Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook  @actscelerate Google+ 

Is the Trinity Scriptural?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Hot Discussions Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post to scooter The strict Constructionis
You said,

Quote:
I don't really understand why that I can't believe in one God who has chosen to reveal Himself in a three fold nature.


I don't see any problem with you believing that at all.

The only real difference in what I believe and what a trinitarian believes is WHEN , WHY, and HOW those distinctions came about.

I personally don't believe those distinctions were from eternity past.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
4/30/07 8:34 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: to scooter Scooter
The strict Constructionis wrote:


I personally don't believe those distinctions were from eternity past.


Response: Yeah I can see how that would present problems.

So lay it out.

Are you saying Christ was not with God?, neither was God?, are you saying Christ was created?, He was the best angel? Are you saying God was not Spirit "from eternity past"? Are you saying God changed for this present world? Are you a Mormon?

When I said that Jesus said "I and the Father are one" you cried foul that I used the scripture against two differing points focusing on separate words. Are the words not there to focus on?

Can a scripture be applied to correct two false notions?


Where is the verse that declares I am the Lord God I changed from what I used to be?
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1741
4/30/07 10:35 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Scooter, wether or Oneness or Trinity.................. The strict Constructionis
.....................you have to admit that the incarnation "changed" God, so to speak, in that it ADDED something to God that He did not have before, namely a HUMAN NATURE.

Trinitarians would say that only one person (God the Son) took on a human nature while Oneness folk would say simply that God took on a human nature. In Christ, He lived as a man on earth for 33-1/2 years while continuing to exist as God and fill all space.

So I really don't see what you're trying to pin me down with.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 8:58 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post to Spartanfan The strict Constructionis
You said,

Quote:
Okay - here's my first name, Billy Graham. Give me a more respected oneness name now


How about, Peter,James, John, and Paul to name a few?

These men were all mono-theistic Jews who would never have embraced the idea of the God of Israel actually being "three beings", but could and did understand the concept of the one true God manifesting Himself in flesh.

I admire, respect, and glean from many of the men you listed. But I'll never put them on the level with Moses who "saw God face to face" and failed to mention that He was a trinity.

As for Joel Hemphill. I am the man's biggest fan. I EVERYTHING the man ever put out and love him dearly.

However, he has fallen prey to an erroneous idea that the "persons" of the trinity can be worshiped separately. I never believed that when I was in the AG.

Brother Joel should consider the following verse,

Quote:
: that God in all things may be glorified THROUGH Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
I Peter 4:11

Even from a trinitarian standpoint, the only way to glorify the Father is to glorify his Son.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 9:20 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Scooter, wether or Oneness or Trinity.................. Scooter
The strict Constructionis wrote:
.....................you have to admit that the incarnation "changed" God, so to speak, in that it ADDED something to God that He did not have before, namely a HUMAN NATURE.

Trinitarians would say that only one person (God the Son) took on a human nature while Oneness folk would say simply that God took on a human nature. In Christ, He lived as a man on earth for 33-1/2 years while continuing to exist as God and fill all space.

So I really don't see what you're trying to pin me down with.


Response: Just wanting to understand your point of view. I don't see why oneness folks would wrestle with the scripture so.

It sounds like an extreme case of splitting hairs.

So I what you're saying is God himself came in the likeness of flesh as the Son but didn't remain distinguishable in heaven as the Father? Just omnipresent?

