things to himself, Colossians 1:12, and whose sovereign will and pleasure it is,

that in him should all fulness dwell: by which is meant, not the fulness of the deity, though it is read by some the fulness of the Godhead: which seems to be transcribed from Colossians 2:9; but though all the perfections of God are in Christ, as eternity, omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, immutability, independence, and necessary existence, and every other, or he would not be equal with God; nor could all the fulness of the Godhead be said to dwell in him, should anyone be wanting; yet this is a fulness possessed by him, that does not spring from, nor depend upon the Father's good will and pleasure; but what he naturally and necessarily enjoys by a participation of the same undivided nature and essence with the Father and Spirit: nor is the relative fulness of Christ intended, which is his church, so called, Ephesians 1:23; and will be so when all the elect are gathered in, and filled with all the gifts and graces of his Spirit, and are arrived to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; for though every believer dwells in Christ, and Christ in him, yet the church is not said to dwell in Christ, but Christ in the church; moreover, as yet she is not his fulness, at least in the sense she will be, and much less can she be said to be all fulness: nor is this to be understood of Christ's fulness of fitness and abilities, as God-man and Mediator, to perform his work and office as such; though this may be taken into the sense of the text as a part, yet is not the whole; but rather chiefly that dispensatory communicative fulness, which is, of the Father's good will and pleasure, put into the hands of Christ to be distributed to others, is here designed. There is a fulness of nature in Christ; the light of nature is from him, and communicated by him to mankind; the blessings of nature are the blessings of his left hand, which he distributes to his people as he thinks fit; and all things in nature are subservient to his mediatorial kingdom and glory. There is a fulness of grace in him, out of which saints receive, and grace for grace, or a large abundance of it; the fulness of the spirit of grace, and of all the graces and gifts of the Spirit is in him; and of all the blessings of grace, as a justifying righteousness, pardon of sin, adoption, sanctification, even of all that grace that is implanted in regeneration, that is necessary to carry on and finish the good work upon the soul; there is a fulness of all light and life, of wisdom, and strength, of peace, joy, and comfort, and of all the promises of grace, both with respect to this world and that which is to come; and there is also a fulness of glory in him, not only the grace, but the glory of the saints, is laid up and hid with him, and is safe and secure in him: this is said to dwell in Christ, which implies its being in him; it is not barely in intention, design, and purpose, but it is really and actually in him, nor is it in any other; and hence it comes to be communicated to the saints: and it also denotes the continuance of it with him; it is an abiding fulness, and yields a continual daily supply to the saints, and will endure to the end of time, and be as sufficient for the last as the first believer; it is like the subject of it, the same yesterday, today, and for ever: and it also intends the safety of it: the saints' life both of grace and glory is hid with Christ, and is secure, it is out of the reach of men and devils, and can never be lost, or they deprived of it; and all this is owing not to any merits of men, to their faith and holiness, or good works, which are all the fruits of this fulness, but to the good will of God; "it pleased the Father" to place it here for them; it was owing to his good will to his Son, and therefore he puts all things into his hands; and to his elect in him, for, having loved them with an everlasting love, he takes everlasting care of them, and makes everlasting provision for them; it was his pleasure from all eternity to take such a step as this, well knowing it was not proper to put it into the hands of Adam, nor into the hands of angels, nor into their own at once; he saw none so fit for it as his Son, and therefore it pleased him to commit it unto him; and it is his good will and sovereign pleasure, that all grace should come through Christ, all communion with him here, and all enjoyment of him hereafter; which greatly enhances and sets forth the glory of Christ as Mediator, one considerable branch of which is, that he is full of grace and truth; this qualifies him to be the head of the church, and gives a reason, as these words be, why he has, and ought to have, the preeminence in all things."

On Colossians 2:9 John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible, "
New International Version (©1984)
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,
New Living Translation (©2007)
For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body.

English Standard Version (©2001)
For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

International Standard Version (©2008)
because all the essence of deity inhabits him in bodily form.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
For all The Fullness of The Deity dwells in him bodily.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
All of God lives in Christ's body,

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
For in him dwells all the fullness of the Deity bodily.

American King James Version
For in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

American Standard Version
for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,

Douay-Rheims Bible
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead corporeally;

Darby Bible Translation
For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily;

English Revised Version
for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,

Webster's Bible Translation
For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

Weymouth New Testament
For it is in Christ that the fulness of God's nature dwells embodied, and in Him you are made complete,

World English Bible
For in him all the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily,

Young's Literal Translation
because in him doth tabernacle all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,


Barnes' Notes on the Bible
For in him dwelleth - That is, this was the great and central doctrine that was to be maintained about Christ, that all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him. Every system which denied this was a denial of the doctrine which they had been taught; and against every thing that would go to undermine this; they were especially to be on their guard. Almost all heresy has been begun by some form of the denial of the great central truth of the incarnation of the Son of God.

All the fulness - Notes, Colossians 1:19.

Of the Godhead - Of the Divinity, the divine nature - θεότης theotēs. The word is one that properly denotes the divine nature and perfections. Robinson, Lexicon. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament.

Bodily - σωματικῶς sōmatikōs. This word also is found nowhere else in the New Testament, though the adjective bodily - σωματικὸς sōmatikos - occurs twice; Luke 3:22, "in a bodily shape;" and 1 Timothy 4:8, "for bodily exercise profiteth little." The word means, "having a bodily appearance, instead of existing or appearing in a spiritual form;" and the fair sense of the phrase is, that the fullness of the divine nature became incarnate, and was indwelling in the body of the Redeemer. It does not meet the case to say, as Crellius does, that the "whole divine will was in him," for the word θεότη theotē - "godhead" - does not mean the will of God; and it is as certainly true that the inspired prophets were under the control of the divine will, as that the Saviour was. Nor can it mean, as Socinus supposes, that the fulness of divine knowledge dwelt in him, for this is not the proper meaning of the word (θεότης theotēs) "godhead;" nor can it mean, for the same reason, that a fullness of divine gifts was intrusted to him. The language is such as would be obviously employed on the supposition that God became incarnate, and appeared in human form; and there is no other idea which it so naturally expresses, nor is there any other which it can be made to express without a forced construction. The meaning is, that it was not anyone attribute of the Deity that became incarnate in the Saviour; that he was not merely endowed with the knowledge, or the power, or the wisdom of God; but that the whole Deity thus became incarnate, and appeared in human form; compare John 14:9; John 1:18. No language could, therefore, more clearly demonstrate the divinity of Christ. Of what mere man - of what angel, could it be used?

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
For in him dwelleth all the fullness - This is opposed to the vain or empty doctrine of the Gentile and Jewish philosophers: there is a fullness in Christ suited to the empty, destitute state of the human soul, but in the philosophy of the Jews and Gentiles nothing like this was found; nor indeed in the more refined and correct philosophy of the present day. No substitute has ever been found for the grace of the Lord Jesus, and those who have sought for one have disquieted themselves in vain.

By the Godhead or Deity, Θεοτης, we are to understand the state or being of the Divine nature; and by the fullness of that Deity, the infinite attributes essential to such a nature.

Bodily - Συματικως signifies truly, really; in opposition to typically, figuratively. There was a symbol of the Divine presence in the Hebrew tabernacle, and in the Jewish temple; but in the body of Christ the Deity, with all its plenitude of attributes, dwelt really and substantially: for so the word σωματικως means; and so it was understood by the ancient Greek fathers, as is fully shown by Suicer, in his Thesaurus, under the word.

"The fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Christ 'bodily,' as opposed to the Jewish tabernacle, or temple; truly and really, in opposition to types and figures; not only effectively, as God dwells in good men, but substantially or personally, by the strictest union, as the soul dwells in the body; so that God and man are one Christ." See Parkhurst.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. This is to be understood, not of the doctrine, or Gospel of Christ, as being a perfect revelation of the will of God; but of Christ, and particularly of his human nature, as consisting of a true body and a reasonable soul, in which the Godhead dwells in a most eminent manner: God indeed is everywhere by his powerful presence, was in the tabernacle and temple in a very singular manner, and dwells in the saints in a way of special grace; but resides in the human nature of Christ, in the highest and most exalted manner; that is to deity what the human body is to an human soul, it is the house in which it dwells: so Philo the Jew (t) calls the "Logos" the house of God, who is the soul of the universe; and elsewhere says (u), that God himself has filled the divine Logos wholly with incorporeal powers. The Godhead dwells in Christ as in a tabernacle, in allusion to the tabernacle of Moses, which looked mean without side, but glorious within; where God granted his presence, and accepted the sacrifices of his people; the human nature of Christ is the true antitypical tabernacle, which God pitched, and not man; and sometimes is called a temple, in allusion to Solomon's; and which is filled with the train of the divine perfections, signified by fulness here: for not the fulness of grace, or a communicative fulness, is here meant; nor the relative fulness, the church; but the fulness of the divine nature, of all the perfections of deity, such as eternity, immensity, omnipresence, omnipotence, omniscience, immutability, necessary and self existence, and every other; for if anyone perfection was wanting, the fulness, much less all the fulness of the Godhead, would not be in him. The act of inhabitation denotes the union of the two natures in Christ, and expresses the distinction of them; and is to be understood of the Godhead, as subsisting in the person of the Son of God, and not as subsisting in the person of the Father, or of the Spirit; and shows the permanency of this union, it is a perpetual abiding one; and this fulness is not dependent on the Father's pleasure; it is not said of this as of another fulness, Colossians 1:19; that it pleased the Father that it should dwell in him: the manner in which it dwells, is "bodily"; not by power, as in the universe; nor by grace, as in the saints; nor by any glorious emanations of it, as in heaven; nor by gifts, as in the prophets and eminent men of God; nor by signs symbols, and shadows, as in the tabernacle and temple; but essentially and personally, or by personal union of the divine nature, as subsisting in the Son of God to an human body, chosen and prepared for that purpose, together with a reasonable human soul; which is the great mystery of godliness, the glory of the Christian religion, and what qualified Christ for, and recommends him to us as a Saviour; and is a reason why, as these words are, that the Gospel should be abode by, continued in, and that with thankfulness: nor should any regard be had to vain and deceitful philosophy, to the traditions of men, or rudiments of the world: Christ only is to be looked to, attended, and followed, who has all fulness in him,

(t) De migr. Abraham, p. 389. (u) De Sommiis, p. 574."


