Can The Holy Trinity Be One God?
-
which of our threads ever have proper theological guidance?Originally posted by NT2:if there is no proper theology guidance given in this thread. i suggest it to be closed to prevent further blasphemy against the name of the Holy Trinity.
-
It was the author's feeble attempts to argue that Jesus is the Messiah for the Jews. However the Jews didn't buy it.Originally posted by vince69:bo pian... its Matthew's fault, he go and traced it through Joseph to David...
(Matthew 1:1-17) -
aiyah u can call it whatever name, the concept is the same lah
-
But in Luke, it says Mary is a desendant of David.
And joseph line provides jesus the legal basis to claim the throne of david.
Mary line rpovides him the blood to also claim it. -
You believe in Holy Trinity?Originally posted by NT2:if there is no proper theology guidance given in this thread. i suggest it to be closed to prevent further blasphemy against the name of the Holy Trinity. -
I had pentecostal friend whose denomination calls the Holy Trinity a doctrine invented by the Romanist in the 4th century. It calls Jesus the Son of God but not trinatiran. I think its called Oneness Pentecostals.
So i believe there must be other means of explaining Gods nature beside the Holy Trinity
Ps: I reckon Holy Burger ( 3 layers) is a better term than Holy Trinity.
-
Actually, the purpose of me asking the question is, whether is it justifiable to describe Holy Trinity as it is as the term created is by MAN.
Not about the existence of Father, Son and Spirit.
Jesus never spoked or used the term Holy Trinity. He merely used the term Holy Father, Son and Spirit.
And so, is it ok for MAN to instill beliefs of the word Holy Trinity to the believers?
NOTE again, I do not deny the existence of Father, Son and Spirit. Nor am I denying Holy Trinity.
Im just asking whether to come up the word Holy Trinity is deemed justifiable as the word is created by MAN. -
Yes, by man.Originally posted by mhcampboy:Actually, the purpose of me asking the question is, whether is it justifiable to describe Holy Trinity as it is as the term created is by MAN.
Not about the existence of Father, Son and Spirit.
Jesus never spoked or used the term Holy Trinity. He merely used the term Holy Father, Son and Spirit.
And so, is it ok for MAN to instill beliefs of the word Holy Trinity to the believers?
NOTE again, I do not deny the existence of Father, Son and Spirit. Nor am I denying Holy Trinity.
Im just asking whether to come up the word Holy Trinity is deemed justifiable as the word is created by MAN.
-
Jesus didnt tell us which books are the Gospel or which books were inspired and to be included in the New Testament canon. Does that make teh New Testament a word created by Man since it is Man who told us which books were inspired???Originally posted by mhcampboy:Actually, the purpose of me asking the question is, whether is it justifiable to describe Holy Trinity as it is as the term created is by MAN.
Not about the existence of Father, Son and Spirit.
Jesus never spoked or used the term Holy Trinity. He merely used the term Holy Father, Son and Spirit.
And so, is it ok for MAN to instill beliefs of the word Holy Trinity to the believers?
NOTE again, I do not deny the existence of Father, Son and Spirit. Nor am I denying Holy Trinity.
Im just asking whether to come up the word Holy Trinity is deemed justifiable as the word is created by MAN. -
Oneness Pentocoastal does not even believe in that concept. Their case is not just calling it by another term but theirs is a totally different belief.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:I had pentecostal friend whose denomination calls the Holy Trinity a doctrine invented by the Romanist in the 4th century. It calls Jesus the Son of God but not trinatiran. I think its called Oneness Pentecostals.
So i believe there must be other means of explaining Gods nature beside the Holy Trinity
Ps: I reckon Holy Burger ( 3 layers) is a better term than Holy Trinity. -
Luke got say meh? Show me leh.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:But in Luke, it says Mary is a desendant of David.
And joseph line provides jesus the legal basis to claim the throne of david.
Mary line rpovides him the blood to also claim it.
But the legal basis includes the bloodline. The bloodline is very important in order to claim lineage. The mother is not part of the equation. As shown in the bible, the bloodline of Judah was tainted by non Jewish blood (Ruth). -
you talking about this passage?Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:But in Luke, it says Mary is a desendant of David.
And joseph line provides jesus the legal basis to claim the throne of david.
Mary line rpovides him the blood to also claim it.
Luke 1:26-38
The Birth of Jesus Foretold
26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. 28The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."
29Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. 31You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end."
34"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"
35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."
38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her. -
As a Christian, what do u understand abt the "beliefs of the word Holy Trinity?"Originally posted by mhcampboy:Actually, the purpose of me asking the question is, whether is it justifiable to describe Holy Trinity as it is as the term created is by MAN.
Not about the existence of Father, Son and Spirit.
Jesus never spoked or used the term Holy Trinity. He merely used the term Holy Father, Son and Spirit.
And so, is it ok for MAN to instill beliefs of the word Holy Trinity to the believers?
NOTE again, I do not deny the existence of Father, Son and Spirit. Nor am I denying Holy Trinity.
Im just asking whether to come up the word Holy Trinity is deemed justifiable as the word is created by MAN. -
Yes, it's a "mad-made" descriptive name. Maybe it's not enough to describe the full nature of God. It is not meant to limit the actual nature of God. But at least it describes what has been revealed to us.Originally posted by mhcampboy:Im just asking whether to come up the word Holy Trinity is deemed justifiable as the word is created by MAN. -
IMO, holy trinity is like a formula, made by man, to rationalise what God has revealed.
-
Man will stop at nothing, even changing Scripture, to support their theological agenda.Originally posted by davidche:IMO, holy trinity is like a formula, made by man, to rationalise what God has revealed.
In case some of you are still in the dark, there is one verse in the NT giving us the clearest indication of the Holy Trinity - 1 John 5:7.
I quote from the Douay Rheims and King James, the two representative Bible of the Catholic and Protestant faith:7 And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one. (http://www.drbo.org/chapter/69005.htm)
WOW!
7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=69&chapter=5&version=9)
Wait a minute .. don't be happy too fast. Check your own bible. I guess many of you are using NIV, so check your NIV ..
This is known as the Johannine Comma in textual criticism. For an explanation, read http://www.bible-researcher.com/comma.html -
And out of curiosity, whats the problem with that?Originally posted by davidche:IMO, holy trinity is like a formula, made by man, to rationalise what God has revealed.
Virtually everyone of our doctrines were formulated by Man even which books in Scripture were inspired. The Bible was created by Man ( in the sense it is us who chsoe which books were inspired). Christ did not come down from the heavens and say baptism must be trinatiran, salvation is by faith and works, my flesh is called the Eucharist etc etc. It is Man.
However we trust the Holy Spirit led those Man to intepretate the revelation is his Word correctly. -
nothing wrong.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:And out of curiosity, whats the problem with that?
Virtually everyone of our doctrines were formulated by Man even which books in Scripture were inspired. The Bible was created by Man ( in the sense it is us who chsoe which books were inspired). Christ did not come down from the heavens and say baptism must be trinatiran, salvation is by faith and works, my flesh is called the Eucharist etc etc. It is Man.
However we trust the Holy Spirit led those Man to intepretate the revelation is his Word correctly.
yes, some doctrines, and science too.... -
icemoon saves the day, thread closed right??Originally posted by Icemoon:WOW!
Wait a minute .. don't be happy too fast. Check your own bible. I guess many of you are using NIV, so check your NIV ..
This is known as the Johannine Comma in textual criticism. For an explanation, read http://www.bible-researcher.com/comma.html -
I never save the day lah .. only show you all how some scribes bochup the warning in deuteronmy and revelations about not adding or removing words to Scripture.Originally posted by davidche:icemoon saves the day, thread closed right??
-
I see both sided arguments on the net...Originally posted by Icemoon:I never save the day lah .. only show you all how some scribes bochup the warning in deuteronmy and revelations about not adding or removing words to Scripture. -
arguments about what?Originally posted by davidche:I see both sided arguments on the net... -
one side says that the verse is fake and added in by churches. and one side says it is real,..Originally posted by Icemoon:arguments about what?
the verse 1 John 5:7.... -
YEA, this page , yi zhen jian xie.......
http://logosresourcepages.org/Versions/johannine.htm
http://www.equip.org/free/DT160.htm
edit: wrong link haha -
well .. the fact is you can't find it in the earliest manuscripts. So unless you have evidence to the contrary, just treat the verse as .. fake.Originally posted by davidche:one side says that the verse is fake and added in by churches. and one side says it is real,..
the verse 1 John 5:7....
In fact this is the position taken by most modern bible translations. Look at the NIV and NRSV. They did not include the verse, but put it in a footnote.
Furthermore, the verse does not seem to be quoted by the church fathers. Well, if the verse is real, you can imagine the church fathers will all appeal to this verse to argue for the Trinity .. right?