Must one Hold to the trinity to be saved?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wouldn't this be equivalent to saying, 'the Son is the Father made visible?
Jesus, the Word, pre-existed his physical birth as the creator. Jesus is only his given name on earth. If we say 'Son' it gives those who deny the deity of Jesus the opportunity, to claim he never existed before c. AD 5. Whereas we know Jesus is the I AM come down from heaven's glory who existed before Abraham, the self-existent One, the Alpha, and Omega, the first and the last.

Plus, to say the Son is the Father is a bit of an oxymoron.

Lights out. :)
 
Last edited:
Jesus, the Word, pre-existed his physical birth as the creator. Jesus is only his given name on earth. If we say 'Son' it gives those who deny the deity of Jesus the opportunity, to claim he never existed before c. AD 5. Whereas we know Jesus is the I AM come down from heaven's glory who existed before Abraham, the self-existent One, the Alpha, and Omega, the first and the last.

Plus, to say the Son is the Father is a bit of an oxymoron.

Lights out. :)
Ok, so in post #336 where you said, at the end, "Jesus is the Father made visible". Doesn't this contradict the Athanasius Creed. where it states...

"For there is one Person of the Father, another of
the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost, is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and
such is the Holy Ghost"

When you say "Jesus is the Father made visible" it sounds as if you are confounding the Persons, close to modalism.
Maybe you meant to say, "Jesus is God made visible"?
 
Wouldn't this be equivalent to saying, 'the Son is the Father made visible?

Jesus, the Word, pre-existed his physical birth as the creator. Jesus is only his given name on earth. If we say 'Son' it gives those who deny the deity of Jesus the opportunity, to claim he never existed before c. AD 5. Whereas we know Jesus is the I AM come down from heaven's glory who existed before Abraham, the self-existent One, the Alpha, and Omega, the first and the last. Plus, to say the Son is the Father is a bit of an oxymoron.
Lights out. :)

Hello crossnote;

I have never heard it put quite like the way you shared but yes, I get it.

Hello Cooper,

Keep the lights on, brother. Regarding the oxymoron part, I don't look it that way because as I'm reading your post and it seems we are limiting Jesus with what names and the definitions behind that we are to use.

God bless you, brother.
 
Try again and tell me where the word "person" comes from with regard to the Trinity. I do not see it in scripture. Thank you.

You're fabricating something I didn't say. I didn't use the word "person" in my post, so please explain to me your point? I'd like to understand how a false allegation proves your point.

Thank you.

MM
 
Ok, so in post #336 where you said, at the end, "Jesus is the Father made visible". Doesn't this contradict the Athanasius Creed. where it states...

"For there is one Person of the Father, another of
the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost, is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and
such is the Holy Ghost"

When you say "Jesus is the Father made visible" it sounds as if you are confounding the Persons, close to modalism.
Maybe you meant to say, "Jesus is God made visible"?
I see what you mean. Jesus is God made visible is fine, and true.
 
Last edited:
You're fabricating something I didn't say. I didn't use the word "person" in my post, so please explain to me your point? I'd like to understand how a false allegation proves your point.

Thank you.

MM
Post #323 by MM Greetings, Cooper,
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Those who try to foist angels into that mix in order for there to be an "us" in those statements, they will have a hard road to go to prove, theologically, that the creations known as angels had any measure of creative power akin to that of Deity.

So when you say that you don't understand where the plurality came from, then you will have to explain this one away without violating any other elements of truth throughout scripture, and will have to assume that the angels were similar to Deity in many, if not all, different aspects and attributes.

MM
Who is God speaking of in Genesis 1:26? You said it wasn't angels, so I assumed you were speaking of persons. If I was wrong I apologise.
 
Last edited:
That is wonderful. I have been looking in all the translations for the word ‘person’ and you found it in the NKJV. Notice it is 'person' in the singular, and not persons, ending the debate about three persons.

Read what the Believers Bible Commentary says about verse 3.

1:3 He is the outshining of God's glory, that is, all the perfections that are found in God the Father are found in Him also. He is the radiance of His glory. All the moral and spiritual glories of God are seen in Him.

Further, the Lord Jesus is the exact image of God's essential being. This cannot, of course, refer to physical likeness because God is, in essence, a Spirit. It means that in every conceivable way Christ exactly represents the Father. No closer resemblance could be possible. The Son, being God, reveals to man by His words and ways exactly what God is like.

And He upholds the universe by the word of His power. Originally He spoke to bring the worlds into being (Heb_11:3). Still He speaks and His powerful word sustains life, holds matter together and maintains the universe in proper order. It is by Him that all things hold together (Col_1:17). Here is a simple explanation of a profound scientific problem. Scientists grapple to discover what holds molecules together. We learn here that Jesus Christ is the great Sustainer, and He does it by His powerful word.

But the next glory of our Saviour is the most amazing of all—when He had by Himself purged our sins. The Creator and the Sustainer became the Sin-bearer.
In order to create the universe, He only had to speak. In order to maintain and guide the universe, He only has to speak because no moral issue is involved. But in order to put away our sin once and for all, He had to die on the cross of Calvary. It is staggering to think that the sovereign Lord would stoop to become the sacrificial Lamb. “Love so amazing, so divine, demands my soul, my life, my all,” as Isaac Watts' hymn says.

Finally, we have His exaltation as the enthroned Lord: He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. He sat down—the posture of rest. This is not the rest following toil, but the rest of satisfaction in a finished work. This posture indicates that the work of redemption has been completed.

The right hand of the Majesty on high is the position of honour and privilege (Heb_1:13). Because of His glorious triumph, God has highly exalted Him. The right hand is also the position of power (Mat_26:64) and delight (Psa_16:11). The nail-scarred hand of the Saviour holds the sceptre of universal dominion (1Pe_3:22).

In summary:- Jesus is the Father made visible.
What I showed is the 1611 KJV, not the NKJV which instead follows the modern critic texts. And the word 'person' is simply what the translators chose for English. It's not in the Greek text. Yet I believe 'Person' is still accurate for English.
 
What I showed is the 1611 KJV, not the NKJV which instead follows the modern critic texts. And the word 'person' is simply what the translators chose for English. It's not in the Greek text. Yet I believe 'Person' is still accurate for English.
It seems the NKJV is in agreement with the 1611 KJV, at least with that.
 
How many persons do you see here?

“Head of State, Chief Executive, Commander in Chief, Head of Government, Chief Diplomat, Manager of the Economy and Ceremonial Head of State.”

I see only one. Do you know why?
You then Hold to Modualism, or to Oneness, as its not the biblical view of God!
 
I hold to neither Modalism nor Oneness.

Oneness states that Jesus is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Modalism states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three modes or forms. Thus, God is a single person who first manifested himself in the mode of the Father in Old Testament times. At the incarnation, the mode was the Son; and after Jesus’ ascension, the mode is the Holy Spirit. These modes are consecutive and never simultaneous. (Carm)

Both of the above are incorrect.

What I believe is that the One Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Omniscient God was manifest in Jesus Christ and that he was “God manifest on earth, according to the scriptures."

"Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this [shall be] a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men.”
.
Does God eternally exist as 3 distinct persons, within the One God?
 
YES Davy, angels has takem human form and men did not know and some did know.

Hebrews 13:2 ........
“Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.”

Angels can appear in different ways because they are pure spirits who have no inherent physical form/DNA.

2 Kings 6:16-17 = in which Elisha prayed that God would open his eyes so he could see the angelic army around him, and God did so.

Genesis chapter 18 records a time when three angels (one of whom was the Pre-incarnant Christ) appeared as men to Abraham and Sarah. The angels even ate a human meal while they were there. One of the angels prophesied that Abraham and Sarah would have a son the next year, even though they were both in their old age at that time. When Sarah laughed to herself at that thought, the Angel of the Lord asked her why she laughed, and Sarah was surprised that he knew about it.
Would say that the angels took on human appearance, but stayed angels, but Jesus was God incarnated as human flesh!
 
Jesus, the Word, pre-existed his physical birth as the creator. Jesus is only his given name on earth. If we say 'Son' it gives those who deny the deity of Jesus the opportunity, to claim he never existed before c. AD 5. Whereas we know Jesus is the I AM come down from heaven's glory who existed before Abraham, the self-existent One, the Alpha, and Omega, the first and the last.

Plus, to say the Son is the Father is a bit of an oxymoron.

Lights out. :)
Does God eternally exist as the father and the Son?
 
It seems the NKJV is in agreement with the 1611 KJV, at least with that.
Maybe, but be careful, the NKJV is not what you may think. That's the Bible version I was given when I was baptized, but it didn't take me long to recognize it was a different translation than the 1611 KJV.

Look at the Bible recommendations thread, and the YouTube links I gave. There are two types of Greek New Testament texts, the newer one comes from Wescott and Hort's 1881 new Greek translation that all modern Bible versions use. They consulted a totally different set of Greek manuscripts than what the KJV used. The KJV used what is called the Received Texts, which make up the majority of existent Greek New Testament manuscripts, which is why it is also known as the Majority Text. There's a war going on with Bible versions, and the NIV was one of greatest examples of a modern NT version that tries to remove Majority Text verses that declare the divinity of Christ Jesus.
 
No, rather the point of Hebrews there was to show the contrast between the limited and Temp Levitical Aaronic priesthood, and the eternal priesthood of Lord jesus, but that was not him back there!
Well yes Melchizedek was our Lord Jesus back in Old Testament times that met Abraham and blessed him. You simply are going on some general idea of what the Book of Hebrews is mainly about, instead of actually reading... the Hebrews 7 Scripture as written. And much of the Book of Hebrews indeed is... about the difference between a priesthood between the old and New Covenant. But what Paul is revealing in Hebrews 7 is something deeper about Christ Jesus.

I will start a new thread to show this point in Hebrews 7 that I'm talking about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top