Which person in the Trinity is the Judge?

[Red Baker]

Side note: Westminster Confession states it somewhat confusing to those who don't grasp what you, and Eleanor and myself sees so clearly... But it is close enough.

I also always feel compelled to post part on a different area...

Westminster Confession of Faith - WestminsterStandards.org

I. Of the Holy Scripture1. Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; (Rom. 2:14–15, Rom. 1:19–20, Ps. 19:1–3, Rom. 1:32, Rom. 2:1) yet they are not sufficient to give that...

westminsterstandards.org

III. Of God's Eternal Decree​

3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels (1 Tim. 5:21, Matt. 25:41) are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death. (Rom. 9:22–23, Eph. 1:5–6, Prov. 16:4)

If there is an unconditional election to eternal life, and there is~ then also one must hold to the doctrine of double predestinations, you cannot have one without the other. Jude 4

 

[Red Baker]

So you agree that the only true God is the Father and that the others aren't God? That's what the Apostle's creed says. It doesn't mention anything about the others being God.

It does not say that, that's an assumption on your part. A creed is nothing more than a brief summary of a certain group's beliefs, without going into depth of what the scriptures do teach. I pretty sure they would not deny Jesus' deity as God manifest in the flesh according to such scriptures as John 1:45-51~like the reprobates do.

 

[Red Baker]

The only one called God in the Apostle's creed is the Father and you still don't believe. lol

She follows the word of God above the creeds, even though the apostle's creed does not not reject the deity of Christ~that's not the purpose of creeds. Did you read anywhere in there where they rejected Jesus' deity? Of course not. Most of the devils were bound (restained) back then whereas, they are now released upon the world in the latter days......................

1st Timothy 4:1​

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;”

 

[Rella]

Nothing in the Bible says God was manifest in the flesh that hasn't been debunked.

There being no proof for the Trinity in the bible is inconvenient for you. You made a lot of noise, but didn't deliver anything of substance.

What's your best Trinity verse or passage? And don't Throw a wall of Scripture at me and say "this is what it means when you read it the way I am telling you to read it." No. Show me where God, Jesus, or any of the disciples talked about it, explained it, or described it. I think this will be the wall you always run into. You're going to find the truth will indeed set you free, soon, I hope.

Was William Wordsworth writing about you?

 

[Rella]

The Greek word for Bible is in Matthew 1:1. The word for Trinity in any language is non-existent in the Bible. You would think with something as important as who God is that it would be reflected in the teachings of Jesus or his disciples.

Why do you people never fully disclose this at the beginning when you start a topic about the Trinity? It looks like you're trying to trick people. You should begin with being upfront that what you're pushing isn't actually in the Bible.

Are you always this dense?

The Greek word for Bible is in Matthew 1:1.

I want a copy and paste page where it shows this word that has been translated Bible in English

The word
Βίβλος
Biblos

Is translated [The} book.

In every single English translation I provided above.

Are YOU correcting Strong?

Strong's Concordance
biblos: (the inner) bark (of a papyrus plant), hence a scroll, spec. a book
Original Word: βίβλος, ου, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: biblos
Phonetic Spelling: (bib'-los)
Definition: (the inner) bark (of a papyrus plant), a scroll, a book
Usage: a written book, roll, or volume, sometimes with a sacred connotation.

Strong's Greek English Morphology 976 [e] Βίβλος Biblos [The] book N-NFS 1078 [e] γενέσεως geneseōs of [the] genealogy N-GFS 2424 [e] Ἰησοῦ Iēsou of Jesus N-GMS 5547 [e] Χριστοῦ Christou Christ, N-GMS 5207 [e] υἱοῦ huiou son N-GMS 1138 [e] Δαυὶδ Dauid of David, N-GMS 5207 [e] υἱοῦ huiou son N-GMS 11 [e] Ἀβραάμ. Abraam of Abraham: N-GMS

So put up your written book in English... Not Greek... or shut up already.

Because Bible is not in the Book..... AND neither is the descriptive word Christianity.

see:

Christianity - Encyclopedia of The Bible - Bible Gateway​

The term Christianity does not occur in the Bible.

So while you are hunting for what you say is there and isn't... be sure to figure out what you need to start to tell people
is the religion you allegedly follow.... because IT CAN NOT BE CHRISTIANITY.......

As to the blessed Trinity.... we will get back to that WHEN AND IF YOU WILL CONCEDE that a word does not need to be in black and white
to hold an acceptible meaning.