1x1x1 = 1

Adam + Eve = one flesh

The Father + The Son + The Spirit = One God

God x God x God = One God

joe4christ:

[size=15pt]But 1+1 which equals 1 according to God in conscerning marraige is what
Did i hear u say wrong mathematical equation
Hahahaha somebody has got to be kidding me indeed! [/size]

In what sense is a husband and wife suppose to be 1 flesh??

Because I knw that when u go home to meet your parents you see 2 distinct persons who are different individuals with different personalities and strength,size,height,etc...name them........

When the bible says 1 flesh you have to explain what it means b4 you run into conclusion to prove your rotten dogma.....

Is the bible telling you that the husband and wife are 1 flesh manifesting in 2 persons??

And did the bible ever tell you about 1 God manifesting in 3 persons??...

What does a husband and wife being one flesh mean??

And I hope you know too that we are suppose to be ONE with Jesus??

So start explaining...

frosbel:

Lastpage , sorry this is where we differ, GOD never had a spiritual SON.

His SON came into being when conceived by MARY and eventually born as a MAN.

...and what and where was "His Son" BEFORE he came "into being"?

"In the beginning was "The Word" (Jesus)..."The word" was with God,.....and the word was "a" God!. "He" (Jesus) was with God in the beginning. (John 1:1-2)

Concerning Jesus, the Bible explains further in (John 1: 10): He was in the world, though THE WORLD WAS MADE THROUGH HIM => Jesus was God's co-worker in making the world.

Recall at the "beginning" when God said: Let "US" make man in "OUR OWN" image! He was talking to a "co-worker". The "co-worker" as shown in the passage above (John 1:10) is no one else but JESUS, the son of God, the "Morning Star", the "first born" of all creation1

Also note;in (John 1: 14) "The Word" (Jesus) became FLESH and made his dwelling amongst us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the "One and Only" WHO CAME FROM THE FATHER

So you see, we need not differ on anything "Biblical", we just need to AGREE with The Bible ....the "constitution and Dictionary" of God!

Just take your time to read through those passages and "connect them together".
I pray God will give you wisdom and understanding.

Lastpage!

gbrookes02: @Boomark...What is Gej?

Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.

That is assuming he is the one that created you and gave you all power to redeem Nigeria back to him. With this you can now answer the question.

gbrookes02: @TroGunn...It says "The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you" if something can't contain a person or thing what those that means? When the bible say God dwells in Heaven that is just figurative language because "The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you". Likewise God was said to dwell in Jerusalem, and so on, 1 Chronicles 23:25, see also Zechariah 8:3; Zechariah 2:10; Exodus 29:45; 2 Chronicles 6:1; John 14:23, this dwelling of God is likewise just figurative language, its all the same figure of speech about God dwelling in Heaven, on earth, or in the Christian.

@frosbel...You like the other anti-Trinitarians have not being able at all to answer the Trinitarian arguments put forward to you all. So what is the use arguing with you all, you all can't cut it at all, you all are too lame. To deny The Son is to deny The Father, 1 John 2:22-23. Denying the Deity of the Son of God is to Deny the Scripture: http://www.letusreason.org/Trin21.htm

While it's obviously figurative to say God dwells in a Christian or in Jerusalem (meaning God is with or close to or turns attention to such), there was nothing figurative about what Stephen saw in Acts 7:55, 56.

Nothing figurative to read into "Our Father who hath in Heaven".

The heavens -- the heavens are Jehovah's, And the earth He hath given to sons of men - Psalm 115:16 (That is, he has reserved the heavens as a home for himself, or as his special possession and home. Compare Isaiah 66:1; Matthew 5:34; Acts 7:49.)

No one is denying the Son or the Father. Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and he is a distinct personality and surbodinate to the Father - too many scriptures attest to this, which Trinitarians ignore or go through confusing loops to attempt to explain away.

Jesus resurrected as a spirit (not flesh and blood), God (Yahweh/Jehovah)is a Spirit - in this sense you may say they both share something common. Angels are spirits too. You might even call Jesus Mighty God (like stated in Isaiah), as long as you know you are not equating him to the ALMIGHTY God. Jesus is certainly not nor equal to the ALMIGHTY God, Jehovah, who is just one. The term Almighty God is never used in the Bible for anyone else except the Father, Jehovah.

@ijawkid...a husband and wife is one flesh in the sense of one union, family, unit, and so on. For more on the meaning of one flesh read below.

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother - There shall be, by the order of God, a more intimate connection formed between the man and woman, than can subsist even between parents and children.

And they shall be one flesh - These words may be understood in a twofold sense.

1. These two shall be one flesh, shall be considered as one body, having no separate or independent rights, privileges, cares, concerns, etc., each being equally interested in all things that concern the marriage state.

2. These two shall be for the production of one flesh; from their union a posterity shall spring, as exactly resembling themselves as they do each other.

