The Trinity in First Corinthians 3

Originally posted by sonship
O keeper of the commands of Jesus, go learn what this means:

[b] " Blessed are you when they reproach and persecute you, and while speaking lies, say every evil thing against you because of Me.

Rejoice and exult, for your reward is great in the heavens, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (Matt. 5:11,12)

[/b]

More bull. Jesus commandments does not include accepting bull from false teachers.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] I mean I don't claim to be much of a Christian. I don't pretend to be something I'm not. I'm pretty poor at being a disciple. I'm not particularly looked up to in my Christian peer group. Don't do much good works - although I'm there when the need arises. I'm not a preacher or a teacher. I'm not an evangelist or a youth leader. I'm not anything obvi ...[text shortened]... tical Points on Progress

Look, just pretend its not me. Pretend it is just someone else ![/b]

I'm not in the slightest miffed at you sonship, my snippy reply to chaney3 was about mine/his posting history, nothing more.

I'm not interested in starting a Unitarian thread. Firstly I'm not a Unitarian by membership nor other adherence and secondly my issue with you is about your inward perspective on the consequences of rejecting the trinity doctrine. Which you don't want to discuss despite you having been led by God to deprioritise all other topics apart for,vibe trinity.

It's odd that you do this and I'm going to chase you down over it because I think you are concealing the belief that rejectees are precluded from receiving the spirit of Christ.

Originally posted by Rajk999
More bull. Jesus commandments does not include accepting bull from false teachers.

You cannot identify the "false teaching"

You can LIE and repeat that I encourage Christians to sin or not be concerned with sanctification. But this is your lying which you have never been able to substantiate.

A quote proving I encourage Christians to not be consecrated or to continue to live as though they were not Christ's will never by you. I never taught that.

As for a "false teaching" you will not identify one.
Disagreement over some interpretation I may have put forth doesn't constitute a false teaching necessarily.

You on the other hand deny, I am pretty sure, that Jesus Christ is God incarnate.
John 1:1,14 proves you teach with the spirit of antichrist.

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not in the slightest miffed at you sonship, my snippy reply to chaney3 was about mine/his posting history, nothing more.

I'm not interested in starting a Unitarian thread. Firstly I'm not a Unitarian by membership nor other adherence and secondly my issue with you is about your inward perspective on the consequences of rejecting the trinity doctr ...[text shortened]... you are concealing the belief that rejectees are precluded from receiving the spirit of Christ.

Speaking of our posting history.....I've said numerous times....recently...that I haven't been drinking and am much different now with my posting style. Yet every chance you get...you bring it up and throw it in my face. Let me know if that's how you will continue, and I will just cease any exchanges with you.

I complimented your post because of its honesty. It was surprising, that's all. I don't recall seeing too many posts like it where a Christian will admit such things.

And....Right now, I have no idea if I'm a Christian....just in case you were wondering.

Originally posted by chaney3
Speaking of our posting history.....I've said numerous times....recently...that I haven't been drinking and am much different now with my posting style. Yet every chance you get...you bring it up and throw it in my face. Let me know if that's how you will continue, and I will just cease any exchanges with you.

I complimented your post because of its hones ...[text shortened]... ings.

And....Right now, I have no idea if I'm a Christian....just in case you were wondering.

I agree with you. I thought it was an honest confession.
I offered some help. But he may be more interested in trying to portray me as hiding something that sounds to me like "Specfic instructions on how to be lost".

This is a weird thing to demand over and over again from a Christian. Or 'What is the exact threshold about belief in an involved subject as the Trinity, in which I can be sure I will be lost?"

Why he turned to bite you I don't know.

Originally posted by sonship
I agree with you. I thought it was an honest admission.
I offered some help. But he may be more interested in trying to portray me as hiding something that sounds to me like [b] "Specfic instructions on how to be lost".

This is a weird thing to demand over and over again from a Christian.

Why he turned to bite you I don't know.[/b]

Hi sonship, I've tried to stay out of the debate between you and Dive.....but, it IS a valid question that he's asking you, and I have been asking the same sort of question for a while......that is:

If you, sonship, believe in the God and Jesus of the 'trinity' and I believe in God and Jesus, but not the 'trinity'....let's say I believe Jesus to be all human and not in any way God.....does that impact my salvation?
Must a person believe in either the 'trinity'.....or nothing?

Originally posted by sonship
Just maybe if certain people like checkbaiter, Rajk999. Divegeester would stop religiously attacking the revelation of the Triune God, maybe I wouldn't write so much on the Triune God.

Do you believe their disagreements with you over your "Trinity" ideology could have serious consequences for them in terms of their "salvation"?

Originally posted by sonship

Why do you spend so much time on "Trinity", do you think Jesus died that we could grasp that or that we would turn towards Him and learn who God is?

Just maybe if certain people like checkbaiter, Rajk999. Divegeester would stop religiously attacking the revelation of the Triune God, maybe I wouldn't write so much on the Triune God.

Bu ...[text shortened]... ou will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you." (John 14:19,20) [/quote][/b]

In my opinion learning about isn't as good as meeting the Lord, which is better in your opinion?

Originally posted by chaney3
Hi sonship, I've tried to stay out of the debate between you and Dive.....but, it IS a valid question that he's asking you, and I have been asking the same sort of question for a while......that is:

If you, sonship, believe in the God and Jesus of the 'trinity' and I believe in God and Jesus, but not the 'trinity'....let's say I believe Jesus to be all hu ...[text shortened]... ...does that impact my salvation?
Must a person believe in either the 'trinity'.....or nothing?

I don't think believing that Jesus is all human is confessing Jesus as Lord. And it probably is not believing that God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead. Then you have rejected the Lord Jesus and what Paul has taught us has probably not taken place -

" That if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

For with the heart there is believing unto righteousness, and with the mouth there is confession unto salvation.

For the Scripture says, Everyone who believes on Him will not be put to shame." (Rom. 10:8-11)

Now the subject of the Trinity can be quite much more involved then this.
Nothing is said about co-inherance - one lives in the other.
Nothing is said about a number of concepts related to what I would call a fuller discussion on the Trinity.

But the point you raise about rejecting that Jesus Christ is the Divine Lord from Heaven raised by God from the dead, I would say is a rejection of Paul's exhortation.

Do you know what co-inherance is?
Do you know that the debate about Patriapassionism is?
Do you know what the Council of Chalcedon was about?
Are you well versed in the two natures of Christ?

These are all points concerning the subject of the Trinity really.
And I don't think a Christian needs to interrogate a new believer to see how much in agreement he is on many of these finer points in the Trinity definition.

The Gospel of John says as many as RECEIVED Him, to them He gave the authority to become children of God, who were BORN of God (John 1:12,13)

If someone thinks to "receive Him" is not different from agreeing with, say, Abraham Lincoln, as to what he stood for, that may NOT be receiving the resurrected Lord Jesus.

How much can I "receive Him" and disagree with major trinitarian arguments ?
The answer " I don't know " is rejected by Dive and he re-asks.

The answer " I don't know because JESUS predicted that sometimes His own disciples will not be able to tell who is a real believer and who is a false one" is also rejected by Dive. And he re-asks the question gleefully assured that I am hiding something.

But God is very merciful. And receiving Him yet being very unclear about some theological matters does happen.

Have you EVER heard the classic hymn "JUST AS I AM" ?


Just As I Am

YouTube

Originally posted by chaney3
Speaking of our posting history.....I've said numerous times....recently...that I haven't been drinking and am much different now with my posting style. Yet every chance you get...you bring it up and throw it in my face.

I don't know what you think you're on about. Your "posting history" is still here, alive and kicking. Here's you from a few weeks back...

It took me some time when I began my 'posting career', but I came to realize that both yourself and dive are the 2 worst people on these forums. It's not so much what you say, but in how you say it. Both of you come across as completely arrogant, self righteous, know-it-alls, with the warped belief that Russ and the entire RHP community should kiss your assses for gracing these forums with your pearls of wisdom. When I realized these things, then added alcohol to the equation, yes, I unleashed on you two clowns in whatever way I was feeling at the time. You will get zero apology from me because both yourself and dive, with much joy, bring out the worst in a person. Even with a sober mind right now, I need to hold back what I really want to say. And by the way, that pic in your profile, if you, looks exactly like the smug, arrogant SOB that aggravates most people on these forums. I feel much better now.

