The Messiah is Deity. We do not dispute that the Father is not the Son (hence reject modalism/Sabellianism and Arianism just as the early church did; these heresies post-date a trinitarian view).
Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus
by snowbird 328 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
designs
The Early Church didn't so much reject those other theologies they murdered the adherents.
One solid proof that the Trinity is a dangerous ideology and its followers are a Cult.
-
godrulz
What murders in the first 3 centuries are you talking about? The reality is that Sabellianism and modalism were not on the radar until a few centuries after the trinitarian view was normatively accepted (even without exhaustive philosophical detail). When they did appear, they were condemned as heretical and orthodoxy was maintained (the WT trinity booklet misrepresents the early Church Fathers, including the Constantine conspiracy). Those who reject the trinity are ignorant of Church history/history of dogma and Scripture itself.
-
designs
History, try boning up on it sometime when you're not blowing hot air here...
-
watersprout
Those who reject the trinity are ignorant of Church history/history of dogma and Scripture itself.
Not ignorant.... More like a noncholant attitude towards it.
The thing is Godrulz each and everyone of us is allowed to believe what we want. Stop forcing your beliefs down everyones throats.
Peace
-
snowbird
Snowbird-
It is revealing, Christians with differing interpretations on the same texts, persons that hear voices and those that don't, some see visons others don't. What to make of it all.
Dang skippy, Breh.
No cookie-cutter, lock-step uniformity here.
Nothing wrong per se with hearing voices and seeing visions.
I've heard that it happens to some during la petite mort.
Make of it whatever you wish, but I like it.
I had enough of the WT's forced Pollyanna attitude.
Syl
-
designs
Jesus divided by the number of earth's population = diluted conviction
-
jonathan dough
Podobear:
@Essan: So when THE LORD (Jehovah) said in verse 6: "Yet have I set my King upon my Holy Hill of Zion", you are saying that Jehovah is referring to himself? Not wanting to put interpretation in your mouth or pen... but I think you are very wrong.
We beg to differ.
You still don't understand the Trinity and the nature of the God-Man, Jesus. You continue to accuse trinitarians of believing that the Father became the suffering creature on the cross, but that isn't what we are taught because that is the heresy of patripassianism. Mainstream Christianity - the overwhelming majority of Catholic and Protestant churches - teaches that: "The humanity of Christ is a creature, it is not God” (Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 922). For this reason, the humanity of Christ who is a creature can pray to the Father and can state that the Father is greater than He is without any contradiction. Even if God the Son were saying such things there would be no contradiction because the Son emptied himself and humbled himself and took the form of a slave, willing subjecting himself to an inferior role. Why is it that you can't understand this? Why do you bear false witness and claim that trinitarians believe something else? That we commit the heresy of believing that the Father became just a man on a cross? That's not fair; it is a false characterization.
Accordingly, in light of the role of the God-man, Psalm 2 and verse 6 can easily be understood; that the Almighty was to place the God-man Christ on a throne. It is very, very simple. The practical implications of the union is that “Jesus sometimes spoke as man, sometimes as God; sometimes as Godman” (M. O’Carroll, Trinitas: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Holy Trinity [Wilmington, Delaware, Michael Glazier, Inc., 1987], 186) (Trinitas).
-
-