Our Lord quotes these words, Matthew 19:5, with some variation from this text: They Twain shall be one flesh. So in Mark 10:8. St. Paul quotes in the same way, 1 Corinthians 6:16, and in Ephesians 5:31. The Vulgate Latin, the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Samaritan, all read the word Two. That this is the genuine reading I have no doubt. The word שניהם sheneyhem, they two or both of them, was, I suppose, omitted at first from the Hebrew text, by mistake, because it occurs three words after in the following verse, or more probably it originally occurred in Genesis 2:24, and not in Genesis 2:25; and a copyist having found that he had written it twice, in correcting his copy, struck out the word in Genesis 2:24 instead of Genesis 2:25. But of what consequence is it? In the controversy concerning polygamy, it has been made of very great consequence. Without the word, some have contended a man may have as many wives as he chooses, as the terms are indefinite, They shall be, etc., but with the word, marriage is restricted. A man can have in legal wedlock but One wife at the same time."


John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

"and shall cleave unto his wife; with a cordial affection, taking care of her, nourishing and cherishing her, providing all things comfortable for her, continuing to live with her, and not depart from her as long as they live: the phrase is expressive of the near union by marriage between man and wife; they are, as it were, glued together, and make but one; which is more fully and strongly expressed in the next clause:

and they shall be one flesh; that is, "they two", the man and his wife, as it is supplied and interpreted by Christ, Matthew 19:5 and so here in the Targum of Jonathan, and in the Septuagint and Samaritan versions: the union between them is so close, as if they were but one person, one soul, one body; and which is to be observed against polygamy, unlawful divorces, and all uncleanness, fornication, and adultery: only one man and one woman, being joined in lawful wedlock, have a right of copulation with each other, in order to produce a legitimate offspring, partaking of the same one flesh, as children do of their parents, without being able to distinguish the flesh of the one from the other, they partake of: and from hence it appears to be a fabulous notion, that Cecrops, the first king of Athens, was the first institutor of matrimony and joiner of one man to one woman; whence he was said to be "biformis" (p), and was called unless, as some (q) have thought, that he and Moses were one and the same who delivered out the first institution of marriage, which is this."

http://bible.cc/genesis/2-24.htm

So they are one very close union, family, unit, and so on that is shared by two persons. In one sense a husband and wife is one flesh, and at the sametime in another sense they are two persons.

The Trinity is one being, nature, and essence that is shared by three persons. The Trinity is one "what" (that is one being, nature, and essence), and three "whos" (that is three persons).

So persons can be one in one context, and more that one in another context at the sametime.

The teaching of The Trinity is based on the teaching of all of scriptures and not just one portion only, nevertheless Matthew 28:19 teaches the Trinty. Other parts of scripture teaches that The Father is God, The Son is God, and The Spirit is God, and yet there is only one God. The scriptures also teaches that The Father, The Son, and The Spirit are distinct from eachother as persons. And they are all co-eternal and co-equal with eachother.

@Boomark...I don't live in Africa, and have never been to Africa but hope to one day.

@TroGunn...If "The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you" then how can it be correctly said that God literally and physically dwells in Heaven (other than that Jesus - who is God - human body dwell in Heaven)? Just like how the temple on earth couldn't contain God so likewise "The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you" as well. Its all figurative. Answer my question.
You correctly said the Jesus is the Son of God but you don't know what that mean. True Christians are sons of God by adoption into God's family by His grace in Jesus blood. Jesus is God's Son by nature and right before anything was created - from all eternity. And since by nature He is God's son that means He has the same nature as His Father. And since Jesus has the same nature as His Father that mean Jesus is God also. A man's son by nature has the same nature as his father, and so that means the son just like his father is a man - a human being. Like Father like son, so Jesus is God just as His Father, that's what the Son of God means in referrance to Jesus, He is God too just like His Father.

@TroGunn...Jesus physical body was raised from the grave John 2:19.

gbrookes02:
...
@TroGunn...If "The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you" then how can it be correctly said that God literally and physically dwells in Heaven (other than that Jesus - who is God - human body dwell in Heaven)? Just like how the temple on earth couldn't contain God so likewise "The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you" as well. Its all figurative. Answer my question.
You correctly said the Jesus is the Son of God but you don't know what that mean. True Christians are sons of God by adoption into God's family by His grace in Jesus blood. Jesus is God's Son by nature and right before anything was created - from all eternity. And since by nature He is God's son that means He has the same nature as His Father. And since Jesus has the same nature as His Father that mean Jesus is God also. A man's son by nature has the same nature as his father, and so that means the son just like his father is a man - a human being. Like Father like son, so Jesus is God just as His Father, that's what the Son of God means in referrance to Jesus, He is God too just like His Father.

God is a spirit (John 4:24). That is God's nature. Jesus was obviously a spirit before he came to earth and was a spirit after ("the last Adam, a life-giving spirit" because "flesh and blood" can't be in heaven. You may want to read 1 Cor 15: 35-50 to grasp difference between human body and spirit body. A human son being human as his father does not become his father.

Jesus is God's Son because he is God's foremost and beloved. He "is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation" (Col 1:15), clearly with a beginning. Humans are children or sons of God too, as are angels, but Jesus is above humans and angels. No one can get to God except through Christ. The only person that is above Christ is God. There really is no point served in trying to elevate Christ to God, except of course to fulfill Bible prophecy about useless teachings like the Trinity springing up and confusing many.

Fact remains that the Trinity term and doctrince has a clear and historically documented beginning and it's post-Apostolic.

MATTHEW 28:19...go ye therefore and teach all nations baptising them in the NAME of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.

PLEASE WHAT IS THE NAME THAT THESE 3 PERSONS SHARE? IT IS GOD...


MAY GOD OPEN YOUR SPRITUAL EYES

@TroGunn...God in His God nature is spirit thats what John 4:24 means. You have not dealt with John 2:19 when I said Jesus physical body was raised from the grave. You (like others here) are only interested in vainly pitting scripture against scripture. "the last Adam, a life-giving spirit" means He is the source and giver of life, not that He is only a spirit. If Jesus was only a spirit then how do you explain John 2:19 and Luke 24:39? Jesus describe His resurrected body in Luke 24:39 as flesh and bone, and not as flesh and blood. In 1 Cor 15: 35-50 the body is not describe as "spirit body" as you said, a spirit don't have a body Luke 24:39 so spirit body is a nonsensical self-contradictary term, the body is describe as a "spiritual body" in the passage, a big differance. A physical person can be spiritual, all true Christians are spiritual even though they are physical, 1 Corinthians 2:15.

You said, "A human son being human as his father does not become his father" which is true and nobody has said anything to the contrary what you miss is the son is as much human and his father is human, father and son have the same nature and essence, it can't be otherwise. No Trinitarian is saying The Father and The Son are the same person, what we are saying is that they are the same God, a big differance. The Trinity is one "what", and three "whos". How someone being someone's "foremost and beloved" makes them the son of the person? Sonship is ascribed to Jesus because it describe Jesus subordinate role to The Father in the Trinity, and it also shows Jesus has the same God nature as The Father. A son is as much human as his father because he shares his father's nature and essence, yet in the family the son has a subordinate role to his father. As to their human nature and essence they are equal, but as to role and authority in the family the father is greater than his son.

"Is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation" (Col 1:15), means Jesus is over all of God's creation ruling all of God's creation. It don't mean Jesus was God's first created being. For much more on the term "firstborn" (which you don't properly understand) as used in the bible see below.


Barnes' Notes on the Bible

"The first-born of every creature - Among all the creatures of God, or over all his creation, occupying the rank and pro-eminence of the first-born. The first-born, or the oldest son, among the Hebrews as elsewhere, had special privileges. He was entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. It has been, also, and especially in oriental countries, a common thing for the oldest son to succeed to the estate and the title of his father. In early times, the first-born son was the officiating priest in the family, in the absence or on the death of the father. There can be no doubt that the apostle here has reference to the usual distinctions and honors conferred on the first-born, and means to say that, among all the creatures of God, Christ occupied a pre-eminence similar to that. He does not say that, in all respects, he resembled the first-born in a family; nor does he say that he himself was a creature, for the point of his comparison does not turn on these things, and what he proceeds to affirm respecting him is inconsistent with the idea of his being a created being himself.

He that "created all things that are in heaven and that are in earth," was not himself created. That the apostle did not mean to represent him as a creature, is also manifest from the reason which he assigns why he is called the first-born. "He is the image of God, and the first-born of every creature, for - ὅτι hoti - by him were all things created." That is, he sustains the elevated rank of the first-born, or a high eminence over the creation, because by him "all things were created in heaven and in earth." The language used here, also, does not fairly imply that he was a creature, or that he was in nature and rank one of those in relation to whom it is said he was the first-born. It is true that the word "first-born" - πρωτότοκος prōtotokos - properly means the first-born child of a father or mother, Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:7; or the first-born of animals. But two things are also to be remarked in regard to the use of the word:

(1) It does not necessarily imply that anyone is born afterward in the family, for it would be used of the first-born, though an only child; and,

(2) it is used to denote one who is chief, or who is highly distinguished and pre-eminent. Thus, it is employed in Romans 8:29, "That he might be the first-born among many brethren." So, in Colossians 1:18, it is said that he was "the first-born from the dead;" not that he was literally the first that was raised from the dead, which was not the fact, but that he might be pre-eminent among those that are raised; compare Exodus 4:22. The meaning, then, is, that Christ sustains the most exalted rank in the universe; he is pre-eminent above all others; he is at the head of all things. The expression does not mean that he was "begotten before all creatures," as it is often explained, but refers to the simple fact that he sustains the highest rank over the creation. He is the Son of God. He is the heir of all things. All other creatures are also the "offspring of God;" but he is exalted as the Son of God above all.

(This clause has been variously explained. The most commonly received, and, as we think, best supported opinion, is that which renders πρωτοτοκος πασης κτισεως prōtotokos pasēs ktiseōs; "begotten before all creation." This most natural and obvious sense would have been more readily admitted, had it not been supposed hostile to certain views on the sonship of Christ. Some explain πρωτότοκος prōtotokos actively, and render "first begetter or producer of all things," which gives, at all events, a sense consistent with truth and with the context, which immediately assigns as the reason of Christ being styled πρωτότοκος prōtotokos, the clause beginning ὁτι εν αυτω εκτισθη hoti en autō ektisthē, "For by him were all things created." Others, with the author explain the word figuratively, of pre-eminence or lordship. To this view however, there are serious objections.

