Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Trinity 101


  • Please log in to reply
143 replies to this topic

#121 Martyn

Martyn

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,791 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 06:55 PM

However, I really don't believe we should disregard what Jesus said simply because there are lots of other passages that 'contradicts' whatever he was saying.

I never for one second said that you should. I said you should look to harmonise Scripture. Jesus never said anything which contradicts another part of Scripture. (Let's not start with the Mosaic Law here :thumbsup:.)

With my current belief, if you were to ask me this multiple choice question, my answer would be  a), b), and c). 

So you disagreed with me when I said '© is palpably not true as there are no verses stating that both God and Christ raised Christ'? Billi, can you find me one verse that says both God and Christ raised Christ? NOT two different verses saying one of each.

I seriously disagree with the notion that since more passages support this idea and only ONE passage supports another... we must disregard this ONE passages. Majority rules... or this ONE passage was mistranslated somehow, it didn't really mean that...

I didn't say disregard that one passage. I said harmonise it. Read it in the wider context of Scripture. You don't need to know any Greek for that. Heck, I don't know any Greek! And the wider context of Scripture in this instance is those other 9 passages that Dianne gave you.

#122 Martyn

Martyn

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,791 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 06:58 PM

I really think Christadelphians need to raise money and translate the Bible properly. I think it's a cop out for some to stay in Trinitarian churchs simply because family or friends are still there. I also think it's a cop out for Christadelphians to continue to use these Trinitarian biased Bibles.

Most Christians reject the JWs for the precise reason that they have translated their own Bible. Christadelphians have long resisted their own translation for that reason.

We need to debate on equal footing. I really hate to be told that I'm wrong because I don't know certain hidden meaning of some Greek words. Trinitarian Doctrine is most certainly not perfect, however, this stupid man-invented doctrine is the only way we can reconcile a), b) and c).

We are on equal footing. You have the exact same access to language tools anyone else does. Not everyone here is a Greek wizard!

#123 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:00 PM

As we read the Bible, we are to hold it as absolute truth, granted, there might be translation errors, but the Holy Bible must be absolutely true or else it's by definition not Holy.

a) God the Father raised Christ
b) Christ raised Christ
c) both raised Christ
d) the Bible contradicts, therefore Jesus' words must be given prominence

Scriptures really shouldn't contradict, if they do, then they're obviously inspired by different author... or perhaps it was merely written based on inspiration by man.

No, in this instance, it means that somone is misinterpretting the scripture. :coffee:

I think part of d) which claims Bible contradicts needs to be rejected. However, I really don't believe we should disregard what Jesus said simply because there are lots of other passages that 'contradicts' whatever he was saying. Jesus is the 'truth', if that's what he said, that's what he said. Another possibility is that John gave false testimony regarding what Jesus said. Final possibility is that the Holy Bible is once again mis-translated.


See above.

With my current belief, if you were to ask me this multiple choice question, my answer would be  a), b), and c).  It's impossible for Paul to give false testimony. It's impossible for Jesus to not know what he's talking about. It's also impossible that John gave false testimony... so for Christadelphians, natural conclusion is Bible mistranslation on the Trinitarians part.


:yuk:

We need to debate on equal footing. I really hate to be told that I'm wrong because I don't know certain hidden meaning of some Greek words. Trinitarian Doctrine is most certainly not perfect, however, this stupid man-invented doctrine is the only way we can reconcile a), b) and c).


No it doesn't because if you use the Trinity to come to the conclusion of a), b) and c) then you claim that Jesus and the Father are the 'same' person, which according to you, they are distinctly different and you have to prove that there is evidence that Christ and his FAther raised Christ from the dead :surf:

I seriously disagree with the notion that since more passages support this idea and only ONE passage supports another... we must disregard this ONE passages. Majority rules... or this ONE passage was mistranslated somehow, it didn't really mean that...


