N
- Status
R
read_me
Guest
can you show me verses in the bible? that you will show is that said “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”?? but the fact that, is there any saying that the father and the son and the holy spirit is a one god? is this verse the proof of that so called trinity? Pls. search about the history of the trinity so you may know about the truth behind that. And the INC doesnt have the doctrine at the first place, that the founder of our church is Ka felix manalo, and Pls. search again the internet so you may know about the INC. (Even you know the true doctrines of INC but you are only denying it and making lies to have negative mind to others about the INC.)
"How can the trinity a doctrine of the apostles or from the bible if it only shows in the 4th century? and that is there are many controversies happen about that doctrine in the time when it is making "
R
read_me
Guest
from wikipedia:
“In 325, the Council of Nicaea adopted a term for the relationship between the Son and the Father that from then on was seen as the hallmark of orthodoxy; it declared that the Son is “of the same substance” (ὁμοούσιος) as the Father.”
“Saint Athanasius, who was a participant in the Council, stated that the bishops were forced to use this terminology, which is not found in Scripture, because the Biblical phrases that they would have preferred to use were claimed by the Arians to be capable of being interpreted in what the bishops considered to be a heretical sense…”
“the Trinity took place in the 4th century, with a group of men known as the Church Fathers.”
“The Nicene Creed, which is a classic formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity, uses “homoousios” (Greek for “of the same essence”) of the relation of the Son’s relationship with the Father…”
search for more…
C
Canto
Guest
The Word [God] was made flesh [Jesus]. Jesus is in the Father and the Father is in Jesus. Same person with the same Spirit.
Why do you need a Bible verse to prove the Trinity anyway? Where is the verse that tell’s us that all doctrines are in the Bible alone? Where’s the verse that tells us what books should be included in the New Testament?
St Thomas called Jesus my Lord and my God.
James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble.
Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him: The first commandment of all is, Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one God.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Yes, I have read the NT even more than several times. You say “there are plenty of eyewitnesses to the resurrection.” Go ahead and show me one; just one. If you show me one eyewitness to the resurrection of Jesus, you have succeeded to make a Catholic out of a Jew. I’ll give you my word of honor.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Sorry pal, but you are trying to cheat on me. Show me the quotations in your own NT asserting that John, Matthew and Peter were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ resurrection or you have done nothing.St. John? St. Matthew? St. Peter?
BTW, Ben, you never cease to crack me up!
C
Canto
Guest
John 20:16 Jesus saith to her: Mary. She turning, saith to him: Rabboni (which is to say, Master).
17 Jesus saith to her: Do not touch me: for I am not yet ascended to my Father. But go to my brethren and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and to your God.
18 Mary Magdalen cometh and telleth the disciples: I have seen the Lord; and these things he said to me.
25 The other disciples therefore said to him: We have seen the Lord. But he said to them: Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails and put my finger into the place of the nails and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.
26 ¶ And after eight days, again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst and said: Peace be to you.
27 Then he said to Thomas: Put in thy finger hither and see my hands. And bring hither the hand and put it into my side. And be not faithless, but believing.
28 Thomas answered and said to him: My Lord and my God.
29 Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen and have believed.
John 21:17 He [Jesus] said to him the third time: Simon [Peter], son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.
18 Amen, amen, I say to thee, When thou wast younger, thou didst gird thyself and didst walk where thou wouldst. But when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee and lead thee whither thou wouldst not.
19 And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had said this, he saith to him: Follow me.
C
Canto
Guest
In 325, the Council of Nicaea…
In 382 AD the Council of Rome came up with the canon of books for the Bible decreed by Pope Damascus.
the canon of the Bible took place in the 4th century, with a group of men known as the Church Fathers
So…
Our teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar; and that we reasonably worship Him, having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third, we will prove." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 13 (A.D. 155).
“For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, ‘Let Us make man after Our image and likeness;’ He taking from Himself the substance of the creatures [formed], and the pattern of things made, and the type of all the adornments in the world.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4,20:1 (A.D. 180).
“In the course of time, then, the Father forsooth was born, and the Father suffered, God Himself, the Lord Almighty, whom in their preaching they declare to be Jesus Christ. We, however, as we indeed always have done and more especially since we have been better instructed by the Paraclete, who leads men indeed into all truth), believe that there is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or oikonomia, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her–being both Man and God, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead; who sent also from heaven from the Father, according to His own promise, the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. That this rule of faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older heretics, much more before Praxeas, a pretender of yesterday, will be apparent both from the lateness of date which marks all heresies, and also from the absolutely novel character of our new-fangled Praxeas.” Tertullian, Against Praxeas, 2 (post A.D. 213).
"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 (extolling the Monarchy at the expense of the Economy) 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.” Tertullian, Against Praxeas, 9 (post A.D. 213).
C
Canto
Guest
“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 San amount to a declaration that they are distinct in personality? For, of course, all things will be what their names represent them to be; and what they are and ever will be, that will they be called; and the distinction indicated by the names does not at all admit of any confusion, because there is none in the things which they designate. “Yes is yes, and no is no; for what is more than these, cometh of evil.” Tertullian, Against Praxeas, 9 (post A.D. 213).
“[T]he statements made regarding Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are to be understood as transcending all time, all ages, and all eternity. For it is the Trinity alone which exceeds the comprehension not only of temporal but even of eternal intelligence; while other things which are not included in it are to be measured by times and ages.” Origen, First Principles, 4:28 (A.D. 230).
""Next, I may reasonably turn to those who divide and cut to pieces and destroy that most sacred doctrine of the Church of God, the Divine Monarchy, making it as it were three powers and partitive subsistences and god-heads three. I am told that some among you who are catechists and teachers of the Divine Word, take the lead in this tenet, who are diametrically opposed, so to speak, to Sabellius’s opinions; for he blasphemously says that the Son is the Father, and the Father the Son, but they in some sort preach three Gods, as dividing the sacred Monad into three subsistences foreign to each other and utterly separate. For it must needs be that with the God of the Universe, the Divine Word is united, and the Holy Ghost must repose and habitate in God; thus in one as in a summit, I mean the God of the Universe, must the Divine Triad be gathered up and brought together. For it is the doctrine of the presumptuous Marcion, to sever and divide the Divine Monarchy into three origins,–a devil’s teaching, not that of Christ’s true disciples and lovers of the Saviour’s lessons, For they know well that a Triad is preached by divine Scripture, but that neither Old Testament nor New preaches three Gods.” Pope Dionysius [regn. 260-268], to Dionysius of Alexandria, fragment in Athanasius’ Nicene Definition 26 (A.D. 262).
“Now the person in each declares the independent being and subsistence. But divinity is the property of the Father; and whenever the divinity of these three is spoken of as one, testimony is borne that the property of the Father belongs also to the Son and the Spirit: wherefore, if the divinity may be spoken of as one in three persons, the trinity is established, and the unity is not dissevered; and the oneness Which is naturally the Father’s is also acknowledged to be the Son’s and the Spirit’s.” Gregory the Wonderworker (Thaumaturgus), Sectional Confession of Faith, 8 (A.D. 270).
“For the kingdom of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is one, even as their substance is one and their dominion one. Whence also, with one and the same adoration, we worship the one Deity in three Persons, subsisting without beginning, uncreate, without end, and to which there is no successor. For neither will the Father ever cease to be the Father, nor again the Son to be the Son and King, nor the Holy Ghost to be what in substance and personality He is.” Methodius, Oration on the Palms, 4 (A.D. 305).
“[T]he statements made regarding Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are to be understood as transcending all time, all ages, and all eternity. For it is the Trinity alone which exceeds the comprehension not only of temporal but even of eternal intelligence; while other things which are not included in it are to be measured by times and ages.” Origen, First Principles, 4:28 (A.D. 230).
""Next, I may reasonably turn to those who divide and cut to pieces and destroy that most sacred doctrine of the Church of God, the Divine Monarchy, making it as it were three powers and partitive subsistences and god-heads three. I am told that some among you who are catechists and teachers of the Divine Word, take the lead in this tenet, who are diametrically opposed, so to speak, to Sabellius’s opinions; for he blasphemously says that the Son is the Father, and the Father the Son, but they in some sort preach three Gods, as dividing the sacred Monad into three subsistences foreign to each other and utterly separate. For it must needs be that with the God of the Universe, the Divine Word is united, and the Holy Ghost must repose and habitate in God; thus in one as in a summit, I mean the God of the Universe, must the Divine Triad be gathered up and brought together. For it is the doctrine of the presumptuous Marcion, to sever and divide the Divine Monarchy into three origins,–a devil’s teaching, not that of Christ’s true disciples and lovers of the Saviour’s lessons, For they know well that a Triad is preached by divine Scripture, but that neither Old Testament nor New preaches three Gods.” Pope Dionysius [regn. 260-268], to Dionysius of Alexandria, fragment in Athanasius’ Nicene Definition 26 (A.D. 262).
“Now the person in each declares the independent being and subsistence. But divinity is the property of the Father; and whenever the divinity of these three is spoken of as one, testimony is borne that the property of the Father belongs also to the Son and the Spirit: wherefore, if the divinity may be spoken of as one in three persons, the trinity is established, and the unity is not dissevered; and the oneness Which is naturally the Father’s is also acknowledged to be the Son’s and the Spirit’s.” Gregory the Wonderworker (Thaumaturgus), Sectional Confession of Faith, 8 (A.D. 270).
“For the kingdom of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is one, even as their substance is one and their dominion one. Whence also, with one and the same adoration, we worship the one Deity in three Persons, subsisting without beginning, uncreate, without end, and to which there is no successor. For neither will the Father ever cease to be the Father, nor again the Son to be the Son and King, nor the Holy Ghost to be what in substance and personality He is.” Methodius, Oration on the Palms, 4 (A.D. 305).