It seems not supported by sufficient evidence. No argument can be drawn from Colossians 1:18 until it is proved that "firstborn from the dead," does not mean the first that was raised to die no more, which Doddridge affirms to be "the easiest, surest, most natural sense, in which the best commentators are agreed." Nor is the argument from Romans 8:29 satisfactory. "Πρωτότοκος Prōtotokos," says Bloomfield, at the close of an admirable note on this verse, "is not well taken by Whitby and others, in a figurative sense, to denote 'Lord of all things, since the word is never so used, except in reference to primogeniture. And although, in Romans 8:29, we have τον ρωτοτοκος εν πολλοις αδελφοις ton prōtotokos en pollois adelphois, yet there his followers are represented not as his creatures, but as his brethren. On which, and other accounts, the interpretation, according to which we have here a strong testimony to the eternal filiation of our Saviour is greatly preferable; and it is clear that Colossians 1:15, Colossians 1:18 are illustrative of the nature, as Colossians 1:16-17 are an evidence of the pre-existence and divinity of Christ.""


John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

"the firstborn of every creature; not the first of the creation, or the first creature God made; for all things in Colossians 1:16 are said to be created by him, and therefore he himself can never be a creature; nor is he the first in the new creation, for the apostle in the context is speaking of the old creation, and not the new: but the sense either is, that he was begotten of the Father in a manner inconceivable and inexpressible by men, before any creatures were in being; or that he is the "first Parent", or bringer forth of every creature into being, as the word will bear to be rendered, if instead of we read which is no more than changing the place of the accent, and may be very easily ventured upon, as is done by an ancient writer (g), who observes, that the word is used in this sense by Homer, and is the same as "first Parent", and "first Creator"; and the rather this may be done, seeing the accents were all added since the apostle's days, and especially seeing it makes his reasoning, in the following verses, appear with much more beauty, strength, and force: he is the first Parent of every creature, "for by him were all things created", &c. Colossians 1:16, or it may be understood of Christ, as the King, Lord, and Governor of all creatures; being God's firstborn, he is heir of all things, the right of government belongs to him; he is higher than the kings of the earth, or the angels in heaven, the highest rank of creatures, being the Creator and upholder of all, as the following words show; so the Jews make the word "firstborn" to be synonymous with the word "king", and explain it by , "a great one", and "a prince" (h); see Psalm 89:27.

(f) De Mund. Opific. p. 6. de Plant. Noe, p. 216, 217. de Coufus. Ling. p. 341. de Somniis, p. 600. de Monarch. p. 823. (g) Isidior. Pelusiot. l. 3. Ep. 31. (h) R. Sol. Urbin. Ohel Moed, fol. 50. 1."

http://bible.cc/colossians/1-15.htm

If everything that was created and made were all created and made by Jesus then how could Jesus have being created unless He created Himself which is nonsense, Colossians 1:16 and John 1:3?

If Jesus is not God then what is the name that Matthew 28:19 speak of, and how do you explain 2 Peter 1:1 (New International Version) "Simon 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", and Titus 2:13 (New International Version) "while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ"?

http://vintage.aomin.org/GRANVILL.html


Athanasian Creed

Whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the catholic faith.

Whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally.

Now this is the catholic faith: We worship one God in trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being.

For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Spirit is still another.

But the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coeternal in majesty.

What the Father is, the Son is, and so is the Holy Spirit.

Uncreated is the Father; uncreated is the Son; uncreated is the Spirit.

The Father is infinite; the Son is infinite; the Holy Spirit is infinite.

Eternal is the Father; eternal is the Son; eternal is the Spirit: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited.

Almighty is the Father; almighty is the Son; almighty is the Spirit: And yet there are not three almighty beings, but one who is almighty.

Thus the Father is God; the Son is God; the Holy Spirit is God: And yet there are not three gods, but one God.

Thus the Father is Lord; the Son is Lord; the Holy Spirit is Lord: And yet there are not three lords, but one Lord.

As Christian truth compels us to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords.

The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten; the Son was neither made nor created, but was alone begotten of the Father; the Spirit was neither made nor created, but is proceeding from the Father and the Son.

Thus there is one Father, not three fathers; one Son, not three sons; one Holy Spirit, not three spirits.

And in this Trinity, no one is before or after, greater or less than the other; but all three persons are in themselves, coeternal and coequal; and so we must worship the Trinity in unity and the one God in three persons.

Whoever wants to be saved should think thus about the Trinity.

It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh.

For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, is both God and man.

He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother -- existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body; equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity.

Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ.

He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity.

He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures.

For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man.

He suffered death for our salvation. He descended into hell and rose again from the dead.

He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again to judge the living and the dead.

At his coming all people shall rise bodily to give an account of their own deeds.

Those who have done good will enter eternal life, those who have done evil will enter eternal fire.

This is the catholic faith.

One cannot be saved without believing this firmly and faithfully.


http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Statements-of-Belief/The-Athanasian-Creed.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed

gbrookes02: @TroGunn...God in His God nature is spirit thats what John 4:24 means. You have not dealt with John 2:19 when I said Jesus physical body was raised from the grave.
.......

John 2:19 proves nothing. It's another case of Trinitarians clutching at straws in trying to twist the Bible to support their man-made Creed by using a few scriptures that can be understood in more than one way.

Did Jesus statement mean he'll raise himself up? Not necessarily. Galatians 1:1 and many other scriptures clearly shows the Father raised Jesus from the dead - "Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead )".

Jesus' statement only showed his conviction that if he stayed the course and does not sin, God will be loyal and raise him up. Jesus had a vital part to play in his ressurection - he had to be faithful and stay sinless, and if he did his Father would surely keep his long foretold promise to raise him up.

A similar case is when Jesus said to a sick woman, who touched his garment: “Your faith has made you well.” Did she heal herself? No; it was power from God through Christ that healed her because she had faith. - Luke 8:46; Acts 10:38.

Another case is found at Ezekiel 43:3, where Ezekiel says "even according to the vision that I saw when I came to destroy the city”. But Ezekiel did not go to destroy Jerusalem; he only predicted the destruction of the city by the Babylonians. Yet he spoke of himself as doing it, because he was convinced it will happen, being as he was prophesying God's message. So Jesus could speak as though he was going to raise himself, yet actually he would be resurrected by God the Father.

Christians today who are determined to be faithful like Christ can speak with samilar conviction and be certain of the outcome - "And if the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, then the one who raised the Messiah from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive by his Spirit who lives in you". (Rom. 8:11)

Firstborn is firstborn. Just as Christ is "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God" - Rev 3:14. Christ has a beginning, God doesn't.

It's easier to believe the simple message in the Bible that tallies with the overall theme of the rest of the Bible than the convoluted man-made Creed you are so determined to stick to, and hope you can find support by twisting a few verses.

TroGunn:

John 2:19 proves nothing. It's another case of Trinitarians clutching at straws in trying to twist the Bible to support their man-made Creed by using a few scriptures that can be understood in more than one way.

Did Jesus statement mean he'll raise himself up? Not necessarily. Galatians 1:1 and many other scriptures clearly shows the Father raised Jesus from the dead - "Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead )".

Jesus' statement only showed his conviction that if he stayed the course and does not sin, God will be loyal and raise him up. Jesus had a vital part to play in his ressurection - he had to be faithful and stay sinless, and if he did his Father would surely keep his long foretold promise to raise him up.

A similar case is when Jesus said to a sick woman, who touched his garment: “Your faith has made you well.” Did she heal herself? No; it was power from God through Christ that healed her because she had faith. - Luke 8:46; Acts 10:38.

Another case is found at Ezekiel 43:3, where Ezekiel says "even according to the vision that I saw when I came to destroy the city”. But Ezekiel did not go to destroy Jerusalem; he only predicted the destruction of the city by the Babylonians. Yet he spoke of himself as doing it, because he was convinced it will happen, being as he was prophesying God's message. So Jesus could speak as though he was going to raise himself, yet actually he would be resurrected by God the Father.

Christians today who are determined to be faithful like Christ can speak with samilar conviction and be certain of the outcome - "And if the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, then the one who raised the Messiah from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive by his Spirit who lives in you". (Rom. 8:11)

Firstborn is firstborn. Just as Christ is "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God" - Rev 3:14. Christ has a beginning, God doesn't.

It's easier to believe the simple message in the Bible that tallies with the overall theme of the rest of the Bible than the convoluted man-made Creed you are so determined to stick to, and hope you can find support by twisting a few verses.

Shall we then say scripture contradict itself If Rev 3:14 is meant to be/say that Christ had a beginning, how then do we interpret Hebrews 7:3

New International Version (©1984)
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.

Goshen360:

Shall we then say scripture contradict itself If Rev 3:14 is meant to be/say that Christ had a beginning, how then do we interpret Hebrews 7:3

New International Version (©1984)
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.

Hmmmmm..

I thought you yourself made a write up about melchizedek??

ijawkid:


Hmmmmm..

I thought you yourself made a write up about melchizedek??

I know what you are saying.....quote me and let's debate it. Am ready interested in this your Jesus was created stuff. By the time we finish when I come online, you will be flat on the floor with all your theology punctured..... . I got load of scriptures for you but am a bit strong due to the cold. Hewever, I will respond to you when I wake up. In fact, I will love to engage a debate with you on "Jesus was created or exist eternally" on a new thread if you don't mind, so I can openly expose you.

Goshen360:

I know what you are saying.....quote me and let's debate it. Am ready interested in this your Jesus was created stuff. By the time we finish when I come online, you will be flat on the floor with all your theology punctured..... . I got load of scriptures for you but am a bit strong due to the cold. Hewever, I will respond to you when I wake up. In fact, I will love to engage a debate with you on "Jesus was created or exist eternally" on a new thread if you don't mind, so I can openly expose you.

No wahala.........

I ready.......

You haven't still actually told me how Jesus is your brother......

Food for thought bro....

Goshen360:

I know what you are saying.....quote me and let's debate it. Am ready interested in this your Jesus was created stuff. By the time we finish when I come online, you will be flat on the floor with all your theology punctured..... . I got load of scriptures for you but am a bit strong due to the cold. Hewever, I will respond to you when I wake up. In fact, I will love to engage a debate with you on "Jesus was created or exist eternally" on a new thread if you don't mind, so I can openly expose you.

you made it sound as though it is a threat?

Meanwhile the scriptures are staring you in the face that Jesus is the first born of all "creation"

who should we listen to?
You or the bible?

See how you contradict the bible with out of context scripture!

Hebrews chapter 7 is talking about the priest hood of Jesus, that it is in the manner of melchizedek not from father to son(without father and mother) and as such a direct appointment from God.

