What trinitarians evade

joman · Tiger Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 823

Franksinatra asked, “How can Jesus be the mediator between God and man and God at the same time? (1 Tim2:5; Heb 12:24.”

I Timothy 2:5
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time”

This verse states that Jesus Christ is a man.
As a man Jesus Christ stands between God on his throne and man.
I note that it reads Christ Jesus in this verse rather than, Jesus Christ.
Verse three of this same chapter reads, “God our Savior.”
I think the phrasing of the name as “Christ Jesus” is a means of emphasizing the fact that Jesus of Nazareth was the man anointed to be Christ. This therefore, stresses the fact that as a man Jesus was given his authority from the throne of God. He thereby, has the power to mediate for man with God because God the Father has officially authorized him to do so. The mention of Jesus’ giving himself a ransom for all explains the means by which he mediates as well as the extent of his commitment to do so. “To be testified in due time”, points out that there is the future revealing of the mediatorship of Christ Jesus before all men, that is, believer and unbeliever alike. His mediatorship will of course be undeniable at the great judgement which is appointed unto all men. We Christians, all ready, understand this mediating ability of Jesus.
Hebrews 12:24 says Jesus is, “….the mediator of the new covenant.” A covenant requires at least two parties and therefore a minimum of two representatives. Jesus is our representative in all covenant matters before God. The book of Hebrews discusses this at length.
However, the poster of the question seems to be wanting someone to explain to him how Jesus can be identical to God on his throne and yet be a man who can mediate between God and man. I want to first mention that this situation is not a math problem as the Reaper supposed when he said, “Of course in our arithmetic we learned better, i. e., that 1+1+1=3, not one.” Jesus said that in marriage the “twain shall become one flesh” Paul asked us, “do you not know this?” I do not think therefore that, we can avoid the sense that the person of Jesus Christ is somewhat a mystery. I have learned that in “rightly dividing” the word of God we do not cause ‘division’ but merely facillitate our partaking of the bread of life which we can’t, as it were, swallow whole. And, in “rightly dividing” the word of God we can't ever allow the vanity, of attempting to break a ‘scripture’ since, our Lord Jesus said that, “scripture cannot be broken.”
Let us keep this in mind during these discussions.
I will state for the record that Jesus Christ is my God. I know nevertheless, that he isn’t the Father. I know that Jesus and the Father are one. I know that Jeus sits at the right hand of the Father and not in his lap. I know that Jesus obeys the Father. I know that the Father has authority over the Son of God. I know that Jesus Christ is the Word of God made flesh. I know that he therefore was with God and is himself God. I know that the scripture never says there is One God. But, that it says God is one. I believe there is one God. I know that ‘Comforter’ is a personal name for the Holy Spirit. I know that the Comforter comforts us in the absence of Jesus Christ. But, I know that Jesus is within me by the Holy Spirit. I don’t get confused because I know that all these things do not equate to mere philosophy. I just accept all the separate truth’s as expressed. I suspect that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one because of love. I think love produces a oneness that is more firm and real than any physical example can show. I don’t think ultimately you can discern any difference among them and you certainly can’t separate them. Paul told us of his prayers that we would someday comprehend the height, depth, breadth and length and knowledge of the love of Christ which passeth all understanding. I think we just don’t understand it.

Franksinatra said, Jesus' God is the Father. (John 20:17; Eph 1:17) Where does it say that the Father's God is Jesus?

I don’t know of anywhere in the scriptures that the Father says Jesus is his God. I think that since Jesus says, his Father is his God then, we must conclude that this is true. Jesus therefore does worship his Father. But, this doesn’t void the scriptures that point to Jesus as being God: Emmanuel. This is because Jesus and the Father are one. The Father isn’t offended when a man worships Jesus Christ as God. Why would God seat Jesus at his right hand if he didn’t want everyone to believe that Jesus is equal with him? If you were a wealthy man and you had a son like Jesus would you not trust him with all you possess both in name and authority? The book of Hebrews tells us not to get confused and think that Jesus sits as Lord over God the Father. But, on the otherhand the same book of Hebrews doesn’t suggest we ought not consider Jesus to be God.

Franksinatra asked, “Why do the Father and son have personal names, but not the holy spirit? (Rev 14:1).”

I consider “Comforter” to be a personal name, don’t you?
Also you used a little 'h' which doesn't refer to the 'Holy Ghost' when it is used in scripture. This is because the term 'holy spirit' can be applied to any spirit that is holy. Your use of the word 'the' preceding the term 'holy spirit' is therefore deceptive. Why are you being deceptive in this discussion. The Holy Spirit is God isn't he? But, didn't Jesus send him to us? Why does the Holy Spirit obey the command of Jesus? Doesn't the Spirit of truth speak what he hears and not his own words? Isn't that the same thing that Jesus did?

Franksinatra asked, “When God spoke at Jesus' baptism and at the transfiguration, why did he say Jesus was "his son" if actually his equal? Why not: "This is God the son" or even "This is my God?" (Matt 3:17; 2 Pet 1:17)”

Jesus didn’t anoint himself did he? So, it’s beyond dispute that Jesus isn’t the Father. But, what is the problem? Maybe I’m the one that doesn’t understand the doctrine of the ‘trinity’.

Do you believe that Jesus is God?

Joman.

franksinatra · Big Hamster Joined: 20 Jul 2004 Posts: 93

metothezero · Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 8:12 am Post subject:

Sir, the Reverend has asked you to allow Reaper to answer the questions. By continuing to post your comments, you are cluttering it up so that Reaper will not know what is asked of him. Therefore, I will start another topic, for you and I, to discuss your Watchtower material.

You made a comment about us getting our Trinitarian doctrines and belief from the likes of Calvin and Luther. Funny thing is I have never read either for the purpose of Trinitarian truths. Would you rather me read material from the Watchtower for my doctrines? Would you rather me put them above that of Jesus and Paul? I'm sure that wouldn't be correct either.

But that is for anothe discussion. I am quite excited about discussing more with you. I love the Witnesses, very twisted doctrines you present. Quite fun I might say, almost as fun as the Open Theist, but not quite Smile

.
Shall we begin?
_________________
The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law which overarches rulers and ruled alike.
C. S. Lewis

Atheism is a ferocious system, that leaves nothing above us to excite awe, nor around us to awaken tenderness. --R. Hall.

Reaper · Hamster Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 86

I will be very pleased to discuss this issue with anyone who truly gives evidence that they are interested in discussing the issue to determine the facts, however I will not waste valuable consecrated time in needless and useless debates with those whose only wish is to argue the issue and who have closed their minds to reason, nor will I discuss the issue with those who present themselves in any arrogant, condescending and demeaning matter. I’ve had too much experience with such and have found it to be a waste of time, there are to many more beneficial issues to discuss. Thus my policy is that as soon as I see that one is exhibiting any such attitude the discussion is ended, and I will no longer reply to such individuals.

As a Bible Student I usually avoid this issue, as it tends not to the mutual edification of the body, but rather to strife, seeing that both those for and against the issue are fully committed to their own viewpoints. However as long as RevJP the moderator is able to control the tone of the responses I will make an effort once again to discuss the issue with those who wish.

I do have one quick question for Frank, are you a Trinitarian or not? The reason I asks this is because reading merely from this thread alone your post seem to contradict one another, one post seems to imply that you are not, and then the next that you are, which is it? It has always been my belief that if one is not straightforward in their professions, i.e. what they believe or don’t believe, their faith, it usually implies that they themselves are not totally assured, thus they lose any credibility in presenting their case to others.

First before I begin any discussion on this issue Metothezero has asked that I give a short bio of myself and of my religion so that others can see from whence my views come. I had intended to discuss this very issue under another thread, however a short version will have to suffice for now (I will post it under the introduction thread, where I made my first introduction).

RevJP · Moderator Joined: 18 Apr 2003 Posts: 7003 Location: USA

Reaper, you first paragraph smacks of arrogance, I may be mistaken, but it sounds like you are saying that your time is too valuable to spend it discussing things with anyone who will not accept your POV without debate.

And as moderator, I do not control the tone. If things get too ugly, I cool them down, if things go too far off topic, I bring it back. If someone gets abusive, I wave bye-bye. But we allow a great lattitude here for the sake of discussion and the respect of individual's desire to be heard and to listen and learn.