...and that was from a discussion about Noah's flood here on the Spirituality Forum. You are what you post, chaney3, drinking or no drinking.

Originally posted by FMF
I don't know what you think you're on about. Your "posting history" is still here, alive and kicking. Here's you from a few weeks back...

[b]It took me some time when I began my 'posting career', but I came to realize that both yourself and dive are the 2 worst people on these forums. It's not so much what you say, but in how you say it. Both of you come acro ...[text shortened]... s flood here on the Spirituality Forum. You are what you post, chaney3, drinking or no drinking.

So he's right.

What's your point?

Oh... he disagrees with you. Well, then, clearly he needs to be punished. Carry on. (Better go get Dive, he might need the belt.)

Originally posted by Suzianne
So he's right.

What's your point?

Oh... he disagrees with you. Well, then, clearly he needs to be punished. Carry on. (Better go get Dive, he might need the belt.)

"Punished"? Don't be silly. You're missing the point completely. I welcome disagreement. I welcome discussion. I welcome debate. That's why I am here and that's why I have been here for years and years. I have discussed in great detail literally hundreds of things. The stuff you do to entertain yourself (when people disagree with you) would not sustain me. Each to their own.

Originally posted by chaney3
Speaking of our posting history.....I've said numerous times....recently...that I haven't been drinking and am much different now with my posting style. Yet every chance you get...you bring it up and throw it in my face. Let me know if that's how you will continue, and I will just cease any exchanges with you.

I complimented your post because of its hones ...[text shortened]... ings.

And....Right now, I have no idea if I'm a Christian....just in case you were wondering.

Firstly - I try to be absolutely honest in all my posts and always have been. What I think you liked about that particular post of mine was not "honestly" it was the candidness, they are different things. In my opinion it is not poor forum etiquette to not be candid, it is poor form to be dishonest.

Secondly when I mention our "posting history" I'm not talking about your "style" I'm talking about the content. I fully accept that peope have personal challenges and that alcohol consumption could be one; however if you feel that in all that exchange that you said something that was not honest, not accurate or that you would like me to consider as incorrect by you, then I think you need to say what it is, or maybe restate your opinion. That would be the honest thing to do. Whatever you decide, I'm happy to move forward from here.

Originally posted by sonship
I don't think believing that Jesus is all human is confessing Jesus as Lord. And it probably is not believing that God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead. Then you have rejected the Lord Jesus and what Paul has taught us has probably not taken place -

[quote] [b] " That if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that Go ...[text shortened]... JUST AS I AM" ?


Just As I Am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxA0TFe3-Uo[/b]

I think you are deliberately misrepresenting the question I am asking you , and which FMF asked you days ago and again on this page, which chaney3 has also now asked you.

Does the rejection of the trinity doctrine preclude someone from being filled with the spirit and therefore salvation?

It's a simple question, there is no guile in it, no hidden meaning, no difficult syntax to stumble over. Just an honest enquiry about what you believe sonship.

I believe the answer should be no. I believe in the oneness of God, but I do not believe that a person believing in the trinity doctrine cannot be filled with the spirit of God. Unequivocal.

Your go...

Originally posted by Suzianne
So he's right.

What's your point?

Oh... he [b]disagrees with you. Well, then, clearly he needs to be punished. Carry on. (Better go get Dive, he might need the belt.)[/b]

You have a funny idea of what disagreement is, of what punishment is. You seem to think that these forums are a place where everyone should get on, or agree, and if they don't then two people arguing their case is somehow "punishment" for one of them.

I rarely see you contribute anything of topic context to these spirituality threads. Your tactic is always the same: turn up in the middle of a thread where two people are in (sometimes) heated debate and swing a punch at the one you don't' like for "punishing" the other.

Why don't you get involved with the topic instead of running round the edge of the pitch shouting at the players?