Until then............ all the blatherskite in the words does not a scholar make.

OK mods... I am reporting myself for being nasty. Put me on report if you need to

​

 

[Rella]

So you agree that the only true God is the Father and that the others aren't God? That's what the Apostle's creed says. It doesn't mention anything about the others being God.

So I see that English is your second language?

The apostles creed.....

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Maker of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried;
(He descended into hell.)1
On the third day He rose again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
and sits at the right hand of God the Father;
from which he will come to judge the living and the dead.

You are saying this is a lie?

This is descriptive of what I believe was the life of Jesus as my Holy Book
explains his life.

It also gets in there about the part of God who impregnated Mary, which should prove
that the Holy Spirit is also God else.. God sent a surrogate to do the deed and then adopted Jesus
the same as he did you or me.

If that be the case... then all we have ever thought about Jesus is wrong.

 

[Rella]

If there is an unconditional election to eternal life, and there is~ then also one must hold to the doctrine of double predestinations, you cannot have one without the other. Jude 4

As you know I dont. Period.

But interesting that the Westminster Confession seems to have gotten this idea (along with baby baptisms) from none other then the self-appointed prophet John Calvin and if the Confession got this wrong then what else wrong did they get? (Written 1643 and 1648 )

(According to John Calvin, predestination is God’s unchangeable decree from before the creation of the world that he would freely save some people (the elect), foreordaining them to eternal life, while the others (the reprobate) would be “barred from access to” salvation and sentenced to “eternal death (180, 184).” Calvin was careful to distinguish the predestination of individuals from the corporate election of nations such as Israel (185). He argued that an explanation of predestination is only complete when it includes the election of individuals (187))
( Written around 1536)

 

[Eleanor]

God is described as sovereign. The trinity isn't described. Big difference.

I say the Trinity is well described:

1) Jesus said that he
came forth out of (exerchomai, ekporeuomai, to proceed out of) God (Jn 8:42), as does the Spirit (Jn 15:26).
came forth from within the Father (Jn 16:27),
came out of the Father (Jn 16:28)
came forth from within you (Father--Jn 17:8)

2) Jesus identifies himself with God, saying that
when you believe in him, you believe in the one who sent him (Jn 12:44),
when you look at him, you are looking at the one who sent him (Jn 12:45),
his disciples should believe in him as they they believe in God (Jn 14:1),
those who know him know the Father (Jn 14:7),
anyone who has seen him has seen the Father (Jn 14:9),
all are to honor the Son just as they honor the Father (Jn 5:23),
all that the Father has is his (Jn 16:15, 17:10),
he is the way, the truth and the life, no one goes to the Father but through him (Jn 14:16).
Jesus declares that what God is, he is, thereby making himself equal with God (Jn 5:18b, 10:33).

3) In Eze 34:11-16, YHWH Adonai declares that he himself is the shepherd of the sheep, while
in Jn 10:11-15, Jesus says he is the shepherd of the sheep, thus declaring himself to be the YHWH Adonai of Eze 34:11-16.
Jesus declares that what God is, he is, thereby making a itself equal with God.

For those that have eyes that can see and ears that can hear, the Biblical testimony to the Trinity is plain.

That would be begging the question because Matthew 28:19 doesn't say they are the trinity.

As Scripture likewise does not say God is sovereign.

We know both the Trinity (Mt 28:19) and the sovereignty of God (Da 4:35) from the demonstration of such in the Scriptures.

 

[Eleanor]

Nothing in the Bible says God was manifest in the flesh that hasn't been debunked.

That's a confounding of unbelief of the word of God in Jn 1:1, 14 with "debunking."

You fool no one but yourself.

 

[Runningman]

So I see that English is your second language?

The apostles creed.....

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Maker of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried;
(He descended into hell.)1
On the third day He rose again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
and sits at the right hand of God the Father;
from which he will come to judge the living and the dead.

You are saying this is a lie?

This is descriptive of what I believe was the life of Jesus as my Holy Book
explains his life.

It also gets in there about the part of God who impregnated Mary, which should prove
that the Holy Spirit is also God else.. God sent a surrogate to do the deed and then adopted Jesus
the same as he did you or me.

If that be the case... then all we have ever thought about Jesus is wrong.

Read the Apostle's creed again. Do you see the only one called God is the Father?

 

[Runningman]

That's a confounding of unbelief of the word of God in Jn 1:1, 14 with "debunking."

You fool no one but yourself.

Actually, I am glad you mentioned John 1:1 because it's one of my favorite verses that John wrote that show the Word is not literally God.

You will have to look in the Greek, though, but it's pretty straight forward.

In John 1:1 the Word is demonstrably not God in context or grammar. For starters, the Greek grammar says God is The God (Ton Theon) and the Word is god (theos). The author wrote it this way to show distinction between God and the Word.

John 1:1
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.

There are options here:

1. There are two divine beings with one being The Lord God Almighty and the other a lesser being.
2. The Word is something godly, i.e., God's words are godly.
3. Or this is personification.

To further enhance this point, there is no reference to an actual being known as the Word in the beginning with God in Genesis. Nor is there a reference to someone named the Word saying or doing anything later. Your interpretation lacks support at virtually every level.

So the way to work with this is to examine the body of Scripture and see what it says. Provided that there your interpretation doesn't have any support, the best alternative is that Jesus isn't God.

This is actually evident by the remainder of the narrative in John 1:1-14.

 

[Arial]

The only one called God in the Apostle's creed is the Father and you still don't believe. lol

The Apostles creed is not the Bible and a creed is not a Confession. It is reductive. Read the Westminster Confession or the Baptist Confession of Faith or any of the other Protestant confessions of faith, if you want to know where the Christian faith stands on the Trinity.

 

[Runningman]

I say the Trinity is well described:

1) Jesus said that he
came forth out of (exerchomai, ekporeuomai, to proceed out of) God (Jn 8:42), as does the Spirit (Jn 15:26).
came forth from within the Father (Jn 16:27),
came out of the Father (Jn 16:28)
came forth from within you (Father--Jn 17:8)

2) Jesus identifies himself with God, saying that
when you believe in him, you believe in the one who sent him (Jn 12:44),
when you look at him, you are looking at the one who sent him (Jn 12:45),
his disciples should believe in him as they they believe in God (Jn 14:1),
those who know him know the Father (Jn 14:7),
anyone who has seen him has seen the Father (Jn 14:9),
all are to honor the Son just as they honor the Father (Jn 5:23),
all that the Father has is his (Jn 16:15, 17:10),
he is the way, the truth and the life, no one goes to the Father but through him (Jn 14:16).
Jesus declares that what God is, he is, thereby making himself equal with God (Jn 5:18b, 10:33).

3) In Eze 34:11-16, YHWH Adonai declares that he himself is the shepherd of the sheep, while
in Jn 10:11-15, Jesus says he is the shepherd of the sheep, thus declaring himself to be the YHWH Adonai of Eze 34:11-16.
Jesus declares that what God is, he is, thereby making a itself equal with God.

For those that have eyes that can see and ears that can hear, the Biblical testimony to the Trinity is plain.

As Scripture likewise does not say God is sovereign.

We know both the Trinity (Mt 28:19) and the sovereignty of God (Da 4:35) from the demonstration of such in the Scriptures.

You have what is called a doctrine. It means you put together the verses you want in order to support the premise you are trying to prove. This sort of thing can be done with almost any idea and people do it by using the same method you're doing. Though you quote Scripture, the doctrine of the Trinity isn't itself Scripture, e.g, nothing in the Bible says God is in three persons.

However, what I am about to show you isn't a doctrine. It's pure scripture and it isn't compatible with your doctrine. Do you understand how your Trinity isn't in the Bible now?

John 17
1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

 

[Runningman]

She follows the word of God above the creeds, even though the apostle's creed does not not reject the deity of Christ~that's not the purpose of creeds. Did you read anywhere in there where they rejected Jesus' deity? Of course not. Most of the devils were bound (restained) back then whereas, they are now released upon the world in the latter days......................

1st Timothy 4:1​

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;”

Jesus isn't God, sorry buddy. That's just how it is according to Scripture. Jesus is the image, not the invisible God who is the only God. See how what Jesus and the apostles taught and believed is different from you?

Colossians 1
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

1 Timothy 1
17Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

 

[Runningman]

It does not say that, that's an assumption on your part. A creed is nothing more than a brief summary of a certain group's beliefs, without going into depth of what the scriptures do teach. I pretty sure they would not deny Jesus' deity as God manifest in the flesh according to such scriptures as John 1:45-51~like the reprobates do.

She said the Apostle's Creed is perfectly stated and perfectly true. Isn't that right @Rella ? But now that I pointed out the Father is the only one called God in it you don't like it so much anymore?

 

[Rella]

Read the Apostle's creed again. Do you see the only one called God is the Father?