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Sorry pal, but Mary Magdalene did not see Jesus resurrecting. I am well aware that I asked for an eyewitness of the resurrection. Besides, when the women went to report to the disciples that Jesus had resurrected, the disciples did not believe them. The report of the women sounded like nonsense and an idle tale. Read Luke 24:11. Do you know why?
It’s only obvious that they had never heard of such a thing from the lips of Jesus. That the idea had been fabricated by Paul 30 years after Jesus had been gone.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Matthew 24:16-17
Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.
Was Matthew one of the eleven? Yes. He was one of the eleven who saw Jesus after the resurrection and recorded this in his Gospel.
Mark 16:14
Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.
Mark was written under the tutelage of Peter. Was Peter one of the eleven? Yes. He was one of the eleven who saw Jesus after the resurrection and conveyed this to Mark who recorded this in his Gospel.
John 20:3-8
So Peter and the other disciple [this is John who modestly declines to name himself in his own Gospel] started for the tomb. 4Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. 6Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus’ head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. 8Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed.
Was John one of the two who entered the empty tomb? Yes, though he modestly declined to name himself throughout his own Gospel. John saw that the tomb was empty and believed that Jesus had been raised from the dead.
For further evidence that John and Peter saw Jesus after the resurrection, read ALL of John 21 which records Jesus talking and walking with them on the beach after breakfast.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I can, of course, show you one from John’s Gospel, and you will deny that it was the Apostle John who wrote it.
John 21:23-24- ***23 So the word spread among the brothers that that disciple would not die. But Jesus had not told him that he would not die, just “What if I want him to remain until I come? (What concern is it of yours?)” 24 It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, **and we know that his testimony is true.*It is this disciple who wrote about the appearances of Jesus, walking through walls, and letting the disciples probe His wounds. This is one of the eye-witnesses that you will now deny.
Your turn, Pal!
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Clearly untrue.
Matthew 12:39-41
39He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one greater than Jonah is here.
Mark 8:30-31
31He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
Mark 9:30-21
30They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were, 31because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.” 32But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.
John 2:18-22
18Then the Jews demanded of him, “What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”
19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” 20The Jews replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” 21But the temple he had spoken of was his body. 22After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.
Yep, Jesus foretold His own death and resurrection, alright. The fact that they did not understand him or did not want to accept the fact that He would be killed does not detract one bit from the fact that everything happened just as He, God, foretold.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Luke 24:1-12
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7’The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ " 8Then they remembered his words.
9When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
Clearly, Peter believed something unusual had happened. Then Luke records the following:
Luke 24:33-35
33They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.” 35Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
Was Peter a witness to the resurrection of Jesus? Oh, yeah.
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7’The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ " 8Then they remembered his words.
9When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
Clearly, Peter believed something unusual had happened. Then Luke records the following:
Luke 24:33-35
33They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.” 35Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
Was Peter a witness to the resurrection of Jesus? Oh, yeah.
C
Canto
Guest
Mary Magdalene did see Jesus post resurection.
Some did not believe but if we read on (Lk ch24) they later did believe
As for fabrication, Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn, Peter all mention Jesus’ ressurection
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
**If after reading these two verses in the fourth gospel, you still believe that John, the Apostle was the author of the fourth gospel, you are what your name says.I can, of course, show you one from John’s Gospel, and you will deny that it was the Apostle John who wrote it.
John 21:23-24- ***23 So the word spread among the brothers that that disciple would not die. But Jesus had not told him that he would not die, just “What if I want him to remain until I come? (What concern is it of yours?)” 24 It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, ***and we know that his testimony is true.It is this disciple who wrote about the appearances of Jesus, walking through walls, and letting the disciples probe His wounds. This is one of the eye-witnesses that you will now deny.
Your turn, Pal!
What you have given me is an extra evidence that the guys who wrote the gospels were not Jews, much less in the quality of Jesus’ Apostles.
So, the guy who wrote the gospel of John says that John is one of the eyewitnesses. Of what if I may ask, of the resurrection? That’s what I want to know and the text just does not say that.**
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
**If Jesus’ own Apostles, after about 4 years talking and listening to Jesus everyday, did not believe the resurrection by considering the report given by the women as nonsense and an idle tale, is it a phenomenon for us, after 2000 years, not being able to believe in the tale of the resurrection? I don’t think so. **Luke 24:1-12
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7’The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ " 8Then they remembered his words.
9When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
Clearly, Peter believed something unusual had happened. Then Luke records the following:
Luke 24:33-35
33They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.” 35Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
Was Peter a witness to the resurrection of Jesus? Oh, yeah.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
**But I remember to have asked for an eyewitness of the resurrtection and not of post-resurrection. Ask any Lawyer that to see someone after the fact that he is being talked about, constitutes no eyewitness. **
- Status