God, one person, or three?

by slimboyfat 49 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • aqwsed12345
    aqwsed12345
    @slimboyfat
    "Neither the phrase nor the concept “in regard to his humanity” occurs in Philippians 2"

    You really love "argument from silence". Since the Philippians 2 hymn specifically speaks of the Son's self-emptying (kenosis), becoming man, his death, and his subsequent exaltation, it is of course that this refers to his human nature.

    "But supposing he did say that, then Jesus' humanity would be deified along with his divinity. There would be no human Jesus left."

    No, the exaltation of Christ does not mean that He has ceased to be human, but that "Jesus Christ, forty days after His resurrection, ascended of Himself into heaven in the sight of His Apostles; and that while as God He was equal to His Father in glory, as man He has been raised above all the Angels and Saints, and constituted Lord of all things." (Catechism of St. Pius X) He exalted him also in his humanity, so according to his human nature. As God, he could not be exalted more. The exaltation of Jesus Christ not only means that he returned to the glory he had before the Incarnation (verse 6), but also that the human nature of Jesus Christ was glorified, which was the instrument of his humility. Although he received the title "The Lord" as a human also, but by this his human nature did not become God (because there can be no change in God), so it means sharing in the divine glory. “The humanity of Christ is a creature, it is not God” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 922).

    "the Bible doesn’t bend to fit the shape of Trinity dogma."

    There is no need to "bend" anything here, since the Bible does not teach that the Father created/made the Son, but that he gave birth/begotten him, and that the Son is God, not an archangel, and not even the Arians claimed that the Holy Spirit was the same as the power/force (dynamis) of God. How could the Holy Spirit be the same as power (dynamis), when the Spirit himself has power (Lk 4:14, Rom 15:13,19, 1 Cor 2:4), and with His power, He can fill beings (Mic 3:8 cf. Acts 1:8). The power of power? :D

    "the Trinity was a later development"

    It's absurd and even ridiculous to have a tantrum of the alleged "later development" on the part of a denomination that was established almost two thousand years after the Bible was written, and every few decades even its own publications are considered obsolete, as it constantly changes its doctrines.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    It's kinda, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, isn't it.

    I mean, why limit it to one or three? Couldn't a godhead include 10 persons?

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete
    I mean, why limit it to one or three? Couldn't a godhead include 10 persons?

    Or thousands.

    The full list of Hindu gods and goddesses includes thousands of deities, each one representing a certain aspect of the Supreme Absolute, which is known as Brahman. Because they are all manifestations of the same divine spirit, these forms of Brahman are different in essence from the gods of ancient Greek and Roman religion, two of the more famous examples of polytheism. Why Do Hindus Have Multiple Gods? (learnreligions.com)
  • Earnest
    Earnest
    aqwsed12345 : But anyway, as John 20:28 shows, He was Lord and God even before that, considering His divine nature.

    John 20:27 "Next he said to Thomas: “Put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop doubting but believe.”"

    aqwsed12345 : Although he received the title "The Lord" as a human also, but by this his human nature did not become God (because there can be no change in God), so it means sharing in the divine glory. “The humanity of Christ is a creature, it is not God” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 922).
  • Rivergang
    Rivergang

    Don't expect this 1500 year-long argument to be resolved any time soon!

  • Halcon
    Halcon
    more precisely, this is accepted by people like Dan Brown and other anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, atheist, often communist authors who want to prove at all costs that mainstream Christianity is just a collection of stupid legends, and these poor imbeciles couldn't come up with anything on their own.

    aqwsed

    The 'argument from authority ' is PRECISELY what you use when you quote all of your sources of authority to attempt to explain ONE simple verse that contradicts the Trinity doctrine. Why are your sources valid but not the ones I and others on this thread referred to?

    And when you render ALL of the observations made by all the historians and scholars regarding the undebatable influence Greek philosophy has on Christianity as fodder for Dan Brown (I'm assuming you're referring to the Davinci Code guy), you are no different than the next fanatical defender at all costs of their religion.

    Talk about a conspiracy theory.

  • Pronger1
    Pronger1

    At every turn the NT text demonstrates that the Trinity was a later development that the Bible writers knew nothing about.”

    If you ignore the verses that call the Father God, Jesus God and the Holy Spirit God.

