Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

May 27th, 2013, 2:10 am #21

If we must necessarily put away "Trinity" because that term does not exist in Scripture, then we must also put away the terms "Bible" and "Holy Bible," because those terms also do not exist in Scripture. Those two latter terms are man-made, yet we would never think of deleting them from our vocabularies, because they are well-accepted terms that do not violate any Scriptural principles. No, we can't use the it-ain't-in-Scripture bit against the "Trinity" unless we want to follow a double standard.

I do not believe calling Father, Son, and Holy Spirit the "Trinity" violates any Scriptural principles, given that we know they are not three physical persons. I also believe that it is unreasonable to reject the term "Trinity" just because the Catholics coined it. Early (Catholic) Church fathers like Chrysostom in the fourth century first referred to the Scriptures as ta biblia (the books) which evolved to "Bible" in English. So, if we reject "Trinity" because of the Catholic influence, then we must also reject "Bible" because of the SAME influence.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dr. Crump, it is OK to identify yourself in some other way. "B" was not addressability-friendly. Call yourself "Professor" perhaps? You are aware that we may address "Anonymous" as "Annie Mouse."

Putting away "Trinity" is not feasible; so, that's not going to happen. The use of the expression "Trinity" itself is not an issue until an investigation of the creed reveals that what it teaches regarding "the 3rd PERSON HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD" is NOWHERE found in the Scripture.

The use of the term "Bible" or "Holy Bible" is not analogous to the what the Trinity doctrine teaches. You know better than that.

What about dealing with this very specific issue -- DO YOU BELIEVE that God's holy spirit is another (a separate, the 3rd PERSON of the "Trinity") Divine Being? Please do not explain what others believe; rather, share with us what you believe.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

May 27th, 2013, 2:28 am #22

I knew that you can get a doctorate of theology (doctor of the law) without being able to read beyond 'proof texts.' Now, it seems you can be an M.D. and use your human imagination to write a prescription. Figures: "first we gonna pass it then we gonna read it--or not."

Sorry, I just felt like abusing old people.
Quote
Like
Share

Bill
Bill

May 27th, 2013, 2:56 am #23

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dr. Crump, it is OK to identify yourself in some other way. "B" was not addressability-friendly. Call yourself "Professor" perhaps? You are aware that we may address "Anonymous" as "Annie Mouse."

Putting away "Trinity" is not feasible; so, that's not going to happen. The use of the expression "Trinity" itself is not an issue until an investigation of the creed reveals that what it teaches regarding "the 3rd PERSON HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD" is NOWHERE found in the Scripture.

The use of the term "Bible" or "Holy Bible" is not analogous to the what the Trinity doctrine teaches. You know better than that.

What about dealing with this very specific issue -- DO YOU BELIEVE that God's holy spirit is another (a separate, the 3rd PERSON of the "Trinity") Divine Being? Please do not explain what others believe; rather, share with us what you believe.[/color]
Speaking strictly about terms, if we reject "Trinity" but accept "Bible," even though both terms are NOT found in the Scriptures, then we practice a double standard. If we reject "Trinity" because the early Catholics coined the term but accept "Bible," a term the early Catholics ALSO coined, we likewise practice a double standard. If we're going to teach anyone anything with credibility, we must first be consistent with our reasons for accepting or rejecting terms derived from a common origin.

Therefore, rejecting certain terms just because Catholics coined them or because they are not explicitly found in the Scriptures just doesn't cut the mustard. You know better than that.

I have no trouble with "Trinity," since I do not perceive Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three physical persons. Some may say, "No, no, 'Trinity' ALWAYS means three separate, independent, physical persons." Such a general assumption applies ONLY IF people do not further clarify how they perceive the "Trinity." I have clarified my own concept of the "Trinity" and am content to leave it at that.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

May 27th, 2013, 5:55 am #24

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill,

There's no agreement between us in terms of the direction in which this discussion is going.

No one argues the point that God's holy spirit cannot be a "physical" person. Of course, a spirit is not a physical person whether it is "the spirit of man" or "the spirit of God."

I am sorry, but you have not clarified your own concept of the "third member" of the "Trinity." I have asked you numerous times already a very specific question relative to that third member. You keep explaining everything else but that. So, I don't think I should be asking you that question anymore. I truly see no point in furthering this discussion with you.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Bill
Bill

May 27th, 2013, 12:27 pm #25

You're right: we don't agree. We each have our own perceptions about the term "Trinity." Is that to say one of us is right and the other is wrong? Not at all. I don't believe that our salvation absolutely hangs on how we perceive the term "Trinity" one way or another. At the Judgment, I cannot visualize God saying to some, "So, you believed the 'Trinity' consisted of three persons; I condemn you to hell!" OR saying to others, "Well, I see you rejected that 'Trinity' doctrine; welcome to paradise!" I do believe God would have us accept "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit," just as the Bible teaches, but to argue endlessly about whether or not they are three individual, separate, independent "persons" or three-in-one or one-in-three is vacuous and pointless IMO.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

May 27th, 2013, 5:27 pm #26

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill,

I believe that THE HOLY SPIRIT OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST is not a separate Divine Being. His spirit sanctifies just as His blood redeems. I do not believe that the blood of Christ is a separate Divine Being, either.

Here are some references to THE SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST:[/color]
  • [color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (Romans 8:9)[/color]

    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. (I Peter 1:11)[/color]

    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ... (Phil. 1:19)[/color]
    </li>
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Since we do not agree and you seem to have NO KNOWLEDGE of the passages above, explain why you believe that THE SPIRIT of Jesus Christ is a separate Divine Being.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

May 27th, 2013, 5:50 pm #27

The neo-trinity does not confess that the Man Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God: they confess God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. These all have their centers of consciousness or their own spirit: each has their own separate abilities needed for the dispensation of the Father, Dispensation of the Son and Dispensation of the Holy Spirit person.

You cannot affirm the word TRINITY in the LU sense of the Word without believing in THREE GODS: they are ONE only in that they are UNITED.

Acts 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.


You cannot be baptized INTO the Word or School of Christ if you DENY that MESSIAH came fully in the flesh: you are an AntiChrist. Jesus was not Messiah or Lord or Word until the ONE GOD "made him to be both Lord and Christ."

Blasphemy is also afoot by claiming that the enoch who had an Isaiah scroll (Bible) with him confessed that Jesus Messiah is the Son of God when latter day NON-readers refute that by saying: NO, he should have said that "I believe that Jesus Christ IS God."

If you no deny that confession the you have despised the Word and your own confession and the Spirit OF Christ in Jeremiah 23 calls that blasphemy and John marks you as an anti-Christ. Yes, it would be consoling if IT DON'T MAKE NO DIFFERENCE.

Moses promised Another Prophet Like Me: in that sense Moses was called "a god" but not Jehovah.

1Timothy 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God [Theos], and one mediator between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus;
1Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Last edited by Ken.Sublett on May 27th, 2013, 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

<:o~~~~
<:o~~~~

May 27th, 2013, 5:57 pm #28



=============================

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Well, Big Fish, some people need a vivid illustration to help them clearly understand the substance of a fallacious doctrinal argument. (A picture is worth a thousand words -- isn't that what they say?)

I think it took a while to search and find that illustration online. Someone must have thought, understandably so, that designating a masculine gender to an improper noun "spirit" can be illustrated in that manner. [/color]
Donnie, Mr. Sublett is very adamant and diligent in his work. Likely he poured over countless websites in his quest. I am sure he searched long and hard to find the perfect ..... illustration. Mr. Sublett enjoys his passions.

ps: Ken, I hope you take it in a spirit that it was given.



Quote
Share

Bill
Bill

May 27th, 2013, 6:03 pm #29

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill,

I believe that THE HOLY SPIRIT OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST is not a separate Divine Being. His spirit sanctifies just as His blood redeems. I do not believe that the blood of Christ is a separate Divine Being, either.

Here are some references to THE SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST:[/color]
  • [color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (Romans 8:9)[/color]

    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. (I Peter 1:11)[/color]

    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ... (Phil. 1:19)[/color]
    </li>
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Since we do not agree and you seem to have NO KNOWLEDGE of the passages above, explain why you believe that THE SPIRIT of Jesus Christ is a separate Divine Being.[/color]
What you believe about the Holy Spirit and the Trinity is fine. What I believe about them is also fine. Our perceptions differ, but that's also fine, because I don't believe this subject has anything to do with our eternal salvation. It is not advantageous for anyone to say that his/her viewpoint about the Holy Spirit is THE ONLY RIGHT ONE and every other viewpoint is absolutely false, because the New Testament does not command us to see the Holy Spirit this way or that way on penalty of damnation. Because I don't believe this topic pertains to salvation, it is academic IMO, meaning that it allows for arguments by those who enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing. There's also nothing wrong with that, unless either side becomes so arrogant and fanatical about his own viewpoint that he is intolerant of other views and shouts down or cuts off all who disagree with him. You can't have a decent dialogue with that kind of hostile environment.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

May 27th, 2013, 6:19 pm #30

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill,

I was speaking ONLY about "the holy spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ." I was asking you a very specific question as to why you believe that "the holy spirit of Christ" is a separate Divine Being.

I quoted passages regarding the spirit of Jesus Christ.

Please get to the point. Get busy with your study of the Bible and the online search features. I await your answer.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share