As for your point of view, I suspect I know what it is and what you will give to support it. I fear It is not as I had hoped that you had an interesting POV. If you have a take on this topic which is supported sola scriptura, I would love to hear it. But if your view is based on doctrine and then attempted to be supported by scripture, particular translations of broad meaning words, specific versions of the bible which are translated specifically to support a specific ideaology, non-contextual uses of verses, etc. - Then I really do not need to hear it, as I am in search of scriptural truth, not the ideas of man with manufactured evidence to lend tenuous support.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog

MoJo · Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:39 pm Post subject:

No stars to you on this one RevJp. Your bad. Because of your discussion with reaper on another thread, you are setting up the parameters of strife on this one. You accuse him of arrogance, then do exactly the same thing yourself. You can't make assumptions about what a person will or will not say.

Reaper · Hamster Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 86

Dear RevJP

It is quite obvious that you have misunderstood my thought; it was not my intention to imply that that my own personal point of view was the only one pertinent to any discussion on this issue.

When I stated, I would be very pleased to discuss this issue with anyone who truly gives evidence that they are interested in discussing the issue to determine the facts, what I meant was that I only wished to discuss the issue with those who have open minds and who are willing to see both sides of the issue, the facts as they are presented by BOTH sides, not merely by my own. I am an Arian, neither you nor anyone else is going to change my viewpoint, no more than is it likely that you as a Trinitarian are likely to change your position. But that’s not the reason for this discussion, the reason is so that both sides of the issue can be thoroughly heard from so that those undecided or on the fringes may be able to weight the evidences provided and thus decide for THEMSELVES what they believe.

Nor was it my thought that my time was to valuable to discuss the word of God with others, what I meant was my time is consecrated in the service of the Lord and his people, and that it would be a waste of that which belongs to the Lord to spend it on someone who merely wished to argue, not discuss. We are caution by our Lord to shun profane and vain babblings, which lead to nothing but strife.

Mojo is correct I do not wish to enter this discussion at square ten, but rather at square one, I fully realize that this issue has most likely been thoroughly exhausted under the thread dealing specifically with this issue, but so it has on about every other bible forum out there. Does that mean that we should just avoid the issue? Saying well there’s nothing left to say? What of new interest, those new to the forum, new to Christianity, what are they supposed to do, come in on square 10 also? How is that supposed to help them in seeking the truth on this issue?

Now as to your statement, As for your point of view, I suspect I know what it is and what you will give to support it. I fear it is not as I had hoped that you had an interesting POV. If you have a take on this topic, which is, supported sola scriptura, I would love to hear it. But if your view is based on doctrine and then attempted to be supported by scripture, particular translations of broad meaning words, specific versions of the bible which are translated specifically to support a specific ideology, non-contextual uses of verses, etc. - Then I really do not need to hear it, as I am in search of scriptural truth, not the ideas of man with manufactured evidence to lend tenuous support.

Now my dear friend you make your self-not only to appear as a bigot, but also as a hypocrite, not only have you already determined my view point before I have even stated it, but you purpose to know upon what grounds I will support it. Tell me is your title genuine? I mean are you really an ordained minister, perhaps retired? If so what seminary school did you attend? How were you educated? Did they not teach you doctrines when you went to school?

What do you think it was that the apostle Paul taught to the Bereans, was it not the doctrines (teachings) of Christ? And did they not search the scriptures daily to see if what he taught them was so? In other words did they not seek to find if the scriptures supported his doctrines?

As to your statement in regards to seeking to know the proper meaning or intent of the original texts, by the use of various translations, yes I do use various translations, and what true student of the word does not? Some translations are better than others; some have more flaws than others. But of course you should have known this if you attended seminary school and even if you had not. (If your hinting that I might be using The New World Translation you are mistaken, I’m not a JW, I’m A Bible Student, my basic bible, which I use most often, is the NKJV) As to your last statement,

“Then I really do not need to hear it, as I am in search of scriptural truth, not the ideas of man with manufactured evidence to lend tenuous support.”

If you continue with the attitude you present here it is assured that you will never find it, true humility and meekness does not allow the mind to be hindered by preconceived opinions, prejudices and or bigotries.

Mojo says we are hoping you have a fresh view on the subject and that we don't all end up in the same old tired argumentation that brings no enlightenment.

In reply I cannot guarantee that, but I will say that it has always been my experience that we always learn a little something more, something new every time we listen to another individual take on any issue (that is if our minds are not closed by preconceived ideas and bigotries fostered by the creeds of men). It always important to remember that the Lord never intended that any one member of the body would have all knowledge on any specific subject, but rather he has set each of the members in the body as it pleases him and that together every joint supplies according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth to the body (both in the knowledge and graces of our Lord Jesus Christ), for the mutual edification of the whole.

I’m not mad at you Rev, I realize as is usually the case, that we tend not to fully explain ourselves as thoroughly as we would like, and thus we tend to be misunderstood, misquoted and such, I apologize for any misunderstandings which my comments have presented here both to you and to anyone else.

metothezero · Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 7:19 am Post subject:

OK!! Now that the preliminaries are over. Let us discuss.

Reaper, I am quite enthused that you are a Bible Student, instead of one of those nasty Witnesses Laughing

Just kidding. Truthfully, I have never spoken with a Bible Student, the Jehovah's Witnesses are my cup of tea. So you are a first for me, don't you feel special. I'll always remember my first.

You say that you are Arian, quite proudly might I add. Also that you have differing views from that of Hell and the Soul, this is allright, I mean not allright, I'll probably think you're wrong, but this is not the discussion right now. I would like to discuss your Arian views.

Hence, I will begin a new topic. LOL, I seem to do alot of that, Hey what can I say, I'm a leader, take charge kind of dude, starter.

I shall call this new topic, ARIAN, quite fitting huh?

Now, you and Rev kiss and make up. DO IT!!!
_________________
The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law which overarches rulers and ruled alike.
C. S. Lewis

Atheism is a ferocious system, that leaves nothing above us to excite awe, nor around us to awaken tenderness. --R. Hall.

RevJP · Moderator Joined: 18 Apr 2003 Posts: 7003 Location: USA

Mojo, yes you are right - I could have been nicer and I could have not made assumptions - for that I offer my apologies for all who may have been offended.

As for this:

MoJo · Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 12:58 pm Post subject:

reaper bad too Sad

I'm with meto, kiss and make up and let's get to what's important Very Happy

_________________
matt 6: 34 "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."

Nobby · Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:44 pm Post subject:

franksinatra · Big Hamster Joined: 20 Jul 2004 Posts: 93

I know you didn't ask, but perhaps this will contribute some fresh ideas:

Are Jesus and the Father 2 or 1? John 10:30 has long been used to support the trinity, even though at John 17:21, 22, Jesus prayed regarding his followers: “That they may all be one,” and he added, “that they may be one even as we are one.” He used the same Greek word (hen) for “one” in all these instances. Obviously, Jesus’ disciples do not all become part of the Trinity. But they do come to share a oneness of purpose with the Father and the Son, the same sort of oneness that unites God and Christ. Paul also used the same expression for "one" at 1 Cor 3:8 regarding Apollos and himself.John 8:17 shows Jesus indicating that he and God are not one, but two that bear witness. I've heard some rather weak arguments in attempting to overlook the obvious meaning of John 10:30 and 8:17, necessitated on the rendering of John 1:1. Put that verse aside and all that's left is John 20:28; however, verse 17 shows even the doubter did not mean to say Jesus was his God. What did he mean? While one cannot be certain, God's words to Moses at Ex 7:1 and 4:16 are enlightening. Many translators insert "like" or "as" God, or fail to capitalize the "G" in order to interpret for the reader, but literally, God made Moses God to Aaron and Pharaoh. Now Tom saw that God made Jesus "as God" or "God" to him! Moses told of the importance of realizing this fact at Deut 18:14-19: verse 19 states "If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account."God's prophet that He sent to speak in God's name, not God himself however.See Edgar Goodspeed's American Translation for his rendering of John 1:1 then ask why the difference. Good translation considers the original language text and grammar rules, in context with the surrounding verses and the entire Bible. The overwhelming Scriptural evidence is that Jesus is the son of God and not God. This fact is supported by the correct translation of John 1:1 in context with John's Gospel and the entire word of God. In other words, the trinity texts are a thimble full of murky water compared to the pristine ocean of the Bible.I would list all the verses that show Jesus was sent, raised up, taught, obeyed, prayed to and worshiped the only true God, but it would be far too unwieldy.

franksinatra · Big Hamster Joined: 20 Jul 2004 Posts: 93

metothezero · Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 8:05 pm Post subject: