The doctrine of the Trinity — that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are each equally and eternally the one true God — is admittedly difficult to comprehend, and yet is the very foundation of Christian truth. Although skeptics may ridicule it as a mathematical impossibility, it is nevertheless a basic doctrine of Scripture as well as profoundly realistic in both universal experience and in the scientific understanding of the cosmos.
Both Old and New Testaments teach the Unity and the Trinity of the Godhead. The idea that there is only one God, who created all things, is repeatedly emphasized in such Scriptures as Isaiah 45:18:
"For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the earth and made it; . . . I am the Lord; and there is none else."
A New Testament example is James 2:19:
"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well; the devils also believe, and tremble."
The three persons of the Godhead are, at the same time, noted in such Scriptures as Isaiah 48:16:
"I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; From the time that it was, there am I; and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me."
The speaker in this verse is obviously God, and yet He says He has been sent both by The Lord God (that is, the Father) and by His Spirit (that is, the Holy Spirit).
The New Testament doctrine of the Trinity is evident in such a verse as John 15:26, where the Lord Jesus said:
"But when the Comforter is come whom I will send unto you from the Father, He shall testify of me."
Then there is the baptismal formula:
"baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Matthew 28:19).
OLAADEGBU: Objection: How can One God be 3 Persons?
Answer:
The doctrine of the Trinity — that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are each equally and eternally the one true God — is admittedly difficult to comprehend, and yet is the very foundation of Christian truth. Although skeptics may ridicule it as a mathematical impossibility, it is nevertheless a basic doctrine of Scripture as well as profoundly realistic in both universal experience and in the scientific understanding of the cosmos.
When I read the bolded nonsense, I lost interest.
Why should a simple concept be so difficult to comprehend
And yes skeptics should ridicule this silly concept, deservedly so , because it is simply a mathematical nonsense with a strong probability of being perfectly improbable
Ravi Zakarias in the videoclip used the analogy by C.S. Lewis a former atheist who had come to the saving knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, in his book called Mere Christianity to explain the concept of the holy trinity which goes like this.
"You know that in space you can move in three ways – to left or right, backwards or forwards, up or down. Every direction is either one of these three or a compromise between them. They are called the three Dimensions. Now notice this. If you are using only one dimension, you could draw only a straight line. If you are using two, you could draw a figure: say, a square. And a square is made up of four straight lines. Now a step further. If you have three dimensions, you can then build what we call a solid body: say, a cube – a thing like a dice or a lump of sugar. And a cube is made up of six squares.
Do you see the point? A world of one dimension would be a straight line. In a two dimensional world, you still get straight lines, but many lines make one figure. In a three dimensional world, you still get figures but many figures make one solid body. In other words, as you advance to more real and more complicated levels, you do not leave behind you the things you found on the simpler levels: you still have them, but combined in new ways - in ways you could not imagine if you knew only the simpler levels.
Now the Christian account of God involves just the same principle. The human level is a simple level and rather empty level. On the human level one person is one being, and any two persons are two separate beings – just as, in two dimensions (say on a flat sheet of paper) one square is one figure, and any two squares are two separate figures. On the Divine level you still find personalities; but up there you find them combined in new ways which we, who do not live on that level, cannot imagine. In God’s dimension, so to speak, you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being, just as a cube is six squares while remaining one cube. Of course we cannot fully conceive a Being like that: just as, if we were so made that we perceived only two dimensions in space we could never properly imagine a cube. But we can get a sort of faint notion of it. And when we do, we are then, for the first time in our lives, getting some positive idea, however faint, of something super-personal – something more than a person. It is something we could never have guessed, and yet, once we have been told, one almost feels one ought to have been able to guess it because it fits in so well with all the things we know already.
You may ask, ‘If we cannot imagine a three-personal Being, what is the good of talking about Him. The thing that matters is being actually drawn into that three-personal life, and that may begin any time – tonight, if you like"
In seeking to understand the Trinity we need to recognise three limiting factors. First, the human language is limited such that it is incapable of describing the aroma of coffee. Secondly, the limitation of our own understanding and intellects.
John Eddison in his book "talking to children" said "Our little intellectual systems find themselves groaning under the strain of trying to accommodate God"
Therefore, in an attempt to describe the Trinity we have to resort to the use of paradox. A paradox as defined by the Concise Oxford Dictionary is a seemingly absurd though perhaps actually well founded statement. And thirdly, we have to recognise the limits of our finite world and our finite minds.
In seeking to understand the Trinity we need to recognise three limiting factors. First, the human language is limited such that it is incapable of describing the aroma of coffee. Secondly, the limitation of our own understanding and intellects.
John Eddison in his book "talking to children" said "Our little intellectual systems find themselves groaning under the strain of trying to accommodate God"
Therefore, in an attempt to describe the Trinity we have to resort to the use of paradox. A paradox as defined by the Concise Oxford Dictionary is a seemingly absurd though perhaps actually well founded statement. And thirdly, we have to recognise the limits of our finite world and our finite minds.
In seeking to understand the Trinity we need to recognise three limiting factors. First, the human language is limited such that it is incapable of describing the aroma of coffee. Secondly, the limitation of our own understanding and intellects.
John Eddison in his book "talking to children" said "Our little intellectual systems find themselves groaning under the strain of trying to accommodate God"
Therefore, in an attempt to describe the Trinity we have to resort to the use of paradox. A paradox as defined by the Concise Oxford Dictionary is a seemingly absurd though perhaps actually well founded statement. And thirdly, we have to recognise the limits of our finite world and our finite minds.
Ola ur finished.....go hide ur face.....
Ur moving in circles......
And u'll be back to d same questions that we've been asking and that has been hunting ur butt........
Go meet ur fore-fathers that instituted this doctrine(trinity) @ the council of nicea.....
In seeking to understand the Trinity we need to recognise three limiting factors. First, the human language is limited such that it is incapable of describing the aroma of coffee. Secondly, the limitation of our own understanding and intellects.
John Eddison in his book "talking to children" said "Our little intellectual systems find themselves groaning under the strain of trying to accommodate God"
all your assertions about understanding of Gods word are unfounded, maybe i need to remind you, apostle peter and other 1st century christians, are they educated? read below;
Acts 4:13; When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.
definately Gods word is easy to understand and God will not unnecesary put anyone into confusion.
all your assertions about understanding of Gods word are unfounded, maybe i need to remind you, apostle peter and other 1st century christians, are they educated? read below;
Acts 4:13; When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.
definately Gods word is easy to understand and God will not unnecesary put anyone into confusion.
trinity fraud is a pagan belief! ok?
according to OLAADEGBU adding a PhD suffix after your name is sure proof that your doctrine is authentic , and if he is right, we can also infer from ancient tradition that no one had more doctorate degrees in theology than the Pharisees ,
Lets see another analogy or paradox from the world of science through the lenses of a scientist and theologian named Alister McGrath:
"An example of this from the world of science concerns the nature of light. By the first decade of the twentieth century, it was clear that light behaved in a very strange way - sometimes it seemed to behave as if it was a particle. It could't be both at once, and so the cry 'contradiction!' was raised. How could it be two totally different things? But eventually, through the development of the Quantum Theory, it was found that this contradiction expressed a fundamental difficulty in grasping what the nature of light really was. In other words, the contradiction did not arise on account of light, but on account of our difficulties in conceiving it."
McGrath went on to show that the nature of light was such that two contradictory models had to be used to account for its behaviour whereas on the Divine level we require three contradictory models.
"Most of us know what light is without needing to think about waves, particles or Quantum Theory. Light is what we need in order to see, to do our everyday business, to read and write. It is what comes out of the sun, and to a lesser extent from the moon. It is what we get when we switch on electric light bulbs or strip lighting. If we were physicsts, we might want to think about light in much more detail and go into the full complexities of it - and so we might start talking about waves, particles and Quantum Theory. But we don't need to do this in order to make use of light or to recognise it when we see it."
The fact that we cannot fully comprehend the Trinity does not mean that it does not make sense. When I switch on the television or communicate on a telephone I do not know how they work, but there is an explanation beyond the limits of my understanding and which does make sense.
OLAADEGBU: The fact that we cannot fully comprehend the Trinity does not mean that it does not make sense. When I switch on the television or communicate on a telephone I do not know how they work, but there is an explanation beyond the limits of my understanding and which does make sense.
Wrong, when I switch on the television or communicate on a telephone, I do actually know how it works.
Spare yourself the trouble bro, this article will soon hit 1000 comments with no agreement !!
Wrong, when I switch on the television or communicate on a telephone, I do actually know how it works.
Spare yourself the trouble bro, this article will soon hit 1000 comments with no agreement !!
Do you think everybody know how it works? and will it not be arrogance to say that they don't believe it can work simply because they don't know how it works? You guys are just like atheists who don't believe in the existence of God for the simple reason that they cannot see Him.
Do you think everybody know how it works? and will it not be arrogance to say that they don't believe it can work simply because they don't know how it works? You guys are just like atheists who don't believe in the existence of God for the simple reason that they cannot see Him.
We worship by faith and not by sight.....forgotten??
We haven't seen Yahweh but yet we obey his commands and principles.....we follow his son,servant,representative,high priest, who came to the earth....
If u or ur predecessors claim to have seen the almighty physically speaking then u shuld all go for a check up......
Because no one,I repeat no one has seen God or has ever seen God @ any point in human history......
John 1:18
##King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.) ..........
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
So ola I am right when I say I haven't seen God..........
Jesus is not the almighty....people saw him.....
No one can see GOD.....
Ola. Leave this enigma(trinity) alone and it will leave u.....
Does the title Son of God, imply that Jesus Christ is different than God? No. The Scriptures states that our Lord Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God (John 3:16), while true Christians are adopted sons of God (Romans 8:15-17). If you are born again you are called adopted sons of God because we are different from God and must become His children (hence, adopted, not begotten). Our Lord Jesus Christ is not called adopted because He never became God's Son, but has always been God's Son. Calling Jesus the only begotten Son of God means that He is of the same nature as God, not a different nature. Below is C.S. Lewis attempt to explain this truth:
"To beget is to become the father of: to create is to make. And the difference is this. When you beget, you beget something of the same kind as yourself. A man begets human babies, a beaver begets little beavers, But when you make, you make something of a different kind from yourself. A bird makes a nest, a beaver builds a dam . . . Now that is the first thing to get clear. What God begets is God; just as what man begets is man. What God creates is not God, just as what man makes is not man. That is why men are not Sons of God in the sense that Christ is. They may be like God in certain ways, but they are not things of the same kind."
There is a clear distinction between making and begetting, that is, you cannot make what you beget. What you make is different from yourself, what you beget has your nature. Therefore to call Jesus the only begotten Son is to say that He has God's nature and was not made. Since He has God's nature, He is, by definition, God and therefore eternal. If Jesus was created by God, He could not have been begotten, and John 3:16; 1:18, 1 John 4:9, etc. are in error.
Therefore, when the Bible says that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, it means that Jesus is equal to God, not less than God.QED
Bros u sabi argue pointlessly no be small, the worse is than, you begin to contradict urself. you said Jesus is equal to God not lesse right? Ok see what he says again.
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. According to Jesus, He is telling us that his Father = Greater, when something is greater then,the other must be lesser/smaller Jesus/I= Lesser/smaller. If Jesus openly tells us that There is one who is greater than him, the only one who knows the date of his second coming. Who are you to contradict?
I no know why you dey keep blind eyes from these well written words of Christ. Anyway, you can believe that everyone is against you. Because we are trying to make you see the errors in the trinity dogman, You have claimed to be the one that speak the truth and have lebelled us names.
"Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart." (Ephesians 4:18 ).
It is a tragedy for a person to have blinded eyes, but infinitely worse to have a blinded heart. No one ever willfully chooses to be sightless, but spiritual blindness is a product of the human will.
After Christ had given sight to the man born blind, the Pharisees still refused to believe, so Jesus said to them, "For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. . . . If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth" (John 9:39, 41).
Like these ancient intellectuals, it often seems that modern intellectuals are incurably blind. They profess to teach science and philosophy of the highest complexity, but their understanding is darkened and their hearts are blinded when it comes to the saving gospel of Jesus Christ. As Paul says: "If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them" (2 Corinthians 4:3-4).
Even very religious people, people who believe in God as Creator, may blind themselves when confronted with the truth that the Creator must also become their Saviour. "But their minds were blinded . . . even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart" (2 Corinthians 3:14-15).
Nevertheless, Christ came as "the light," and when anyone will simply in faith "turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away" (2 Corinthians 3:16), and the gospel will "shine unto them" (2 Corinthians 4:4). HMM
Bros u sabi argue pointlessly no be small, the worse is than, you begin to contradict urself. you said Jesus is equal to God not lesse right? Ok see what he says again.
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. According to Jesus, He is telling us that his Father = Greater, when something is greater then,the other must be lesser/smaller Jesus/I= Lesser/smaller. If Jesus openly tells us that There is one who is greater than him, the only one who knows the date of his second coming. Who are you to contradict?
I no know why you dey keep blind eyes from these well written words of Christ. Anyway, you can believe that everyone is against you. Because we are trying to make you see the errors in the trinity dogman, You have claimed to be the one that speak the truth and have lebelled us names. .
Do you think your heart is not blind by saying Jesus was not the author of John 14:28?
A point to remember, Deeper Life doctrine is infallible , they are always right ?
Why on earth did u quote revelations 1:8 if not to prove that Jesus is infact Yahweh??.....and u've been debunked!!!!!!.......
Ur such a weak bible student......
We also can be reffered to as "" I AM""...
I am i§ not a title that exclusively means Yahweh or God.....
Ola read ya bible well......
Ok let's analyze john 14:28 with ur favorite lovely title ""I am"" which u claim exclusively means God.....and after this whole discussion go back get some english tutorials...the trinity has finished u......
Jesus said the Father is greater than ""I am"".......
Its bold there.......
With all d english u know tell me what Jesus meant by saying those words using ""I am""......
If ""I am"" is also a title attributed to both the Father and son who are co-equal How can one "" I am"" be greater than another ""I am""??.....u urself said its impossible......so what's happening??...
Ola just go bak to school.......
U've run out scriptures..........
""I am"" is not a title.........its an expression denoting ones existence...
Jesus = Jesus
Yahweh = Yahweh.....
Ola = ola
Ijawkid = ijawkid
I am not u,you are not me.....that's what ""I am"" signifies
We humans use the word "" I am"" every day.....
U use it everyday.....
If I may ask u::::: are u ola??
Ur answer will be:::::YES "" I AM""
Now are u Yahweh or Jesus??
Hurry back to school..........
And u haven't still answered why an "" I am""(since its a title meant exclusively for Yahweh and Christ according to u) will not know when d end will come...... ??
And also ur spurious 1 * 1 * 1 = 1 formular depicts Jesus as Yahweh.....and u have said that several times just to prove ur false doctrine called trinity.......
That boy didn't see God....he saw mayb a demon....lol...
We'll see God in a symbolic sense not physically...u shuld understand that my bro....
As far as man is concerned we can't see God and no one has seen Him.....john 1:18 tells us that....
Are you sure he saw a demon? I have a question for all Jehovah Witnessess on this thread (ijawkid, BARRISTERS, Truthislight, Fresky) including the JW's wannabe, frosbel:
Do you believe Jesus bodily resurrected from the grave?
Are you sure he saw a demon? I have a question for all Jehovah Witnessess on this thread (ijawkid, BARRISTERS, Truthislight, Fresky) including the JW's wannabe, frosbel:
Do you believe Jesus bodily ressurrected from the grave?
Yeah that lil boy saw a demon.......:-)....
And d question u asked might infact lead to another question.......
Hope ur ready for it......??
Jesus was infact ressurected back to what he was b4 coming to the earth.......
1 corinthians 15:47-49
47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven. .....
What was Jesus b4 coming to d earth.....??
What he was b4 coming to the earth is what he was ressurected into......
And d question u asked might infact lead to another question.......
Hope ur ready for it......??
'Am not surprised that you know what the boy saw because you were the one telling us what Jesus Christ meant when He said "the pure in heart shall see God"
Answer my kweshun without jumping to another kweshun to divert us from the issue at hand:
Did Jesus Christ bodily rise from the dead, Yes or No?
Are you sure he saw a demon? I have a question for all Jehovah Witnessess on this thread (ijawkid, BARRISTERS, Truthislight, Fresky) including the JW's wannabe, frosbel:
^^^ Do you believe Jesus bodily ressurrected from the grave?
that is a coded statement, pls expanciate the more. Thanks.
And d question u asked might infact lead to another question.......
Hope ur ready for it......??
Jesus was infact ressurected back to what he was b4 coming to the earth.......
1 corinthians 15:47-49
47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven. .....
What was Jesus b4 coming to d earth.....??
What he was b4 coming to the earth is what he was ressurected into......
it is sowed in the flesh it is resurrected a life giving..............
'Am not surprised that you know what the boy saw because you were the one telling us what Jesus Christ meant when He said "the pure in heart shall see God"
Answer my kweshun without jumping to another kweshun to divert us from the issue at hand:
Did Jesus Christ bodily rise from the dead, Yes or No?
.