Questions to ask Oneness Pentecostal believers
|
Posted:Dec 17, 2010 6:06 am
Last Updated:Dec 19, 2010 8:49 pm 69192 Views
|
1. Is Jesus His own Father?
2. If Jesus' will and the Father's will were identical, then why did Jesus express the desire to escape the cup but resigns Himself not to His own will, but the will of the Father? See my article on this.
3. Was Jesus praying to Himself in the Garden of Gethsemane?
4. If Jesus was praying to the divine side of Himself, then isn't He still praying to Himself?
5. Why was Jesus not saying, "Not My will, but MY will be done?" if there is only one person and one will involved when He was praying in Luke 22:42 & Matt. 26:39.
6. If baptism is essential for salvation, then what happens to someone who repents of sin, accepts Jesus as Savior, walks across the street to get baptized but is killed by a car. Does he go to heaven or hell?
1. If he goes to heaven, then baptism isn't a requirement is it?
2. If he goes to hell, then faith in Christ isn't sufficient to save him is it?
7. Since the Bible teaches us that Jesus is in bodily form now (Col. 2:9), then how does the Oneness Pentecostal person maintain that God is in the form of the Holy Spirit? Also, when Jesus returns, will He return in His body? Will God's form then revert to the form of the at a later date?
8. If God is only one person, why did Jesus say in John 14:23, "If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." If God is only one person, why does Jesus say, "we"?
9. Oneness theology teaches that God was in the mode of the Father in the Old Testament. God was seen in the OT (not as a vision or a dream or an angel in the following verses: Exo. 6:2-3; Gen. 19:24; Num. 12:6- . But, Jesus said no one has seen the Father (John 6:46). If they were seeing God Almighty (Exo. 6:2-3) but it wasn't the Father, then who was it?
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
The Trinity Visualized
|
Posted:Dec 17, 2010 6:01 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 68088 Views
|
The Trinity Visualized
This "shield of the Holy Trinity" teaches that the Father (P=Pater) is not (non est) the (F=Filius), the is not the Holy Spirit (SS=Spiritus Sanctus), and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. The Father is distinguishable from the , the is distinguishable from the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit is distinguishable from the Father. However the Father is God (est Deus), nothing less, and the is God, nothing less, and the Holy Spirit is God, and God is essentially one.
This picture grasps the essential logic of triune teaching that avoids tri-theism, the heterodox view that Christians worship three Gods. God's unity is affirmed in three persons. God is una sabstantia, one substance, which means that God remains essentially one while becoming known in tres persona, three persons. The Father is God, the is God, the Spirit is God.
Quoted without parenthetical references from Thomas Oden, The Living God, 2001, Peabody, MA: Prince Press, p. 221.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity
|
Posted:Dec 17, 2010 5:54 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 69716 Views
|
An Outline Study by Robert Bowman Jr
1. There Is One God
2. This God is Known In The OT As Jehovah/Yahweh ("The Lord")
3. God Is A Unique, Incomprehensible Being
4. Is God One Person?
5. The Father Of Jesus Christ Is God
6. Jesus Christ Is God
7. The Holy Spirit Is God
8. The Father, , And Holy Spirit Are Distinct Persons
9. Conclusion
10. What Difference Does The Doctrine Of The Trinity Make?
Here we go:
Introduction
It is often alleged that the doctrine of the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine. While the word Trinity is not in the Bible, the substance of the doctrine is definitely biblical.
The following outline study presents an overview of the biblical basis of the doctrine of the Trinity. Comments on the texts have been kept to a bare minimum; the emphasis is on the many biblical texts themselves (about 700 references are listed, including references from 26 of the 27 books of the New Testament).
An exposition of many of the texts discussed here can be found in the author's book Why You Should Believe in the Trinity (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989). Unfortunately, it is currently out of print, but you may be able to locate a copy through Amazon.com's out-of-print service.
A proper evaluation of the biblical evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity will depend on the faithful application of sound principles of biblical interpretation. Here I will mention just two principles which, if followed, would prevent almost all interpretive errors on this subject.
The first is to interpret the implicit in light of the explicit. That is, texts that explicitly state that such-and-such is true are to govern our understanding of passages that do not address the issue directly. For example, many passages of the Bible state explicitly that God is omniscient, that is, that he knows all things, including the thoughts of men and all future events (1 Sam. 16 ; 1 Chron. 28:9, 17; Job 37:16; Psa. 139:1-4; Isa. 41:22-23; 42:9; 44; Jer. 17:10a). These texts must govern our understanding of passages which might seem to imply, but which do not assert, that God did not know something (e.g., Gen. 3:9-13; 4:9; 18:9, 20-21).
The other principle is that we interpret logically but not rationalistically. Using the same illustration, if God knows everything ahead of time, then logically He must have known that Adam and Eve would fall into sin. However, to argue that if God knew Adam and Eve would sin then they would not be responsible for their choosing to sin is not "logical," is rationalistic. It may be difficult to understand how persons could be responsible for their sinful actions if God knew ahead of time that they would sin, but it is not illogical (not self-contradictory) to say so.
It should be noted that a study of the Trinity should not be undertaken apart from a study of the nature of God.
I. There Is One God
1. One God: Explicit Statements
1. OT: Deut. 4:35; 4:39; 32:39; 2 Sam. 22:32; Isa. 37:20: 43:10; 44:6-8; 45:5; 45:14; 45:21-22; 46:9
2. NT: John 5:44; Rom. 3:30; 16:27; 1 Cor. 8:4-6; Gal. 3:20; Eph. 4:6; 1 Tim. 1:17; 1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19; Jude 25
2. None like God (in his essence)
1. Explicit statements: Ex. 8:10; 9:14; 15:11; 2 Sam. 7:22; 1 Kgs. 8:23; 1 Chr. 17:20; Psa. 86:8; Isa. 40:18, 40:25: 44; 46:5, 46:9; Jer. 10:6-7; Micah 7:18
2. Being like God a Satanic lie: Gen. 3:5; Isa. 14:14; John 8:44
3. Fallen man become "like God" only in that he took upon himself to know good and evil, not that he acquired godhood: Gen. 3:22
3. Only one true God: 2 Chr. 15:3; Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 John 5:20-21
4. All other "gods" are therefore false gods (idols), not gods at all: Deut. 32:21; 1 Sam. 12:21; Psa. 96:5; Isa. 37:19; 41:23-24, 41:29; Jer. 2:11; 5; 16:20; 1 Cor. 8:4; 10:19-20
5. Demons, not gods, are the power behind false worship: Deut. 32:17; Psa. 106:37; 1 Cor. 10:20; Gal. 4:8
6. How human beings are meant to be "like God"
1. The image of God indicates that man is to represent God and share his moral character, not that man can be metaphysically like God: Gen. 1:26-27; 5:1; 1 Cor. 11; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10
2. The goal of being like Christ has the following aspects only:
1. Sharing His moral character: 1 John 3:2; Rom. 8:29
2. Being raised with glorified, immortal bodies like His: Phil. 3:21; 1 Cor. 15:49
3. Becoming partakers of the divine nature refers again to moral nature ("having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust"), not metaphysical nature: 2 Pet. 1:4; see also Heb. 12:10; on the meaning of "partakers," See 1 Cor. 10:18, 10:20; 2 Cor. 1:17; 1 Pet. 5:1
7. Are mighty or exalted men gods?
1. Scripture never says explicitly that men are gods
2. Powerful, mighty men are explicitly said not to be gods: Ezek. 28:2, 28:9; Isa. 31:3; 2 Thess. 2:4
3. Men and God are opposite, exclusive categories: Num. 23:19; Isa. 31:3; Ezek. 28:2; Hosea 11:9; Matt. 19:26; John 10:33; Acts 12:22; 1 Cor. 14:2
4. Moses was "as God," not really a god: Ex. 4:16; 7:1
5. Ezek. 32:21 speaks of warriors or soldiers as "mighty gods," but in context they are so regarded by their pagan nations, not by God or Israel; cf. Ezek. 28:2, 28:9
6. The elohim before whom accused stood in Exodus was God Himself, not judges, as many translations incorrectly render: Ex. 22:8-9, 22:28; compare Deut. 19:17
7. The use of elohim in Psalm 82:1, probably in reference to wicked judges, as cited by Jesus in John 10:34-36, does not mean that men really can be gods.
1. It is Asaph, not the Lord, who calls the judges elohim in Psa. 82:1, 82:6. This is important, even though we agree that Psa. 82 is inspired.
2. Asaph's meaning is not "Although you are gods, you will die like men," but rather "I called you gods, but in fact you will all die like the men that you really are"
3. The Psalmist was no more saying that wicked judges were truly gods than he was saying that they were truly "sons of the Most High" (Psa 82:6 b)
4. Thus, Psa. 82:1 calls the judges elohim in irony. They had quite likely taken their role in judgment (cf. point 5 above) to mean they were elohim, or gods, and Asaph's message is that these so-called gods were mere men who would die under the judgment of the true elohim (vss. Psa. 82:1-2, 82-
5. Christ's use of this passage in John 10:34-36 does not negate the above interpretation of Psalm 82
6. The words, "The Scripture cannot be broken," means "the Scripture cannot go without having some ultimate fulfillment" (cf. John 7:23; Matt. 5:17). Thus Jesus is saying that what the OT judges were called in irony, He is in reality; He does what they could not do, and is what they could never be (see the Adam-Christ contrasts in Rom. 5:12-21 and 1 Cor. 15:21-22, 15:45 for a similar use of OT Scripture)
7. The clause, "those against whom the word of God came" (John 10:35) shows that this "word" was a word of judgment against the so-called gods; which shows that they were false gods, not really gods at all
8. Finally, these wicked men were certainly not "godlike" or "divine" by nature, so that in any case the use of elohim to refer to them must be seen as figurative, not literal
8. Even if men were gods (which they are not), this would be irrelevant to Jesus, since He was God as a preexistent spirit before creation: John 1:1
8. Are angels gods?
1. Scripture never explicitly states that angels are gods
2. Demonic spirits are not gods, 1 Cor. 10:20; Gal. 4:8; thus, being "mighty spirits" does not make angels gods
3. Satan is therefore also a false god: 2 Cor. 4:4
4. Psalm 8:5 does not teach that angels are gods
1. Psa. 8:5 is paraphrased in Heb. 2, not quoted literally (cf. Psa. 68:18 with Eph. 4:. In Psa. 8:5, elohim certainly means God, not angels, since Psa. 8:3-8 parallels Gen. 1:1, 1:8, 1:16, 1:26-28. Note that the Psalmist is speaking of man's exalted place in creation, whereas Hebrews is speaking of the lower place taken by Christ in becoming a man. Thus, Heb. 2 may not mean to equate angels with gods at all.
2. Even if Heb. 2 does imply that angels are "gods," in the context of Hebrews 1-2 these angels would be those falsely exalted above Christ: Note Heb. 1:6 (which quotes Psa. 97, which definitely speaks of "gods" in the sense of false gods); and cf. Col. 2:16 on the problem of the worship of angels.
5. Elsewhere in the Psalms angels, if spoken of as gods (or as "sons of the gods"), are considered false gods: Psa. 29:1; 86:8-10; 89:6; 95:3; 96:4-5; 97-9 (note that these false gods are called "angels" in the Septuagint); Psa. 135:5; 136:2; 138:1; cf. Ex. 15:11; 18:11; Deut. 10:17; 1 Chr. 16:25; 2 Chr. 2:5.
6. Even if the angels were gods (which the above shows they are not), that would be irrelevant to Jesus, since He is not an angelic being, but the who is worshiped by the angels as their Creator, Lord, and God: Heb. 1:1-13.
9. Conclusion: If there is only one God, one true God, all other gods being false gods, neither men nor angels being gods, and none even like God by nature - all of which the Bible says repeatedly and explicitly - then we must conclude that there is indeed only one God.
II. This One God Is Known in the OT as "Jehovah/Yahweh" ("The Lord")
1. Texts where Jehovah is said to be elohim or el: Deut. 4:35, 4:39; Psa. 100:3; etc.
2. Texts where the compound name "Jehovah God" (Yahweh Elohim) is used: Gen. 2:3; 9:26; 24:3; Ex. 3:15-18; 4:4; 2 Sam. 7:22, 7:25; etc.
3. Only one Yahweh/Jehovah: Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29
4. Conclusion: Jehovah is the only God, the only El or Elohim
III. God Is a Unique, Incomprehensible Being
1. Only one God, thus unique: See I.A.
2. None are even like God: See I.B.
3. God cannot be fully comprehended: 1 Cor. 8:2-3
4. God can only be known insofar as the reveals Him: Matt. 11:25-27; John 1:18
5. Analogical language needed to describe God: Ezek. 1:26-28; Rev. 1:13-16
6. God is transcendent, entirely distinct from and different than the universe, as the carpenter is distinct from the bench
1. Separate from the world: Isa. 40:22; Acts 17:24
2. Contrasted with the world: Psa. 102:25-27; 1 John 2:15-17
3. Created the world: Gen. 1:1; Psa. 33:6; 102:25; Isa. 42:5; 44:24; John 1:3; Rom. 11:36; Heb. 1:2; 11:3
IV. Is God One Person?
1. God is one God (cf. I above), one Yahweh, one Lord (cf. II above), one Spirit (John 4:24)
2. However, the Bible never says that God is "one person"
1. Heb. 1:3 KJV speaks of God's "person," but the word used here, hupostasis, is translated "substance" in Heb. 11:1 KJV; also in Heb. 1:3 "God" refers specifically to the Father
2. Gal. 3:20 speaks of God as one party in the covenant between God and man, not as one person
3. Job 13:8 KJV speaks of God's "person," but ironically the Hebrew literally means "his faces"
3. The use of singular and plural pronouns for God
1. Over 7000 times God speaks or is spoken of with singular pronouns (I, He, etc.); but this is proper because God is a single individual being; thus these singular forms do not disprove that God exists as three "persons" as long as these persons are not separate beings
2. At least three times God speaks of or to himself using plural pronouns (Gen. 1:26; 3:22; 11), and nontrinitarian interpretation cannot account for these occurrences.
1. A plural reference to God and the angels is possible in Isa. 6:8, but not in the Genesis texts: in Gen 1:26 "our image" is explained in Gen 1:27, "in God's image"; in Gen 3:22 "like one of us" refers back to Gen 3:5, "like God."
2. The "literary plural" (possibly, though never clearly, attested in Paul) is irrelevant to texts in which God is speaking, not writing.
3. The "plural of deliberation" (as in "Let's see now…") is apparently unattested in biblical writings, and cannot explain Gen. 3:22 ("like one of us").
4. The "plural of amplitude" or of "fullness" (which probably does explain the use of the plural form elohim in the singular sense of "God") is irrelevant to the use of plural pronouns, and again cannot explain Gen. 3:22.
5. The "plural of majesty" is possibly attested in 1 Kgs. 12:9; 2 Chron. 10:9; more likely Ezra 4:18; but none of these are certain; and again, it cannot explain Gen. 3:22; also nothing in the context of the Genesis texts suggests that God is being presented particularly as King.
4. The uniqueness of God (cf. III above) should prepare us for the possibility that the one divine Being exists uniquely as a plurality of persons
V. The Father of Jesus Christ Is God
1. Explicit statements: John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; etc.
2. The expression, "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ": 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 1:3; 1 Pet. 1:3
VI. Jesus Christ Is God
1. Explicit statements
1. Isa. 9:6; note Isa. 10:21. Translations which render "mighty hero," are inconsistent in their rendering of Isa. 10:21. Also note that Ezek. 32:21 is (a) not in the same context, as is Isa. 10:21, and (b) speaking of false gods, cf. I.G.5. above.
2. John 1:1 Even if Jesus is here called "a god" (as some have argued), since there is only one God, Jesus is that God. However, the "a god" rendering is incorrect. Other passages using the Greek word for God (theos) in the same construction are always rendered "God": Mark 12:27; Luke 20:38; John 8:54; Phil 2:13; Heb. 11:16. Passages in which a shift occurs from ho theos ("the God") to theos ("God") never imply a shift in meaning: Mark 12:27; Luke 20:37-38; John 3:2; 13:3; Rom. 1:21; 1 Thess. 1:9; Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 4:10-11
3. John 1:18. The best manuscripts have "the unique God" (monogenês, frequently rendered "only-begotten," actually means "one of a kind," "unique," though in the NT always in the context of a or ). Even if one translates "only-begotten," the idea is not of a "begotten god" as opposed to an "unbegotten god."
4. John 20:28. Compare Rev. 4:11, where the same construction is used in the plural ("our") instead of the singular ("my"). See also Psa. 35:23. Note that Christ's response indicates that Thomas' acclamation was not wrong. Also note that John 20:17 does show that the Father was Jesus' "God" (due to Jesus becoming a man), but the words "my God" as spoken by Thomas later in the same chapter must mean no less than in John 20:17. Thus, what the Father is to Jesus in His humanity, Jesus is to Thomas (and therefore to us as well).
5. Acts 20:28: "the church of God which He purchased with His own blood." The variant readings (e.g. "the church of the Lord") show that the original was understood to mean "His own blood," not "the blood of His own []" (since otherwise no one would have thought to change it). Thus all other renderings are attempts to evade the startling clarity and meaning of this passage.
6. Rom. 9:5. While grammatically this is not the only possible interpretation, the consistent form of doxologies in Scripture, as well as the smoothest reading of the text, supports the identification of Christ as "God" in this verse.
7. Titus 2:13. Grammatically and contextually, this is one of the strongest proof-texts for the deity of Christ. Sharp's first rule, properly understood, proves that the text should be translated "our great God and Savior" (cf. same construction in Luke 20:37; Rev. 1:6; and many other passages). Note also that Paul always uses the word "manifestation" ("appearing") of Christ: 2 Thess. 2:8; 1 Tim. 6:14; 2 Tim. 1:10; 4:1, 4:8.
8. Heb. 1:8. The rendering, "God is your throne," is nonsense - God is not a throne, He is the one who sits on the throne! Also, "God is your throne," if taken to mean God is the source of one's rule, could be said about any angelic ruler - but Hebrews 1 is arguing that Jesus is superior to the angels.
9. 2 Pet. 1:1. The same construction is used here as in Titus 2:13; see the parallel passages in 2 Pet. 1:11; 2:20; 3:2, 3:18.
10. 1 John 5:20. Note that the most obvious antecedent for "this" is Jesus Christ. Also note that the "eternal life" is Christ, as can be seen from John 1:2.
2. Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh
1. Rom. 10:9-13: Note the repeated "for," which links these verses closely together. The "Lord" of Rom. 10:13 must be the "Lord" of Rom. 10:9, 10:12.
2. Phil. 2:9-11. In context, the "name that is above every name" is "Lord" (Phil. 2:11), i.e., Jehovah.
3. Heb. 1:10: Here God the Father addresses the as "Lord," in a quotation from Psa. 102:25 (cf. Psa. 102:24, where the person addressed is called "God"). Since here the Father addresses the as "Lord," this cannot be explained away as a text in which a creature addresses Christ as God/Lord in a merely representational sense.
4. 1 Pet. 2:3-4: This verse is nearly an exact quotation of Psa. 34:8 a, where "Lord" is Jehovah. From 1 Pet. 2:4-8 it is also clear that "the Lord" in 1 Pet. 2:3 is Jesus.
5. 1 Pet. 3:14-15: these verses are a clear reference to Isa. 8:12-13, where the one who is to be regarded as holy is Jehovah.
6. Texts where Jesus is spoken of as the "one Lord" (cf. Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29): 1 Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:5; cf. Rom. 10:12; 1 Cor. 12:5.
3. Jesus has the titles of God
1. Titles belonging only to God
1. The first and the last: Rev. 1:17; 22:13; cf. Isa. 44:6
2. King of kings and Lord of lords: 1 Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16
2. Titles belonging in the ultimate sense only to God
1. Savior: Luke 2:11; John 4:42; 1 John 4:14; Titus 2:13, cf. Titus 2:10; etc.; cf. Isa. 43:11; 45:21-22; 1 Tim. 4:10; on Jesus becoming the source of salvation; Heb. 5:9, cf. Ex. 15:2; Psa. 118:14, 118:21
2. Shepherd: John 10:11; Heb. 13:20; cf. Psa. 23:1; Isa. 40:11
3. Rock: 1 Cor. 10:4; cf. Isa. 44:8
4. Jesus received the honors due to God alone
1. Honor: John 5:23
2. Love: Matt. 10:37
3. Prayer: John 14:14 (text debated, but in any case it is Jesus who answers the prayer); Acts 1:24-25; 7:59-60 (cf. Luke 23:34, 23:46); Rom. 10:12-13; 1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 12:8-10 (where "the Lord" must be Jesus, cf. 2 Cor. 12:9); 2 Thess. 2:16-17; etc.
4. Worship (proskuneô): Matt. 28:17; Heb. 1:6 (cf. Psa. 97); cf. Matt 4:10
5. Religious or sacred service (latreuô): Rev. 22:13
6. Doxological praise: 2 Tim. 4:18; 2 Pet. 3:18; Rev. 1:5-6; 5:13
7. Faith: John 3:16; 14:1; etc.
5. Jesus does the works of God
1. Creation: John 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2; Rev. 3:14 (where archê probably means ruler); on "through" and "in" cf. Rom. 11:36; Heb. 2:10; Acts 17:28; cf. also Isa. 44:24
2. Sustains the universe: Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3, 1:11-12
3. Salvation:
1. In General: See C.2.a. above
2. Forgives sins: Matt. 9:1-8; Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26; note that Jesus forgives sins not committed against Him.
4. All of them: John 5:17-29 (including judgment, cf. Matt. 25:31-46; 2 Cor. 5:10)
6. Jesus has all the incommunicable attributes of God
1. All of them: John 1:1; Phil. 2:6; Col. 1:15; 2:9; Heb. 1:3
2. Self-existent: John 5:26
3. Unchangeable: Heb. 1:10-12 (in the same sense as YHWH); Heb. 13:8
4. Eternal: John 1:1; 8:58; 17:5; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:2
5. Omnipresent: Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13; Eph. 1:23; 4:10; Col. 3:11
6. Omniscient: John 16:30; 21:17; cf. John 2:23-24
7. Incomprehensible: Matt. 11:25-27
7. Jesus is "equal with God"
1. John 5:18: Although John is relating what the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming, the context shows they were basically right: In John 5:17 claimed to be exempt from the Sabbath along with His Father, and in John 5:19-29 Jesus claimed to do all of the world of the Father and to deserve the same honor as the Father
2. Phil. 2:6: Jesus did not attempt to seize recognition by the world as being equal with God, but attained that recognition by humbling himself and being exalted by the Father (Phil. 2-11)
8. Jesus is the of God
1. "" in Scripture can mean simply one possessing the nature of something, whether literal or figurative (e.g. " of man," "sons of thunder," "sons of disobedience," cf. Mark 3; Eph. 2:1).
2. Usually when " of" is used in relation to a person ( of man, of Abraham, of David, etc.) the possesses the nature of his father.
3. Jesus is clearly not the literal of God, i.e., He was not physically procreated by God.
4. On the other hand, Jesus is clearly the of God in a unique sense (cf. "only-begotten ," John 1:14; 3:16, 3:18; 1 John 4:9) and in a preeminent sense (i.e. the term is more fitting for Him than for anyone else).
5. Scripture is explicit that the possesses God's essence or nature (cf. F. above).
6. Jesus' repeated claim to be the of God was consistently understood by the Jewish leaders as a blasphemous claim to equality with God, an understanding Jesus never denied: John 5:17-23; 8:58-59; 10:30-39; 19; Matt. 26:63-65.
7. Jesus is therefore by nature God's , not God's creation or God's servant; Jesus is God's who became a servant for our sake and for the Father's glory (John 13:13-15; 17:4; Phil. 2:6-11; Heb. 1:4-13; 3:1-6; 5:8; etc.).
9. Objections
1. Prov. 8:22: This text is not a literal description of Christ, but a poetic personification of wisdom (cf. all of Prov. 1-9, esp. Prov. 8:12-21; Prov. 9:1-6), poetically saying that God "got" His wisdom before He did anything - i.e., that God has always had wisdom.
2. Col. 1:15: Does not mean that Christ is the first creature, since He is here presented as the and principal heir of the Father (cf. Col. 1:12); thus "firstborn" here means "heir" (cf. Gen. 43:33; 48;14-20; Ex. 4:22; 1 Chron. 5:1-3; Psa. 89:27; Jer. 31:9); note that Col. 1:16 speaks of the as the Creator, nor creature (cf. E.1. above).
3. Rev. 3:14: "Beginning" (archê) in Rev. as a title means source or one who begins, i.e. Creator (cf. Rev. 1:8; 21:6; 22:13); elsewhere Christ is called the archê in the sense of "ruler," Col. 1:18, cf. plural archai, "rulers," in Col. 1:16; 2:10, 2:15, also Luke 12:11; Rom. 8:38; Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Tit. 3:1; cf. Luke 20:20; Jude 6; 1 Cor. 15:24; Eph. 1:21.
4. 1 Cor. 11:3; 15:28: Jesus is still subordinate to God, but as the to the Father; i.e., they are equal in nature, but the is subordinate relationally to God.
5. John 20:17; Rom. 15:6; 1 Cor. 15:24; 2 Cor. 1:3; Rev. 1:6; 3:12: Jesus calls the Father "My God" because He is still man as well as God; note the distinction between "My God" and "your God" in John 20:17 (i.e., Jesus never speaks of "our God" including Himself with the disciples).
6. Mark 13:32: Jesus' statement that He did not know the time of His return is to be explained by His voluntary acceptance of the humble form and likeness of a man (Phil. 2); in fact Jesus, as God, did know all things (John 16:30), and after His resurrection He does not including Himself as not knowing (Acts 1:6-7).
7. Mark 10:17-18: Jesus does not deny being God, but simply tells the man that he has no business calling anyone "good" in an unqualified sense except God.
8. Heb. 5:14: Jesus was tempted, cf. James 1:13; but note that Jesus could not sin, John 5:19.
9. John 1:18: No one has seen God, but men have seen Jesus, e.g. 1 John 1:1-2; but note that no man can see the glorified Jesus either, 1 Tim. 6:16, and to see Jesus is to see the Father, John 14:9.
10. 1 Tim. 1:17: God cannot die, but Jesus did, e.g. Phil. 2:8; but note that no one could take Jesus' life from Him, He could not remain dead, and He raised Himself: John 10:18; Acts 2:24; John 2:19-22.
11. 1 Cor. 8:6: Father called God, Jesus called Lord: but here "God" and "Lord" are synonymous (cf. 1 Cor. 8:5; cf. also Rom. 14:3-12 for a good example of "God" and "Lord" as interchangeable); moreover, this text no more denies that Jesus is God than it does that the Father is Lord (Matt. 11:25); cf. Jude 4, where Jesus is the only Lord.
12. 1 Tim. 2:5: Jesus here supposedly distinct from God; but Jesus is also distinct from (fallen) men, yet is Himself a man; likewise Jesus is distinct from God (the Father), but is also God.
13. Deut. 4:12, 4:15-25; God not appear in a human form to Israel, lest they fall into idolatry; but this does not rule out His appearing in human form later after they had learned to abhor idolatry.
14. In many texts Jesus is distinguished from God: He is the of God, was sent by God, etc.; in all these texts "God" is used as a name for the person most commonly called God, i.e., the Father.
VII. The Holy Spirit Is God
1. Equated with God: Acts 5:3-4; 2 Cor. 3:17-18
2. Has the incommunicable attributes of God
1. Eternal: Heb. 9:14
2. Omnipresent: Psa. 139
3. Omniscient: 1 Cor. 2:10-11
3. Involved in all the works of God
1. Creation: Gen. 1:2; Psa. 104:30
2. Incarnation: Matt. 1:18, 1:20; Luke 1:35
3. Resurrection: Rom. 1:4; 8:11
4. Salvation: Rom. 8:1-27
4. Is a person
1. Has a name: Matt. 28:19; note that even though "name" might be used of a nonperson, here, in conjunction with the Father and the , it must be used of a person
2. Is the "Helper"
1. Is another Helper: John 14:16, cf. 1 John 2:1; note also that "Helper" (paraklêtos) was used in Greek always or almost always of persons.
2. Is sent in Jesus' name, to teach: John 14:26.
3. Will arrive, and then bear witness: John 15:26-27.
4. Is sent by Christ to convict of sin, will speak not on his own but on behalf of Christ, will glorify Christ, thus exhibiting humility: John 16-14.
3. Is the Holy Spirit, in contrast to unholy spirits: Mark 3:22-30, cf. Matt. 12:32; 1 Tim. 4:1; 1 John 3:24-4:6.
4. Speaks, is quoted as speaking: John 16:13; Acts 1:16; 8:29; 10:19; 11:12; 13:2; 16:6; 20:23; 21:11; 28:25-27; 1 Tim. 4:1; Heb. 3-11; 10:15-17; 1 Pet. 1:11; Rev. 2, 2:11, 2:17, 2:29; 3:6, 3:13, 3:22.
5. Can be lied to: Acts 5:3
6. Can make decisions, judgments: Acts 15:28
7. Intercedes for Christians with the Father: Rom. 8:26
8. "Impersonal" language used of the Spirit paralled by language used of other persons
1. The Holy Spirit as fire: Matt. 3:11; Luke 3:16; cf. Ex. 3:2-4; Deut. 4:24; 9:3; Heb. 12:29
2. The Holy Spirit poured out: Acts 2:17, 2:33; cf. Isa. 53:12; Phil. 2:17; 2 Tim. 4:6
3. Being filled with the Holy Spirit: Eph. 5:18, etc.; cf. Eph. 3:17, 3:19; 4:10
VIII. The Father, , and Holy Spirit Are Distinct Persons
1. Matt. 28:19
1. "the Father and the and the Holy Spirit": use of definite article before each personal noun indicates distinct persons unless explicitly stated otherwise; compare Rev. 1:17; 2:8, 2:26
2. The views that "Father" and "" are distinct persons but not the Holy Spirit, or that the Holy Spirit is not a person at all, or that all three are different offices or roles of one person, are impossible in view of the grammar (together with the fact that in Scripture a "spirit" is a person unless context shows otherwise).
3. Does singular "name" prove that the three are one person? No; cf. Gen. 5:2; 11:14; 48:6; and esp. Gen. 48:16
4. "Name" need not be personal name, may be title: Isa. 9:6; Matt. 1:23. If a single personal name is sought, the name shared by all three persons is "Yahweh" or "Jehovah."
2. Acts 2:38 and Matt. 28:19
1. Neither passage specifies that certain words are to be spoken during baptism; nor does the Bible ever record someone saying, "I baptize you in the name of…"
2. Those said to be baptized in the name of Jesus (whether or not the formula "in the name of Jesus" was used) were people already familiar with the God of the OT:
1. Jews: Acts 2:5, 2:38; 22:16
2. Samaritans: Acts 8:5, 8:12, 8:16
3. God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 10:1-2, 10:22, 10:48
4. Disciples of John the Baptist: Acts 19:1-5
5. The first Christians in Corinth were Jews and God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 18:1-8; 1 Cor. 1:13
3. Trinitarian formula for baptism (if that is what Matt. 28:19 is) was given in context of commissioning apostles to take the gospel to "all the nations," including people who did not know of the biblical God
3. God the Father and the Jesus Christ are two persons
1. The salutations: Rom. 1; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2; 6:23; Phil. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1-2; 1 Tim. 1:1-2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; Phm. 3; James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:2; 2 John 3
2. Two witnesses: John 5:31-32; 8:16-18; cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15
3. The Father sent the : John 3:16-17; Gal. 4:4; 1 John 4:10; etc.; cf. John 1:6; 17:18; 20:21
4. The Father and the love each other: John 3:35; 5:20; 14:31; 15:9; 17:23-26; cf. Matt. 3:17 par.; Matt. 17:5 par.; 2 Pet. 1:17
5. The Father speaks to the , and the speaks to the Father: John 11:41-42; 12:28; 17:1-26; etc.
6. The Father knows the , and the knows the Father: Matt. 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 7:29; 8:55; 10:15
7. Jesus our Advocate with the Father: 1 John 2:1
4. Jesus is not God the Father
1. Isa. 9:6: "Father of eternity" means eternal; compare other names formed with word "father": Abialbon, "father of strength" = strong (2 Sam. 23:31); Abiasaph, "father of gathering" = gatherer (Ex. 6:24); Abigail, a woman's name(!), "father of exultation" = exulting (1 Chron. 2:16).
2. John 10:30
1. Jesus did not say, "I am the Father," nor did He say, "the and the Father are one person."
2. The first person plural esmen ("we are") implies two persons.
3. The neuter word for "one" (hen) is used, implying essential unity but not personal unity (compare John 17:21-23).
3. John 5:43: Jesus' coming in His Father's name means not that He was the Father because He had the Father's name, but that, while others come in their own name (or their own authority), Jesus does not; He comes in His Father's name (on His Father's authority).
4. John 8:19; 16:3: Ignorance of Jesus is indeed ignorance of the Father, but that does not prove that Jesus is the one He calls "My Father."
5. John 14:6-11
1. Jesus and the Father are one being, not one person.
2. Jesus said, "I am in the Father," not "I am the Father."
3. The statement, "the Father is in Me," does not mean Jesus is the Father; compare John 14:20; 17:21-23.
6. John 14:18: An older adult brother can care for his younger siblings, thus preventing them from being "orphans," without being their father.
7. Colossians 2:9: Does not mean that Jesus is the Father, or that Jesus is an incarnation of the Father; rather, since "Godhead" (theotês) means Deity, the state of being God, the nature of God, Jesus is fully God, but not the only person who is God. "The Godhead" here does not = the Father (note that Jesus is in the Father, John 10:38; 14:10, 14:11; 17:21), but the nature of the Father.
8. The Father and the are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus (Gal. 1:1; John 2:19-22), raising the dead (John 5:21; 6:39-40, 6:44, 6:54, 1 Cor. 6:14), answering prayer (John 14:13-14; 15:16; 16:23), sending the Holy Spirit (John 14:16; 15:26; 16), drawing people to Jesus (John 6:44; 12:32), etc. These common works do prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Father
5. The existed before his Incarnation, even before creation
1. Prov. 30:4: This is not predictive prophecy; "prophecy" in Prov. 30:1 translates massa, which is rendered elsewhere as "burden."
2. The created all things: See VI.E.1
3. Jesus was "with" (pros or para) God the Father before creation: John 1:1; 17:5; pros in John 1:1 does not mean "pertaining to," although it does in Hebrews 2:17; 5:1 (which use pros with ta).
4. Jesus, the of God, existed before John the Baptist (who was born before Jesus): John 1:15, cf. John 1:14-18, 1:29-34
5. Jesus, the , came down from heaven, sent from the Father, and went back to heaven, back to the Father: John 3:13, 3:31; 6:33; 6:38, 6:41, 6:46, 6:51, 6:56-58, 6:62; 8:23, 8:42; 13:3; 16:27-28; cf. Acts 1:10-11; cf. the sending of the Holy Spirit, John 16:5-7; 1 Pet. 1:12
6. Jesus, speaking as the (John 8:54-56), asserts His eternal preexistence before Abraham: John 8:58
7. The explicitly said to exist "before all things": Col. 1:17, cf. Col. 1:12-20
8. These statements cannot be dismissed as true only in God's foreknowledge
1. We are all "in God's mind" before creation; yet such passages as John 1:1 and John 17:5 clearly mean to say something unusual about Christ.
2. To say that all things were created through Christ means that He must have existed at creation.
3. No one else in Scripture is ever said to have been with God before creation.
9. Texts which speak of the being begotten "today" do not mean He became the on a certain day, since they refer to His exaltation at the resurrection (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:3-5; 5:5; cf. Psa. 2; cf. also Rom. 1:4).
6. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit
1. The Holy Spirit is "another Comforter": John 14:16; compare 1 John 2:1.
2. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit: John 15:26; 16.
3. The Holy Spirit exhibits humility in relation to, and seeks to glorify, Jesus (John 16:13-14).
4. The and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.
5. The Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus: Luke 3:22.
6. Is Jesus the Holy Spirit?
1. 2 Cor. 3:17: the Spirit is here called "Lord" in the sense of being Yahweh or God, not Jesus (cf. 2 Cor. 3:16, citing Ex. 34:34; cf. 2 Cor. 3:17 in the Revised English Bible); note Acts 28:25-27, cf. Isa. 6:8-10.
2. 1 Cor. 15:45: Jesus is "a life-giving Spirit," not in the sense that He is the Holy Spirit whom He sent at Pentecost, but in the sense that He is the glorified God-man; and as God He is Spirit by nature. All three persons of the Trinity are Spirit, though there are not three divine Spirits; and only one person is designated "the Holy Spirit."
3. Rom. 8:27, 8:34: the fact that two persons intercede for us is consistent with the fact that we have two Advocates (John 14:16; Rom. 8:26; 1 John 2:1).
4. John 14:18: Jesus here refers to His appearances to the disciples after the resurrection (compare John 14:19), not to the coming of the Spirit.
5. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus (John 2:19-22; Rom. 8:9-11), raising the dead (John 5:21; 6:39-40, 6:44, 6:54, Rom. 8:9-11), dwelling in the believer (John 14:16; 2 Cor. 13:5; Col. 1:27), interceding for the believer (Rom. 8:26; Heb. 7:25), sanctifying believers (Eph. 5:26; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. These works prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Holy Spirit.
7. The Father is not the Holy Spirit
1. The Father sent the Holy Spirit: John 14:15; 15:26.
2. The Holy Spirit intercedes with the Father for us: Rom. 8:26-27.
3. The Father and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.
4. Is the Father the Holy Spirit?
1. Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35: It is argued that the Holy Spirit is the Father of the incarnate of God; this argument ignores the fact that the "conception" is not a product of physical union between a man and a woman!
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are both said to be active in various activities; the resurrection of Jesus (Gal. 1:1; Rom. 8:11), comforting Christians (2 Cor. 1:3-4; John 14:26), sanctifying Christians (Jude 1; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. The most these facts prove is that the two work together; they do not prove the two are one person.
IX. Conclusion: The Bible teaches the Trinity
1. All the elements of the doctrine are taught in Scripture.
1. One God
2. The Father is God.
3. The is God.
4. The Holy Spirit is God.
5. The Father, , and Holy Spirit are three persons (i.e., they are not each other, nor are they impersonal; they relate to one another personally).
2. The New Testament presents a consistent triad of Father, , Holy Spirit (God, Christ, Spirit): Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:3-4; also Luke 1:35; 3:21-22 par.; Luke 4:1-12; John 4:10-25; 7:37-39; 7:14-16; 20:21-22; Acts 1:4-8; 2:33, 38-39; 5:3-4, 5:9, 5:30-32; 7:55-56; 10:36-38, 10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:8-11; 20:38; 28:25-31; Rom. 1:1-4; 5:5-10; 8:2-4, 8:9-11, 8:14-17; 1 Cor. 6:11; 12:4-6, 12:11-12, 12:18; 2 Cor. 1:19-22; 3:6-8, 3:14-18; Gal. 3:8-14; 4:4-7; Eph. 1:3-17; 2:18, 2:21-22; 3:14-19; 4:4-6, 4:29-32; 5:18-20; Phil. 3:3; 1 Thess. 1:3-6; 2 Thess. 2:13-14; Tit. 3:4-6; Heb. 2:3-4; 9:14; 10:28-31; 1 Pet. 1:2; 1 John 3:21-24; 4:13-14; Jude 20-21; Rev. 2:18, 2:27-29.
3. Therefore, the Bible does teach the Trinity.
X. What Difference Does the Doctrine of the Trinity Make?
1. Sovereignty: Because the three persons have each other, we can be assured that God created us only to share the love they have and not as a means to His own end: Acts 17:25; John 17:21-26.
2. Mystery: The triune God is totally unlike anything in our world, and therefore greater than anything we can comprehend: Rom. 11:33-36; Isa. 40:18.
3. Salvation: God alone planned our salvation, came to save us, and dwells in us to complete our salvation: 1 Pet. 1:2; Eph. 1:3-18; etc.
4. Prayer: We pray to the Father through the , and also pray to the directly, in the Spirit: John 14:13-14; Eph. 2:18; etc.
5. Worship: We worship Father and in the Spirit: John 4:23-24; Phil. 3:3; Heb. 1:8; etc.
6. Love: The love among the three persons is the basis and model for our love for one another: John 17:26.
7. Unity: The unity of the three persons is the basis and model for the unity of the church: John 17:21-23.
8. Humility: As the persons of the Trinity seek the glory of each other, so we should seek the interests of others above our own: Phil. 2:5-11; John 16:13-14.
9. Sonship: We are "sons of God" as we are united with the of God by the work of the Holy Spirit and the adoption of the Father: John 1:12-23; Rom. 8:14-17.
10. Truth: All those who wish to worship and love God must seek to know Him as He is in truth, for God, as Father, , and Holy Spirit, is truth: John 4:24; 14:6, 14:17; 15:26; 16:13.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Yes my dear...there is a trinity... if you are Christian
|
Posted:Dec 17, 2010 5:50 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 69532 Views
|
The Godhead - Father, and Holy Spirit
God exists in three Persons -- the Father, the , and the Holy Spirit. This is called the doctrine of the Trinity. Although the word Trinity is not in the Bible, it expresses a scriptural truth; in fact, it was coined by one of the early Latin Christian writers to set forth the truth that God is a Tri-unity of Persons.
The term Godhead (Godhood) refers to God's essence or divine Being; and is a proper statement of truth to say that there are three Persons in the Godhead.
The Old Testament emphasizes the unity of God; that is, it asserts that there is but one God, in contrast to the many false gods of the heathen; nevertheless, there are intimations in the Old Testament of the fact that God exists in a plurality or Trinity of Persons. For example, the Spirit of God is mentioned in Genesis 1:2; the is mentioned in Psalm 2, 12; and there are plural expressions in a number of places which show that God is a Trinity.
"And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26). The New Testament, while fully recognizing the unity of God, emphasizes the fact of the three Persons.
Three Persons -- One God
The Bible presents to us a Father who is God (John 3:16), a who is God (Philippians 2:5-8; John 1:1), and a Holy Spirit who is God (Acts 5:3, 4); yet these are not three Gods, but one and the same God.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to explain what the word Person means as applied to the Father, the , and the Holy Spirit. We are accustomed to think of persons as individual human begins, and we know that three persons cannot be one being. The Persons of the Godhead are clearly distinguished from one another in many passages of Scripture; yet they cannot be separated. This truth is beyond complete understanding by our finite minds.
No illustration of the Trinity will suffice to explain this relationship, but we can perhaps get some help by trying to express the relationship mathematically. Men would ordinarily say of the Persons: one plus one plus one equals three. But it would be more accurate to say: one times one times one equals one, for each of the Persons is fully God in the absolute sense, and the three together are the one self-same God.
It is not possible for me to explain this truth fully, but it is necessary to know and to state clearly what the Bible actually says.
Throughout the Scriptures the Gospel message is plain: God the Father sent His to redeem fallen man; The willingly came to die for the sins of the world; and the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, regenerates the heart by the Word of God which He inspired, takes the things of Christ, and shows them unto us who love Him (see John 16:12-15).
Colossians 2:9 speaks very plainly: "In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily."
Further Bible proof of the Trinity
I have already alluded to some Bible proofs of the Trinity. One of these is the use of the plural in reference to God. In creating man, God said, "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26). If there were only one Person in the Godhead, does it not seem unlikely that God would use the words "us" and "our" in this instance? Would He not have been more likely to say, "I will make man in my image"? (see also Genesis 3:22). Again, in Isaiah 6:8 God refers to Himself as "I" and "us", indicating both unity and plurality in the same Being.
Another Bible proof of the Trinity which has already been mentioned is the fact that each of the Persons is individually called God.
Some further proofs may be listed this way:
1. Comparison of Scripture with Scripture
The passage in Isaiah 6 mentioned previously is still more interesting and presents a stronger proof of the Trinity when compared with John 12:35-41 and Acts 28:25-27.
In John 12:35, 35, Christ is speaking about Himself. Verse 37 tells us that the people to whom He spoke did not believe in Him, even through He had performed many miracles before them. Then in verses 38-40 John quotes Isaiah 53:1 and 6:10 (written about 700 years before Christ was born), stating that Isaiah had foretold that some people would not believe in Him. And John says plainly that the God whom Isaiah saw was the Lord Jesus: "Esaias . . . Saw his glory" (v. 41).
In Acts 28:23 Paul was speaking to the people about Christ, but some of them did not believe in Him. In verses 25-27 Isaiah 6:8-10 is again referred to -- this time as the voice of the Holy Spirit (v. 25).
So we see how this one passage from Isaiah, when compared with these two New Testament references, brings out the truth that there are three Persons in one God.
2. The Manifestation of the Trinity at the Baptism of Jesus
Let us turn now to Matthew 3:16, 17. Here we have a beautiful picture painted for us, as well as a proof text given. through we may forget every other Scripture evidence of the Trinity, it will not be easy to forget this if it is once imprinted upon our minds. There is the blessed Jesus, the second Person of the Trinity, standing in the water, having been baptized by John. And now, behold, the heavens open, and the Spirit of God, the third person of the Trinity, descends like a dove upon Jesus. But hearken! A voice is heard from heaven, the voice of the Father, the first Person of the Trinity, saying, "This is my beloved !" What clearer and better proof can we have than this that in the Godhead there are three Persons -- the Father, the , and the Holy Spirit?
3. Christ's Declaration regarding the Trinity in His Great Commission to His Disciples
"Go . . . teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the , and the Holy Ghost [Spirit]" (Matthew 28:19).
If these three were not God, it would not seem right to give each the same dignity and honor. And if they were more than one God, would not Jesus have been likely to say "in the names" instead of only "in the name?"
4. Paul's Statement in the Apostolic Benediction
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all Amen" (II Corinthians 13:14).
If these three Persons here mentioned were not equally God it would not seem right to give each of them the same importance. Indeed, would it not be an insult to the true God to do this?
There are many other similar passages, but these are sufficient for my purpose here.
Faith believes what the human intellect cannot explain
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1).
Perhaps after reading and thinking about these statements of the Scripture regarding the Trinity you are ready to exclaim, "This is a great mystery; I cannot understand it!" That is what everyone else says. And we are not required to understand it. He asks us only to believe it on the testimony of His own Word. There are a great many things in the Bible, and out of it, which we believe, but we do not understand. For example, we believe that God created the earth and everything in it, but we do not understand how He did it. Neither do we understand why a little brown see planted in the black soil pushes a little green shoot up through the ground and brings forth a red flower -- yet we believe it.
Then again, let me ask the question: Can you put the whole of the Atlantic Ocean in a teacup? No more can you expect to put the whole of the idea of God into a human brain.
"Canst thou by searching finding out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea" (Job 11-9).
"O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" (Romans 11:33)
Fred Montey
|
|
|
1
comment
|
|
who am i
|
Posted:Dec 17, 2010 5:31 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 67567 Views
|
I think there are times in everyone's life where their actions or lack therein show who they are. Indeed none of us are perfect and some greatly lacking. I am thankful for my friends. Thankful for all the different things I see in all of them. There is however usually some type of feeling or one thing that stands out about each one of them.
There is a song that speaks my heart this morning, the lyrics are thank you for being my friend. That is how I feel. Some of us are close friends while others are due to agreements on Christianity or Politics ...or just something. It is good to have people you can agree with in life, just as it is good to have those who help iron sharpen iron.
Being true to ones self is important. Otherwise who are we, if we truly do not have standards and barriers that we live by.If we do not have principles and guidelines then we probably do not have love or understand love. It makes us selfish and self seeking in most aspects of our lives.
People will always find ways of letting us down. However true friends value the friendship enough to find ways to work it out. Sometimes it just takes a little time. Sometimes people just do not care. The dynamics of the family relations is a little different than that of the friends we accumulate in life. There is a lot more riding on the relationships of parent- or siblings. The unwritten code is we should have each others backs. Unfortunately it is not always the case. It can be heart breaking and take a toll. Everyday a is abandoned, beaten or molested by a parent or sibling or relative. Things that you could in no way imagine happening. But they happen.
Wives beaten by husbands, cheating by one or both spouses. It just makes one scratch their head and wonder what exactly has real meaning? What is it about this world that is so insane? How refreshing it is to see people who do love and who do take care of each other in a loving and responsible way. Yet as time goes on we witness so much that just should not be so. We look for answers and in many cases, because of the hardness of people's hearts there is none. None that makes sense anyway because the actions are not actions of reason or sanity. You end up asking yourself, who am I and what am I doing here?
There is one answer to it all and it is found in the personal relationship with God, through Jesus Christ. The rest is just being. Just existing and hoping for a shred of joy and peace here in a basically selfish world that wants to chew you up and spit you out.
Be Blessed
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
who am i
|
Posted:Dec 17, 2010 4:27 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 67594 Views
|
I think there are times in everyone's life where their actions or lack therein show who they are. Indeed none of us are perfect and some greatly lacking. I am thankful for my friends. Thankful for all the different things I see in all of them. There is however usually some type of feeling or one thing that stands out about each one of them.
There is a song that speaks my heart this morning, the lyrics are thank you for being my friend. That is how I feel. Some of us are close friends while others are due to agreements on Christianity or Politics ...or just something. It is good to have people you can agree with in life, just as it is good to have those who help iron sharpen iron.
Being true to ones self is important. Otherwise who are we, if we truly do not have standards and barriers that we live by.If we do not have principles and guidelines then we probably do not have love or understand love. It makes us selfish and self seeking in most aspects of our lives.
People will always find ways of letting us down. However true friends value the friendship enough to find ways to work it out. Sometimes it just takes a little time. Sometimes people just do not care. The dynamics of the family relations is a little different than that of the friends we accumulate in life. There is a lot more riding on the relationships of parent- or siblings. The unwritten code is we should have each others backs. Unfortunately it is not always the case. It can be heart breaking and take a toll. Everyday a is abandoned, beaten or molested by a parent or sibling or relative. Things that you could in no way imagine happening. But they happen.
Wives beaten by husbands, cheating by one or both spouses. It just makes one scratch their head and wonder what exactly has real meaning? What is it about this world that is so insane? How refreshing it is to see people who do love and who do take care of each other in a loving and responsible way. Yet as time goes on we witness so much that just should not be so. We look for answers and in many cases, because of the hardness of people's hearts there is none. None that makes sense anyway because the actions are not actions of reason or sanity. You end up asking yourself, who am I and what am I doing here?
There is one answer to it all and it is found in the personal relationship with God, through Jesus Christ. The rest is just being. Just existing and hoping for a shred of joy and peace here in a basically selfish world that wants to chew you up and spit you out.
Be Blessed
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Fatalism can cause you to miss out
|
Posted:Dec 10, 2010 5:59 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 67809 Views
|
I grew up in the height of the Charismatic movement in the 1970's. So much was being taught about Jesus' return and that it had to be 1988 because of Israel becoming a nation for the 3rd time in 1948. Of course they pointed to the scripture that not a generation shall pass away before he comes back after Israel became a nation for the third time. Problem was, that in the bible, I now find out that a generation can be 40-70 years. So now let us point to 2017, sometime  .
I see parents talk about how they can not wait for their to get out of the house. It is normal to me for to have that itch to scratch regarding adulthood. However when I see parents saying this I quite frankly want to pour ice water on them and say...do you have any idea of the blessings God has given you? Nothing worthwhile is easy in life. Nothing. It all has its ups and downs. It all has its time of harvest. If you plant poison ivy in your house hold, you will harvest poison ivy. yet if you plant and nurture a redwood in all of its glory, be prepared to cut a hole in the roof because it will happen. Success breeds success, as does faith breed faith. So where does selfishness and laziness get you?
Yeah Yeah yeah.....we as believers are not "of this world". I get it. But we also live in it. It is what we choose to make of it. I consider it a great gift from God. A life worth living with its ups and downs; highs and lows. If what we are doing is not a gift and worthwhile, then we are in essence calling God a liar. he created this place with you and I and all things. Its fatalism to say, gee I wish Jesus would come back soon.
Let me tell you a story. When i was 18, I wanted one of these kool Addidas running/workout suits. Thats all I wanted for Christmas. Something to wear to and from the gym when I went to play basketball. It was the kool thing at the time. My father loved me very much. He was part of the great generation and he was a participant in the battle of the bulge. He was also very practical. He loved me. I have no doubts of that. He has been gone since April of 1979 and I miss him so.
Well on Christmas day I was all excited and hoped for what iI wanted. What I did get was a lesson in life and a humiliation that changed my way of thinking forever as I matured. All parents want to please their , but there also is a generation gap sometimes. Instead of the warm up suit I wanted, my dad got me gray sweats and sweat shirt. I was so disappointed and I ignorantly made my disappointment known. I think I ruined Christmas. They said just take it back and get what you want, they even gave me some money for the difference . I did. a few days later.
Its funny, I looked at all the kool suits that I had before wanted. I finally bought one. On the way home....I had no joy. I just knew my dads pain in all of this was more important than the pleasure I was seeking in life. I took the warm ups back, I went and repurchased what he had originally got me. I wore them into the house as I told my dad thank you, and please forgive my ungratefulness and hugged him.
This same scenario plays out in the life he has given us, our heavenly Father. So is everything going to be all about us and what we want, how it may not be what we want in life, or is it going to be us being thankful for what we do have? Are we always going to wanting to trade what we have, what he gave us, for something we have not experienced and think we want? I hope not. I have been there and done that. I was wrong.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
the Mark of the Beast and the number 666
|
Posted:Dec 7, 2010 8:28 am
Last Updated:Dec 8, 2010 7:38 am 69731 Views
|
* I am not sure who wrote this. I looked for a author but came away not sure.
The mark of the beast and the number 666 comes from Revelation chapter 13 verses 16-18. John saw another beast coming out of the earth (13:11). This beast then forces everyone to receive the mark.
(Rev 13:16-18 NIV) He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark (charagma) on his right hand or on his forehead, {17} so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark , (charagma) which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. {18} This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.
The whole of Chapter 13 is a vision: Rev 13:1 "And I saw a beast coming out of the sea"; Rev 13:11 "Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth". The two beasts he saw were symbols of earthly realities.
When we read Revelation we naturally tend to read it literally, but we need to read it symbolically. When we go to heaven, will we see a Lamb or Jesus Christ? We will see Jesus Christ because the Lamb in Revelation is a symbol of Jesus Christ (Rev 5:6). It is a rich symbol that tells us in one word a lot about Jesus Christ. If we read our bible we already know that Jesus is the Lamb of God (John 1:29). The seal of God on the 144,000 in Rev 7:3 was not literal but symbolic and so is the mark of the beast.
(Rev 7:3 NIV) "Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God."
Just as the servants of God have the seal of God on their foreheads, so the enemies of God have the mark of the beast on their foreheads or their right hand.
I personally do not sit at home worrying about the mark of the beast. Maybe you have seen the emails about a bio-implant of a chip, which some say is the mark of the beast, but this depends on a literal interpretation of Revelation. In Revelation the mark of the beast is in contrast to the seal of God on the foreheads of the servants of our God, see Rev 7:3 . If the first seal is symbolic then so is the mark of the beast. I have no problem using credit cards, I even use them to support a Pastor that I know in India. The mark of the beast means that you belong to the world system, in other words you are an idolater, in contrast to Christians who worship God, they refuse to worship the beast (Rev 13:15). Do you worship Christ or the world? The mark is on the right hand which corresponds to our deeds and the forehead to our thoughts, in other words our deeds and thoughts belong to the world.
If we look in more detail at the seal on the foreheads of the 144,000, it was the Lamb's (i.e. Jesus) name and his Father's name (Rev 14:1) written on their foreheads. And if we look at the mark, it is the name of the beast or the number of his name i.e. 666. Now the question is, are there a special group of Christians going around with 'Jesus' and the Father's name on their forehead? If the answer is no, then I submit to you that the seal and the mark are symbolic not literal marks.
(Rev 14:1 NIV) Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.
The seal of God marks out those who belong to God, and the mark of the beast marks out those who belong to the world system. So for the Christian the answer is stay close to God and not to love the things of the world. If we love the things of the world we become an idolater.
Why then will Christians not be able to buy or sell? Because they will refuse to worship the beast, Rev 13:15. Christians worship God, not a world system set up by man. We belong to the kingdom of heaven not to Satan's kingdom. Rev 13:10 tells us that some saints (Christians) will go to prison and some will die, this speaks of persecution, which requires "patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of the saints."
666 is man's number because man was created on the sixth day. In early Christian thought 888 was Christ's number because he rose on the first day of the week. If we are marked by 666 it is because we are in man's kingdom which is ruled by Satan (who is the dragon of Rev 13:1), who gives his power and authority to the beast. Please check out the scriptures I have given you and make your own mind up.
(Rom 14:5b NIV) ... Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.
For further thoughts on being separate from the world system see my essay on "Coming out of Babylon"
Detailed analysis:
Rev 13:16 He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17 so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
13:18 This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.
The mark of the beast.
v16 - He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead - As well as forcing people to worship the image he also forces everyone to receive a mark on the hand or forehead. This mark is on the hand or forehead and is therefore conspicuous, it is not hidden. He had great power over all classes of society, note the three couplets giving six in all: small and great, rich and poor, free and slave. Contrast this mark on the hand or forehead with God's command to the Israelites in Deu 6.8 to 'Tie them (the commandments) as symbols on your hands (meaning strength i.e. actions) and bind them on your foreheads (i.e. mind)'. It is also a parody of God's deliverance from bondage in Egypt, only it is enslavement, (the Passover observance) see Exo 13:1-16 'And it will be like a sign on your hand and a symbol on your forehead that the LORD brought us out of Egypt with his mighty hand'. But the Christians do not receive the mark (Rev 20:4). This mark is a parody of the sealing of God's servants in Rev 7:2, who have the name of the Lamb and his Fathers name written on their foreheads Rev 14:1. As the elect are sealed upon their foreheads to escape the destruction about to fall upon the earth, so the followers of the beast escape his wrath against the church by bearing his mark (Mounce). The mark affects their action (hand) and thinking (forehead), it identifies those who worship the beast.
The mark (Gr. charagma) must not be taken literally as in most of John's imagery. The mark received is a parody or counterfeit to the seal received by the of God, see Rev 14:1, this seal is not a visible seal. They have the name of the Lamb and the Father written on their foreheads, if we do not take this as a literal mark then it is likely that the mark of the beast is not a literal mark. Here it is described in v17 'the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name' which is identified as 666 in verse 18. It is closely linked to those who worship the beast and his image, it marks them as his (the beast's). It is received on the forehead meaning their mind or on the hand meaning their actions i.e. anyone who follows the philosophy or who carries out the actions of the beast. The characteristics of those so marked is described in Rev 21:8, also Rev 22:15, everyone who loves (mark on the forehead) and practises falsehood (mark on the hand). From Rom 12:1 those who worship the beast are those who are conformed to the pattern of this world (worldly) and are not renewed in their mind, they do not obey the will of God. The mark can mean ownership, devotion, acceptance of the authority of the beast, just as the seal of God marks out those who are His, so the mark of the beast marks out those who are his. Not only cattle but slaves were branded as a mark of ownership. Perhaps John is also thinking of the marks of the cross that Jesus bore on his hands and the marks caused by the crown of thorns. Those who receive this mark are going to be punished along with the beast (Rev 14:9-11, 19:20). Those who worship the beast and his image and those who receive the mark of his name are the same (4:11). The saints are those who had not worshipped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or hands (20:4). The saints are those who worship God (11:1), obey God's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus (14:12).
Barclay has the following comments on the mark: The word for the mark of the beast is charagma, and it could come from more than one ancient custom.
i. Sometimes domestic slaves were branded with the mark of their owner. But usually they were branded only if they had run away or had been guilty of some grave misdemeanour. Such a mark was called a stigma; we still use the word in English. If the mark is connected with this, it means that those who worship the beast are his property. Note: the word used for servants in Revelation means slaves [of Christ] so in the same way those marked by the beast are his slaves or servants.
ii. Sometimes soldiers branded themselves with the name of their general, if they were very devoted to him. This to some extent, corresponds to the modern custom of tattooing upon one's person the name of someone specially dear. If the mark is connected to this, it means that those who worship the beast are his devoted followers.
iii. On every contract of buying or selling there was a charagma, a seal, and on the seal the name of the emperor and the date. If the mark is connected with this, it means that those who worship the beast accept his authority. Note: this could also be the seal of ownership.
iv. All coinage had the head and inscription of the emperor stamped upon it, to show that it was his property. If the mark is connected with this, it means that those who bear it are the property of the beast.
v. When a man had burned his pinch of incense to Caesar, he was given a certificate to say he had done so. The mark of the beast may be the certificate of worship which a Christian could obtain only at the cost of denying his faith.
The only other NT use of the word for mark (charagma) apart from Revelation is in Acts 17:29 where Paul speaks to the men of Athens "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone--an image (charagma) made by man's design and skill.' Paul is contrasting idols with the living God who made the world and everything in it see Acts 17:24 cf. Rev 14. We should note then the close connection between the mark and worshipping the image (13:15) which is an act of idolatry cf. 2:14, 2:20, 9:20, 21:8, 22:15, therefore receiving the mark means being marked as an idolater.
v17 - so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. - The second beast as well as having religious power (v15) also has economic power, no one could buy or sell unless they had the mark of the beast on their forehead or hand. It is significant that the coinage of the time had the head of the emperor on it (Mat 22:19-21) and some emperors used divine titles on the coinage as did Antiochus Epiphanes (Gleason) who is a type of the antichrist. The mark is here described as the name of the beast. In contrast to those who have the name of the Lamb and the Father on their foreheads (14:1) see also those who overcome in Philadelphia (3:12) and those in the New Jerusalem (22:4). It is to be contrasted with the 144,000 who are sealed on the forehead (Rev 7:3). The mark is therefore not a literal mark; it is to be a follower and worshipper of the beast, an idolater, and ultimately to worship Satan rather than God.
The number of his name is most likely referring to a gematria, see verse 18. The penalty for worshipping the beast and his image and receiving the mark is proclaimed by the third angel in Rev 14:9-11 and is eternal torment. The first bowl is poured out on those who have the mark of the beast and who worship his image. Those who are victorious over the beast and his image and the number of his name will sing the song of Moses and of the Lamb in heaven (15:2). They will reign with Christ for a thousand years (20:4).
His number is 666
v18 - This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666. - Here we are warned that wisdom will be required, as in 17:9 where wisdom is also required to interpret the seven heads of the beast. The one having a mind, let him count the number of the beast! i.e. let him use his mind. In the seven letters to the churches the one having ears is told to use them (Lenski). It is man's number meaning literally it is the number of a man, but note that in the Greek the definite article is omitted so that the NIV is correct in saying that it is man's number not a man's number (see also Hailey). Man's number is six because he was created on the sixth day, in Revelation seven stands for completeness as in the seven days of the week, God rested on the seventh day of creation (Gen 2:2).
Some interpret this as a riddle in the form of a gematria, whereby the number stands for the letters of a mans name, has not been satisfactorily solved to this day. But the simplest understanding is that if seven means complete then 6 always falls short of 7 and therefore 666 is a trinity of imperfections, it is man's religion. Certainly Nero, Domitian, Mao, Stalin and Hitler all fit the role of the beast quite nicely. Any church under persecution will readily identify who their beast is. To any church not under persecution it is just idle speculation, they will have to wait until the beast is revealed (2 Thess 2:3-7). Perhaps we should heed the words of the angel to Daniel (Dan 12:9), 'the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end', only then will we be able to identify the last but greatest antichrist who the Lord will slay with the breath of his mouth. However all the saints need to be able to interpret the signs of the times and an understanding of the principles involved in the book of Revelation will therefore be of value. Lenski shows that John writes the number not in words but in Greek letters: cxs; c=600; x=60; s=6 (chi_xi_stigma: G5516). This is the number 6, plus its multiple by 10, namely 60, again plus its multiple by 10*10 (intensified completeness), namely 600 -- thus 666, three times falling short of the divine 7 (cf. the measurements of Nebuchadnezzar's statue 60*6 cubits, Dan 3:1).
v18 - 666 - There are alternative explanations, it is difficult to pin down any one person but this is probably intentional. Whenever you try to be specific you usually end up having to twist some historical fact to make it fit. The point is that John is giving principles that apply throughout the gospel age and not to one particular point in time. Remember that John is seeing human history from the point of view of heaven. As John makes clear in his epistle, 'the' antichrist is coming, and also many antichrists have come. The number can be interpreted symbolically as man's number, a trinity of sixes or specifically to one man, the antichrist.
i. It tells us that it is man's number, 6 is the number of man for he was created on the sixth day, 666 is a trinity i.e. it indicates a man accepting worship due to God, this is reflected in the antichrist, see 2 Thess 2:3-4, who proclaims himself to be God. This happened in John's time with Domitian who claimed divinity. This also fits in with Mat 24:11 and 24:23-24, here Jesus warns that there will be false Christ's performing great signs and wonders to deceive even the elect.
ii. The number 666 is a trinity (Satan, beast, false prophet) it can also be considered to be man's religion, or his man made philosophy, but it falls short of true religion that is revealed from God. The evidence is more in favour of a man, a ruler or emperor, however the false prophet (a man) will give false doctrines, the resulting product will be false religion or false philosophy. Those who have the mark are therefore those who follow and believe in the false religious system or philosophical system. For example Marxism, Confucianism, Buddhism all these fall short of true divinely revealed religion. They fail to enter into God's rest. Six always falls short of perfection (seven) it misses the mark which is the very essence of sin. Milligan points out that John would be well aware of the perverted Judaism of his day which eventually crucified his Lord, it was the religion of men (Mark 7:6-.
iii. 666 can also be a gematria in which letters of the alphabet are also used as numbers, both in Hebrew and Greek. Various attempts have been made, most of them unsuccessful, an interesting one is made by translating the Greek Neron Kaisar into Hebrew which gives 666. The principle is that Nero would be an example of the beast out of the land others would arise after him i.e. Domitian. The name of Jesus in Greek is 888, I H S O U S (10, 8, 200, 70, 400, 200), if John's audience knew this, as Sweet maintains, then 666 would immediately indicate that 666 was the devil's counterfeit of Jesus namely the (or an) antichrist. If Nero is the type, then modern examples would be Hitler (consider Nazism, the philosophy that helped keep him in power), Mao (communism), Stalin (communism); the final fulfilment is the antichrist. If a=100, b=101 c=102 etc. then HITLER=666. The first six Roman numerals I V X L C D add up to 666. J B Smith quoted by Walvoord says 'All the numbers from 1 to 36 total 666. Beast in the evil sense occurs exactly 36 times (6*6) in Revelation'. Mounce adds that all the numbers from 1 to 8 also add up to 36 and eight is the number of the antichrist because he is an eighth king (17:11). The main problem with the use of a gematria is that many names can give the resulting 666, there is no unique name. Some texts have even been altered to give 616 which can give Nero Caesar in Latin or Gaios Kaisar (Caligula) in Greek, see Sweet. If we take the number of Jesus being 888 this fits into the 7 day pattern of creation in which the eighth day is the first day of the new order. The Jews believed that the seven days of creation corresponded to 7,000 years based on Ps 90:4 in which one day equalled a thousand years, the sixth day belongs to the antichrist and the seventh to the millennium. The fact that the antichrist is an eighth king indicates that he is the counterfeit of Christ (17:11), the penultimate claiming ultimacy (Sweet).
iv. The number sums up the character of the beast. To the Jew six falls short of the sacred number seven which is perfection, triple it and it represents a potency of evil than which there can be none greater, a direfulness of fate than which there can be none worse (Milligan).
Does Revelation indicate that there will be a world wide religion at the time that the antichrist is revealed? Rev 13 indicates that the first beast will have authority over 'every tribe, people, language and nation', this fourfold description indicates over the four corners of the earth. And 13:8 indicates that all the inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast, except for the saints. The second beast exerts religious and economic control over the world. He performs miraculous signs that deceive the inhabitants of the earth 13:14. He coerces the inhabitants of the earth to worship the first beast and his image 13:12, 15. He forces everyone from all strata of society to accept the mark of the beast without which no one could buy or sell, 13:16-17. Therefore the answer to our question is that during the reign of the antichrist there will be world-wide worship of the beast and his image, but the saints will resist him even to the death. Since the worship of the beast is forced it is likely that any world-wide religion prior to the unveiling of the beast will be voluntary. It should be noted that with modern travel, media and communications the structure through which a world-wide kingdom of the beast could be ruled is being set-up. Every household even has its own TV set.
It is likely that very soon it will be possible for a person to have an identifying mark, even invisible, on the hand or forehead which will uniquely identify that person and it will be used for buying and selling, is this the mark of the beast? Firstly this mark did not apply to previous generations and yet there were many who did follow the beast in their generation. Goldsworthy points out that taking a literalistic interpretation of the mark being 666 tends to break down under its own weight because then every single individual will be stamped with exactly the same mark, 666, which has value only to identify the members of the group but not to distinguish one from another. Again the 144,000 referred to in chapters 7 and 14 have the mark of God on their forehead but we do not take this literally, it symbolises that we are securely sealed as the Father's own possession, the redemption which is received by faith and sealed by the Spirit of God. Similarly the mark of the beast must symbolise unbelief, rejection of Christ and his gospel (Goldsworthy). This expectation of a literal mark arises because we interpret Revelation literally rather than symbolically as it should be interpreted. We should also note that both rich and poor have the mark so that it is unlikely to be something to do with credit cards which only the rich have.
However there is a danger here, if we look for some world-wide dictator who has economic control over individuals as well as political and religious control and who therefore looks like the 'antichrist' this does not necessarily mean that the end is about to come unless that other prerequisite of the second coming is fulfilled, namely the preaching of the gospel to all nations (Mat 24:14). We must not allow speculation as to the nature of the mark of the beast to deflect the church from its primary mission, namely the preaching of the gospel. Each of the four gospels ends with the great commission (Mat 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-20, Luke 24:46-49, John 20:21-23) and Acts starts with it, Acts 1-8. The two witnesses continued to prophecy until the beast killed them (11).
The two beasts represent both the political and ecclesiastical power of the beast. The founding fathers of America separated the church and state, they recognised that an amalgam of church and state was potentially lethal for both church and state. The separation was to prevent the state interfering with the church and to prevent the church having political power with which it might coerce the people. It recognised the distinction between giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and giving to God what belongs to God. When Caesar starts claiming those things that belong to God he becomes a beast. In China there is an official state sponsored church, again this is dangerous because the claims of Christ on his people are above that of the state. When the emperor Constantine declared himself a Christian this removed persecution but had a disastrous effect on the church. Persecution keeps the church pure but when it becomes the official religion the church become weak and feeble and eventually it becomes apostate. The apostate church is not just backslidden it is has so completely fallen away that it is part of the political structure of the beast. Therefore some see the apostate church as Babylon the great, Ch. 17. The apostate church had become so worldly that she is indistinguishable from the world.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
CS LEWIS
|
Posted:Dec 7, 2010 1:08 am
Last Updated:Jul 16, 2026 10:42 am 67599 Views
|
what people need to know:
Personal note: Since C. S. Lewis points readers to this book, The Abolition of Man, in the first chapter of his more familiar book, Mere Christianity, these excerpts should help explain what Lewis meant by "Right and Wrong" and by his many references to a "Law of Human Nature." They show how he merged truth and behavior into a universal package of "good" values found in all major religions. Keep in mind, Lewis was writing this multicultural philosophy in between some of his more "Christian" books
Lewis seems to see Chinese Taoism as a universal ethical umbrella -- one that would include Christianity as well as other religions. Symbolized by the Yin Yang, the Tao would be the supreme guide to moral and ethical values:
"The Chinese also speak of a great thing (the greatest thing) called the Tao. It is the reality behind all predicates, the abyss that was before the Creator Himself. It is Nature, it is the Way, the Road. It is the Way the universe goes on, the Way in which things everlastingly emerge... into space and time. It is also the Way which every man should tread in imitation of that cosmic and supercosmic progression, conforming all activities to that great exemplar. page
"This conception in all its forms, Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic, Christian, and Oriental alike, I shall henceforth refer to for brevity simply as 'the Tao.'" page
"...it is worth inquiry whether there is any instinct to care for posterity or preserve the species. I do not discover it myself.... Only people educated in a particular way have ever had the idea 'posterity' before their minds at all. It is difficult to assign to instinct our attitude towards and object which exist only for reflective men.... Those of us who accept the Tao may, perhaps, say that they ought to do so...." page
A contemporary of Aldous and Julian Huxley, Lewis may be referring to their evolutionary vision of a controlled society, in which the masses are continually conditioned to behave in pre-determined ways through increasingly sophisticated behavioral "science." See Brave New World
"The final state is come when Man by eugenics, by pre-natal conditioning, and by an education and propaganda based on a perfect applied psychology has obtained full control over himself. Human nature will be the last part of Nature to surrender to Man.... We shall have 'taken the thread of life out of the hand of Clotho' and be henceforth free to make our species whatever we wish it to be. ... But who, precisely, will have won it? For the power of Man to make himself what he pleases means, as we have seen, the power of some men to make other men what they please." 69-70
The significance of the Tao:
"In the older systems both the kind of man the teachers wished to produce and their motives for producing him were prescribed by the Tao -- a norm to which the teachers themselves were subject and from which they claimed no liberty to departs... They handed on what they had received: they initiated the young neophyte into the mystery of humanity.... Judgments of value are to be produced in the pupil as part of the conditioning. Whatever Tao there is will be the product, not the motive of education." 71
"We do not look at trees either as Dryads or as beautiful objects while we cut them into beams: the first man who did so may have felt the price keenly, and the bleeding trees in Virgil and Spenser may be far-off echoes of that primeval sense of impiety. The stars lost their divinity as astronomy developed, and the Dying God has no place in chemical agriculture." 78 [referring to ancient myths in which the sun god died during the winter solstice]
"We reduce things to mere Nature in order than we may 'conquer them.... Every conquest over Nature increases her domain. The stars do not become Nature till we can weigh and measure them; the soul does not become Nature till we can psycho-analyze her. The wresting of power from Nature is also the surrendering of things to Nature."79
Apparently, the Chinese Tao replaces the Bible as ultimate authority and guide for our lives -- and for the common good:
Either we are rational spirit obliged for ever to obey the absolute values of the Tao, or else we are mere nature to be kneaded and cut into new shapes for the pleasures of masters who must, by hypothesis, have not motive but their own 'natural' impulses. Only the Tao proves a common human law of action which can overarch rulers and ruled alike. A dogmatic belief in objective value is necessary to the very idea of a rule which is not tyranny or an obedience which is not slavery." 81
"In the Tao itself, as long as we remain within it, we find the concrete reality in which to participate is to be truly human: the real common will and common reason for humanity, alive, and growing like a tree, and branching out, as the situation varies, into ever new beauties and dignities of application. While we speak from within the Tao we can speak of Man having power over himself in a sense truly analogous to an individual's self-control. But the moment we step outside and retard the Tao as mere subjective product, this possibility has disappeared." 82
"I hear rumours that Goethe's approach to nature deserves fuller consideration -- that even Dr. [Rudolf] Steiner [occult founder of Waldorf Schools] may have seen something that orthodox researchers have missed."85 [See The Inklings: Lewis, Tolkien and Barfield, who explored Theosophy and Reincarnation]
The last section of the book, "Illustrations of the Tao," lists examples of "Natural Law collected...."
"It will be noticed that writers such as Locke and , who wrote within the Christian tradition, are quoted side by side with the New Testament. This would, of course, be absurd if I were trying to collect independent testimonies to the Tao.... It is at least arguable that every civilization we find has been derived from another civilization and, in the last resort, from a single centre -- 'carried' like an infectious disease or like the Apostolical succession." 91-92
This statement is followed by 16 pages of quotes from various religions and civilizations that illustrate the supposed reality and universality of the Tao: Ancient Egyptian, Ancient Jewish, Babylonian, Ancient Chinese, Hindu, Old Norse, Greek and Roman....
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
To live another day......
|
Posted:Dec 5, 2010 7:15 am
Last Updated:Dec 7, 2010 1:01 am 70050 Views
|
I can hear the families in the malls smiling and celebrating the season. Perhaps no one knowing what it is really about. But do we really think Jesus is worried if we make it all about him? That should be everyday should it not? Pray without ceasing is just saying continual fellowship and communication. That's what it means. To the believer its not that hard because he resides in you and is in constant dealings with our eternal being... our spirit man.
But away and perhaps staring from afar are the ones hurting. The people who have not only lost at love but also have lost loved ones. People looking for a real reason to go on. Maybe even looked into God, but were told when they were sad that they had no reason to be sad because God was with them and loved them. Its weird, God never promised ongoing Utopian Joy in life. He said we could have peace that passes our understanding in the difficulties of life. He also told us to mourn with those who mourn. What is so hard about that? However we create this god in a box for who knows whatever reason and all of a sudden it is the way it should be.
When we get cut, our body goes through a process. A scab, then healing. The scab is a protection from outside influences that could allow infections etc. But it doesn't just heal. Sometimes if the wound is bad enough it takes stitches. In the case of great pain and injury in others lives, we need to keep in mind that just maybe God wants us to be a stitch in our friends lives. Something holding their wound together until it can heal up. It is something we need to think of instead of just considering them needy and wanting to preoccupy ourselves in our own lives.
Then there is something else to consider. When the stitches are out, sometimes with a bad wound there are scars. Some scars are worn with a badge of honor to some people that it is a reminder of getting through a rough time and you are healed up enough to recognize and appreciate getting through the ordeal. But for some the scar is almost as bad if not worse than the original wound. It is disfiguring to them. a constant reminder of loss or imperfection in their world. It is even perhaps more important to be considerate and continually encouraging to the people in this situation. Some people can rise above any obstacle that happens in their path. There are others that just can not see any light at the end of their tunnel and they become assimilated in the miry abyss.
I have had friends, and known people who clapped their hand of life in the sign of....enough. They ended their lives. No coming back. No other day to have hope and keep on keeping on. It was their end. Their choice. Could others have made a difference? Given them a chance? In most cases people do not believe others care enough. They also do not think they matter and see life and themselves as a burden.
I have had a lot of personal pain in my life. Lost my parents when i was a very young adult. Felt all alone.Married a person that was bi-polar. Walked on eggs for 20 years of my life trying to make everything work. Perhaps not fulfilling my potential. But, as dark as any period or experience in my life has been, I always believed it would somehow get better. I always knew inside life is worth living. Maybe to those giving up, that would seem a mystery. But what would I tell them? I think it has always been Jesus inside me. Jesus in me, my hope and glory.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