The reference of ETERNAL in this hebrews 7 is in reference to christ priest hood, how can you childishly attempt using it for trinity when we are not talking About priest Hood?

The maturity of reasoning of some of those in this forum is amazing.

If the bible contradict itself dont you think we should leave it?

*sigh*

truthislight:

you made it sound as though it is a threat?

Meanwhile the scriptures are staring you in the face that Jesus is the first born of all "creation"

who should we listen to?
You or the bible?

See how you contradict the bible with out of context scripture!

Hebrews chapter 7 is talking about the priest hood of Jesus, that it is in the many of melchizedek not from father to son(without father and mother) and as such a direct appointment from God.

The reference of ETERNAL in this hebrews 7 is in reference to christ priest hood, how can you childishly attempt using it for trinity when we are not talking About priest Hood?

The maturity of reasoning of some of those in this forum is amazing.

If the bible contradict itself dont you think we should leave it?

*sigh*

Goshen will also have to agree that melchizedek doesn't have a beginning...

Infact melchizedek is the almighty ....

Goshen360:

Shall we then say scripture contradict itself If Rev 3:14 is meant to be/say that Christ had a beginning, how then do we interpret Hebrews 7:3

New International Version (©1984)
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.

you are the one that just said "remained a priest for ever"

Goshen360:
like the Son of God[/b] he remains a priest forever.

if the bible says that you will remain forever, does it means that you have no begining. Psalm 37:29.

The bible does not contradict itself but wrong knowledge like this does.

That scripture was showing how great our new high priest(Jesus) is and you out of context carry it desperately and wish to use it for trinity.

Is it not when the priest hood of Aron stoped that christ priesthood began?

So, what kind of eternal are you wishing for?

Young man, dont shot yourself on the leg oh!

Hebrews 7 has nothing to do with trinity but rather refute trinity since christ will not be a priest unto himself just like he will not be a mediator unto himself.

He took over from Aron but on a higher level by direct appointment by God for the benefit of all of mankind.

Was the former priest Aron a priest unto himself?

Christ is not in equality to Yahweh but rather christ is appeasing the almighty Yahweh on our behalf.

FOR JOHN2:19,

We all know that
the Father raised Jesus from the
dead. And he is trying to tell us
that Jesus raised Himself from the
dead. Therefore He is the same
person as the Father. I wonder
what is the actual definition of

trinity.
Let me explain it to you because
you refuse to pay attention to
v21. 'The temple is in His body'.

Read this:
jn12:6-8
6 But i tell you that some thing
greater than the temple is
here....8 For Lord of the Sabbath is
what the Son of man is.
I hope you know that Christ is our
High priest. When He came,
everything the priest and
phareseas were doing in the
temple matters no more cos the
High priest has come. He controls
everything in the temple of God
as the High priest.
See what happened. In three days
God raised Him from dead and He
in turned raised the temple for
God as the High priest just as it is
the work of the priest, Levites etc
to raise/build a temple for God.
He is our High priest in service to
God. Read your Hebrew well.

This is the explanation for it

King James Bible
(Cambridge Ed.)
Without father, without
mother, without descent,
having neither beginning
of days, nor end of life;
but made like unto the
Son of God; abideth a
priest continually.
International Standard

Version (©2008)
He has no father, mother,
or genealogy, no birth
date recorded for him, nor
a date of death. Like the
Son of God, he continues
to be a priest forever.

Aramaic Bible in Plain
English (©2010)
Without his father and his
mother being written in
the genealogies, neither
having beginning of his
days nor end of his life,
but in the likeness of The
Son of God, his Priesthood
remains for eternity.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
(©1995)
No one knows anything
about Melchizedek's
father, mother, or
ancestors. No one knows
when he was born or
when he died. Like the
Son of God, Melchizedek
continues to be a priest
forever.

@Goshen360
these quotes above will also help you understand it better. When he appeared on earth, there is no record of him having a father, mother, genealogies, date of birth or date of death. But MADE like a Son of God and He is a priest of God forever.

frosbel:

Nothing betrays the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion’s or mainstream Christianity’s sandy Babylonian (Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy) foundations more than The Trinity Lie. It is the humdinger proof and magical link that ties in all the Protestant denominations (demon-inations) to this satanic money making organisation. These denominations (demon-inations) are just schisms or splinters, via the Protestant ‘protest’ – and a feeble protest at that against their mother in Rome. The VatiCain in Rome is the spiritual home of their whoring harlot mother and they are her slapper daughters – period, whether they like it or not and/or whether they are prepared to admit it or not. Indeed, some deluded adherents of these whoring counterfeit schisms, use Mickey Mouse mathematics in a pathetic attempt to prove that the trinity is true. Here is their ‘Einstein’ trinity equation: 1x1x1=1. Wow! I would cry with laughing if it were not so laughable and at the same time heinous in its deluded wretched sinfulness and wickedness.

http://beforeitsnews.com/religion/2012/09/exposing-the-trinity-lie-2443762.html?currentSplittedPage=0

So true. The Trinity teaching is of pagan roots.

But the writer above no sabi maths. 1x1x1=1 is actually correct mathematically. Trinity logic is actually 1+1+1 = 1 and it befuddles.