The trinity in the Gospels

  • Thread starter Thread starter whyeyeman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
whyeyeman said:
EDIT: I am not asking for a debate.
Click to expand...
Are you sure?
whyeyeman said:
All I am asking is whether this view would be accepted by the church.
Click to expand...
No it would not be accepted by the Church. If you’re looking for a passage in which Christ says explicitly: “Hi, I, Jesus, am God!” You won’t find it. That doesn’t mean He didn’t claim divinity, or that the people around Him at the time didn’t understand Him to be claiming divinity.

Notice John 5:18-20
“My Father is still working, and I also am working.” 18 For this reason the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because he was not only breaking the sabbath, but was also calling God his own Father, thereby making himself equal to God."
Click to expand...
Also, the beginning of John 1 says flatly “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Christ is the Word made flesh; Christ is God.

Then there’s Mark 14:62-63 in which the High Priest tore his robes in indignation because he understood Christ to be claiming to Divinity when he said:
" Then Jesus answered, “I am; and ‘you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.’”At that the high priest tore his garments"
Click to expand...
It’s commonly understood that what made the high priest tear his garments (a sign that a blasphemy had just occurred) were Jesus’ words “I Am”. This may be true, but it was most likely from his next statement regarding the Son of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven. When Jesus said this He was quoting Daniel 7:13-14 almost verbatim:
I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed (Daniel 7:13-14).
Click to expand...
This and Jesus’ use of the phrase “I AM” are what caused the high priest to react so harshly. Jesus is clearly identifying Himself as God and drawing upon this prophecy.
 
Someday I am going to die.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Hello whyeye, Jesus Christ was almost stoned to death for claiming to be He was “Before Abraham,”, (John 8:58), for indeed, Jesus Christ shared the same Glory with His Eternal Father before the world began, (John 17:5), as Jesus Christ is indeed, Lord of the Sabbath and Greater than the Temple, as God alone is, (Matthew 12:6,8), as Jesus Christ refers to Himself as the awaited Bridegroom of Hebrew Scriptures, as God alone is, (Mark 2:19, Hosea 2;15-20). For indeed, God alone can save us from our sins, as it states of Jesus Christ, “HE shall save His people from their sins”, (Matthew 1;21). Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, God the Eternal Son and Author of Life
 
Padre pio icon guy.

You are (name removed by moderator)ungning the known truth.

You are grounded mister!
 
Last edited:
whyeyeman said:
It is obvious to me that the doctrine that Jesus was God is a later development logically following from the belief found in John that Jesus always existed, that he came down from heaven etc.

That being said, I do believe this is a natural development of doctrine which God revealed gradually to the early church.
Click to expand...
Well, there is another possibility: that the early church figured it out on its own, without God’s revelation on the point.

By the way, I’ve just scanned through 155 posts in this thread to count up the supposed trinitarian arguments that are, in fact, just binitarian arguments. It’s kind of amusing, actually. Posters point to a scripture verse arguably supporting the divinity of Christ, and automatically press it into an argument for the divinity of the Holy Spirit as well. The logical leap from “Christ is God co-equal with the Father” to “there are THREE persons in the Godhead” likely never occurs to them.
 
whyeyeman said:
40.png
HarryStotle:
it claims that Romans 8:11 says the holy spirit raised Jesus from the dead. This is quite simply a lie.
Click to expand...
Read this. “The lie” of which I speak is the claim that Romans 8:11 says such.
Click to expand...
Except that the passage from Romans does imply that God raises the dead through the actions of the Holy Spirit.

…he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.”

If God “gives life to your mortal bodies” through “His Spirit,” then there is no reason to think God didn’t raise Jesus from the dead “through his Spirit.” Especially since “he…will also” connects the two together.

Personally, I think you are making way too big a deal of this. Certainly calling the writer a “liar” is stretching things just a bit. You might register your disagreement, but to say he is a “liar” means he has intentionally set out to deceive.
 
