Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?

quote:

---

PURPLEDAWN:
In the OP (Message 1) you asked:

​

quote:

---

Alter2Ego writes:

​

Are there scriptures in the Bible to support the teachings of Trinity and hellfire? If so, present the scriptures by giving Bible book, chapter, and verse and also explain why you believe the scripture you present is talking about Trinity or literal hellfire.

---

​

Scriptures from the Bible that supposedly support the Doctrine of the Trinity (No, the word Trinity is not in the Bible.) were provided. Some of us proceeded to argue that these scriptures did not support the 3 in 1 God idea.

​

Proclaiming that Thomas is imperfect, so what he says doesn't count, or that nothing in the Bible is correct is unsupported and out of line for someone who claims to have the deepest respect for God's inspired Word. The fruit doesn't seem to match the tree.

---

ALTER2EGO -to- PURPLEDAWN:
You are getting it twisted. I asked for proof of trinity in the Bible so that I could see what the Trinitarian is focusing on. Nowhere in my OP did I say I would accept somebody else's wrong interpretation of scripture if the context debunks what they are claiming. In fact, I explained that several times in this thread. I did not merely reject Thomas' words because he was imperfect. I wrote an entire paragraph explaining why I rejected what Thomas might have assumed. You decided to cherry pick only the sentence where I mentioned Thomas' imperfection so that you could make an issue of that. Below is what I wrote as the last post on Page 8 of this thread.

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO: (previous quote)
Not only that, Thomas was an imperfect, sinful human being. So even if, for the sake of argument, one would accept that Thomas thought Jesus was also Jehovah, what does that prove? Jesus' true relationship to Jehovah was provided three verses later, in the very same chapter 20 of John that you used earlier. So at this point, you are banking on Thomas who was so lacking in faith, that he would not believe the other disciples who told him Jesus had been resurrected. The result was that Jesus had to show himself to Thomas, as indicated by the verses you quoted earlier.

---

ALTER2EGO -to- PURPLEDAWN:
In the "three verses later" that I am referring to in the above response, the Bible explains who Jesus Christ was, in relationship to Jehovah. I made that point in a response prior to the one about Thomas' imperfection.

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO (previous quote):

​

REASON #1 FOR WHY JOHN 10:28 IS NOT REFERRING TO A TRINITY:
Three verses later (the context) Jesus confirmed who he is, in relationship to Jehovah, as follows:

​

"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God , and that by believing you may have life in his name." (John 20:31 -- New International Version)

​

"But these are written so that you may continue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life by the power of his name." (John 20:31 -- New Living Bible)

---

ALTER2EGO -to- PURPLEDAWN:
I expanded on the context of John 20:28 where Thomas said "My Lord and My God," by presenting even more of the context, which clearly shows Jesus Christ was not eternal, as follows:

quote:

---

"{1} On the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the memorial tomb [of Jesus] early, while there was still darkness, and she beheld the stone already taken away from the memorial tomb. {2} Therefore she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple, for whom Jesus had affection, and she said to them: 'They have taken away the Lord out of the memorial tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.' {3} Then Peter and the other disciple went out and started for the memorial tomb. {9} For they did not yet discern the scripture that he must rise from the dead.." (John 20:1-3, 9)

---

ALTER2EGO -to- PURPLEDAWN:
So not only does the context of John 20:28 clarify that Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah, meaning he is not Jehovah (John 20:31), but the context further says Jesus Christ died (John 20:1-3 and 9). The trinity dogma says the Son of God, Jesus Christ, is eternal. According to John 20:1-3 and 9, Jesus Christ literally died. So even if one were to argue that Thomas really assumed Jesus was also Jehovah, Thomas was clearly in error and his error was due to his imperfection.

Again:
1) It would indeed be a monumental "error" for any Jew EVER to call a human being by the name of Jehovah God, making Thomas far worse than a merely imperfect human being that he did so.2) Jesus would NOT accept such a statement from any man UNLESS He actually was Jehovah God. But He did accept it, He did not correct Thomas. Therefore this is evidence for His Deity.3) Nowhere in scripture does anyone mention that Thomas was at fault in any way, which the other disciples certainly would have if that were the case.4) Your claim that the following verses describing Jesus' death prove that He couldn't have been eternal God, cannot possibly erase the fact that Jesus did not deny Thomas' affirmation of His Deity, so that your claim does not stand as "context" but only as contradiction of the truth.The claim has also been answered and answered and answered according to the orthodox understanding that Jesus as God could not die but as man He could, by choice, and did. I've also gone to some length in my last post to show that while His body could die, His Spirit could not, which is parallel to our own human nature, since when we die it is our bodies that die while our souls live on forever. And I added scripture references to these points.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't thing you've grasped the nature of the proposed rules. The two "descriptions" referred to are those which are conjoined by καὶ. Read the rule again: As for what an English translation of the Septuagint says, this is not nearly so important as what the Septuagint says.

quote:

---

I don't thing you've grasped the nature of the proposed rules. The two "descriptions" referred to are those which are conjoined by καὶ. Read the rule again:

---

Wow, I did all that work and all you can say is read it again?Sharp found the patterns in the NT.

I addressed all those issues in Message 138, why are you repeating yourself?

quote:

---

So not only does the context of John 20:28 clarify that Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah, meaning he is not Jehovah (John 20:31), but the context further says Jesus Christ died (John 20:1-3 and 9). The trinity dogma says the Son of God, Jesus Christ, is eternal. According to John 20:1-3 and 9, Jesus Christ literally died. So even if one were to argue that Thomas really assumed Jesus was also Jehovah, Thomas was clearly in error and his error was due to his imperfection.

---

Actually in John 20:1-3 and 9, Jesus died. In the scriptures he wasn't deemed Christ until he had risen.Deeming Thomas to be in error due to his imperfection is something you can't support. You're just battling fiction with fiction.YHWH is a supreme being, do you really know what he can and can't do? He could be like the Changelings in DS9, which I think is kinda what the Trinity idea is like.

Well, since you did in fact misread it, I thought that was apter advice than: "Rub yourself repeatedly with a small marsupial while singing My Way". I pondered my options carefully.

Seems to me the Trinity has already been definitely proven on this thread to have been biblically derived, but there will always be diehards who won't accept the obvious. Perhaps the whole debate is over at this point, but I did post a new topic back in Message 156 and thought I'd bring it up front in case anyone wants to address it.Two references in Jeremiah -- Jer 23:6 and Jer 33:16 -- both clearly messianic passages, referring to the promised Messiah as The Branch and a King who shall be called THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS, the word "Lord" in the Hebrew being the word for Jehovah. And the other passage, which is similar but slightly different: The reference to the man to sit on the throne of David is recognized in the NT to be fulfilled in Christ the coming King, and the reference to the man to offer offerings and sacrifices is recognized in the Letter to the Hebrews to be fulfilled in Christ who would fulfill the functions of the High Priest through the once-for-all sacrifice of Himself on the cross.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Of course, this "proof" simply assumes that the name is meant literally and not symbolically. And that's a very big assumption. Indeed it relies on a particular reading of the name. If it is better rendered "God is our Righteousness" - and I see no reason why it should not - how can it be said to mean that the person bearing that name IS God ?

I think you're missing the obvious:Jesus' death wasn't his end.

Well, once again you answer my post with great detail and I'm left without much to offer for contribution.Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Hey CS, I thought Catholicism taught the Trinity too. Did that change?

Why do you ask?

I thought I might wade in on this from another angle. Let’s look at how John starts out.

quote:

---

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it. 6 There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God-- 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God. 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " 16 From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.

---

John is giving us the foundation for all that he is going to write about in his Gospel. First off we see that what existed in the beginning was God and His Word. He is going back to the very beginning with this obvious reference to Genesis 1. It seems to me that in one sense when we speak, the words we use reflect our wisdom, (or lack of wisdom), so in that sense God’s Word is also God’s wisdom.John goes on to tell us that the Word became flesh. The Word, or God’s Wisdom was made incarnate in Jesus. However, he also says that Jesus was begotten. Jesus had a beginning as a human but the Word or the wisdom of God the Father was there from the beginning. Jesus died a physical death but the Word of God which He embodied is eternal.The resurrection of Jesus by the Father is God’s vindication and endorsement of the life and words of Jesus.When John gets close to the end of his book is where he tells of Thomas saying to Jesus My Lord and my God. He is bringing it full circle. It is through the man Jesus that Yahweh returned in wisdom to the world for the world.All this is of course JMHO, but when the whole narrative within the Gospel of John is taken into account I contend that my view is completely consistent with what John wants us to understand. I also contend that he has faithfully recorded Christ’s life and message.

Well, you call yourself Catholic but you seem to object to the Trinity idea.

So Jesus isn't REALLY God, Jesus was blaspheming every time He accepted the name, all the references to Him as God were wrongheaded or misunderstood although they were written by Jews who were positively allergic to anything that violated their traditions about the Oneness of God and would have taken extraordinary care not to say anything that could have been misconstrued in that way, and Thomas was one very confused Jew although He must have heard the Shema intoned every Sabbath for his entire life, and along with the Pharisees would have considered it blasphemy for Jesus to be called God if He really wasn't God.You're all so clever at denying what 2000 years of theologically astute and spiritually deep men have had to say about it. I guess you've just all evolved to such a superior plane of understanding you can ignore anything said before our time?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.