Forgive me as I have never sorted through "Oneness".
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1741
5/1/07 10:54 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Good try but no cookie! spartanfan
To try to say that the apostles were oneness is ridiculous. If they were then the Book of John would start out saying, "In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with Jesus and Jesus was Jesus. Jesus was in the beginning with Jesus.(etc.)." Try putting the name Jesus everywhere you see Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Lord, God - everywhere you find reference to one or more of the members of the Godhead. At His baptism you will have Jesus coming up out of the water and Jesus saying this is my beloved Jesus in whom Jesus is well pleased as Jesus descends upon Jesus in the form of a dove. Maybe you better stick with the explanation of the leader of the second largest oneness denomination in America: when told by one of his leading ministers that "I'm having some serious doubts because I keep seeing the Trinity all through the Bible", he responded by saying, "Now Brother __________, we've been riding this horse a long time and you don't change horses in the middle of a stream." How lame can you get - that is the leader? No Scripture to come back with only tradition. In the Garden of Gethsemane was Jesus saying to Jesus, "Jesus, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Jesus"? The oneness view makes for some interesting reading...you have Him saying "Jesus and Jesus are one". Or baptizing them in the name of Jesus, Jesus and Jesus. You better get off of that traditional horse cause it ain't going anywhere. In my opinion the oneness people try to scare people into staying in their churches by saying or insinuating that unless you've been baptized in the name of Jesus you might not make it to Heaven. I have seen it over and over again where I live. I've helped backslidden oneness people find their way back to Jesus and some were so brainwashed by the doctrines they grew up with that they felt they had to go back to the oneness church they grew up in to make it all the way back to Jesus! I'm glad I could help them get saved and if they just liked the old church better I wouldn't care as much but knowing that fear (by their own admission) drove them back makes me hate the bondage of the oneness churches even more. I guess if you've been riding a horse all of your life and you're told if you get off you might not make it in to Heaven you would be afraid to get off. In my opinion it's bondage. Fear is used to hold them - and God has not given the spirit of fear. I see no room for the oneness fear antics in true Christianity. The oneness stuff (the dominant ones today) is an offshoot of pentecostalism. It is pentecostalism gone ignorant. And them using fear to hold their people in their denomination is what I abhor. Threatening them that if they leave and go to a Trinitarian church they might not make it to Heaven. Have you ever noticed how we open our churches to the oneness evangelists and musicians, but generally speaking they keep their doors closed to Trinitarian evangelists? What happens though is people like Joel Hemphil, Geron & Becky Davis, Vickie Yohee, T.D. Jakes and others start backing off of the Jesus only stuff after being enlightened to the face that all of the stuff they were brainwashed with isn't necessarily true. When arguing over whether or not Trinidadians will make it to Heaven in one oneness church's state convention, Anthony Mangum stood up and said, "Brethren, I don't think God gave the Trinitarians the Holy Ghost so they can walk around in Hell speaking in tongues." If they were more like him - they would almost be tolerable. But then, he is one of their biggest and most successful. He has more understanding than most. The Jews for Jesus are Trinitarian. How can that be? I'll show you how, the most sacred verse in all Judaism, The Shema:

Sh'ma Yis'ra'eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad.
Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One (Deut. 4:6)

Note the word "echad" which means "a compound one". If you take three sticks and wrap them with twine to hold them together to make a tool, the three together make "a compound one". The Hebrew word "yachid" means "an absolute one". Echad is used in the Shema to define the Triune God. There are so many places in the Bible where you see the Three in One that you have to be deliberately blind or brainwashed by a lesser teacher or organization to miss it, in my opinion. The Muslims deny the Trinity and the Deity of Christ in the Koran. Those who deny the Father and the Son are of the spirit of antichrist. Too much time has to be spent arguing with the smaller and less prominent pentecostals over the Trinity. God is "echad" - a "compound one". What - are they now going to say that the translators should have used "yachid" but God who gave us His word was not wise enough to preserve it for us? He is "echad", not "yachid". If I were to tell you that the tzit-zith on the corner of the typical Jewish garment had 8 chords with 5 double knots, and the windings in the 4 spaces between the 5 knots in Hebrew gramatria spelled out the name of God in the first three spaces and the word "one" in the fourth, you couldn't even see the Trinity in that. Three for the name of God and then one. The three make one. But all of these things do not move any of you from your position. The bread holder used in the Passover Sedar is three-pouched, and the matza used to represent the Body of Christ is the 2nd one, the middle one. You see nothing there - but the enlightened Jews for Jesus do. You see nothing anywhere except what you have been taught by a bunch of inferior theologians who ride their hobby-horse while the real world passes them by. You can change horses in the middle of a stream, as the most notable Jews who have become Christians have - Zola Levitt, Arnold Fructhenbaum, etc. Jesus said the Father would send another of the same kind as He. The Comforter. He didn't say, "In that day you shall ask Jesus nothing, and whatsoever you shall ask Jesus in the name of Jesus - Jesus will give it to you." What about the response of the leader of the number two oneness denomination in America when asked by one of his ministers how come he is starting to see the Trinity all through the Bible? How's that for leadership and scholarship?
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3628
5/1/07 11:41 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post scooter The strict Constructionis
Quote:
I don't see why oneness folks would wrestle with the scripture so


Well. we feel the same way 'bout yall.

It is sad to see guys like spartanfan resorting to using priestly garments to prove God is three persons. And to think those poor priests that wore those robes didn't have a clue! They mistakenly thought they were only worshiping ONE person of God. Thanks for straightening them out there, spartanfan.

As for your question,


Quote:
So I what you're saying is God himself came in the likeness of flesh as the Son but didn't remain distinguishable in heaven as the Father? Just omnipresent?


In my opinion, this is completely open to interpretation.

Whether or not God always had a visible image is also debatable. Or did He manifest Himself in that image to commune with His creation?

We see several instances in the OT where God appeared to people, often in some sort of likeness of a man.

Trinitarians, several hundred to thousand years later try to tell us that what those people REALLY saw was a "pre-incarnate" vision of "god the Son", even if they have no scripture to support that view.

The Bible says that Jesus is "the IMAGE of the invisible God".

Some would say that the image of God that physically sat on the throne took on flesh and came to earth and that the throne was empty during that time.

I tend to believe that the throne was indeed still occupied while Christ was here. However, I believe since the glorification of Christ, that we will only see ONE visible image of God when we get to heaven. We will see "the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 11:56 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: scooter Scooter
The strict Constructionis wrote:


I tend to believe that the throne was indeed still occupied while Christ was here.


Response: So you're semi-oneness? ME too.... Laughing Cool




The strict Constructionis wrote:
However, I believe since the glorification of Christ, that we will only see ONE visible image of God when we get to heaven. We will see "the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."


Response: Your belief would contradict a scriptural account of exactly what you describe.

After the glorification of Christ there is a bold witness of the heavens. This example is one that really highlights for me the three fold nature of God.

Act 7:55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

In this one verse God's triune nature is on display for any honest seeker.

Regardless of abuses of theology concerning the trinity here we have the view.

God's desire all along was to renew proper fellowship with humanity. His plan in essence is to walk in us Himself.

You will notice throughout the NT Christ in you, the Spirit in you, and God in you.

Stephen was full of God in that he was filled with HIS Spirit, He saw Jesus in distinct position he saw the glory of God and Jesus. His view was one that must not be discounted as it is the view of one passing from this life into eternity. It is perhaps the most realistic view we have, as others are likened to through dreams or visions and the like.
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1741
5/1/07 12:32 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Ahhh... Inkling
So THIS is what happens when a movement is anti-creedal.

I love the part when historic Christians stand (usually after the sermon) and confess the Nicene Creed.

Or the part of the Daily Office when the Apostle's Creed is confessed.

Or the part in Chatechism when the Athanasian Creed is read and explained.

The poor anti-creedalists have forgotten the language of the Kingdom!
_________________
"The Spirit cannot effect transformation until one is able to host ambiguity within oneself and let the Spirit settle the question." - Walter Brueggemann
Friendly Face
Posts: 117
5/1/07 1:30 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Huh? spartanfan
Does the oneness Bible read, "...I see Jesus standing at Jesus' right hand"? Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3628
5/1/07 1:57 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Spartanfan The strict Constructionis
You're rantings only prove that you have absolutely no idea what oneness people believe.

For instance,

Quote:
If they were then the Book of John would start out saying, "In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with Jesus and Jesus was Jesus. Jesus was in the beginning with Jesus.(etc.)." Try putting the name Jesus everywhere you see Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Lord, God - everywhere you find reference to one or more of the members of the Godhead.


This proves you have NO idea what we believe.

The name "Jesus" is the name of the SON OF GOD, the genuine human being that God was manifest as and in. God's name was not Jesus prior to the incarnation, nor do OP's claim such.

What you like to do is re-invent the oneness doctrine, and then critique what you've re-invented.

In I John chapter one, the Apostle John plainly explains what He meant in the Gospel of John, chapter one. I dealt with this in detail sometime back. I'll copy and paste that thread for you.

As for your other babblings, since when did this become a thread about all of the weird quirks about OP's? Why hijack this thread? The author of this thread wants to discuss whether or not the doctrine of the trinity is scriptural. If you want to start a thread about oneness weirdos, then go right ahead. I'm in Anthony Mangum's camp. You don't have to try to convince me.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 2:40 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post John ch 1 and I John ch 1 The strict Constructionis
This is from another thread, but it is relevant to the subject.
___________________________________________________________



Blessed in MSTN wrote:


Quote:
When you figure out how to "Return eternal life back to it's original sender: then you can figure out how to lose salvation... His Word says when we were saved we crossed over from death to life,, we RECEIVED eternal life at that moment... So as soon as I figure out how to return this eternal life and cross back over to the death that I have already been delivered from then I will know how to lose my salvation





I believe I have the answer to that question, or at least part of it.


We often say,
Quote:

“God gives ETERNAL LIFE to those who believe”





This is true. He indeed does.

However, the problem I have is when we separate eternal life from the God who gives it, as if though ETERNAL LIFE is one thing, and God Himself is another thing. But they are NOT two separate things.


God IS Eternal Life. The reason the believer can say they have “eternal life” is because ETERNAL LIFE (the PERSON) has come to dwell within them.

What does the Bible say about this?



Jhn 11:25


Quote:
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:





Notice that Jesus doesn't’t just say that He “gives” a resurrection or (eternal) life, but that He IS the “Resurrection AND the LIFE”.


As God (who is SPIRIT) Jesus had always been the Resurrection and the Life prior to His incarnation as the Son.

In John 4:10 Jesus told the Samaritan women,

Quote:
“If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give Me a drink,’ you would have asked Him, and He would have given you LIVING WATER.”




In Jeremiah 2:13, Jehovah refers to HIMSELF as the “FOUNTAIN OF LIVING WATER”

Jer 2:13


Quote:
For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, [and] hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water

.



In John 4:13-14 Jesus says,


Quote:
“Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into EVERLASTING LIFE.”




Of course we know that this “water” is the infilling if the Holy Spirit. Jesus “gives” us this water, yet He has also declared that He IS that water. This water gives us EVERLASTING LIFE.

Therefore, if God IS that water that gives us ETERNAL LIFE, then He IS ETERNAL LIFE. Again, you can’t separate ETERNAL LIFE from the One who “gives" eternal life, as if though this LIFE were some abstract gift.

God manifested His own eternal life in the flesh,



Quote:
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life— the LIFE was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that ETERNAL LIFE which was with the Father and was manifested to us .




Jesus is God’s own ETERNAL LIFE manifest in flesh. These verses also give us the true identity of the “WORD” of John 1:1. The WORD who was WITH God, but was also GOD, was God’s own ETERNAL LIFE, His SPIRIT that gives life to the Believer, NOT some mysterious “second person”. This is why Jesus referred to Himself as the “Resurrection and the LIFE”.

In His humanity, Jesus has “become” a QUICKENING (or “Life giving") spirit



Quote:
And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.”[d] The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.(I Cor 15:45)




The glorified, human spirit of Christ indwells, and gives eternal life to the believer. Yes, the divine Spirit of God is also a human spirit, fully divine and fully human.

Therefore, if we turn away from God, if ask Him to exit through that same door (of our heart) through which we invited Him to enter, then we are letting ETERNAL LIFE walk out of our lives.

It is impossible for Jesus to leave and eternal life to stay.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 2:47 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Right hand of God The strict Constructionis
Spartanfan said,

Quote:
Does the Oneness Bible read , "I see Jesus standing at Jesus' right hand"?


Of course it doesn't, and you know that.

Consider this, please. In Acts 2:25 , Peter quotes a Messianic Psalm of David that says,

Quote:
" 'I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.


Now according to your thinking, this is God the Son expressing His faith in God the Father. However, there is a major problem with this. Here, God the Son says that God the Father is at HIS right hand!

So which is it? Who sits at whose right hand? Or (logically) is the term "right hand" not even speaking of a literal, physical location? The latter seems likely.

Take for instance, Stephen's vision as he is being executed in Acts 7_55-56,

Quote:
But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. "Look," he said, "I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."


He saw "the GLORY of God", (NOT the "first member of the trinity") and "Jesus standing at the 'right hand' of God."

He then said,
Quote:
"I see the SON OF MAN standing at the 'right hand of God'"


He saw Jesus standing right where he said he'd be as THE SON OF MAN.

Again,the emphasis here is one a distinction between HUMANITY and DIVINITY , not "two persons in the trinity".

To further prove this point, look again at Stephen's own words,

Quote:
( Acts 7:59) And they stoned Stephen as he was CALLING ON GOD and saying, “Lord JESUS, receive my spirit.”


When he called on God, WHO did He call to ? JESUS!

Now are you going to tell me that the God he saw in verses 55-56 and the God he called to in verse 59 are two different persons? Whatever!
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 3:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post You're right. spartanfan
I admit I get carried away because it's so easy to expose how ridiculous the oneness movement is. How about the leader of the second largest oneness denomination in America: when told by one of his leading ministers that "I'm having some serious doubts because I keep seeing the Trinity all through the Bible", he responded by saying, "Now Brother __________, we've been riding this horse a long time and you don't change horses in the middle of a stream." How lame can you get - that is the leader? Makes me laugh real hard. Something that doesn't make me laugh though is the oneness people trying to scare people into staying in their churches by saying or insinuating that unless you've been baptized in the name of Jesus you might not make it to Heaven. I have seen it over and over again where I live. I've helped backslidden oneness people find their way back to Jesus and some were so brainwashed by the doctrines they grew up with that they felt they had to go back to the oneness church they grew up in to make it all the way back to Jesus! I'm glad I could help them get saved and if they just liked the old church better I wouldn't care as much but knowing that fear (by their own admission) drove them back makes me hate the bondage of the oneness churches even more. Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3628
5/1/07 4:10 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Spartanfan The strict Constructionis
I happen to attend a UPC church. However, I have to admit that if I moved to another city that would not mean I would automatically attend an OP church. If it was one like you've described, I would not fit in.

To me, this Godhead issue is a separate matter.

I've met many "trinitarian" ministers whose concept of the godhead was TOTALLY what oneness teaches.

They just don't condemn everyone else to hell because they might believe a little different and they still refer to themselves as "trinitarian".

Though I'm not crazy about your style, and I feel you tend to generalize, some of your criticisms are valid.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 4:41 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Right hand of God Scooter
The strict Constructionis wrote:
He saw "the GLORY of God", (NOT the "first member of the trinity") and "Jesus standing at the 'right hand' of God."

He then said, "I see the SON OF MAN standing at the 'right hand of God'"

He saw Jesus standing right where he said he'd be as THE SON OF MAN.

Again,the emphasis here is one a distinction between HUMANITY and DIVINITY , not "two persons in the trinity".


Response: Man how in the world do you do that?

You yourself said that Jesus after glorification was God the Father.

When faced with a verse that clearly for any honest seeker shows a distinction you focused on the first part of the verse and even quoted the last part as if that somehow changed the meaning of the verse.

Whether Jesus as the Son of Man or Jesus Himself is standing at the right hand of God. HE IS STILL STANDING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD.




The strict Constructionis wrote:
To further prove this point, look again at Stephen's own words,

( Acts 7:59) And they stoned Stephen as he was CALLING ON GOD and saying, “Lord JESUS, receive my spirit.”

When he called on God, WHO did He call to ? JESUS!

Now are you going to tell me that the God he saw in verses 55-56 and the God he called to in verse 59 are two different persons? Whatever!


Response: Those verses present me no problem I see Jesus as He is.

It really shows both the distinction and the connection of Christ. Sorry you can't see that.
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1741
5/1/07 4:58 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Trinity Bulldawgbishop
I have tried to read this thread thoroughly (when my eyes didn't get crossed) and I have yet to see one particular scripture mentioned. I am in no way shape or form getting into this endless cycle of an argument but I am curious as to what we do with I John 5:7.."There are three that bear witness in Heaven the Father, Word (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit...and these three are one..." I'm also curious as to why, If there is no trinity, Jesus would instruct us to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. also wonder if the fact that Genesis 1..In the beginning God..uses the word elohim for God which is a plural form of the word...no theologian here...just curious. Acts-celerater
Posts: 755
5/1/07 5:32 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Scooter The strict Constructionis
You carefully choose which parts of my post to respond to, don't you?

Again I ask, HOW can the Messiah be sitting at the God's literal right hand and God be at the Messiah's right hand at the same time (Acts 2:25), if indeed the term means a literal, physical place? PLEASE answer.

How can Jesus be sitting at a literal right hand of someone who "fills all space"? That right hand must be zillions of light years out in the cosmos.

And when did I say that Jesus was only "God the Father AFTER the glorification? I never said that. He has always been God, but has not always been manifest in flesh.

What I did say is that prior to the glorification, that human being played a distinct role, the Lamb. Now, instead of seeing just a manifestation of God sitting on His throne, those in Heaven see all the fullness of the Godhead literally "housed" in the person of Christ, with the glory of the Father streaming from His face. The invisible God now has an image, and that is what Stephen saw and called out to Him to receive his spirit at death.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 5:44 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post I John 5:7 The strict Constructionis
NOT in the original greek. See if you can find it in the NIV. Even so, it does not say God exists as three persons.

As for Matthew 28:19, the Apostles fulfilled that command by invoking the name of Jesus at baptism.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 6:03 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Right Hand of God The strict Constructionis
I don't agree with David Bernard on some things, but this is an adequate essay on the term "right hand of God". Enjoy.
__________________________________________________________

THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD

BY DAVID K. BERNARD


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bible teaches that God is an invisible Spirit, yet it also describes Him in terms that relate to the human body. Many Trinitarians use these descriptions to support their doctrine, particularly passages that speak of the right hand of God and the face of God. Let us investigate what the Bible means by these terms.

John 4:24 says, "God is a Spirit," or "God is spirit" (NIV). This means His eternal essence is not human or physical. Apart from the Incarnation, God does not have a physical body. "A spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39). God the Father is not "flesh and blood" (Matthew 16:17).

Because He is a Spirit, God is invisible to humans. "No man hath seen God at any time" (John 1:18). "No man hath seen, nor can see" Him (I Timothy 6:16).

Moreover, the Bible teaches that God is omnipresent: His Spirit fills the universe. "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me" (Psalm 139:7-10).

These facts about God show that we cannot understand the physical descriptions of Him in a grossly "letteristic" way. We are to interpret the Bible according to the ordinary, apparent, grammatical, historical meaning of its words, just as we do with other forms of speech and writing. In doing so, we will recognize that all human communication, including the Bible, uses figurative language. We are not free to impose an allegorical interpretation upon Scripture, but when the Bible itself indicates that we are to understand certain phrases or passages in a figurative way, then that is how we must interpret them.

When we read about God's eyes, nostrils, heart, feet, hands, and wings, it is clear from the rest of Scripture that we are not dealing with a human, beast, or fowl. The Bible does not use these terms to describe a physical being, but to give us insight into the nature, character, and attributes of God. For instance, God expresses His sovereignty by saying, "The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool" (Isaiah 66:1). The Bible describes God's miraculous power as "the finger of God" and "the blast of thy nostrils" (Exodus 8:19;15:Cool; His omniscience and omnipresence by saying, "The eyes of the LORD are in every place" (Proverbs 15:3); His protection by speaking of "the shadow of thy wings" (Psalm 36:7); and His sorrow over human sin as having grieved him at his heart" (Genesis 6:6).

It would be foolish to conclude from these passages that God is a giant who props up His feet on the North Pole, blows air from His nostrils, focuses his eyes to see us, uses wings to fly, and has a blood-pumping organ. Rather the Bible uses concepts taken from our human experience to enable us to understand the characteristics of God's spiritual nature.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RIGHT HAND

This principle is especially true when the Bible speaks of the right hand of God. Since most humans are right-handed, in most cultures the right hand signifies strength, skill, and dexterity. The very word dexterity comes from the Latin word dexter, meaning "on the right side." In ancient times, the most honored guest was seated on the right hand of the host. As a result, in Hebrew, Greek, and English the right hand is a metaphor for power and honor.

The Bible uses this metaphor repeatedly with reference to humans as well as God. Of course, in some passages the Bible uses "right" or "right hand" in its locational meaning, in contrast to "left" or "left hand. " But many times the use of "right hand" is figurative. Since God does not have a physical right hand (apart from the Incarnation) and is not confined to a physical location, when the Bible speaks of His right hand, it speaks figuratively or metaphorically.

A study of the "right hand" passages in the Bible reveals that the right hand of God represents His almighty power, His omnipotence, particularly in bestowing salvation, deliverance, victory, and preservation. "My right hand hath spanned the heavens" (Isaiah 48:13). `Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.... Thou stretchedst out thy right hand, the earth swallowed them" (Exodus 15:6,12). "His right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory* (Psalm 98:1). "Thy right hand shall save me" (Psalm 138:7). "I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness" (Isaiah 41:10). There are numerous other examples where the Bible uses "right hand" as a metaphor for power. [1]

In Scripture, the right hand also signifies the position of honor, blessing, and preeminence. "At thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore" (Psalm 16:11). "Thy right hand is full of righteousness" (Psalm 48:10). "A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left" (Ecclesiastes 10:2).

When Jacob blessed Joseph's two sons, Joseph wanted him to put his right hand upon Manasseh, the older son, to signify that he would have preeminence. Joseph insisted, "This is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head" (Genesis 48:18). Jacob refused, in a reversal of normal procedure, saying, "Truly his younger brother shall be greater than he" (Genesis 48:19). (For other examples where the right hand means a position of favor or preeminence, see Exodus 29:20; Leviticus 8:23; 14:14-28; Psalm 45:9; 110:1; Jeremiah 22:24; Matthew 25:33-34.)

JESUS AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD

So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God (Mark 16:19).

Many passages in the New Testament tell us that Jesus sits on the right hand of God. As we have already seen, it would be a mistake to interpret this description to mean that Jesus sits eternally on top of a giant divine hand or at the side of another divine personage. How could we determine what is the right hand of the omnipresent Spirit of God?

The obvious purpose of this description is to exalt the Lord Jesus Christ. By using this phrase, the New Testament tells us that Jesus is not merely a man, but He is a man who has been invested with the almighty power of the indwelling Spirit of God and who has been exalted to the position of highest honor.

Since verses like Mark 16:19 speak of Jesus as being "on the right hand of God," some people suppose that in heaven they will see two divine persons, the Father and the Son, sitting or standing side by side. But no one has ever seen or can see God's invisible presence (I Timothy 6:16); no one can see God apart from Christ. Moreover, God has emphatically declared that there is no one beside Him (Isaiah 43:11 ; 44:6,Cool. Christ is the visible "image of the invisible God," and the only way we can see the Father is to see him (Colossians 1:15; John 14:9). There is only one divine throne in heaven, and only One on that throne (Revelation 4:2; 22:3-4).

New Testament passages make clear that Jesus is "on the right hand of God" in the sense of having divine power, honor, glory, and preeminence. Jesus Himself said, "Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven" (Matthew 16:64). "Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God" (Luke 22:69). These words do not imply that we will see two divine persons in the clouds or in heaven, but one divine human person who has all he power and glory of the invisible Spirit of God.

Jesus was "by the right hand of God exalted" (Acts 2:33). He "is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him" (I Peter 1:22). God "raised him [Christ] from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is lamed, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come" Ephesians 1:20-21). "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God" (Colossians 3:1).

When Stephen was stoned, he "saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God" (Acts 7:55). He did not see two personages, but he saw the glory of God surrounding Jesus, who was revealed in the position of supreme power and authority. While on earth Jesus appeared to be an ordinary man and He lived as such with His disciples, but after His resurrection and ascension He appeared with visible glory and power as the almighty God. Although John had been Christ's closest associate while He was on earth and knew Him well, when He saw the ascended Christ in a vision he "fell at his feet as dead" (Revelation 1:17). Unlike Christ's typical appearance on earth, John saw Him in His divine glory.

That is what Stephen beheld also. The only divine person he saw was Jesus, and the only divine person he addressed was Jesus. He said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God" (Arts 7:56). He died "calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59).

F. F. Bruce, one of the foremost evangelical theologians of the twentieth century, explained that biblical scholars past and present recognize Christ's right-hand position to be metaphoric, not physical:

Christ's present position of supremacy is described in the Pauline writings as being "at the right hand of God."... The apostles knew very well that they were using figurative language when they spoke of Christ's exaltation in these terms: they no more thought of a location on a literal throne at God's literal right hand than their twentieth-century successors do.... Martin Luther satirizes "that heaven of the fanatics ... with its golden chair and Christ seated at the Father's side, vested in a choir cope and a golden robe, as the painters love to portray him!" [2]

Several passages carry a further connotation relative to the Christ's right-hand position: they use this term to describe His present mediatorial role. "It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us" (Romans 8:34).

This does not mean that Christ has been kneeling for two thousand years, praying to some other deity. As a man, He has been glorified and has no further need to pray. As God, He never needed to pray and never had anyone to whom He could pray. Moreover, there is nothing He needs to add to the Atonement; His one sacrifice on the cross is sufficient to cover the sins of the whole world. When He said, "It is finished" and then died, His atoning work was complete (John 19:30). He "offered one sacrifice for sins for ever" [Hebrews 10:12).

What Christ's present intercession means is that His sacrifice is continually effective in our lives. His blood can cover our sins today. If we sin, we still have "an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (I John 2:1). When we confess our sins to God, no one needs to convince Him to forgive us; He looks at the Cross, and that event is all the advocacy we need.

To remind us that Christ was a "real man who died for our sins and so became our advocate, mediator, and high priest, the New Testament speaks of Him as at the right hand of God." At the same time, it shows us the completeless and finality of His work on the cross by saying that after His mediatorial work, He "sat down" on the right hand. "When he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Hebrews 1:3).

"We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens" (Hebrews 8:1). "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God" (Hebrews 10:12). Jesus "is set down at the right hand of the throne of God" (Hebrews 12:2).

Significantly, the Book of Revelation never describes Jesus as being on the right hand of God. It looks forward to the time when His mediatorial role will no longer be necessary. In eternity to come, we will not see Him in the right hand position as an exalted man who serves as our mediator, but we will see Him as the One on the throne, the One who is both God and the Lamb at the same time (Revelation 22:3-4).

The Wycliffe Bible Commentary explains the significance of Christ's right-hand position and its reference to the present age:

The position occupied by Christ [is] the place of authority and of priestly service. For believers, he both rules and intercedes.... The rule of Christ will become actual. Meanwhile he patiently waits for the time when his enemies will be vanquished. There will then be no more opposition to Christ or his rule. [3]

[1] Deuteronomy 33:2; Job 40:14; Psalm 16:8; 17:7; 18:35; 20:6; 21:8; 44:3; 45:4; 60:5; 63:8; 73:23; 77:10; 78:54; 80:15, 17; 89:13, 25, 42; 108:6; 109:31; 118:15-16; 137:5; 139:10; Isaiah 62:8; 63:12; Lamentations 2:3-4; Ezekial 21:22; Habakkuk 2:16; Acts 5:31; Revelation 1:16.

[2] Bruce, Epistles, 132-33. The quote from Martin Luther is from Werke, Weimarer Ausgabe 23, 131.

[3] Robert Ross, "The Epistle to the Hebrews," in the Wycliffe Bible Commentary, ed. Charles Pfeiffer and Everett Harrison (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), 1419.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/1/07 6:09 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Hot Discussions Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 5 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.