RedFan said:
Posters point to a scripture verse arguably supporting the divinity of Christ, and automatically press it into an argument for the divinity of the Holy Spirit as well. The logical leap from “Christ is God co-equal with the Father” to “there are THREE persons in the Godhead” likely never occurs to them.
Click to expand...
It would seem a kind of logical leap out of nowhere to insist: “Christ is NOT one of the Persons in the Godhead, but the Holy Spirit is.”

On the other hand, establishing that a human being could be God would seem more of a logical challenge than demonstrating from Scripture that the Holy Spirit is, no?

Besides which, the thread title is just a tad misleading since the OP concerned the divinity of Christ and not the Trinity, per se.
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle said:
It would seem a kind of logical leap out of nowhere to insist: “Christ is NOT one of the Persons in the Godhead, but the Holy Spirit is.”
Click to expand...
Sure would!
HarryStotle said:
On the other hand, establishing that a human being could be God would seem more of a logical challenge than demonstrating from Scripture that the Holy Spirit is, no?
Click to expand...
I really couldn’t compare the two efforts. But then again, I don’t view the task as one of “establishing that a human being could be God.” I view it as establishing that the pre-incarnate, eternally existing Word of God (who happened to take on flesh a little over 2,000 years ago) is actually fully God, in every sense.
HarryStotle said:
Besides which, the thread title is just a tad misleading since the OP concerned the divinity of Christ and not the Trinity, per se.
Click to expand...
Yup.
 
RedFan said:
I really couldn’t compare the two efforts. But then again, I don’t view the task as one of “establishing that a human being could be God.” I view it as establishing that the pre-incarnate, eternally existing Word of God (who happened to take on flesh a little over 2,000 years ago) is actually fully God, in every sense.
Click to expand...
Touché 🤐

(16 characters)
 
A lot of this thinking is flawed because it relies on a perception of linear time.

God is transcendent. Not bound by time.

The incarnation happened sure…

But he has always existed. Human and divine. Christ has always existed. He conquered all this.

Look at medieval icons he is walking in Eden.

They walked with the Lord in the “cool of the day”

Part of refuting the Arian heresy was knowing that there was never a time Jesus didn’t exist.

Beginning and end.

These are eternal things.

Crucifixion included to an extent.

Perpetual sacrifice.

A lot of these concepts defy how we normally think about reality.

And that is not just in Christianity.

Anyway.

Whatever.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Have fun.

I’m tired of this.
 
PaladinSword said:
The incarnation happened sure…

But he has always existed. Human and divine. Christ has always existed. He conquered all this.

Look at medieval icons he is walking in Eden.

They walked with the Lord in the “cool of the day”

Part of refuting the Arian heresy was knowing that there was never a time Jesus didn’t exist.
Click to expand...
I have to take mild issue with you here, my friend, because I think you are using loose language. The Son of God has indeed always existed. But not as a human. Not as the man we know as “the annointed one.” Not as the man named “Jesus.” The name “Jesus” is the name given to the God-man born of Mary 2000 years ago. “Jesus” didn’t exist, say, 2,100 years ago. The Son of God who would take on flesh and become man did.

If you could manage to do what the medieval iconists couldn’t, and free yourself of the overlay of the incarnate Son, the person of Jesus Christ, that subtly clutters most Christians’ attempts to conceptualize the Logos, we’d probably be on the same page here. (Maybe not. I’d still need to get you off the notion that the word “Lord” as used in the Genesis story is a reference to the Son rather than the Father. Something tells me that would be an even harder task, given how accustomed we Christians are to referring to Jesus Christ as “Lord” and blithely assuming that the Hebrew word translated as “Lord” in our English Old Testaments must necessarily be referring to the same person!)
 
Last edited:
He is in genesis and revelation.

Alpha and omega.

Entirely missing the point.

And how is heaven limited by a historical linear perception of time?

Don’t even bother to answer.

Good bye for real.
 
Invalidating him in anyway as God… Or implying he didn’t exist as we know him would make him not God if it were true.

Seriously read the creed.

Later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top