Misinterpreted but according to Ev's post, it's in accordance with Christ getting having this priviledge through his Father.

Regarding the visionary transfiguration:
Luke9:32Peter and his companions were very sleepy, but when they became fully awake, they saw his glory and the two men standing with him.

When one has visions and is fully awake, doesn't it make the visions 'real'?


The Bible says that it's a vision.

The two dead men who's supposed to be dead and unconscious, how do they now appear before them?


It's a vision.

Were they resurrected? Were those disciples simply day dreaming?


No, it's a vision. That's what the bible says.

Didn't you just write the following?

As we read the Bible, we are to hold it as absolute truth, granted, there might be translation errors, but the Holy Bible must be absolutely true or else it's by definition not Holy.


You said we are to hold the Bible as absolute truth and now when the bible clearly tells us that something was a 'vision' you want to deny it. Strange :thumbsup:

Edited by Dianne, 16 March 2004 - 07:03 PM.

"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#124 luke

luke

    Tau

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,175 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:06 PM

[...]

a) God the Father raised Christ
b) Christ raised Christ
c) both raised Christ
d) the Bible contradicts, therefore Jesus' words must be given prominence

[...]

I think part of d) which claims Bible contradicts needs to be rejected. However, I really don't believe we should disregard what Jesus said simply because there are lots of other passages that 'contradicts' whatever he was saying.

No one is saying that we should disregard Jesus' words. What we are saying is that we need to understand what the Bible is really saying.
The other passages that you suggest 'contradict' Jesus' words in John 10:18 don't contradict Jesus' words - rather, they help us to understand Jesus' words more. That is the way to look at it; that is useful.

Jesus is the 'truth', if that's what he said, that's what he said.

No one's denying that. But what did he say? That's the question.

Another possibility is that John gave false testimony regarding what Jesus said.

I agree with you that this isn't the case (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

Final possibility is that the Holy Bible is once again mis-translated.

This is always a possibility, and there are plenty of really bad translaions out there that mess around with what God's message is actually saying. This doesn't mean that we can't eventually come to understand what God's message really says.

It's impossible for Paul to give false testimony.

Agreed.

It's impossible for Jesus to not know what he's talking about.

Agreed.

It's also impossible that John gave false testimony

Agreed.

I agree to all of the above three points. But we still need to truly understand what they mean by what they say. Sometimes it's hard to understand what they say, but it can be worked out.

so for Christadelphians, natural conclusion is Bible mistranslation on the Trinitarians part.

I believe that there are a few mistranslations in many of the versions of the Bible that we have; most of the time I would say that these mistranslations aren't on purpose, but are just the result of bias on the side of the translaters.
However, I'd go as far as to say that, in some versions of the Bible, there are even bits that have not just been mistranslated, but which have been simply added by the translators (like the imformous verse added in the KJV of 1 John).

I really think Christadelphians need to raise money and translate the Bible properly. I think it's a cop out for some to stay in Trinitarian churchs simply because family or friends are still there. I also think it's a cop out for Christadelphians to continue to use these Trinitarian biased Bibles.

Why is it a cop out? People have read these 'trinitarian biased' versions for years and, with prayer and a bit of proper study, have still come to understand what Christadelphians believe to be the turth.

Personally, I think having a Christadelphian translation would be a bad idea, because then Christadelphians could be charged with producing something that is biased themselves. Better to work with what we've got than to be accused of that.

We need to debate on equal footing. I really hate to be told that I'm wrong because I don't know certain hidden meaning of some Greek words.

It's not hard to do a bit of looking into the original Greek words, and it can be very useful to. Why not give it a go.

Trinitarian Doctrine is most certainly not perfect, however, this stupid man-invented doctrine is the only way we can reconcile a), b) and c).

Clinging to the trinity isn't the only way to understand John 10:18 and the other passages about who raised Jesus. This thread has shown you another way to do that, and a way that stays within the scope of the Bible, without having to base its starting point on a man made-doctrine like the trinity.

I seriously disagree with the notion that since more passages support this idea and only ONE passage supports another... we must disregard this ONE passages. Majority rules...

No body is saying that we should disregard anything. What is being said is that we should use the majority to understand the minority. If we use scripture to help us understand other parts of scripture then we can come to the truth.

or this ONE passage was mistranslated somehow, it didn't really mean that...

But that is a very real possibility. Why can't you accept that?


For what it's worth, some English translations verify what has been said in this thread with regard to the Greek of John 10:18. The Contemporary English Version (CEV), for example says this:

No one takes my life from me. I give it up willingly! I have the power to give it up and the power to receive it back again, just as my Father commanded me to do.


And the Weymouth New Testament puts it like this:

No one is taking it away from me, but I myself am laying it down. I am authorized to lay it down, and I am authorized to receive it back again. This is the command I received from my Father."


Edited by luke, 16 March 2004 - 07:11 PM.


#125 Martyn

Martyn

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,791 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:13 PM

This is so funny. Sorry for the major artillery attack Billi!!!

#126 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:16 PM

That's cool, I don't mind being under attack! :surf:

Most Christians reject the JWs for the precise reason that they have translated their own Bible.  Christadelphians have long resisted their own translation for that reason.

No, I reject JW because they have made false prophecies in the past... and they don't believe that Jesus was bodily resurrected. Worst yet, they don't believe that we are saved by faith and grace alone. I do not consider JW to be my brothers and sisters, I do consider Christadelphians to be brothers and sisters though.

Anyway, Christadelphinas need to have multiple scholars translating... verifying each other... at least the NT. If the translation is authentic from the original source, Trinitarian Christians will have no option but to embrace your newly translated Bible. To reject your accurately translated Bible... is to reject the original source. That is just stupid. If people continue to have 'blind' faith in the falsely translated Bible... then falling in to the pit will be inevitable.

Regarding your answer c), no, scripture never said Father and Son both raised the Son from the dead. However, scripture did say the Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son. Father did give Jesus full authority to do as the Son pleased. The Son delights in obeying his Father... so with the authority given to him by the Father, Jesus made a conscious decision by himself that he will lay down his life for us... and in 3 days, he'll raise it back up again in order to fulfill the acient prophecies. Yes, I'd agree, without the Father, without Father giving the Son authority, the Son won't be able to do JACK! So without the Father, Son simply could not raise anything. Father's will is to raise the Son from the dead. Son's will is totally seperate and independent from the Father's, but the Son's will is exactly the same as the Father's will. Anyway, this is how I 'harmonize' the scriptures.

Father is indeed greater than the Son, but Son is absolutely equal to the Father, this is done with Father's authorization of course. There you have it, my explanation of my belief without mentioning that bad bad 'trinity' word. :thumbsup:

Edited by Billi, 16 March 2004 - 07:19 PM.


#127 Martyn

Martyn

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,791 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:21 PM

That's cool, I don't mind being under attack!  :surf:

I believe the expression 'famous last words' are appropriate here ...

If people continue to have 'blind' faith in the falsely translated Bible... then falling in to the pit will in inevitable.

I couldn't agree more.

Regarding your answer c), no, scripture never said Father and Son both raised the Son from the dead. However, scripture did say the Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son. Father did give Jesus full authority to do as the Son pleased. The Son delights in obeying his Father... so with the authority give to him by the Father, Jesus made a conscious decision by himself that he will lay down his life for us... and in 3 days, he'll raise it back up again in order to fulfill the acient prophecies. Yes, I'd agree, without the Father, without Father giving the Son authority, the Son won't be able to do JACK! So without the Father, Son simply could not raise anything. Father's will is to raise the Son from the dead. Son's will is totally seperate and independent from the Father's, but the Son's will is exactly the same as the Father's will. Anyway, this is how I 'harmonize' the scriptures.