    Polycarp (AD 69-155)

    Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal high priest himself, the Son of God Jesus Christ, build you up in faith and truth...and to us with you, and to all those under heaven who will yet believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ and in his Father who raised him from the dead.(1)

    Ignatius of Antioch (AD 50-117)

    Ignatius, who is also Theophorus, unto her which hath been blessed in greatness through the plentitude of God the Father; which hath been foreordained before the ages to be for ever unto abiding and unchangeable glory, united and elect in a true passion, by the will of the Father and of Jesus Christ our God; even unto the church which is in Ephesus [of Asia], worthy of all felicitation: abundant greeting in Christ Jesus and in blameless joy.(2)

    Being as you are imitators of God, once you took on new life through the blood of God you completed perfectly the task so natural to you.(3)

    There is only one physician, who is both flesh and spirit, born and unborn, God in man, true life in death, both from Mary and from God, first subject to suffering and then beyond it, Jesus Christ our Lord.(4)

    For our God, Jesus the Christ, was conceived by Mary according to God’s plan, both from the seed of David and of the Holy Spirit.(5)

    Consequently all magic and every kind of spell were dissolved, the ignorance so characteristic of wickedness vanished, and the ancient kingdom was abolished when God appeared in human form to bring the newness of eternal life.(6)

    For our God Jesus Christ is more visible now that he is in the Father.(7)

    I glorify Jesus Christ, the God who made you so wise, for I observed that you are established in an unshakable faith, having been nailed, as it were, to the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ.(8)

    Wait expectantly for the one who is above time: the Eternal, the Invisible, who for our sake became visible; the Intangible, the Unsuffering, who for our sake suffered, who for our sake endured in every way.(9)

    Justin Martyr (AD 100-165)

    And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush, so also was manifested at the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully by what has been said.(10)

    Permit me first to recount the prophecies, which I wish to do in order to prove that Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts.(11)

    Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Jesus] is witnessed to by Him [the Father] who established these things, as deserving to be worshiped, as God and as Christ.(12)

    The Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God. And of old He appeared in the shape of fire and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to the other prophets; but now in the times of your reign, having, as we before said, become Man by a virgin...(13)

    For if you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God.(14)

    Melito of Sardis (AD ?-180)

    He that hung up the earth in space was Himself hanged up; He that fixed the heavens was fixed with nails; He that bore up the earth was born up on a tree; the Lord of all was subjected to ignominy in a naked body—God put to death!.... [I]n order that He might not be seen, the luminaries turned away, and the day became darkened—because they slew God, who hung naked on the tree.... This is He who made the heaven and the earth, and in the beginning, together with the Father, fashioned man; who was announced by means of the law and the prophets; who put on a bodily form in the Virgin; who was hanged upon the tree; who was buried in the earth; who rose from the place of the dead, and ascended to the height of heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father.(15)

    Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 130-202)

    For I have shown from the Scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth. Now, the Scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like others, He had been a mere man.... He is the holy Lord, the Wonderful, the Counselor, the Beautiful in appearance, and the Mighty God, coming on the clouds as the Judge of all men;—all these things did the Scriptures prophesy of Him.(16)

    He received testimony from all that He was very man, and that He was very God, from the Father, from the Spirit, from angels, from the creation itself, from men, from apostate spirits and demons.(17)

    Christ Jesus [is] our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father.(18)

    Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spoke to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers.(19)

    Carefully, then, has the Holy Ghost pointed out, by what has been said, His birth from a virgin, and His essence, that He is God (for the name Emmanuel indicates this). And He shows that He is a man.... [W]e should not understand that He is a mere man only, nor, on the other hand, from the name Emmanuel, should suspect Him to be God without flesh.(20)

    Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215)

    This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first (for He was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, He alone being both, both God and man—the Author of all blessings to us; by whom we, being taught to live well, are sent on our way to life eternal.... The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught us to live well when He appeared as our Teacher that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never ends(21)

    For it was not without divine care that so great a work was accomplished in so brief a space by the Lord, who, though despised as to appearance, was in reality adored, the expiator of sin, the Savior, the clement, the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God...(22)

    Tertullian (AD 150-225)

    For God alone is without sin; and the only man without sin is Christ, since Christ is also God.(23)

    Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled.... That which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one. In this way also, as He is Spirit of Spirit and God of God, He is made a second in manner of existence—in position, not in nature; and He did not withdraw from the original source, but went forth. This ray of God, then, as it was always foretold in ancient times, descending into a certain virgin, and made flesh in her womb, is in His birth God and man united.(24)

    Bear always in mind that this is the rule of faith which I profess; by it I testify that the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit are inseparable from each other , and so will you know in what sense this is said. Now, observe, my assertion is that the Father is one, and the Son one, and the Spirit one, and that they are distinct from each other. This statement is taken in a wrong sense by every uneducated as well as every perversely disposed person, as if it predicated a diversity, in such a sense as to imply a separation among the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit. I am, moreover, obliged to say this, when they contend for the identity of the Father and Son and Spirit, that it is not by way of diversity that the Son differs from the Father, but by distribution: it is not by division that He is different, but by distinction; because the Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being. For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: “My Father is greater than I.” In the Psalm His inferiority is described as being “a little lower than the angels.” Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and He who is begotten is another; He, too, who sends is one, and He who is sent is another; and He, again, who makes is one, and He through whom the thing is made is another. Happily the Lord Himself employs this expression of the person of the Paraclete, so as to signify not a division or severance, but a disposition (of mutual relations in the Godhead); for He says, “I will pray the Father, and He shall send you another Comforter...even the Spirit of truth,” thus making the Paraclete distinct from Himself, even as we say that the Son is also distinct from the Father; so that He showed a third degree in the Paraclete, as we believe the second degree is in the Son, by reason of the order observed in the Economy. Besides, does not the very fact that they have the distinct names of Father and Son amount to a declaration that they are distinct in personality?(25)

    As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.(26)

    Hippolytus of Rome (AD 170-235)

    The Logos alone of this God is from God himself; wherefore also the Logos is God, being the substance of God.(27)

    For, lo, the Only-begotten entered, a soul among souls, God the Word with a (human) soul. For His body lay in the tomb, not emptied of divinity; but as, while in Hades, He was in essential being with His Father, so was He also in the body and in Hades. For the Son is not contained in space, just as the Father; and He comprehends all things in Himself.(28)

    For all, the righteous and the unrighteous alike, shall be brought before God the Word.(29)

    Let us believe then, dear brethren, according to the tradition of the apostles, that God the Word came down from heaven, (and entered) into the holy Virgin Mary, in order that, taking the flesh from her, and assuming also a human, by which I mean a rational soul, and becoming thus all that man is with the exception of sin, He might save fallen man, and confer immortality on men who believe on His name.... He now, coming forth into the world, was manifested as God in a body, coming forth too as a perfect man. For it was not in mere appearance or by conversion, but in truth, that He became man. Thus then, too, though demonstrated as God, He does not refuse the conditions proper to Him as man, since He hungers and toils and thirsts in weariness, and flees in fear, and prays in trouble. And He who as God has a sleepless nature, slumbers on a pillow.(30)

    Origen (AD 185-254)

    Jesus Christ...in the last times, divesting Himself (of His glory), became a man, and was incarnate although God, and while made a man remained the God which He was.(31)

    Seeing God the Father is invisible and inseparable from the Son, the Son is not generated from Him by “prolation,” as some suppose. For if the Son be a “prolation” of the Father (the term “prolation” being used to signify such a generation as that of animals or men usually is), then, of necessity, both He who “prolated” and He who was “prolated” are corporeal. For we do not say, as the heretics suppose, that some part of the substance of God was converted into the Son, or that the Son was procreated by the Father out of things non-existent, i.e., beyond His own substance, so that there once was a time when He did not exist.... How, then, can it be asserted that there once was a time when He was not the Son? For that is nothing else than to say that there was once a time when He was not the Truth, nor the Wisdom, nor the Life, although in all these He is judged to be the perfect essence of God the Father; for these things cannot be severed from Him, or even be separated from His essence.(32)

    For we who say that the visible world is under the government to Him who created all things, do thereby declare that the Son is not mightier than the Father, but inferior to Him. And this belief we ground on the saying of Jesus Himself, “The Father who sent Me is greater than I.” And none of us is so insane as to affirm that the Son of man is Lord over God. But when we regard the Savior as God the Word, and Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Truth, we certainly do say that He has dominion over all things which have been subjected to Him in this capacity, but not that His dominion extends over the God and Father who is Ruler over all.(33)

    Wherefore we have always held that God is the Father of His only-begotten Son, who was born indeed of Him, and derives from Him what He is, but without any beginning, not only such as may be measured by any divisions of time, but even that which the mind alone can contemplate within itself, or behold, so to speak, with the naked powers of the understanding.(34)

    But it is monstrous and unlawful to compare God the Father, in the generation of His only-begotten Son, and in the substance of the same, to any man or other living thing engaged in such an act; for we must of necessity hold that there is something exceptional and worthy of God which does not admit of any comparison at all, not merely in things, but which cannot even be conceived by thought or discovered by perception, so that a human mind should be able to apprehend how the unbegotten God is made the Father of the only-begotten Son. Because His generation is as eternal and everlasting as the brilliancy which is produced from the sun. For it is not by receiving the breath of life that He is made a Son, by any outward act, but by His own nature.(35)

    And that you may understand that the omnipotence of Father and Son is one and the same, as God and the Lord are one and the same with the Father, listen to the manner in which John speaks in the Apocalypse: “Thus saith the Lord God, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” For who else was “He which is to come” than Christ? And as no one ought to be offended, seeing God is the Father, that the Savior is also God; so also, since the Father is called omnipotent, no one ought to be offended that the Son of God is also called omnipotent.(36)

    The majority of these were taken from Early Christian Writings

    1. Polycarp, Philippians, 12:2. ↩
    2. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 0.0. (This is the Greeting.) ↩
    3. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 1.1. ↩
    4. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 7.2. ↩
    5. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 18.2. ↩
    6. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 19.3. ↩
    7. Ignatius, Letter to the Romans, 3.3. Holmes, AF, 229. ↩
    8. Ignatius, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 1.1. Holmes, AF, 249. ↩
    9. Ignatius, Letter to Polycarp, 3.2. Holmes, AF, 265. ↩
    10. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 128. Translation from Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, I:264. ↩
    11. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 36. ANF, I:212. ↩
    12. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 63. ANF, I:229. ↩
    13. Justin Martyr, First Apology, 63. ANF, I:184. ↩
    14. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 126. ANF, I:263. ↩
    15. Melito, 5. ↩
    16. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.19.2. ↩
    17. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.6.7. ↩
    18. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.10.1. ↩
    19. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.5.2. ↩
    20. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.21.4. ↩
    21. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen, 1. ↩
    22. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen, 10. ↩
    23. Tertullian, Treatise on the Soul, 41. ↩
    24. Tertullian, Apology, 21. ↩
    25. Tertullian, Against Praxeas, chapter 9. ↩
    26. Tertullian, Against Praxeas, chapter 2. ↩
    27. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 10.29. ↩
    28. Hippolytus, Exegetical Fragments from Commentaries, On Luke, Chapter 23. ↩
    29. Hippolytus, Against Plato, Section 3. ↩
    30. Hippolytus, Against the Heresy of one Noetus, Section 17. ↩
    31. Origen, De Principiis, Preface, 4.  ↩
    32. Origen. Contra Celsus, Book 5, Chapter 11.  ↩
    33. Origen, Contra Celsus Book 8, Chapter 15.  ↩
    34. Origen, De Principiis, Book 1, Chapter 2, Section 2.  ↩
    35. Origen, De Principiis, Book 1, Chapt
  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    It strikes me that a lot of the argument about this is based upon the idea that the Bible Writers were inspired and had knowledge from god, therefore we have to argue that because one Scripture says thus and so, another Writer could not have thought differently.

    The Bible is not inspired in any way, so we cannot take what is an Anthology of Writings from very different times in history, and in religious Thought, and try to make sense of it as a whole.

    The Bible Writers had their own concepts of Theology, and later of Christology, often very different and in tension with the thoughts of other Writers.

    The very basis for the Trinity Doctrine can be traced back to the ideas that the Jewish Educated Elite encountered and adopted while in Exile in Babylon, the concept of Hypostasis was not foreign to them, so the three in one, ousia or substance of a deity is not some new 3rd Century C.E idea at all.

    What has complicated matters is anthropomorphising each "substance" or "essence" of the Deity to make them three different individuals within one "Godhead", a concept because of its muddled constituent parts, is difficult for us to process.

    It would have been far easier for Christianity if had stuck to the more understandable concept of god that the Jews had, and if Christians hadn't tried to graft in the Jesus Figure to the person of YHWH.

  • Rattigan350
    Rattigan350

    If one is good, two are better, why stop at 3? Why not 7 persons in one being?

    The thing that they don't realize is that the trinity is something that they learn from their pastors who learn it from the council of Nicea, which was the man of lawlessness. It is not something that people learn from reading the Bible.

    People will connect John 8:58 with Ex 3:!4 I wonder who came up with that? Paul was good at making such connections, but he did not make that connection.

    The fact that Jesus was the priest and mediator between God and man shows he can not be God.

    I really hate the word "Godhead'. What does that even mean? It shows that the KJV and its derivatives do not care about relaying proper meaning if they use words without a meaning.

  • Rattigan350
    Rattigan350

    Vanderhoven said "JWs have an unrelatable Jesus that you cannot come to and share your burdens with"

    Speak for yourself . JWs believe that Jesus is the one through whom we pray, and he is our priest that approaches Jehovah for us. We don't want a relationship with Jesus, we want one with Jehovah.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit