It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is The Trinity Biblical?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by slymattb
Miriam if you can give some time what are your thoughts on what I have said just carious????


i think your holding the logical arguement.

if one were to read the bible without prior knowledge of the trinity, its hard to see how they would arrive at the conclusion of one. this simple fact eludes alot of people.

the bible in plain language denotes jesus and god as separate people.

the one scripture that confuses alot of people is "I and the father are one" found in john. but its funny, because if you read the passage, the jews thought jesus was blaspheming! the jews took the same reasoning the church today takes, except the church doesnt think its blasphemy. but jesus himself corrects their thinking a few verses down.

the amount of illogical thinking required to believe the trinity gives me a headache when i see people defend it tooth and nail.




posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60 The pagan ideas that were the foundation for the Trinity doctrine being developed, so many hundred years ago, may not be so influential, today.


but they are, the trinity is a doctrine that is basically unaltered from it's days in babylon. and millions of "christians" believe it and will defend whole heartedly. i would say that is very influential


The Greeks worried about things like differentiating between the Titans and the Gods, and came up with a principle of the un-changeable nature of God. So, they ended up with the necessity of Jesus being eternally God.
Now, we have the opposite concept gaining prominence, that God can change all He wants and could be the El of the Old Testament, at one time, and Jesus at another, without any contradiction of foundational beliefs. Thinking like this can calm a person's worries of damaging a strict monotheism, but you cause other theological problems that lead to having to ignore a lot of verses in the Bible.


think about this for a moment though, what does this have to do with truth? nothing. its all about catering to peoples wants. if you have pagans worshipping a tree ALL their life, its admittedly hard for them to come to grips with the idea that they have to stop. the priest santifying the tree and declaring it holy might make it easier for the pagan to "convert", but is it really bringing him closer to god? is his worship really acceptable to god?

jesusintruth thinks yes, and he uses the "binding" scripture to support his arguement, but what he fails to realize is that when jesus gave the keys, it was pertaining to the ministry. it was peter who would eventually open the preaching work to the samaritans, it was peter who opened the work to the gentiles. jesus wasnt giving permission to change god's standards, or to change god's truths.

if the isrealites died for worshipping ba'al (which some of the idols were made in god's name), why would he not be incensed with us if were are praying to a pagan trinity in his name?


My answer is I have no pagan beliefs (I was raised to be as adverse to pagan symbology, as much as any J's W*, with no cross on our Bible or on the church, no Easter or religious observance of Christmas or Sunday). I do not want to cater to the old pre-Christian paganism that I do not think is as big a problem as the post-Christian paganism that is creeping into dominance, with no concerted resistance from Christians, in general.


im not a JW as you already know, but i think your mistaken. post-Christian paganism is the same as the the paganism that started in babylon. its the same religion, but like the trinity, it has different names and forms.

if you get a chance (or if you can even find it) i recommend the 2 babylons by rev hislop. i think it was published in the late 1800's. the english is really difficult to understand but it really is a jewel of information when comparing pagan traditions today with those in ancient babylon, and how the church adapted them.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 06:21 AM
link   
Without wanting to be gauche, I find the following excerpt from an 18th c. text interesting. It is steeped in the tradition of alchemy and so inherits it's own interpretation of the trinity in contrast to that of religion, Christian or otherwise.

In the context of the text, "Nabu" is a "sage" who is imparting information to a student and in the process imparting information to the reader.


9. — So did Nabu advise that the greatest lesson that could be taught at this moment was the divinity of the triune as exemplification of all things created. 10. — That all creation and gifts of God apparent to man may be enumerated within the triune, alpha to omega, that man should hesitate to write the trinity with impunity. 11. — So let every man see the triune and remember that in that divine number is all things past present and future that all roads may lead from the formations of that great enumeration. 12. — This lesson is the first in principle and so describes the creation as sworn by the Watcher of Heaven as we know now. 13. — As has been shewn, did God exist in entirety yet this cannot be named or written by men for it is a sacred Word. 14. — So did the being of God become the first matter that in eventuality should we be able to ask and ponder the very presence. 15. — By divine manipulation of division was birth given to multiplication and in this do we see the very working of the world about us for does man not multiply by division?