That's a mighty long diversion to avoid the simple conclusion we've been suggesting.

Father is indeed greater than the Son, but Son is absolutely equal to the Father

:thumbsup: Billi, please please read that again. You don't mean that. It makes no sense in the slightest.

#128 luke

luke

    Tau

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,175 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:30 PM

This is so funny. Sorry for the major artillery attack Billi!!!

Aye, sorry Billi. :thumbsup:

#129 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:31 PM

Billi first you say:

Scriptures really shouldn't contradict, if they do, then they're obviously inspired by different author... or perhaps it was merely written based on inspiration by man.


Yet you say:

Father is indeed greater than the Son, but Son is absolutely equal to the Father


It's a contradiction!!! :surf:

How do you reconcile that scripture should never contradict scripture but yet you believe that scripture teaches a doctrine such as the Trinity which contradicts scripture? :thumbsup:

Edited by Dianne, 16 March 2004 - 07:34 PM.

"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#130 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:33 PM

Why doesn't it make sense? Besides giving authorization the Son(which made Father greater), can you tell me if there's anything that the Son cannot do? BTW, the Son can give authorization to others as well... just that the Son doesn't give orders to the Father. Son is just as powerful as the Father, which makes him equal. But since only Father's will will be done, this makes Father greater.

Anyway Dianne, can you be certain that transfiguration is a vision? Only Gospel of Matthew made that claim. Gospel of Mark and Luke indicated otherwise. We're back to the same delimma. How can we harmonized this? Chistadelphians will hold on to Matthews account, Trinitarians will hold on to Mark and Luke's accounts. Two vs One. Does that mean trinitarians win?

Edited by Billi, 16 March 2004 - 07:35 PM.


#131 luke

luke

    Tau

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,175 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:36 PM

Why doesn't it make sense? Besides giving authorization the Son(which made Father greater), can you tell me if there's anything that the Son cannot do? BTW, the Son can give authorization to others as well... just that the Son doesn't give orders to the Father. Son is just as powerful as the Father, which makes him equal. But since only Father's will will be done, this makes Father greater.

Is this even the Trinity? :thumbsup:

#132 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:42 PM

Why doesn't it make sense? Besides giving authorization the Son(which made Father greater), can you tell me if there's anything that the Son cannot do? BTW, the Son can give authorization to others as well... just that the Son doesn't give orders to the Father.

We've already been through this. The son can only do what the Father does via authority of the Father.

Jhn 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.


Christ can't do anything of himself.

Anyway Dianne, can you be certain that transfiguration is a vision?


That's what the bible says.

Only Gospel of Matthew made that claim. Gospel of Mark and Luke indicated otherwise.


So, you wish to say that the Gospel of Matthew is uninspired?

We back to the same delimma. How can we harmonized this? Chistadelphians will hold on to Matthews account, Trinitarians will hold on to Mark and Luke's accounts. Two vs One. Does that mean trinitarians win?


NO, because the Gospel of Mark and Luke doesn't indicate otherwise. How do you figure? Does the Gospel of Mark and Luke indicate that this was Elijah and Moses come down from heaven?
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#133 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 07:54 PM

Luke, I'm not here to argue FOR the Holy Trinity, I'm here to attempt to grasp the real truth. Am I really way off with my belief? Is my current belief against what the scripture was saying?

Dianne, I do agree with you that Christ cannot do anything by himself. However, Christ was given full authority, with his God given power, is he still not equal to God? Exactly what did God the Father hold back? What can't Jesus do?

Further, I'm not discounting Matthew's account. We see things because we have 'vision'. Mark and Luke was pretty clear that disciples saw those two people with their eyes and they were not sleeping. Elijah and Moses appeared in glorious splendor. I don't know if they came from heaven or not, but one begs to know whether these two are indeed the same Elijah and Moses that existed long before. And if they can converse with Jesus, it proves that the dead can be conscious after their bodily death.

#134 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 08:01 PM

Dianne, I do agree with you that Christ cannot do anything by himself. However, Christ was given full authority, with his God given power, is he still not equal to God?

No, he's not equal because the power was 'given' to him by someone who obviously had the authority to give it.

Exactly what did God the Father hold back?


You are clearly missing the point.

If the Father gave Jesus the authority then it stand to reason that the Father could also take back the authority that was given.

What can't Jesus do?


He cannot deny his Father.

Further, I'm not discounting Matthew's account. We see things because we have 'vision'. Mark and Luke was pretty clear that disciples saw those two people with their eyes and they were not sleeping.


There is a difference between a vision and a dream, Billi. Don't you agree?
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#135 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 08:09 PM

Father won't deny the Son too! Do you think the Father will ever deny his Son?

Anyway, so exactly what is your definition of a 'vision' during the transfiguration?

I'm saying the disciples actually saw the real Moses and Elijiah who lived long ago.

Who or what did they really 'see' based on your biblical interpretation?

#136 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 08:23 PM

Father won't deny the Son too! Do you think the Father will ever deny his Son?

That's a 'moot' point since it's already established that the Father gave authority to the son and the Son can do nothing of himself.

Can the Father do nothing of Himself???
Can Christ do nothing of Himself???

Who gave whom 'authority'?

They are not equal.

I'm saying the disciples actually saw the real Moses and Elijiah who lived long ago.

they saw a 'vision' of Elijah and Moses.

A vision is a divinely granted sight given while in some sort of trance.
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#137 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 08:34 PM

Can the Father do nothing of Himself???
I wonder about this. How will the Father do things if He had no Son and no power(Holy Spirit).

Can Christ do nothing of Himself???
Yeah, if there's only Christ, without Father and Holy Spirit, Christ certainly won't be able to do much.

So you see how I see them as equal?


Who gave whom 'authority'?
For sure it is the Father who gave the Son authority.

Yes, this means Father is indeed greater! :thumbsup:

Back to the 'vision', So, if you see a 'vision' of God or angles or whoever, you're saying what you're seeing in the vision may or may not be really them? So you're saying 'visions' are just hallucinations?

I'm saying they really saw real Moses and Elijah. Can you prove me wrong using the scriptures?

#138 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 08:44 PM

Can the Father do nothing of Himself???
I wonder about this. How will the Father do things if He had no Son and no power(Holy Spirit).

The answer is in Hebrews 1

You keep asking the same questions. All of this has been answered before.

Hebrews 1
1:1 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, 1:2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son,


The Father is never without his Holy Spirit or His power.

Can Christ do nothing of Himself???
Yeah, if there's only Christ, without Father and Holy Spirit, Christ certainly won't be able to do much.


Well lets just keep remembering John 5:30.

John 5:30 I (Jesus) can do nothing on my own initiative.55 Just as I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just,56 because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me.57


So you see how I see them as equal?


No, I see you going back and forth and back and forth.

Who gave whom 'authority'?
For sure it is the Father who gave the Son authority.

Yes, this means Father is indeed greater!


Well, i'm not going to celebrate because you'll only end up contradicting yourself again later on down the line. LOL

Back to the 'vision', So, if you see a 'vision' of God or angles or whoever, you're saying what you're seeing in the vision may or may not be really them? So you're saying 'visions' are just hallucinations?


No, in this instance, the vision was a 'divinely' granted sight brought on by a trance. Not all visisions are divinely granted.

Hallucinations are usually brought on by mental disorder or a response to drugs.

Edited by Dianne, 16 March 2004 - 08:48 PM.

"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#139 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 09:02 PM

Anyway, I think we're stucked in a loop, we both continue to ask and give the same questions and answers... and we're not really going anywhere. :surf: You keep on saying that I contradict myself... and I continue to think that I'm not. Perhaps I'm just nuts. Okay..., let's eat some popcorn... :thumbsup: and have a drink :coffee:

Regarding this devinely granted sight brought on by a trance..., my question is:

Does God usually show us real things or just fake images in these 'visions'?

Edited by Billi, 16 March 2004 - 09:03 PM.


#140 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 09:24 PM

Anyway, I think we're stucked in a loop, we both continue to ask and give the same questions and answers... and we're not really going anywhere. :thumbsup:

Well, I see differently here but okay.

You keep on saying that I contradict myself


Sure you do. You cannot be 'equal' to something you are greater than. If God has 'authority' over Christ then he is NOT equal to Christ.

Regarding this devinely granted sight brought on by a trance..., my question is:
Does God usually show us real things or just fake images in these 'visions'?


Who said anything about 'fake' images? I said that they saw a vision of both Elijah and Moses. They were in a trance or a hypnotic state.
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#141 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 16 March 2004 - 09:33 PM

Mathematically, it's possible to have something that's 'greater than and equal to', right?

Further, let's try some algebra,

Let Father's authority = infinity
Let Father's power = infinity

Let Jesus' real authority(he can't tell Father what to do) = zero
Let Jesus' power = infinity (<=== this is given to him by the Father)

Based on the above, it's obvious that Father is greater, right? (Don't jump for joy yet... :thumbsup: )

Now,

Father = Father's authority + Father's power = infinity + infinity = infinity

Son = Jesus' authority + Jesus' power = zero + infinity = infinity

So you see! Now, I have proved that Father and the Son are equal.

Anyway, Dianne, let's go back to the 'vision'.

Did the disciples see the 'real' Elijah and Moses talking with Jesus or not?

Edited by Billi, 16 March 2004 - 09:36 PM.


#142 Billi

Billi

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 17 March 2004 - 07:31 PM

Anyway, I guess this thread is now dead.

Just want to re-iterate my point again, instead of having this thread end with a cartoon... :thumbsup:

At this point in time, I believe that the Son can do everything that the Father can do. Jesus is just as all mighty as his Father. This is the reason why I believe that they are equal.

This 'equality' was granted by the Father Himself. It is because of THIS, even the Son acknowledges the fact that Father is greater than him. Son will forever be humbled before his Father and they'll also forever share the same will.

I don't see this as contradicting. If you guys continue to see it as contradictions, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm not absolutely sure how will Jesus judge us during the end times with our slightly different beliefs. However, I'm inclined to believe that as long as we earnestly follow the way of Christ, he will forgive us of our mis-beliefs. After all, we alll believe Christ is the truth, way, and life. We all have different lives. God also make different ways for us(Jesus touches us all differently). Naturally, we will only be able to comprehend different degrees of truth. If God wants me to know more and more of His truth, then I hope God will grant me the wisdom to be able to properly understand. I pray this in Jesus' name. Amen! :surf:

Edited by Billi, 17 March 2004 - 07:33 PM.


#143 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 17 March 2004 - 07:33 PM

:thumbsup:
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#144 Truth

Truth

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 01 December 2009 - 04:01 AM

Trinitarians don't believe any one is greater than the other two. Jesus is a humble person. Naturally he'll tell you that his Father is greater.

So you believe that the Father isn't greater than Jesus whilst Jesus will naturally tell you the Father is greater.

So you believe that Jesus is using empty flattery here???

I'd like to know why the Father is called the God of Jesus if He's not greater - and it's Paul who says it.

:first:

Paul also said Jesus is equal and has the same nature as his Father. But when this happens, Christadelphians claims Paul was mistranslated by trinitarian translators.

Who am I to believe?

Just want to make clear that for sure Jesus isn't GREATER than his Father. It is my belief that whatever the Father can do, so can Jesus. Do you guys believe that there is anything that Jesus cannot do that only the Father can do?


Yes there is one thing God can do that Jesus nor any other creature can "KNOW THE TIME THE END WILL COME".




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users