is the trinity a biblical doctrine?

Originally posted by drevill

God resurrected Jesus. He didn't resurrect Himself.

hello there cani have a scriptural reference to back that up please?

1 peter 1:[21] Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

1 thess 1:[9] For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;
[10] And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

col 2:[12] Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

eph 1:[17] That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
[18] The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
[19] And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to usward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
[20] Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,.

gal 1:[1] Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead

1 cor 6:[14] And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.

acts 13:[30] But God raised him from the dead:

acts 10:[40] Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;

acts 5:[30] The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

acts 2:[32] This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

clearly, god raised jesus, not jesus.

It was clear he was quoting Prophecy and for anyone that new their scripture it would have been a sign.

that is an extremely unreasonable thing to say.

as for Jonah

even jonah was freed by god, not his own doing.

reply to post by miriam0566


And this is why reading & studying the bible is so important, if you have been going to church and looking up the odd passage, and didn't know this, well, look at all the scriptures Miriam was able to use to answer that question, if you previously missed them all...it raises the question what else have you missed or are missing?

Worth thinking about.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by miriam0566

 

And this is why reading & studying the bible is so important, if you have been going to church and looking up the odd passage, and didn't know this, well, look at all the scriptures Miriam was able to use to answer that question, if you previously missed them all...it raises the question what else have you missed or are missing?

Worth thinking about.

sometimes it goes a step further. sometimes people miss the ¨meatier¨ things of the bible because they get hung up on one or 2 scriptures.

ive always thought of the bible as a rubik cube. there is only one possible ¨unlocked¨ state, if you dont have 6 sides that are all solid colors, then you havent solved it. simple as that.

john 10:[30] I and my Father are one.

there are 2 possible interpretations for this scripture. literal or figurative. either jesus is saying that he is god, or he means that he and god are united in a figurative in will and purpose much like a husband and wife can be ¨one flesh¨. one or two.

but this is only one side. so this and john 1:1 make and apparent red side for example.

yet luke 18:19 jesus is apparently denying being god.

john 14:28 jesus is saying that god is greater than him (something not possible if they are the same person)

luke 6:12 jesus prayed to god.

acts 4:27 the disciples refer to jesus as god's servant.

luke 22:42 says that god and jesus do not have the same will.

etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc [/take breath]

im just showing you literally a small fraction of the scriptures that show jesus to be a separate person from GOD.

saying that jesus is god, you got the one completed red side, what about the other 5 sides? yet, accepting john 10:30 as figurative (which jesus explains so in later verses) you get a completed rubiks cube. nothing conflicts and you can move on to "meatier" things about thier relationship.

like it was mentioned in another thread that jesus had a prehuman existence. revelation calls jesus the "beginning of god's creation" implying that he was the first entity created.

we can see that jesus has a very close relationship with his father. we can now understand how it must have hurt GOD to watch his son die. we can begin to appreciate jesus' ransom and not look at it as some inexplicable "mystery"

so, if your a trinitarian, and your flashing you one side you have completed... enjoy it, but you not really any closer to figuring it out. sorry

reply to post by miriam0566


1 peter 1:[21] Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Thanks for the reference, i asked for this becaus ei like to see where you are coming from.

Jesus raised himself

John 2:19-21 KJV

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

John 10:17-18 KJV

17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

or was it the holy spirit

Romans 8:11 KJV

But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

so here we have references to God the Father, God the holy Spirit and Jesus all doing the same thing

sorry but your comments after that i will answer later (have little ankle biter)

you said

sometimes it goes a step further. sometimes people miss the ¨meatier¨ things of the bible because they get hung up on one or 2 scriptures.

ive always thought of the bible as a rubik cube. there is only one possible ¨unlocked¨ state, if you dont have 6 sides that are all solid colors, then you havent solved it. simple as that.

i totally agree Miriam but i will bat that comment back to you also.

Somone once said to me that they could back up their church doctrine with the bible, yet it is not the same thing as the bible being your doctrine, is it now?

ill try to answer the other soon but if there is a delay my apologies. little Eli is quite an active 4 mth old:0)

all the best


David

Originally posted by drevill
reply to post by miriam0566

 

Romans 8:11 KJV

But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

so here we have references to God the Father, God the holy Spirit and Jesus all doing the same thing

i wanted to start with this one first. because it offers no proof to your argument whatsoever.

it specifically mentions the holy spirit doing the work. which you are correct, if jesus and god are the same then it would imply jesus raised himself

however you are simply assuming that is the case here. if you were to assume the opposite, it would work too.

god is god, and his spirit (his force or hand) resurrected jesus his son who is separate from him.

since this passage can go both ways, its pointless to bring it up (which is why i didnt)

John 10:17-18 KJV

17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

your focusing on "I have power to take it again" and your not including "i have the power to lay it down". if "having the power" is to mean that he actually raised himself, then that also means he killed himself because he also has the power to lay down.

to put it simply, he is not talking about the power to resurrect, he's actually talking about a right to live.

adam sinned and therefore deserved death. we through adam have been born into sin (romans), we deserve death too. jesus however was perfect. he never sinned so he deserved to live. it is a right he has and we dont.

for jesus to die, he had to consent. in this way, he had the power to "lay down". but because he would die perfect, he too have the right to be resurrected. in this respect too jesus had "the power to take it again"

since jesus would never literally kill himself, this is the only way this scripture can be interpreted

john 10:18 No one takes my life from me. I give my life of my own free will. I have the authority to give my life, and I have the authority to take my life back again. This is what my Father ordered me to do."
(GWT)

John 2:19-21 KJV

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

luke 8:48

did the woman heal herself? or did jesus?

i totally agree Miriam but i will bat that comment back to you also.

Somone once said to me that they could back up their church doctrine with the bible, yet it is not the same thing as the bible being your doctrine, is it now?

yes, but look at what you are doing in this thread. you are tossing scriptures away in favor of the scripture you think suit yourself.

if you let the bible determine doctrine, its clear that jesus and god are separate people. its the simplest and nonconflicting train of thought

reply to post by miriam0566


hello

please dont resort to the look at what you are doing line as anyone can state this.

you duck the spirit as you belive its force not a living thing with a personality.

reply to post by miriam0566

i wanted to start with this one first. because it offers no proof to your argument whatsoever

this was referring to all the scripture i quoted

your focusing on "I have power to take it again" and your not including "i have the power to lay it down". if "having the power" is to mean that he actually raised himself, then that also means he killed himself because he also has the power to lay down.

to put it simply, he is not talking about the power to resurrect, he's actually talking about a right to live.

that is nonsence miriam, you are the one that is now reading what you want into something. This is clear that it is talking about an ability and authority not a right.

this is clear when Jesus says it is a command from God the father, so it is in no way a right.

From Vines Dictionary: 1849 Authority, Noun, exousia denotes "authority" (from the impersonal verb exesti, "it is lawful"). From the meaning of "leave or permission," or liberty of doing as one pleases, it passed to that of "the ability or strength with which one is endued," then to that of the "power of authority," the right to exercise power, e.g., Matt. 9:6; 21:23; 2 Cor. 10:8; or "the power of rule or government," the power of one whose will and commands must be obeyed by others, e.g., Matt. 28:18; John 17:2; Jude 1:25; Revelation. 12:10; 17:13

If jesus is not God then John 10-18 offers a conflict of Authority, clearly Jesus states that he has the authority, yet says he is commanded so he hasn't. He says he lays it down of his own will you can only conclude as do most that the word here means an ability/authority not a right as you suggest.

reply to post by drevill


Have you read true biblical doctrine and not church doctrine? Jesus and God are not the same person. The Holy Spirit is God's power. You sound like you're trying to get milk from a turnip and it doesn't taste right in the cereal.

Originally posted by drevill
that is nonsence miriam, you are the one that is now reading what you want into something. This is clear that it is talking about an ability and authority not a right.

this is clear when Jesus says it is a command from God the father, so it is in no way a right.

From Vines Dictionary: 1849 Authority, Noun, exousia denotes "authority" (from the impersonal verb exesti, "it is lawful"). From the meaning of "leave or permission," or liberty of doing as one pleases, it passed to that of "the ability or strength with which one is endued," then to that of the "power of authority," the right to exercise power, e.g., Matt. 9:6; 21:23; 2 Cor. 10:8; or "the power of rule or government," the power of one whose will and commands must be obeyed by others, e.g., Matt. 28:18; John 17:2; Jude 1:25; Revelation. 12:10; 17:13

If jesus is not God then John 10-18 offers a conflict of Authority, clearly Jesus states that he has the authority, yet says he is commanded so he hasn't. He says he lays it down of his own will you can only conclude as do most that the word here means an ability/authority not a right as you suggest.

im sorry, but i find your argument utterly incoherent. your grasping at straws.

- you assert that jesus is god, yet the scripture clearly states that jesus is commanded by god. this contradiction passes completely unnoticed by you.

- you assert that "authority" to do something is in no way a "right" to do something, which just isnt true. "you have the right to remain silent" means that you have the authority and ability to not speak if you so wish. no policeman can take that right away. even your dictionary says "the right to exercise power, e.g., Matt. 9:6; 21:23; 2 Cor. 10:8;".

- you ignored the fault in you logic that i mentioned before. to take "I have power to take it again" to literally mean that jesus raised himself, then one HAS to interpret "I have power to lay it down" to mean that jesus also literally killed himself which is something he would not do.

so no, my argument is not "nonsense"

Originally posted by Locoman8
reply to post by drevill

 

You sound like you're trying to get milk from a turnip and it doesn't taste right in the cereal.

That's awesome.

I was recently reminded that the first so-called pagan/christian Emperor was
Constantine(306-337 CE) and the Council of Nicaea was during his reign in 325 CE. As Christianity was becoming legal in Roman society is when maximum infiltration, sabotage and apostasy of truth could be attained.
Since it's out of this time period this trinity doctrine was formulated, should not it at the very least, be suspect to a modern day challenge?

After all the church has been wrong before, for example when they burned so-called heretics like Michael Servetus alive at the stake. So yeah they can be wrong, don't you think?

by a blogger friend of mine:

Questions for Trinitarians

reply to post by Locoman8


hello there

i refer you to the answer i gave to miriam, you say i am doing something for which i could bat straight back to you

if you can name the church (denomination) i attend i will have look at your comment about the church, its a big comment based on assumption that you made

cheers

david

- you assert that jesus is god, yet the scripture clearly states that jesus is commanded by god. this contradiction passes completely unnoticed by you.

clearly it shows that the contridiction is not, i feel it is this that you are missing the truth here

John 3:13

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven

Genesis 17:22

And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.

seems clear to me one and the same and shows God can and has taken human form as no one has seen the father (John6:46)

Hebrews 1:5-6

for unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?


And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

God is not the author of confusion and he also will not allow worship of anyone else nor give his glory to another, so here we have a conflict again, unless Jesus is God in human form

Isaiah42:8

I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

proskuneo is the word in the NT that Jesus used to rebuke Satan and to worship the Lord God (Luke 4:8)

It is the same that is used when the disciples worshipped Christ after he walked on water and after the resurrection.

is Jesus a hypocrite? telling Satan that only God is worthy of Worship and accepting it himself or is he God in human form? i think he is God in human form.

Titus 2:13

Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;


david

reply to post by drevill

Isaiah42:8
I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

I think what this verse is talking about is the name, Jehovah. God does not allow someone else to take that name for themselves, and thus rob Him of the Glory that the name signifies and deserves.

Titus 2:13
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

This is talking about the same person. You have to realize that though it means one person, it is not talking about him as being God the Father. It does name him as Jesus and it does describe him as the Messiah. (You can understand the word “Christ” also as Messiah.) That is to say that he is someone who is able to have God dwell in him, to the extent that someone could point to him as being God.

John 3:13
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven

Jesus is not talking about going up and down. He says he is in heaven. What he means is that he knows spiritual things, not by going anywhere, but that part of his being is “heavenly”, or spiritual.


[edit on 30-4-2009 by jmdewey60]

Originally posted by drevill
you say i am doing something for which i could bat straight back to you

just because you can make a counter claim doesnt not automatically make that claim valid. you need to back that claim up with evidence and critical thinking.

you, unlike most people i have debated on this forum at least try to use the scriptures to back up your claims which i respect. however you fail to see the contradictions that your very claims make.

Originally posted by drevill
clearly it shows that the contridiction is not, i feel it is this that you are missing the truth here

John 3:13

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven

Genesis 17:22

And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.

seems clear to me one and the same and shows God can and has taken human form as no one has seen the father (John6:46)

interesting angle, one ive never seen before but its still flawed.

while genesis DOES specifically mention JEHOVAH as speaking with abraham in flesh form, but john 1:18 very explicitly and in no uncertain terms states that no man has seen god. john repeats later in his first letter chapter 4 verse 12.

moses (who wrote genesis) confirms this in exodus 33:20

[20] And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

does this contradict gen 17:22? not at all

there are many accounts in the bible of god being represented by an angel. obviously, while abraham was infact talking to god, we can see that is was through someone else.

second, we know with 100% certainty that john 3:13 is not referring to god. it refers to "man" and "son of man"

Numbers 23:19 “God is not a man...nor a son of man…”

Hosea 11:9 “...For I am God, and not man...”

Hebrews 1:5-6

for unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

God is not the author of confusion and he also will not allow worship of anyone else nor give his glory to another, so here we have a conflict again, unless Jesus is God in human form

you pick the word "worship" but you ignore the rest of the scripture. you especially ignore the part about him being called his son, and him being "begotten" or born from god and "firstbegotten".

this scripture clearly paints a picture of 2 separate people. a father and his son!

what you should be doing is investigating what god meant by worship. ill give you a hint, the greek word is "προσκυνησατωσαν".

Isaiah42:8

I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

proskuneo is the word in the NT that Jesus used to rebuke Satan and to worship the Lord God (Luke 4:8)

It is the same that is used when the disciples worshipped Christ after he walked on water and after the resurrection.

is Jesus a hypocrite? telling Satan that only God is worthy of Worship and accepting it himself or is he God in human form? i think he is God in human form.

you read the passage, but you just dont see what its saying.

isaiah is specifically referring to JEHOVAH, in fact in the original hebrew Jehovah would be there.

then you cross reference this with luke 4:8?

why would satan try to tempt god is god cannot be tempted? (james 1:13) and dont say jesus wasnt tempted, because he was (hebrews 4:15)

jesus then responded that he couldnt worship satan because he's suppose to worship himself?

then you make reference to "προσκυνησατωσαν" which i still suggest you look up.

Titus 2:13

Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

yes and your point is?

"great god" is one of many of jesus TITLES. yes, "God" in the bible is a title that means mighty one.

satan is called a "god" (2 cor 4:4)

men are called "gods" (psalms 82)

even lifeless idols are called "gods" (psalms 96:5)

jesus has many title, including "mighty god"

reply to post by miriam0566


hello

i think we are very opposite Miriam, i too respoect that you use scripture. The problem we have is that we both feel that each other is misunderstanding.

Its hard, also, to get the true emotion out of an email and can be misinterpreted,

All the best though, I think the triniity is done to death on here, would be nice to have a crack at something else..

david

reply to post by miriam0566


1 john 4:12

does God physically dwell in us? or is his love in us?

4:15 says God dwells in us. obviously God does not physically take up residence in us.

but here we also have Christ saying that we HAVE seen the father

John 14:9

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

IMHO no man has seen directly God the father, But as per previous post about Abraham men have seen him in another earthly/fleshly form.

David

reply to post by drevill


Jesus is saying this because, as being a son involves recieving attributes or genes from your biological father, looking upon the only begotten Son of God, you are looking upon God himself. The only thing God actually created Himself as the Word of God (Jesus) took on the role of creator on behalf of the Father.

reply to post by Locoman8


are you serious?

thats a poor reply Locoman, i did expect more than conjecture from you.

I think you need to re reply. I hardly think it comes down to genetics, i would have thought that Jesus does his fathers will so that he is reflected inhim would have been much better.

all the best

david

reply to post by drevill

but here we also have Christ saying that we HAVE seen the father

An attempt to reverse-engineer God would have to start with Jesus. He is the best expression of the nature of God that we are going to find.
There is a verse that says we see darkly, God. By beholding, we become more like him, and the more we change, the clearer a picture we have of what God is like. I think Jesus was expressing his disappointment with Philip over how he had not made much spiritual progress, though he was right there, as a witness to the manifestation of God, through the works of Jesus.
By the time that Jesus came into the world, people everywhere had come to a general understanding that there needed to be a mediator between a righteous God and sinful man. Jesus presented himself as the practical application to what before was only a philosophical concept.
Jesus did not come to explain himself to the doctors of philosophy, in order to give them a clearer picture of what that mediator was, exactly , that they had perceived had to exist, by their own reasoning. Jesus came and talked not about himself, but went ahead with what he had been sent to do, which was to give a real world presentation of God and how that God is not passive or detached, but took it upon Himself to do a marvelous work of redemption.

[edit on 3-5-2009 by jmdewey60]