What!? Not Talk About the Trinity ?

Is the Spirit of God an indwelling One in the Christian ? Yes.
Is the Spirit of Christ this same one indwelling the Christian ? Yes.
Is Christ the same one indwelling the Christian ? Yes.
Is the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead indwelling the Christian? Yes.

Now is this one Who gives divine life to the moral bodies of the believers the same God ? Yes

"And if the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also ... GIVE LIFE ... to your moral bodies through His Spirit who indwells you." (Rom. 8:11)

This Wonderful One "gives life". But we are also told that Christ, the last Adam BECAME a life giving Spirit.

"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

Does anyone believe that there are TWO life giving Spirits ?
I don't believe there are TWO life giving Spirits.

The Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead is the same Spirit that gives life as the life giving Spirit that the last Adam, Christ, became.

Don't you now believe in the Trinity then ?

" ... the last Adam became a life giving Spirit"

that He might indwell the Christians to be the life giving Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead. This Spirit will even give divine life to our mortal bodies.

Originally posted by sonship

If you say so, but the bible says different.
Goodnight

Goodnight. But no the Bible says that this PERSON was in the world and the world came into being through this Person. [b](John 1:3,10)

And the Bible says that this Person is "I am" before Abraham (who came into being along with the world eventually) ... was. ...[text shortened]... en from the Father), full of grace and reality." (v.14) [/b] [/quote]

That's the Triune God.[/b]

After a careful study of the Greek, here is the way John 1:1-13 reads.....
1In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and what God was, the word was. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through it, and without it was not anything made that has been made. 4In it was life and the life was the light of mankind. 5And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not overcome it. 6A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came for testimony in order to testify concerning the light, so that through him all might believe. 8He was not the light, but came in order to testify about the light. 9There was the true light, even the light that gives light to everyone, coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world did not know him. 11He came to his own, and those who were his own did not receive him. 12But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in his name, 13who was born, not of bloods,a nor of the desire of the flesh, nor of the will of a man, but of God.

Commentary for: John 1:10...REV


He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world did not know him.

“and the world was made through him.” This is a wonderful verse telling us how much God cares for His creation, and highlights how God keeps on loving and giving to His creation and His people despite the fact that they are not thankful for it. Many Trinitarians think this verse refers to Jesus Christ, and use it to try to support the doctrine of the Trinity, but the verse is about the Father, not Jesus Christ.

A study of the context reveals that this section opens in verse 6 by telling us, “There came a man who was sent by God.” We are told, “God is light,” and that God’s light shown through Jesus Christ and made him “the light of the world.” Though God was in the world in many ways, including through His Son, the world did not recognize him. He came unto his own by sending Jesus Christ to them, but even then they did not receive God, in that they rejected His emissary. The fact that the world did not receive Him is made more profound in the context as Scripture reveals how earnestly God reached out to them—He made his plan and purpose flesh and shined His light through Christ to reach the world—but they did not receive Him, even though He was offering them the “right to become children of God” (v. 12).

Some scholars think the phrase, “the world was made by him,” is a reference to the new creation only (cp. Col. 1:15-20 and Heb. 1:1,10), but if it is, then it is only so as a double entendre referring to both the original and the new creations.

Originally posted by sonship

Trinitarians claim that the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus because he was claiming to be God ,

The Jews tell Jesus WHY they want to stone Him. I don't think they were "Trinitarians".

[b] " ... for blasphemy, because You, being a man, are making Yourself God." (See John 10:33)

This is not "Trinitarians" explaining why they wanted to stone Jesus.
This is the ones doing the stoning, explaining why.[/b]

I did not say the Jews were Trinitarians, there was no such belief at the time. The Trinity started in the 4th Century with Constantine.

Originally posted by sonship

Jesus wasn't just given the benefit of doubt.....His entire being seems to align with OT prophecy and writings......as the Messiah.....not God.

The One on whose shoulders the government rest is the Messianic son of David.
Here is what [b]Isaiah says about this Messiah.


[quote] " To the increase of His government and to ...[text shortened]... that this mingling of God and man is called [b]'Wonderful" for He is indeed full of wonder.[/b]

No it is not. We have been over these verses before. Repetition may work with some but not with me and not with the bible.

Trinitarians should admit that this verse is translated improperly just from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Everlasting Father” anywhere else in Scripture. Indeed, Trinitarians correctly deny that Jesus is the “Everlasting Father.” It is a basic tenet of Trinitarian doctrine that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed). Thus, if this verse is translated properly, then Trinitarian Christians have a real problem. However, the phrase is mistranslated. The word translated “everlasting” is actually “age,” and the correct translation is that Jesus will be called “father of the [coming] age.”

There is much more detail here http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/videos/isaiah-9-6 if you are interested, but I do not think you are.

Originally posted by sonship

Then receive him as your Savior. That is what is essential. Have you done that?

This is wonderful. So the sinner received Jesus and he becomes a Christian.

Now, this Jesus in him IS the [b]"Spirit of God."
This Jesus in him is also the "Spirit of Christ."
And this Jesus in him is Himself "Christ".

Proof:

[q ...[text shortened]... divine life to man. Yet each, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, is said to be eternal.[/b]

Christ is the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead.

This Trinity is about God dispensing God into man.
This Triune God is not that men may have a perplexing doctrine.
Neither is He so that men may have a difficult dogma.
This three-one Divine indwelling Person is for the dispensing of God as divine life into man to fulfill His eternal purpose.

This is so confusing, I'm not sure even you understands what you are talking about.

The Lord our God is One, not three. The bible says it, even Jesus quoted it.
One meant one then and it means one now.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I did not say the Jews were Trinitarians, there was no such belief at the time. The Trinity started in the 4th Century with Constantine.

That post of mine was to emphasize that the Jews doing the stoning, themselves explained WHY it was necessary.

Pointing out that they were not Trinitarians was only done for emphasis and contrast. Trinitarians did not FIRST explain those stonings.

You may feel comfortable to go from complaint to complaint scatter shot style. Now it is a fourth century concept you push.

Perhaps IF there had not been opposers fighting hard to claim Jesus was not who the New Testament SAID He was, then the very word "Trinity" may have no been invented. But there were those in the early centuries as well as those today, who will not accept what the Scripture says about Jesus Christ.

Mainly, that the "Word was with God, and the Word was God ... And the Word became flesh" (John 1:1,14)

Perhaps if those critics did not try to twist the truth to make TWO Gods here, there may have been no need to coin the phrase "the triune God".

If Arians did not try to teach the the Word was some God other than God, there may have been no need for the coining of the word "Trinity". Notice though, they have not given up to teach polytheism - ie. the Word was a god.

I think instead of kind of hiding out now behind volumes of church history, you should first just acknowledge what the Scripture revealed. John 8:58 was not inserted into the NT in the fourth century.

I think instead of kind of hiding out now behind volumes of church history, you should first just acknowledge what the Scripture revealed. John 8:58 was not inserted into the NT in the fourth century.

No it wasn't, but it has been expounded to you and you just don't like it. I have so much more on why there is no Trinity, but like I said, it will not matter because you are "sold" on the trinity. And as I said we are at at impasse and we just have to agree to disagree, so to speak....Peace

"Trinity" - When did the word first appear as far as we know ?

Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 115 -188) (prior to the fourth century of course)

That is the first reference scholars have to the word. He was a bishop of Antioch and used the word "Trinity" in Theophilus to Antolycus, Book II, 15 .

This information comes to me in the book "The Testimony of Church History Regarding the Mystery of the Triune God" by the late Bill Freeman, and published by The Stream Publishers.

And on page 9 he has this quotation from the above mentioned writing by Theophilus of Antioch commenting on the book of Genesis.

"In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries are types of the Trinity, of God and His Word, and His Wisdom."

Originally posted by sonship
"Trinity" - When did the word first appear as far as we know ?

[b]Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 115 -188) (prior to the fourth century of course)

That is the first reference scholars have to the word. He was a bishop of Antioch and used the word "Trinity" in Theophilus to Antolycus, Book II, 15 .

This information comes to me in the bo ...[text shortened]... e before the luminaries are types of the Trinity, of God and His Word, and His Wisdom." [/quote][/b]

I don't care about the word Trinity, it is the concept I am referring to. God is not three or any combination thereof. He is One. There is One God and One Lord, Jesus Christ the Son of God.
This is what I believe and it is what I believe the bible teaches.
You believe otherwise, and I can live with that. I do not hold it against you.
I still consider you a brother if you have Jesus as your Lord as I do, and I believe you do.

Originally posted by checkbaiter

You believe otherwise, and I can live with that. I do not hold it against you.
I still consider you a brother if you have Jesus as your Lord as I do, and I believe you do.

1. A chap, good of heart but void of God, rescues your donkey from a burning shed. (Didn't want to use your family in such a trite analogy).

2. A chap who has Jesus as his Lord and saviour, but who pilfers your wallet when you visit the cloakroom.

Which, if either, is your brother?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
1. A chap, good of heart but void of God, rescues your donkey from a burning shed. (Didn't want to use your family in such a trite analogy).

2. A chap who has Jesus as his Lord and saviour, but who pilfers your wallet when you visit the cloakroom.

Which, if either, is your brother?

LOL, I would hope both. But only God knows...
But I would preach to the first and teach number two😉

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
1. A chap, good of heart but void of God, rescues your donkey from a burning shed. (Didn't want to use your family in such a trite analogy).

2. A chap who has Jesus as his Lord and saviour, but who pilfers your wallet when you visit the cloakroom.

Which, if either, is your brother?

A chap who is good of heart cannot be void of God.
A chap who has Jesus will not steal.

Brothers in Christ are the ones who follow the commandments of Christ.

Originally posted by Rajk999

A chap who is good of heart cannot be void of God.
A chap who has Jesus will not steal.

Let's look at that premise a little more closely:

Are you saying no atheist can be good of heart? Or that, if they are good of heart, God is working in them without them being aware of it?

And what if a 'chap who has Jesus' DOES steal. Has such a chap lost Jesus or never had Jesus in the first place?

Originally posted by Rajk999
A chap who is good of heart cannot be void of God.
A chap who has Jesus will not steal.

Brothers in Christ are the ones who follow the commandments of Christ.

I know many nice people who are void of God.
I also know people that believe in God who are not nice.

Originally posted by checkbaiter

I don't care about the word Trinity, it is the concept I am referring to.

So it is not a knee-jerk reaction to the word "Trinity" then. I'll take that as good news.

God is not three or any combination thereof. He is One. There is One God and One Lord, Jesus Christ the Son of God.

Does the pronoun "We" indicate more than one "Person"?

Does the pronoun "Us" indicate more than one "Person?

"We" -

" ... and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:23b)

"Us" -

" That they all may be one; even as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they may be in Us ..." (John 17:21a)

If these pronouns - "We" - (the Father and the Son,) and "Us" - (the Father and the Son) then this indicates that this mysterious "Person" is also somehow three-one.

This is what I believe and it is what I believe the bible teaches.
You believe otherwise, and I can live with that. I do not hold it against you.
I still consider you a brother if you have Jesus as your Lord as I do, and I believe you do.

That is good that in agape love you are willing to call be a brother.
But for the sake of the truth consider what I have written above.

Is we say that the 'We" refers to God and someone else who is not God completing the two, OR we say that the "Us" refers to God and someone else who is not God then I would ask you:

Question: If God indwells the believer what NEED is there for someone ELSE to be in them in addition to God ?

IE.

" Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God." (1 John 4:15)

If God abides in him, what NEED is there for another besides God and who is not God, to abide in him ?

ie.

" Test yourselves whether you are in the faith; prove yourselves, Or do you not realize about yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you, unless you are disapproved?" (2 Cor. 13:5)

Will you please answer that for me? And this is assuming that the 'We" (John 14:23) and the "Us" (John 17:21) mean God plus someone ELSE who is not God.

Isn't God then all we need? Why then this additional someone else not God, has to accompany God to be in us ?