Red herrings

 

[Rella]

She said the Apostle's Creed is perfectly stated and perfectly true. Isn't that right @Rella ? But now that I pointed out the Father is the only one called God in it you don't like it so much anymore?

You are denying that God the Father was Jesus' Father when Jesus walked in flesh and did everything you men do.

It is a perfect description of Jesus as a mortal and beyond... God was Not the Words father.

 

[Rella]

God is described as sovereign. The trinity isn't described. Big difference.

Trinitarianism in the Church Fathers - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Trinitarianism in the Church Fathers​

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Theophilus of Antioch is the earliest Church father documented to have used the word "Trinity" to refer to God.
Debate exists as to whether the earliest Church Fathers in Christian history believed in the doctrine of the Trinity – the Christian doctrine that God the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons sharing one homoousion (essence).
Some of the evidence used to support an early belief in the Trinity are triadic statements (referring to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) from the New Testament and the Church Fathers. The view that the Son was "of the substance of the Father, God of God [...] very God of very God" was formally ratified at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. The Holy Spirit was included at the First Council of Constantinople (381 AD), where the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as one substance (ousia) and three co-equal persons (hypostaseis) was formally ratified.[1]

Introduction​

[edit]
Some Trinitarians say the doctrine of the Trinity was revealed during the time that the New Testament was written;[a] others state that it was revealed in the Patristic period (c. 100–451/787 AD).[3] Nontrinitarians, on the other hand, generally state that the traditional doctrine of the Trinity did not exist until centuries after the end of the New Testament period.[4] Some Trinitarians agree with this, seeing a development over time towards a true understanding of the Trinity.[5] Trinitarians sometimes refer to Christian belief about God before the traditional statements on the Trinity as unsophisticated, 'naive',[6] or 'incipient Trinitarianism',[7] and that early Christians were 'proto-Trinitarian, partially Trinitarian'.[8] Unitarians and some Trinitarians state that this means that those early Christians were not actually Trinitarians.[9]
Expressions which link together the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit occurred very early in the History of the Christian Church. These are sometimes taken as expressions about the Trinity.[citation needed] Other times, they are referred to more generally as 'triadic'.[10] It is stated by some[who?] that "these passages cannot immediately be taken as evidence of the belief in the co-substantial unity of God; names may be conjoined for any number of reasons (e.g. unity in greeting, unity of purpose, etc.) so even the use of a threefold formula cannot be conclusive".[11]
Two examples appear in the New Testament: 2 Corinthians 13:13[12] and Matthew 28:19.[13] The context of 2 Corinthians 13:14 (verse 13 in the Vulgate and the NRSV), which is the close of a letter, suggests the church's conjunction of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit may have originated as a doxological formula; while the context of Matthew 28:19, the Great Commission, shows that the verbal conjunction of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was used early on as a baptismal formula. Unitarians hold that "the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned together [in the New Testament] in the same context, but not in any way that suggests they are all distinct persons who together comprise the totality of God";[14] a "literary triad does not equate to an ontological triunity".[15]
This triadic pattern is even more marked in the glimpses available of the early Church's liturgy and day-to-day catechetical practice.[1] Even so, some[who?] have said that the "indications from the apostolic and sub-apostolic writers are that [their] triadic formulas [...] do not carry the same significance as post-Nicene triadic formulas".[16] The oldest extant work in which the word "Trinity" itself (Greek Trias, triados) is used is Theophilus of Antioch's 2nd-century To Autolycus.[17] There it is used to refer to God, his word and his wisdom.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarianism_in_the_Church_Fathers#cite_note-20 The view that the Son was "of the essence of the Father, God of God [...] very God of very God" was formally ratified at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. The Holy Spirit was included at the First Council of Constantinople (381 AD), where the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as one substance (ousia) and three co-equal persons (hypostaseis) was formally ratified.[1]

to be cont​

 

[Rella]

cont​

First century​

[edit]
The Didache is thought to use the Gospel of Matthew (although a minority of scholars argue they are independent of one another or that it is Matthew that uses the Didache[19]) only and no other known Gospel, and thus it must have been written before the four-Gospel canon had become widespread in the churches, i.e. before the second half of the 2nd century when Tatian produced the Diatessaron.[20] Given its literary dependence on the Gospel of Matthew, it is not surprising that the Didache follows the Gospel of Matthew in designating a triadic formula as the baptismal formula:[21]

After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water [...]. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
— Didache 7:1[22]

Scholars such as Clayton N. Jefford have noted that Jesus is not "ever specifically given a designation of divinity within the text. He is simply called "servant, child" (παῖς) in the prayers and referenced as "the Lord" (ὁ κύριος) elsewhere."[23][24] Jefford argues that this may have been for reasons of cultural sensitivity. Specifically towards Jews, as their beliefs on deity (found in the Torah at Deuteronomy 6:4)[25] stand in opposition to belief in a triune God. This allows for a reading of Didache that harmonises fully with the Jewish perspective on God. This allows the reader to come away unoffended, and thus the text can be correctly read without invocation of a triune God.
Some scholars, however, disagree with Jefford's conclusion on cultural sensitivity. They argue that such caution was impossible to exercise as they believe the trinity doctrine had not yet been developed. For example, the Encyclopedia Britannica says of the trinity "The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries".[26] This position would mean it was impossible for Jefford's conclusion on cultural sensitivity to be correct, since these scholars say "It was not until later in the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons."[26] However, other scholars disagree with this conclusion and argued that proto-trinitarian formula and teaching can be found there.[27]

to be cont​

 

[Rella]

cont

Second century​

[edit]

Early second century: Ignatius of Antioch​

[edit]
Ignatius, second bishop of Antioch, who was martyred in Rome around 110 AD,[28] wrote a series of letters to churches in Asia Minor on his way to be executed in Rome. The conjunction of Father, Son and Holy Spirit appears in his letter to the Magnesian church:

Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles, that so all things, whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit; in the beginning and in the end; with your most admirable bishop, and the well-compacted spiritual crown of your presbytery, and the deacons who are according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that so there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual.
— Epistle to the Magnesians, Chapter 13 [SR][29]

Unitarians[who?] argue that Ignatius is not indicating that the Father, the Son and the Spirit "are one substance anymore than he is saying flesh and spirit are one substance".[16]

c. 155: Polycarp of Smyrna​

[edit]
Polycarp was martyred in Smyrna (where he was also Bishop) in the year 155. It is said by Irenaeus of Lyons that he was a pupil of the Apostle John. In his final prayer before his martyrdom, he "praises, glorifies, and blesses" the Father. He does this "through" Jesus.

For this cause, yea and for all things, I praise Thee, I bless Thee, I glorify Thee, through the eternal and heavenly High-priest, Jesus Christ, Thy beloved Son, through whom with Him and the Holy Spirit be glory both now [and ever] and for the ages to come. Amen.
— Martyrdom of Polycarp 14:3[30]

169–181: Theophilus of Antioch​

[edit]
Theophilus of Antioch's Ad Autolycum is the oldest extant work that uses the actual word "Trinity" to refer to God, his Word and his Wisdom. The context is a discussion of the first three days of creation in Genesis 1–3:...the three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity, God, his Word, and his Wisdom.— To Autolycus 2:15[31]It is maintained by some[who?] that "Theophilus does not use τρίας to mean 'three-in-one', but rather simply uses it to indicate that there were three things before man, God and His Word and His Wisdom";[17] that he, like other second and third century authors, was referring to "a "trinity", triad or threesome, but not a triune or tripersonal God".[32]In contrast to Trinitarian theology, Theophilus of Antioch did not view the Son as an eternally self existing person. Theophilus wrote that God "begat Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things."[33] Instead of speaking of the Word as the Creator, Theophilus speaks of the "Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him",[33] thus he assigns the role of Creator to God alone, while assigning the lesser position of "helper" to the "begat" Son. Many scholars believe this viewpoint is inconsistent with Theophilus believing in a trinity. For example, Dr. Norman Geisler comments: "There are no exceptions; Christ is the Creator of all things including angels and everything visible or invisible. Since Christ could not be both the Creator of everything and at the same time a creature Himself, it is necessary to conclude that He is Himself the uncreated Creator of all creation".[34][35] It is noteworthy that Theophilus specified that only 1 of the 3 mentioned is God.[36] Even in his most famous quote "Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom", Theophilus only identifies one of the three as God. The other two are described as being parts or aspects of this God ("His" Word and "His" Wisdom). Neither does Theophilus describe the Word and Wisdom as persons. He simply says "God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begat Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things."[33] The viewpoint held by Theophilus of both the Word (whom he later identified as the Son)[37] and God's Wisdom, as both being emitted at some point in time, would seem to conflict with the Trinitarian viewpoint of God being eternal, uncreated, equal and self existing.[38]

​

1. to be cont