The thought may be considered heretical and so dismissed by many without further thought, however, it does promote an interesting concept of the trinity as a symbol of creation itself.

Take what you will and ignore the rest.

[EDIT] Transcription errors - fingers and thumbs!

[edit on 28-10-2008 by SugarCube]



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 07:32 AM
link   
" You can't go scripture to scripture with me "

yea right. Kid listen, you are a circular argument, you completely skipped over many of my points and have an arrogance about your typing. Like I said you will find this out later hidden in your soul.


The trintiy is biblical, God did found a church and he did allow it to loose and bind things on Earth.


I can go scripture with scripture with your butt all day long, but that fact is that we both have different interpretations which is why God set up this church as well. So we will never agree.


You didn't even explain all the passages I gave which are plain as day, you are deverting to just saying.


" It's false yada yada.. "

" It sads me to see this "


I can say that all day long too and look like I win the argument, but you are a cirular argument which dreads me to deal with in these forums.



As for st Gemma, you don't know how good she was. She grew up Catholic, she had the stigmata and she gave her life for others. Your ass don't know her like that thank you.



When God said in john 3... which is the only passage you tried to explain.


" Those who come in God's name '


like I said, and seriously saying it again since you skipped it the first zillion times woman.


Jesus came as a servant but was equal to God. Scripture points this out. Also the fact that Thomas called Jesus lord and God.

Jesus is the lord of the sabbath

all things subject to christ

Christ and his saints.


Thomas didn't call satan nor was satan called God. thomas called Christ key word (his) God.

and no I don't want you to die, I want you to see what I see and you will soon. Soon the Lord will show you face to face and time will do what it will do.

until let's hope the readers are smart enough to realize what I'm saying.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 07:48 AM
link   
jesusintruth thinks yes, and he uses the "binding" scripture to support his arguement, but what he fails to realize is that when jesus gave the keys, it was pertaining to the ministry. it was peter who would eventually open the preaching work to the samaritans, it was peter who opened the work to the gentiles. jesus wasnt giving permission to change god's standards, or to change god's truths.



No Miriam, I think when Jesus gave the keys, he gave them the power to interpret scripture and tell us what is needed for salvation. And they are not changing it, what is truth anyways? The OT didn't contain hidden mysteries and truth back then, they contained commandments and doctrines but it wasn't the time for God to reveal others truths like the NT era, which is what the holy ghost did and they didn't change they ellaborated on the truths in a more deep way.


He said whatever you loose and bind on Earth.


why didn't he just say that whatever is in the bible?


Because he formed a hierarchy to interpret scripture, I can't believe how simple this is and people can't see it. agenda blinds common sense. Also the OT had a hierarchy and so does the NT.

and like I said, this church existed 1500 years before protestant interpretation was even a thought.

it's the bride of Christm it's the only church with a real communion, Baptist have communion too but it's different from ours, atleast they realize communion is biblical.

Daniel also mentions the sacrafice in the NT era. Antichrist will take it away soon.


But anyways 1 John is not the only thing to defend God, and niether is (I and the father are one )



Kinglizard, junglejake, where are you guys? Don't you also believe in the trinity.






[edit on 28-10-2008 by JesusisTruth]



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Btw Miriam I still love you to death and pray for you, please pray for me too. I suck and need many prayers.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by JesusisTruth
 

you completely skipped over many of my points and have an arrogance about your typing.

This may be none of my business, but what you might be taking as arrogance could be that English is a second language to her and Spanish people have a way of talking in a direct sort of way that may not be so familiar to you.
I find a lot of your "arguments" rather inexplicable so you may have to forgive her for not answering them.

note: I made a mistake in my last post because I copied it from a post I made on a "Lucifer" thread, on another forum. I had to change it to make it fit this thread and I goofed up.
It should read, "a comparison between the Antichrist and Jesus".


[edit on 28-10-2008 by jmdewey60]



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 

why would he not be incensed with us if were are praying to a pagan trinity in his name?

I was never taught to pray to a trinity. The trinity is not something that is emphasized in my church. The teaching of it is not too distant from what I am saying about it, that we recognize there are three persons, but we are adverse to the Roman idea of the Trinity and realize it is fatally flawed in its basic premises.
The Two Babylons is like a basic issue for SDA's and we all have read it several times and recognize that Babylonian paganism permeates Christendom, thanks to the overt sanctioning of paganism by the Church of Rome.
My point is that paganism has many facets, represented by many gods and an evolution of the various pantheons. If the messengers of disinformation can not get people hooked by one system, they will approach us with another system that might be more appealing to their self conceit.
What seems to me to be the most immanent danger of taking hold is this idea of a transitional trinity. What this is, is the concept that God was one person, at one time and then, transformed Himself into another form or person and then, when necessary, become a Third. My idea of how to combat this, is to say that there are three separate persons who exist independently and at the same time. My heresy, in many minds, is that I have to destroy the traditional Trinitarian concept of Unity of the Godhead because I think there is one person who is truly and completely God. The other two persons get their power and authority from the One and not from a source within themselves.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Lol Good job Jesusistruth lets ignore what God said. I knew you would do that. And you ignore what Jesus did and said. And like I said before I believe that their are saved people in all christian churches. Those that Truly believe that Jesus came die for their sins. And that Jesus is God's son. Which it says in the bible. And the communion is biblical I don't really know if this is true so please give me scripture and a tell me what it is.

Look man I don't want to argue. And I would like to remind you that you want to call me a kid, but I am not the one ignoring what God said or what Jesus said or did. How hard is that for you to understand?? "THIS IS MY SON WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED" come on man do you need better English?? Not to mention Jesus once said that he wanted us to come to him like a kid. Jesus was sent by God to do God's will not his own. And a servant must need a master for if he doesn't have one he is not longer a servant. Jesus did not come to serve himself. I like to point out that will Jesus was on earth while God was in heaven.

Any case I was defending Christianity against Islam believers. And I told the man this. Its better to have what God wants, than what your beliefs want or what your church wants. From the day that I heard of Trinity (which I might add I never heard off when reading the bible, I heard Trinity outside of the bible) I prayed that God show me the truth. And here and now if I am wrong God show me the path. I think you should do the same. Pray to God for the truth of Trinity. If you truly love God and want what God wants. Pray for the truth of who Jesus is and let God tell you. Don't ask me, let God speak to you. And if you don't pray for this, then you don't want what God wants. And that's you bad not mine. God Bless and go with his spirit.

[edit on 28-10-2008 by slymattb]



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by slymattb
 


And the communion is biblical I don't really know if this is true so please give me scripture and a tell me what it is.

Here is probably the best explanation of communion in the Bible.
1 Corinthians 11
23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
33Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
Paul is saying that they need to all wait until everyone can eat, at one time, to make it a proper Lord's Supper, instead of some people eating all the food before some people have a chance to have some.
It should be divided up for the group gathered, and people to be given out evenly.
Also they were to examine themselves before partaking, in order to not disrespect it.


[edit on 28-10-2008 by jmdewey60]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
It has always been known that you must partake in breaking of the bread and water but Catholics don't drink water. (I know from experience) Like said the bread is Christ flesh and the water is his blood symbolic I believe. And no where does it say it has to be given by a priest. It can be done by anyone thats a man of God. Or saved. I believe!



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by slymattb
 


It can be done by anyone thats a man of God.

Depends on whether you think it is a symbol and communion is an ordinance. Believing it is literal and a sacrament, requires a priest.
I do not see any good reason to go with the second view.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Where did ever did Christ say you need a priest?? He didnt. Jesus never said that you have to have a priest. So I still go with a true believer can bless the bread, water and food for that matter. (even make holy water) And I will still believe that until you show me scripture to believe otherwise! God bless (my bad if I sounds mean, I just getting to the point)

[edit on 29-10-2008 by slymattb]



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by slymattb
 

I go with the first view that the bread and wine are symbols. That view does not require a priest.
The other view is that the bread and wine become literally flesh and blood, does require a priest in order to effect the necessary transformation.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by JesusisTruth
yea right. Kid listen, you are a circular argument, you completely skipped over many of my points and have an arrogance about your typing. Like I said you will find this out later hidden in your soul.


no i have not skipped over your points. in fact every scripture you have brought up i have answered, and i have 3 threads that back me up on that statement. i submit that it is YOU who is ignoring comments.

you call my explanations "deverting" which is simply not true. its that you dont like what im saying. you dont want to hear that john 1:1 is a mistranslation because it goes against something you want to believe. you dont want to hear that 1 john 5 was changed after the 3rd or 4th century because it cuts out the backbone of your beliefs

i mean this with respect and love. your not reading the bible. you are forcing the passages into your view instead of letting them tell what they say. that goes beyond simple interpretation. your adding things to the scriptures (actually, the people who teach the trinity are the ones adding it, but you share in that by spreading it elsewhere).

dont you think if the trinity was actually true that scriptures like 1 john 5 would actually be real? in fact dont you think there would be more scriptures like it?

instead of believing what you are told, try finding out the truth from the source itself. ancient christians did that too.

acts 17:[11] These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.


As for st Gemma, you don't know how good she was. She grew up Catholic, she had the stigmata and she gave her life for others. Your ass don't know her like that thank you.


i read her tale. im sure she was a lovely person. but you asked me a question, and i answered it.


like I said, and seriously saying it again since you skipped it the first zillion times woman.


Jesus came as a servant but was equal to God. Scripture points this out. Also the fact that Thomas called Jesus lord and God.

Jesus is the lord of the sabbath

all things subject to christ

Christ and his saints.


and this is where you ignore the bible.

john 14:[28] Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is GREATER than I.

what part of this scripture is not clear?


nor was satan called God.


2 cor 4:[4] In whom the GOD OF THIS WORLD hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

are we reading the same bible? mine is king james...

because i dont remember jesus or GOD blinding anyone. satan too has the title of a god.


and no I don't want you to die, I want you to see what I see and you will soon. Soon the Lord will show you face to face and time will do what it will do.

until let's hope the readers are smart enough to realize what I'm saying.


this is the point that you dont seem to like. All truth can be derived from scripture. you dont need visions or to meet god to know what the truth is. its all in the bible. GOD is not imperfect so as to leave things out.


No Miriam, I think when Jesus gave the keys, he gave them the power to interpret scripture and tell us what is needed for salvation. And they are not changing it, what is truth anyways? The OT didn't contain hidden mysteries and truth back then, they contained commandments and doctrines but it wasn't the time for God to reveal others truths like the NT era, which is what the holy ghost did and they didn't change they ellaborated on the truths in a more deep way.


on the keys:

The questions therefore arise, What does Jesus mean when he says to Peter: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens”? (Matt. 16:19) What are the keys? How many are there? When were they used and for what? Who benefits from the use of the keys?

Jesus gave us a clue to what the keys open up when he said to the Jewish Pharisees: “Woe to you who are versed in the Law, because you took away the key of knowledge; you yourselves did not go in, and those going in you hindered!” (Luke 11:52) The keys, then, would have something to do with unlocking knowledge. They would unlock something that had been previously locked up for centuries. They would have to do with the sacred secret of God, his administration of the universe by his heavenly kingdom. (Rom. 16:25; Col. 1:26, 27) While faithful men of ancient times had looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and his kingdom, it was never understood by them that associated with him would be men taken from earth to heaven to be heavenly kings and priests. The apostle Paul explains the purpose of this sacred secret at Ephesians 1:9-12; 3:5, 6.

Since even the faithful prophets of old did not have this knowledge, when was it first opened up? When were the keys used and how many of them were there? In speaking of the sacred secret, notice that the apostle says that a feature of that secret was “that people of the nations should be joint heirs and fellow members of the body and partakers with us of the promise in union with Christ Jesus through the good news.” (Eph. 3:6) The “us” here would be Paul and his fellow Christian Jewish associates. He speaks here additionally of people of the nations as others to whom this knowledge would be opened. So there were two keys of the Kingdom, keys that unlocked knowledge. First, the Jews had the opportunity unlocked to them of entering into the heavenly kingdom and, second, the Gentiles were later invited to this great privilege.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
The Key was Jesus.
More specifically, the belief in Jesus. Without Jesus, we can not understand what the Old Testament is about.
The key is important because what you do with it now, has an influence on what happens to people in the future.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Didnt Miriam just point out that the key was knowledge??? or did I miss something!



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:42 AM
link   
well everyone has different opinions.

when the first key was used (by peter to whom they were given)


Accordingly, the greatest favor ever offered them was that which God held out to them a short time after Jesus’ death, at Pentecost, 33 C.E., for at this time Peter stood up and used the first of the keys of the Kingdom. There was a miraculous outpouring of the holy spirit upon the 120 disciples in the upper room, which brought the attention of a great crowd of the Jews gathered at Jerusalem for the Pentecost festival. By holy spirit Peter explained to these Jews that this miraculous occurrence was in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 and explained that Jehovah had resurrected Jesus and had exalted him to his right hand, giving him the promised holy spirit, which he was now pouring out upon the 120 disciples. Peter then unlocked the door for these Jews by saying to them: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.” (Acts 2:38) There were three thousand Jews that immediately grasped the opportunity for gaining the heavenly kingdom with the Messiah or Christ. Shortly after this the number grew to five thousand.—Acts 2:1-41; 4:1-4.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by miriam0566]



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:44 AM
link   
second key


How did it come about that Peter used the second key? Just as in the first instance holy spirit directed him, so in the second instance it was not his own idea. He did not bind up the opportunity exclusively for the natural Israelites until the end of the seventieth week. He did not loose the Gentiles from their restrictions to enter into the race for the heavenly Kingdom. All this was arranged in heaven first by God, not by Peter on earth, as the account of the facts shows.

There was a Gentile man, a devout worshiper of God but not a Jewish proselyte, a centurion named Cornelius. Exactly at the time of the end of the seventieth week, God by a vision and by his spirit instructed Peter to accept Cornelius’ invitation to his home in Caesarea, after Peter had hesitated. When Peter arrived and saw the Gentile people gathered there to hear the Kingdom message, he said: “For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial [now to the Jews], but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” Heaven thus directed Peter and he stood up and used the second key by preaching to those Gentiles about the Anointed One, Messiah the Leader, and how he died. He said: “God raised this One up on the third day and granted him to become manifest, not to all the people, but to witnesses appointed beforehand by God, to us, who ate and drank with him after his rising from the dead. Also, he [God] ordered us to preach to the people and to give a thorough witness that this [Jesus] is the One decreed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone [Gentile or Jew] putting faith in him gets forgiveness of sins through his name.”

The Gentiles listening accepted this Kingdom message with full faith, and God himself showed his approval of Peter’s use of the second key by his acceptance of the Gentiles to be grafted in to fill the places the Jewish nation had vacated. (Rom. 11:17-19, 24) The account reads: “While Peter was yet speaking about these matters the holy spirit fell upon all those hearing the word. And the faithful ones that had come with Peter who were of those circumcised were amazed, because the free gift of the holy spirit was being poured out also upon people of the nations. For they heard them speaking with tongues and glorifying God [like on the day of Pentecost].” Peter acted on this indication from God by informing these Gentiles what to do, saying: “Can anyone [Jewish] forbid water so that these might not be baptized who have received the holy spirit even as we [natural Jews] have?” No circumcised Jew present forbidding, Peter “commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.”—Acts 10:1-48; 15:7-9.


no more keys


The question arises, Did Peter continue to carry these keys of the Kingdom around with him to open to those whom he would and to close to others the opportunities for entering the Kingdom? Are there more keys besides the two? The answers are shown in the following facts. Up to this time God had divided up mankind into just two classes: the Jews, whom he dealt with as his special people, and the people of the nations, the Gentiles. So only two keys were needed. Neither could Peter use the keys further, for the door was opened to both Jews and Gentiles now. In using the second key Peter did not shut the door to the Jews but merely opened up the opportunity to the Gentiles as well as Jews. From this time on, Jews and Gentiles were on the same basis as to opportunities of entering into Kingdom privileges. There was therefore no need for further keys and neither could Peter close or lock the door of opportunity thus opened, for the two keys were to unlock, not to lock up Kingdom opportunities.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:50 AM
link   
If the doors were open to gentile and Jew, why did God say that in the first place?

He should of just said.

" To thee I don't give no keys, but they are already open "

But he said that because he's signifying that the Church would interpret scripture and loose doctrines on Earth which is what happened. Lose and bind on Earth.

furthermore h'es also talking about holy communion.

peace.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join