Page 5 of 19 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 456

Thread: God as Spirit or flesh and bone

  1. #101
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    [quote]Originally Posted by dberrie2000
    You are right--and the NT distinguishes only God the Father as the "one God".


    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    And the Son as "one LORD" who is the second person of the Trinity.
    The second personage of the Godhead--the term "Trinity" is not found within the Bible.


    The Biblical Term Godhead

    Versus the Term "Trinity"

    by Bob Allgood

    An Effort To Contend For The Faith

    Once Delivered Unto The Saints




    All three of these declarations are very good, but I personally prefer the first two over the last. I could not help but notice that each of the statements became more condensed and less elaborate about the attributes of the Godhead. Is this a sign of the times? In some our modern day Articles of Faith the statements of belief are so concise that it is hard to determine exactly what the Primitive Baptists authors are trying to say or really believe. To illustrate this I will quote from a common Articles of Faith I have seen copied (without change) and used in Colorado and NM:

    " We believe in one true and living God and the trinity of persons in the Godhead - Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and yet not three but one God ".

    I'll be as kind as possible, but in my opinion, this last declaration is a weak and confusing statement about the Godhead. It is weak because there are no Biblical comments about the attributes of God. It is confusing because it says "We believe in -- God and the trinity of persons in the Godhead". The phrase "trinity of persons in the Godhead" is unbiblical terminology which conflicts with and/or directly contradicts Scripture. It shows how easily confusion and error can get into our doctrine through ignorance, apathy, slothfulness and/or failure to "study and rightly divide the word of truth". I have the "little white book" from which this statement was taken word for word and p***ed on to at least three churches. In this we can see how the error of one can afflict others. As Solomon said, "Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good".

  2. #102
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    The second personage of the Godhead--the term "Trinity" is not found within the Bible.
    Sure it is a way to distinguisthe Father from the Son in those verses.

    Can "Lord" refer to the Father in some verses and the Son in other verses?

    Can "God" refer to the Father in some verses and the Son in other verses?

  3. #103
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Originally Posted by dberrie2000
    The second personage of the Godhead--the term "Trinity" is not found within the Bible.
    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Sure it is a way to distinguisthe Father from the Son in those verses.
    Not "Trinity". That term is not found within the Bible.

    Can "Lord" refer to the Father in some verses and the Son in other verses?

    Can "God" refer to the Father in some verses and the Son in other verses?
    Well, of course. You don't think Christ would use the term "Gods" to designate those whom the word of God came--and it not also be applied to His own self? The term "Lord" was used to denote both the Father and the Son also.

    But the term "one God" is never used to denote Jesus Christ in the NT--only God the Father.

  4. #104
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    But the term "one God" is never used to denote Jesus Christ in the NT--only God the Father.
    But the term "God" can be used for the Father or the Son and the term "Lord" can be used for the Father or the Son. These verses are using each to distinguish between the Father and the Son.

  5. #105
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Originally Posted by dberrie2000
    But the term "one God" is never used to denote Jesus Christ in the NT--only God the Father.

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    But the term "God" can be used for the Father or the Son
    But that is also true for all the Sons of God that comprise the divinity of the divine council--they were all referred to as "Elohim".

    They all took on the ***le "God" or "Gods".

  6. #106
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    But that is also true for all the Sons of God that comprise the divinity of the divine council--they were all referred to as "Elohim".
    So why do you take issue when God is used for the Father and Lord is use for the Son in the verses that you have brought up?

  7. #107
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Originally Posted by dberrie2000
    But that is also true for all the Sons of God that comprise the divinity of the divine council--they were all referred to as "Elohim".


    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So why do you take issue when God is used for the Father and Lord is use for the Son in the verses that you have brought up?

    Duh! I don't take issue with that--only when someone tries to pawn on me they were the same God. They were not the same Gods within the council.

    They were all referred to as Elohim, or the sons of God--but that is a designation ***le, not a personal identification.

  8. #108
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    Duh! I don't take issue with that--only when someone tries to pawn on me they were the same God. They were not the same Gods within the council.
    .
    You don't even know who were in the council do you?

  9. #109
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    Duh! I don't take issue with that--only when someone tries to pawn on me they were the same God.
    Yet you would agree that Jehovah is both the Father and the Son. Correct?

  10. #110
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Yet you would agree that Jehovah is both the Father and the Son. Correct?
    No. I would not. Not speaking of God the Father and God the Son.And neither are the sons of God that were part of the divine council Jesus Christ either.

    They were all separate Gods.

  11. #111
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    No. I would not.
    So you don't believe that the Father and the Son can be called Jehovah?

  12. #112
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So you don't believe that the Father and the Son can be called Jehovah?
    The LDS believe that Jehovah is Jesus Christ, as Paul explains:

    1 Cor10:1-4--"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ********, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all p***ed through the sea;

    2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

    3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

    4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."

  13. #113
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    The LDS believe that Jehovah is Jesus Christ, as Paul explains:
    When you see LORD in the OT you believe that this is Jehovah right?

  14. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    When you see LORD in the OT you believe that this is Jehovah right?
    In the OT, there is no distinction between God the Father and Jesus Christ. That distinction does not come until the NT.

    That is why OT writers would sometimes change the word "Lord" to "Elohim" because they did not want to say "Lord" twice in a row---it was ackward--and they would orate the word "YHWH" as Lord.
    I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

  15. #115
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    In the OT, there is no distinction between God the Father and Jesus Christ. That distinction does not come until the NT.
    Isaiah 9:6
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.


    So you don't see a distinction between the Father and Son in this verse given the fact that is clearly mentions a "child is born"?

  16. #116
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Isaiah 9:6
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.


    So you don't see a distinction between the Father and Son in this verse given the fact that is clearly mentions a "child is born"?
    Yes---this is speaking of Christ---but, if you were to say "LORD" in the OT, it would be addressing both the Father and the Son. Prophesies of Christ aside, when the Israelites were commanded from their "LORD God"---there would be no distinction.

    One way you can know that these ***les are not speaking of the OT---is it says He shall be CALLED...at some future time.
    I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

  17. #117
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    Yes---this is speaking of Christ--
    So there is a distinction and what you said was wrong then. Correct?

  18. #118
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    but, if you were to say "LORD" in the OT, it would be addressing both the Father and the Son.
    So Jehovah was both the Father and the Son depending on the verse. Right?

  19. #119
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So Jehovah was both the Father and the Son depending on the verse. Right?
    In the OT, the Jews did not recognize the Son.
    I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

  20. #120
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    In the OT, the Jews did not recognize the Son.
    But that is not what I asked. I asked if Jehovah can refer to both the Father and the Son depending on the verse?

  21. #121
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    But that is not what I asked. I asked if Jehovah can refer to both the Father and the Son depending on the verse?
    And I gave you an answer to this question--the LDS stance is that Jehovah is Jesus Christ.

  22. #122
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    And I gave you an answer to this question--the LDS stance is that Jehovah is Jesus Christ.
    So your answer is no and BigJ's answer will be yes.

  23. #123
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So your answer is no and BigJ's answer will be yes.

    I don't speak for BJ--but the LDS stance is Jesus Christ--which is what Paul taught:


    1 Cor10:1-4--"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ********, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all p***ed through the sea;

    2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

    3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

    4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."

  24. #124
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
    I don't speak for BJ--but the LDS stance is Jesus Christ--which is what Paul taught:
    So LORD (in all caps) in the OT exclusively speaks of Christ. Correct?

  25. #125
    dberrie2000
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So LORD (in all caps) in the OT exclusively speaks of Christ. Correct?
    I have no idea, there is continuing debate about that subject.

    But one thing is not as debated--there were numerous Gods in the divine council. They were referred to as Elohim, or sons of God, or both. They were a heavenly host.

    That is all that is needed to destroy the faith alone Trinitarian theology. If that is true--faith alone theology is false--end of story.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •