Amen and the unity of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam

[Nick Ginex]

I agree with parts of the Bible because many areas offer myths and inconsistencies. Of course, you would have to be an uneducated person to believe God's Flood killed all human life on earth except Noah and his family. It has been verified with actual findings that the Egyptian civilization existed before and after God's Flood. Yet, people who are gulible, would believe every word of the Bible. These people will be lost in the face of God because they do not seek knowledge to understand the past nor wish to acquire knowledge that brings them closer to the belief in God.

The Church Fathers actually committed heresy by devising the concept of the Trinity. To even think a Son of God is co-equal and co-eternal with God is heresy when it is God that first existed in the beginning. To compound the heresy, there are those that believe Jesus created the heaven and earth. This is false. The Word did not exist in the beginning because man was not yet created and the Word from God was therefore not required. It was God that gave Jesus the Word to announce to mankind after he was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary.

It is unfortunate that the TRUTH is not obvious to you as it is to me. Yes, the Church Fathers committed a heresy for developing a concept that makes no sense. Yet, the Church Fathers will burn at the stake those that have revealed the Truth; such as Giordano Bruno. Shall we say the Church Fathers have committed a gross error?

[Bowman]

I agree with parts of the Bible because many areas offer myths and inconsistencies. Of course, you would have to be an uneducated person to believe God's Flood killed all human life on earth except Noah and his family. It has been verified with actual findings that the Egyptian civilization existed before and after God's Flood. Yet, people who are gulible, would believe every word of the Bible. These people will be lost in the face of God because they do not seek knowledge to understand the past nor wish to acquire knowledge that brings them closer to the belief in God.

People who fail to read scripture are preparing to fail, Nick.

People like yourself.

Biblical scripture tells us that the flood was local – not world-wide.

Further, you are still stuck on adding up generations to arrive at dates. Scripture never tells us to add up the generations to arrive at dates.

Come on brother, your time is almost up…

[Nick Ginex]

Dear Viv, thank you for such a detailed reply. I will try to answer some of the questions you put to me. But also, I will keep in mind your perspectives in the belief in God.

Viv, you wrote, “I believe this is the spirit behind the insights you are wishing to share in your book?” You are partially right about what I am trying to reveal in Future of God Amen. The book was written to inform people how man first developed the concept, a belief, in one-universal God. Few people, like yourself, have any real appreciation for how the idea of God was transmitted to the Hebrews who later advanced that belief into a scripture of their own. The belief in God just did not fall out of the sky nor was it given to us by God. It was developed by the minds of men who, after thousands of years of experience of what works to form a stable society, and an inborn spiritually, they developed many gods to explain their perception of all the wonder, beauty, and gratefulness of the fruitfulness of their lives. They, the Egyptians, came to worship a god of all creation, Atum.

The book unfolds to relate how that initial god was transformed through many stages of development; taking on the worship of Osiris, Re, and Amon, now known as Amen. This history and events occurred before Abraham entered Egypt. To discount the development of one of the greatest legacies known to man and say it all began with the Hebrews and the Torah is to ignore the Truth and embrace arrogance and pride.

You also indicated that your reading Future of God Amen would not add to your mental construct of God Most High. I would have to say that you are depriving yourself of learning history of a most fascinating civilization and a greater appreciation why you believe in God. To limit yourself to only the Bible is a disservice to God for only through knowledge can you get closer to understanding the mysterious and incomprehensible God.

If you are closed to reading what took me two years of research and hours searching for the Truth, then I believe I should keep my reply short. I am not about to dissuade you from your beliefs about God. We all have a different and personal view of God. What is evident is that there is a God that has surfaced in the minds of men. Whether that God has entered our thoughts through the Holy Spirit, which in my mind pervades the universe, or developed by the natural spiritual nature of mankind, I tend to lean towards the latter.

I thank you for your many thoughts. There are areas of disagreements that I have with the Bible and it is these areas that have also turned away many honest loving people from putting much effort into reading the Bible. You will find that in my book, a sincere effort was made to reveal truth and point to areas of belief that are unsatisfactory.

Many Christians have been fooled into thinking that because they are righteous men they are infallible to error. However, the Church Fathers have committed a gross error in fabricating the concept of the Trinity. Jesus always said his Father was greater than he and told his followers that the Word he speaks was given to him by God. God was the Word and Jesus was His surrogate to deliver the Word to mankind. But is this too complicated to understand or has the dogma of the Trinity been so ingrained that your mind will not permit other views for evaluation?

Forgive me for being too blunt for I love all people and only desire to open their minds to the Truth. I am not a very holy man but one who does not like to be made a fool of. In the same way, I will not make a fool out of others by feeding them lies and myths.

I would like to hear from you after you have read Future of God Amen. In that way, you may have a greater appreciation of the message of the book. I look to the future where the Judaic, Christian, and Islamic religious leaders will work together to form a unified belief in God. We, people all around the world, must pressure our religious leaders to wake up and teach the Word of God so that our sisters and brothers, from all nations, love and assist one another.

I leave you Viv with my best wishes for health, love and happiness.
Nicholas P. Ginex

[reece1984]

I agree with parts of the Bible because many areas offer myths and inconsistencies. Of course, you would have to be an uneducated person to believe God's Flood killed all human life on earth except Noah and his family. It has been verified with actual findings that the Egyptian civilization existed before and after God's Flood. Yet, people who are gulible, would believe every word of the Bible. These people will be lost in the face of God because they do not seek knowledge to understand the past nor wish to acquire knowledge that brings them closer to the belief in God.

The Church Fathers actually committed heresy by devising the concept of the Trinity. To even think a Son of God is co-equal and co-eternal with God is heresy when it is God that first existed in the beginning. To compound the heresy, there are those that believe Jesus created the heaven and earth. This is false. The Word did not exist in the beginning because man was not yet created and the Word from God was therefore not required. It was God that gave Jesus the Word to announce to mankind after he was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary.

It is unfortunate that the TRUTH is not obvious to you as it is to me. Yes, the Church Fathers committed a heresy for developing a concept that makes no sense. Yet, the Church Fathers will burn at the stake those that have revealed the Truth; such as Giordano Bruno. Shall we say the Church Fathers have committed a gross error?

Wow; this is a mouthful. Where to begin? Uhhhh. Ok; now you say you agree with parts of the Bible, the other parts ar myths and inconsistent. So, is it your position then that when the Bible was first written, that it was indeed accurate and true, or did it contain these myths and inconsistencies from the time it was written? I a also wondering if you find any myths and inconsistencies in the Egyptians writings, like the Papyrus of Ani, the Book of Knowing the Evolutions of Ra and the Overthrowing of Apep. Are these filled with myth and inconsistency too? Or is it only the holy books outside of Egyptian lore that you have a problem with?

You accuse me of being uneducated for believing the Flood account in the Bible. Were the Egyptians educated when they believed in the sun-god and gave their praise to a ball of fire and molten rock drifting in space? Were they educated for not realising that the sun cannot hear nor appreciate their prayers? They believed that the sun-god Ra traversed the sky in a boat! That a agic serpent bit him and he, the God of all gods did not even know what bit him, and got sick, and Isis blackmailed him to give up his two eyes and that is how he got the cure! Were the very Egyptians to whom you direct me uneducated for believing all this? I am not uneducated as you say! And what proof did you offer against the flood being real?

You claimed that the Egyptian civilization existed before and after the flood. Well, that is what the Bible teaches. The Bible speaks of Ethiopia before the flood (see Gen 1) suggesting that Africa was inhabited, and it speaks of Egypt after the flood. There is no contradiction here. Noah and his family populated the earth, and that includes rebuilding the Egyptian civilization. Also, I would challenge you that the Egyptian king-lists and c14 dating are questionable. That is another discussion all together.

As for the trinity, I really wonder which parts of the Bible you accept, cause the Bible does teach the trinity; and since the passages that teach the trinity are found in the same manuscripts that contain all the other verses, and are found in all the oldest manuscripts, to reject those verses would be to reject the whole Bible; so that's why I asked you about which parts of the Bible you accept! You say that the Word did not exist in the beginning, when John 1:1 says "In th beginning was the Word." A direct contradiction of what you said. What is more, this passage is found in all the oldest manuscripts we have of John, and is quoted by the early fathers of the first and early second century, which shows that this is what the Apostle John actually wrote!

Now, I ask again, since you question the Bible, what is the name of the Egyptian text that you accept as the TRUTH? And is it the word of God? You obviously are rejecting the Bible, or as you say, parts of it, so can you show me a more reliable text in Egypt? I don't go by the church fathers, I go by the Bible; and I find it weird that you have a problem with the trinity when the Egyptians had their triad of three gods (Osiris, Isis and Horus) long before the New Testament was written. Were they ignorant as well?

You say you are sorry that the truth is not obvious to me as it is to you; and you talk about the trinity doesn't make sense. It does to me. But even if it didn't make sense to us, so what? God is a God of miracles! A man rising from the dead cannot make sense scientifically because it breaks the rules of science or nature; a man walking on water can't make sense scientifically, but just because science contradicts it doesn't make it true! Let me ask you this: can God be in more than one place at the same time? If not, why not?

God doesn't have to live up to man's view of what is sensible, for the things of God are greater than you can ever grasp with your finite mind. We are the finite trying to comprehendthe infinite! It is impossible. The gods of Egypt hadall the frailties and weakness of human beings. It's no wonder that the Egyptians, in trying to fathom a God who is beyond their understanding, should end up creating him in their image.

[Nick Ginex]

Hello Reece, you did not tell the truth that Jesus is God. John 20: 28-29 indicates Jesus is the Son of God and in 20:31 clarifies that Jesus is the Son of God. Do not take phrases out of context and try to perceive the Truth. You must understand that the Truth is contained in the Gospels and Revelation; all other documents are subserviant including Hebrews. You misquoted Hebrews 1: 8-10 as well. For in 1: 9, What was said of Jesus was that he loved righteousness, hated inequity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Thus, Jesus was anointed by God the Father is therefore the Son of God.

Regarding the Trinity, it is fabricated heresy by the Church Fathers. In 325 CE, the Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nice, attended by 220 bishops, and the Nicene Creed was formulated; it states that the Father and son are co-equal and co-eternal. This disagrees with the words of Jesus in John 14:28, “my Father is greater than I.” Also in John, Jesus confirms he is the Son of Man and does what his Father has taught him because he always does those things that please his Father.

John 8: 28-29. When ye have lifted up the Son of Man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things. And He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please Him.

The fabricated Nicene dogma was extended to include the Holy Spirit in 381 CE by the Catholic Church at the Council of Constantinople. They defined the Trinity as one God consisting of three persons: the Father, the Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. This definition of the Trinity was a foolish and obvious mistake by the Church Fathers because they did not understand that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God that pervades the entire universe. The fusing of three entities into one God has caused the church to be plagued for centuries for fabricating a concept that has caused many discerning believers to lose faith in God as the creator of all there is.

Unfortunately, to try to validate the Trinity, the Church has misconstrued Jesus as co-equal with God when Jesus stated in John 10: 30, “I and my Father are one.” Yes, the Scriptures teaches a oneness between the Father and the son, but this oneness is extended to all those that follow the Word. The oneness with God for all followers of God is expressed in John 17: 8-11, 20-23, wherein Jesus prayed that his followers would experience the same oneness; “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may also be one in us.” Jesus is clearly saying he and followers are not one in substance with the Father and son but one in mind in the belief of God’s Word.

[Bowman]

Unfortunately, to try to validate the Trinity, the Church has misconstrued Jesus as co-equal with God when Jesus stated in John 10: 30, “I and my Father are one.”

At age 75, you have very, very little time left to get the recipe correct brother Nick.

Observe the Granville Sharp rule of Greek grammar...unrefuted after 200+ years...

“Our restatement of Sharp’s rule is believed to be true to the nature of the language, and able to address all classes of exceptions that were raised.

The “Sharper” rule is as follows:

In native Greek constructions (i.e., not translation Greek), when a single article modifies two substantives connected via και (thus, article-substantive-και-substantive), when both substantives are (1) singular (both grammatically and semantically), (2) personal, (3) and common nouns (not proper names or ordinals), they have the same referent.”

Ref:
Granville Sharp’s Canon and its Kin; Semantics and Significance
2009 Daniel B. Wallace
p. 281




Titus 2.13

προσδεχομενοι την μακαριαν ελπιδα και επιφανειαν της δοξης του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος ημων χριστου ιησου

prosdechomenoi tēn makarian elpida kai epiphaneian tēs doxēs tou megalou theou kai sōtēros ēmōn christou iēsou

Looking for the blessed hope and appearance of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,





2 Peter 1.1

σιμων πετρος δουλος και αποστολος ιησου χριστου τοις ισοτιμον ημιν λαχουσιν πιστιν εν δικαιοσυνη του θεου ημων και σωτηρος ιησου χριστου

simōn petros doulos kai apostolos iēsou christou tois isotimon ēmin lachousin pisten en dikaiosunē tou theou ēmōn kai sōtēros iēsou christou

Simon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those equally precious with us, having obtained faith in the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:





Regarding the TSKS construction, Wallace has this to say…

“…..there is no good reason to reject Titus 2:13 as an explicit affirmation of the deity of Christ.”

Ref:
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament
Daniel B. Wallace
p. 276

“…there is no good reason for rejecting 2 Pet 1:1 as an explicit affirmation of the deity of Christ.”

Ref:
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament
Daniel B. Wallace
pp. 276 - 277




Regarding the above two passages, Wallace has this to say…

“…these two passages are as secure as any in the canon when it comes to identifying Christ asθεός.”

Ref:
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament
Daniel B. Wallace
p. 290

[reece1984]

Hello Reece, you did not tell the truth that Jesus is God. John 20: 28-29 indicates Jesus is the Son of God and in 20:31 clarifies that Jesus is the Son of God. Do not take phrases out of context and try to perceive the Truth. You must understand that the Truth is contained in the Gospels and Revelation; all other documents are subserviant including Hebrews. You misquoted Hebrews 1: 8-10 as well. For in 1: 9, What was said of Jesus was that he loved righteousness, hated inequity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Thus, Jesus was anointed by God the Father is therefore the Son of God.

Regarding the Trinity, it is fabricated heresy by the Church Fathers. In 325 CE, the Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nice, attended by 220 bishops, and the Nicene Creed was formulated; it states that the Father and son are co-equal and co-eternal. This disagrees with the words of Jesus in John 14:28, “my Father is greater than I.” Also in John, Jesus confirms he is the Son of Man and does what his Father has taught him because he always does those things that please his Father.

John 8: 28-29. When ye have lifted up the Son of Man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things. And He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please Him.

The fabricated Nicene dogma was extended to include the Holy Spirit in 381 CE by the Catholic Church at the Council of Constantinople. They defined the Trinity as one God consisting of three persons: the Father, the Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. This definition of the Trinity was a foolish and obvious mistake by the Church Fathers because they did not understand that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God that pervades the entire universe. The fusing of three entities into one God has caused the church to be plagued for centuries for fabricating a concept that has caused many discerning believers to lose faith in God as the creator of all there is.

Unfortunately, to try to validate the Trinity, the Church has misconstrued Jesus as co-equal with God when Jesus stated in John 10: 30, “I and my Father are one.” Yes, the Scriptures teaches a oneness between the Father and the son, but this oneness is extended to all those that follow the Word. The oneness with God for all followers of God is expressed in John 17: 8-11, 20-23, wherein Jesus prayed that his followers would experience the same oneness; “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may also be one in us.” Jesus is clearly saying he and followers are not one in substance with the Father and son but one in mind in the belief of God’s Word.

You claim that I misquoted Hebrews 1:8-10, I didn’t. Verse 8 says: “But unto the Son he saith.” So these words are addressed to the Son (Jesus), and it says to him in verse 10: “Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thine hands.” So it is calling Jesus the Creator. In verse 2 Jesus was involved in creating the world at the Father’s side as he is in John 1:1-3; thus, he existed in heaven before the world was made, long before his human birth by Mary.

I don’t know if you understand what we Trinitarians mean when we say Jesus is God. We view Jesus’ relationship to the Father in much the same way that one would view the relationship between a human father and son. While the son is a distinct person from his father and is subordinate to his father’s will, so Jesus as God’s Son is a distinct person from God the Father and is subordinate to God the Father’s will. Yet, just as a human son possesses just as much “human” nature as his father, so Jesus as God’s Son possesses just as much “God” nature as His Father. This is why the Jews endeavored to stone Jesus for blasphemy. They understood Jesus’ claim to be the “Son of God” as a claim that made Him “equal” in nature to the one and only true God (See John 5:18; 19:7; c.f., Leviticus 24:16). This is also why Jesus called the Father His “God” at John 20:17. His Father would always be His “God,” just as our human fathers will always be our “human” ancestors.

In the same way that one would not argue that a human son is an inferior “human” simply because his father is in a “greater” position as leader of the family, so it is incorrect to argue that Jesus is an inferior “God” simply because His Father is in a “greater” position of authority (John 14:28). At Luke 2:51, we read that Jesus “continued in subjection” to Mary and Joseph as they were in a greater position of authority over Him at that point in His earthly life. Are we to argue that Jesus was inferior to them? I’m sure by now you see our point that submission to authority does not denote an inferior nature. Thus, Scriptural references to this affect (i.e., John 5:19; Matthew 28:18; 1 Corinthians 11:3 and 15:24-28) do not have any bearing on whether or not Jesus is an inferior “God.

As for John 20:31, this is not an explanation of Thomas confession of faith in John 20:28, but an explanation of the meaning of Jesus signs, his miracles. It says they are many not written in this book, but these are written to prove Jesus is the Son of God. That doesn’t stop him from being God. Thomas called him my God in verse 28. What does my God mean? EVERY other time in Scripture this term occurs it refers to the Almighty. Thomas and Jesus were monotheistic Jews, and Jesus would have rebuked Thomas for blasphemy if Jesus were not God! Thomas would have been breaking the first of the ten commandments.

Note the following Scriptural passages which clearly articulate God’s preservation of the Church throughout history:

“…I write so that you may know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.”—1 Timothy 3:15
“...upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it.” —Matthew 16:18
“to Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.” —Ephesians 3:21
“...I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” —Jude 3

With this assurance of protection, how could the Church have apostatized to the point of not knowing who God is? How could the Church which is “the pillar and support of truth” have crumbled, when Jesus promised that the gates of Hades would “not overpower it”? If the church truly apostatized, how could it have given glory to God throughout “all generations”? Due to the fact that it was in response to heresy that many doctrines of Christianity were formulated into creeds, the doctrine of the Trinity was not officially formulated until the fourth century. However, this does not in the least imply that this doctrine was not understood or taught prior to this time. Contrary to the Watchtower Society’s claims, the Ante-Nicene Fathers did uphold Trinitarian doctrine as is clearly revealed in their writings.

IGNATIUS (30-107 A.D.)
Ignatius studied under the Apostle John and was acquainted with other apostles who had seen Jesus. As a martyr who was executed for his faith in Christ, Ignatius was a fervent follower of Jesus Christ and wrote four epistles to the Ephesians just prior to his execution at Rome on December 20th, A.D. 107. Therefore, Ignatius’ testimony on this issue is worth investigation:

“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia…predestinated before the beginning of time…and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God….Being the followers of God, and stirring up yourselves by the blood of God, ye have perfectly accomplished the work which was beseeming to you….There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, — even Jesus Christ our Lord.” —The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, pp. 49, 52

These statements by Ignatius provide ample evidence that the concept of the Deity of Christ was well-known and accepted by the apostles and the early Church

JUSTIN MARTYR (165 A.D.)
Justin Martyr actually taught that Christ is “the Angel of God” who conversed with Moses out of the burning bush and revealed Himself as the Jehovah God saying, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.…I AM WHO I AM.” Justin Martyr also understood the Scriptural term “first-begotten” of God to mean that Christ is of the same nature as God the Father. Note the following excerpts taken from his writings:

“For at that juncture, when Moses was ordered to go down into Egypt...our Christ conversed with him under the appearance of fire from a bush....‘And the Angel of God spake to Moses, in a flame of fire out of the bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, the God of thy fathers….’...the Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God. And of old He appeared in the shape of fire and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to the other prophets....in order to prove that Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts....Moreover, in the diapsalm of the forty-sixth Psalm, reference is thus made to Christ: ‘God went up with a shout....’ And Trypho said, ‘…For you utter many blasphemies, in that you seek to persuade us that this crucified man was with Moses and Aaron, and spoke to them in the pillar of the cloud…and ought to be worshipped.’…And Trypho said, ‘We have heard what you think of these matters.…For when you say that this Christ existed as God before the ages…this [assertion] appears to me to be not merely paradoxical, but also foolish.’ ”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, pp. 184, 212, 213, 219

IRENAEUS (200 A.D.)
“Very properly, then, did he say, ‘In the beginning was the Word,’ for He was in the Son; ‘and the Word was with God,’ for He was the beginning; ‘and the Word was God,’ of course, for that which is begotten of God is God.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, p. 328

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (215 A.D.)
“...the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God....I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father.…There was, then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreate.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, pp. 202, 468, 574

TERTULLIAN (230 A.D.)
In his writings, Tertullian was very explicit in his articulation of the doctrine of the Trinity:

“He is the Son of God, and is called God from unity of substance with God….so, too, that which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one. In this way also, as He is Spirit of Spirit and God of God, He is made a second in manner of existence—in position, not in nature….and made flesh in her womb, is in His birth God and man united.…Thus does He make Him equal to Him.…I testify that the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit are inseparable from each other….they contend for the identity of the Father and Son and Spirit, that it is not by way of diversity that the Son differs from the Father, but by distribution: it is not by division that He is different, but by distinction; because the Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being….when all the Scriptures attest the clear existence of, and distinction in, (the Persons of) the Trinity….In what sense, however, you ought to understand Him to be another, I have already explained, on the ground of Personality, not of Substance—in the way of distinction, not of division. But although I must everywhere hold one only substance in three coherent and inseparable (Persons)….”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, pp. 34-35, 601, 603, 606-607

HIPPOLYTUS (235 A.D.)
“God, subsisting alone, and having nothing contemporaneous with Himself, determined to create the world....Beside Him there was nothing; but He, while existing alone, yet existed in plurality....And thus there appeared another beside Himself. But when I say another, I do not mean that there are two Gods....Thus, then, these too, though they wish it not, fall in with the truth, and admit that one God made all things....For Christ is the God above all.....He who is over all is God; for thus He speaks boldly, ‘All things are delivered unto me of my Father.’ He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God for ever....And well has he named Christ the Almighty.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pp. 227, 153, 225


THE COUNCIL OF NICAEA
Amid the fires of debate generated on account of the heresy of Arius spreading within Constantine’s empire, on June 19, 325 A.D., the Council of Nicaea began with Eusebius of Caesarea the “first church historian” recording the events. The issue of debate focused on the person of Christ and His relationship to God the Father. Around 318 A.D., Arius began teaching that Jesus is a created being who is of a different substance (Greek: heteroousios) than the Father. Prior to this, as already noted in the discussion on the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Christians held to the view that God is a Trinity who consists of three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Arius’ heresy struck at the very heart of this doctrine; for by insisting that Jesus had to be created, he was teaching that Jesus is not the one true God, but is rather an inferior god who is in some sense only “divine.”

Fearing that the term homoousios could be misunderstood to advocate the heresy of modalism (promoted in earlier centuries by Sabellius and others who taught that Jesus and the Father are the same person), Eusebius and his proponents favored the term homoiousios feeling that this would avoid the heresy of Sabellius and at the same time refute Arianism. As the Council proceeded, each group shared its views, seeking to come to an agreement on what Scripture teaches and how to best communicate this truth. As the Orthodox group expressed their position that by using the term homoousios, they were not compromising the teaching of the distinctions in the persons of the Trinity, but were rather endeavoring to defend the Deity of the persons, the Council eventually came to an agreement with all but Arius and two bishops signing the following creed:

“We believe...in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father, only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one substance (homoousios) with the Father, through Whom all things were made.…” Quoted in “What Really Happened At Nicea?” by James R. White, Christian Research Journal, July-August 1997, pp. 28-34

You claim that the doctrine of the Trinity was not totally formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., because there was no mention of the Holy Spirit at this council. While it is true that the person of the Holy Spirit was not discussed at this time, the council did affirm Trinitarian doctrine not only by the fact that it acknowledged that Christ is of the same substance as the Father, but the Nicene Creed states: “I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth...And in one Lord Jesus Christ.…And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life.…” Quoted in Christianity In Crisis, by Hank Hanegraaf, 1993, (Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR), p. 375. The reason the person of the Holy Spirit was not discussed at the Nicene Council is due to the fact that the issue of controversy concerned the Son—not the Holy Spirit.

John14:28
There is a significant reason why Jesus (in indicating His relationship to the Father) chose to use the term meizon (meizwn) translated “greater” rather than the term kreitton (kreittwn) which means “better”. Meizon denotes a greater position, whereas kreitton denotes a better nature. The difference between these two words can be seen at John 14:12, where we read that believers will do “greater” (meizon) works than Jesus. Since we know that this verse is not implying that we will do “better” works than Jesus, it is clear from the context that Jesus used this same word to demonstrate the greatness of the Father’s position (being in heaven) as opposed to Jesus’ position (being here on earth).

When the Jehovah’s Witnesses bring John 14:28 to my door I usually illustrate it using the Watchtower’s own authority structure: A Presiding Overseer can be said to be “greater” than an elder. Yet, by saying this, one is not implying that the elder is of an inferior nature than the Overseer, but rather, that the Overseer’s jurisdiction is “greater” than the elder’s jurisdiction. In the same way, it is only in Jesus’ human nature that the Father can be said to be “greater” than He. However, this illustration cannot be used to refer to Jesus’ relationship to angels because at Hebrews 1:4 the other term (kreitton), translated “better,” is employed to demonstrate that Jesus is “better” than the angels in His very nature.

The context of John 17:21-22 where Jesus prays that his followers would be “one” just as He and the Father are “one” is totally different from the context of John 10:30. According to 2 Corinthians 13:5, the test of being a true believer is having Christ living “in you.” When God, through the Holy Spirit, comes to dwell within a new believer (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19), He changes that person’s heart (2 Corinthians 5:17) and gives him a new nature and a new love for fellow believers (Ephesians 1:15). God imparts each believer with spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12, 14) which equip him to be able to work together in unity with other believers for the cause of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:10). This “oneness” of “unity of purpose” found among believers, however, is different from the oneness that Jesus at John 10:30 was expressing that He and the Father possess. This is evident by the Jews’ immediate reaction to Christ’s claim, for they took up stones to stone Him as they understood His claim to be an affirmation of Deity.

“‘I and the Father are one.’ The Jews took up stones again to stone Him.…The Jews answered Him, ‘For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.’ Jesus answered them, ‘Has it not been written in your Law, “I said, you are gods”? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, “You are blaspheming,” because I said, “I am the Son of God”?….believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.’ Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him, and He eluded their grasp.”—John 10:30, 32-36, 38-39

If Jesus was merely claiming to have “unity of purpose” with the Father (as you claim), why would the Jews try to stone Him for something that they believed they possessed—that is, unity of purpose with the Father? If the Jews simply misunderstood Christ’s statements, why didn’t Jesus correct their misunderstanding? Instead of correcting their understanding, however, Jesus indicated that the Jews understood His statements correctly. By contrasting His claim to be the true God with the vain claims of unrighteous judges who thought of themselves as “gods” but to whom God’s judgment was pronounced (Psalm 82), Jesus demonstrated that what these judges claimed in falsehood, He is in reality—the true God!

Jehovah is the only one who knows the hearts of all men. (1 Kings 8:39; Jeremiah 17:9-10) Jesus knows the hearts of all men. (John 2:24-25; Rev. 2:18, 23) How can Jesus do what only God can do if he is not God?

Isaiah 43:11 says that there is no Saviour besides Yahweh (Jehovah). 2 Timothy 1:10 and Acts 4:12 make it plain that Jesus is our Saviour; so, is Jesus another Saviour besides Jehovah? Or is he Jehovah?

You talk a lot about the trinity no making sense. You remind me of a skeptic who told me that a man walking on water doesn’t make sense, and another who said that people can’t rise from the dead, that doesn’t make sense. These people reject the miracles of Jesus because they don’t make sense to them. Like you, they fail to see that the power of God is beyond the grasp of our science and imperfect logic. The works and attributes of God do not need to measure up to man’s standard of logic! Just because it doesn’t make sense to some people doesn’t make it any less true.

[reece1984]

Hello Reece, you did not tell the truth that Jesus is God. John 20: 28-29 indicates Jesus is the Son of God and in 20:31 clarifies that Jesus is the Son of God. Do not take phrases out of context and try to perceive the Truth. You must understand that the Truth is contained in the Gospels and Revelation; all other documents are subserviant including Hebrews. You misquoted Hebrews 1: 8-10 as well. For in 1: 9, What was said of Jesus was that he loved righteousness, hated inequity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Thus, Jesus was anointed by God the Father is therefore the Son of God.

Regarding the Trinity, it is fabricated heresy by the Church Fathers. In 325 CE, the Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nice, attended by 220 bishops, and the Nicene Creed was formulated; it states that the Father and son are co-equal and co-eternal. This disagrees with the words of Jesus in John 14:28, “my Father is greater than I.” Also in John, Jesus confirms he is the Son of Man and does what his Father has taught him because he always does those things that please his Father.

John 8: 28-29. When ye have lifted up the Son of Man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things. And He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please Him.

The fabricated Nicene dogma was extended to include the Holy Spirit in 381 CE by the Catholic Church at the Council of Constantinople. They defined the Trinity as one God consisting of three persons: the Father, the Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. This definition of the Trinity was a foolish and obvious mistake by the Church Fathers because they did not understand that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God that pervades the entire universe. The fusing of three entities into one God has caused the church to be plagued for centuries for fabricating a concept that has caused many discerning believers to lose faith in God as the creator of all there is.

Unfortunately, to try to validate the Trinity, the Church has misconstrued Jesus as co-equal with God when Jesus stated in John 10: 30, “I and my Father are one.” Yes, the Scriptures teaches a oneness between the Father and the son, but this oneness is extended to all those that follow the Word. The oneness with God for all followers of God is expressed in John 17: 8-11, 20-23, wherein Jesus prayed that his followers would experience the same oneness; “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may also be one in us.” Jesus is clearly saying he and followers are not one in substance with the Father and son but one in mind in the belief of God’s Word.

I don't suppose you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses, but you have taken up there heretical claims against the trinity and are using the very arguments they bring to my door.

Isaiah 44:24 tells us that Yahweh has made all things, stretched out the heavens alone, and spread out the earth by Himself, yet scripture reveals the Father as creator (Isaiah 64:8), the Son as creator (John 1:3, Colossians 1:16), and the Holy Spirit as creator (Job 26:13, 33:4). Combine this with God’s use of the plural pronouns “us” and “our” in Genesis 1:26 and the Trinitarian has an airtight case.

One quick note is that the Biblical writers did explicitly teach that Jesus was the Savior, to this there is no doubt (Matthew 1:21; Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 4:12, 5:31; Ephesians 5:23; Philippians 3:20; 2Timothy 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2Peter 1:11; 1John 4:14; etc.). To say He is an “agent of salvation” seems nothing more than an admission that He is the Savior while trying to avoid actually saying it. Once again we must remember that Yahweh said in Isaiah 43:11; “I myself am Yahweh and besides me there is no savior” (WEB).

I must at this point mention the Granville Sharp rule of Greek grammar. This rule states that when there are 2 nouns that are both singular which describe a person, and these nouns are connected by the word “and,” the first noun having the article, the second noun not having the article then they refer to the SAME PERSON. (*Note that the nouns cannot be personal names*) There is absolutely no exception to this rule in all of the Greek New Testament. Having stated this rule I find it necessary to present two verses of scripture that unequivocally qualify Jesus as both God and Savior.

Titus 2:13 - while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, (NIV)

2Peter 1:1 - Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours: (NIV)

Notice in both verses the noun “God” (theou) has the article (tou) and is connected to the second noun “Savior” (sōtēros) which does not have an article, by the word “and” (kai). Thus “God and Savior” both refer to the Person of Jesus. Grammatically this is irrefutable. So not only is Jesus Savior, He is God!

Yahweh said in Isaiah 42:8 that he would not give His glory to another or his praise to graven images. Again in Isaiah 48:11 he explicitly states that He will not give His glory to another. Jesus Himself said in his famous prayer to the Father in John 17:5, “Father, glorify me with the GLORY I HAD WITH YOU before the world existed.”

This verse speaks volumes… For one it tells us that Jesus possessed the SAME GLORY as the Father. Secondly, it tells us that the Son existed before the world existed. Thirdly, it tells us via the imperfect tense of Jesus’ possession of this glory, that He had it as far back as can possibly be conceived. In other words, the action of Jesus’ “having” this glory was a continuous action in the past, thus there was never a time when he came into possession of this glory. It was ALWAYS HIS!!!

One Scripture that Christians appeal to in support of the idea that Jesus receives prayer is John 14:14. It says in the New American Standard Bible: “If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.” Christians appeal to the fact that not only does Jesus encourage believers to pray to Him by saying, “ask Me anything,” but He is the One who answers the prayer when He promises, “I will do it.”

While this Scripture is a strong support of prayer being rendered to Jesus, it is complicated by the fact that some translations omits the “me” in the phrase “ask Me anything” in John 14:14. But the Greek text itself states: “If ever anything you should ask me in the name of me this I shall do.”

reason that certain Bible versions leave out the “me” is due to a textual variant in the manuscripts of the Greek text of this verse.

The Majority text (most dating from around the 9th century) split on this issue with some containing the “me” and others dropping the “me.” But in recent years, scholars have uncovered manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures (New Testament) that date as far back as the second and third centuries. The oldest manuscripts we have available today of this verse in the Gospel of John are Papyrus 66, written in 125 A.D., and Papyrus 75, written sometime between 175-225 A.D. Both of these papyrus fragments contain the “me” in this passage. Not only do the oldest fragments of John that we possess today contain the “me,” but two of the oldest ancient complete copies of the entire Bible in Greek, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (also called the Wescott and Hort manuscripts) written around the 4th century, both agree with the papyrus’ renderings of “ask me” in John 14:14.

Since Desiderius Erasmus complied and published the Greek text (Textus Receptus) of the King James Bible version in the 1500’s, he did not have access to the older Greek manuscripts that we have today. Thus, the King James Bible version and other Bible versions based upon the Textus Receptus or the Majority text do not contain the “me” in John 14:14. Indeed, John 14:14 is a strong testimony to Jesus’ approval of the early Christian practice of directing their prayers to Jesus Christ as God.

2 Corinthians 12:8-9

“In this behalf I three times entreated the Lord that it might depart from me; and yet he really said to me: ‘My undeserved kindness is sufficient for you; for [my] power is being made perfect in weakness.’ Most gladly, therefore, will I rather boast as respects my weaknesses, that the power of the Christ may like a tent remain over me.”

Here Paul prayed to the “Lord” Jesus three times and Jesus answered his prayer by saying: “My... power is being make perfect in weakness.” Paul concluded by admitting that he would “rather boast ...that the power of the Christ may like a tent remain over me.” So, here again, we see an example of a Christian in the Bible praying to the Lord Jesus with Jesus responding to the prayer with His “underserved kindness” and “power.” We are told about Jesus hearing our prayers again in 1 John 5:12-16 and Acts 7:59.

Consider these verses of Acts 4:10,12 and 22:16:

“Let it be known to all of YOU and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ the Naz·a·rene´…by this one does this man stand here sound in front of YOU. ...Furthermore, there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved.’ ‘…Rise, get baptized and wash your sins away by your calling upon his name.’” If there is no salvation in anyone else, then Jesus must be God, otherwise, it would mean there is no salvation in God.

Why do these verses say that we must call upon Jesus’ name and “not another name” for salvation? It is clear from these passages that the “calling upon” of Jesus name is a prerequisite for salvation and the washing away of our sins.

Romans 10:13 reads: “For ‘everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’ ” If calling upon the Lord means to pray to him, why doesn’t the act of calling upon Jesus’ name mean to pray directly to Jesus? Ponder what Jesus said at John 6:45:

“Everyone that has heard from the Father and has learned comes to me.”

If you have learned from Jehovah, you are commanded to “come to” Jesus. Have you come to Jesus by asking Him to wash away your sins and to give you eternal life? At John 10:27-30, Jesus promised:

“My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. And I give them everlasting life, and they will by no means ever be destroyed, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. What my Father has given me is something greater than all other things, and no one can snatch them out of the hand of the Father. I and the Father are one.”

How can you “listen to” Jesus voice if you don’t communicate with Him in prayer? How can you receive “everlasting life” if you don’t ask Jesus to give it to you? Jesus said at John 14:6: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” How can you go “through” Jesus to get to the Father if you do not deal directly with Jesus by first going to Him prayer for salvation?

“...saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours... God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.” —1 Corinthians 1:2, 9 3.

How can you have “fellowship” with Jesus if you never talk to Him?

No relationship can survive without communication. If Jesus is your friend, how do you sustain yout relationship with him if you don't talk to him? Do you have a relationship with Jesus, or don't you?

[Bowman]

Nice comments brother Reece...

[reece1984]

Nice comments brother Reece...

I like urs too.

[OneSizeFit]

God only loves christians. get with the program nick.

[jo7241974]

God only loves christians. get with the program nick.

Hey OSF!

It's a good thing I had already swallowed my mouthfull of water when I read this. I love your sarcastic wit.

I really wish you had more time to post!! I pray that all is well with you and your beautiful family!

Love,

jo

[reece1984]

Nice comments brother Reece...

All of a sudden Nick Ginex has nothing to say in response to the above. I'd love to see him pick that apart piece by piece and tell me the Bible doesn't teach Jesu is God...

[Bowman]

All of a sudden Nick Ginex has nothing to say in response to the above. I'd love to see him pick that apart piece by piece and tell me the Bible doesn't teach Jesu is God...

Your reply to him was first-rate!

Nick's position emanates from scripture ignorance. He will never directly reply to scriptural evidence which is counter to his ideology.

He should not promote his book in a debate forum if he does not want it challenged...

[reece1984]

Your reply to him was first-rate!

Nick's position emanates from scripture ignorance. He will never directly reply to scriptural evidence which is counter to his ideology.

He should not promote his book in a debate forum if he does not want it challenged...

I really don't see how one can base an entire argument on a single word. His claim seems to be that if Amen was an Egyptian god, and the Bible uses the word Amen, then it was referring to the Egyptian god. What poor scholarship for the author of a book. What lack of research before publishing? That equal to saying that because the word "gay" meant "happy" a long time ago, that a man who says in 2011 "I'm coming out of the closesr, me and my male lover; we are gay and proud of it," is saying they are just happy! Total lack of regard for context and ignorance of how the term is used at the time. He offers no proof that when Jews or Christians in the first century used the word Amen they were referring to the Egyptian god. How does he know the meaning of th word had not changed just as the meaning of "gay" has changed?

And he doesn't even post excepts from his book. I'm broke, so I can't buy it. I would challenge him to a debate on the trinity, but I doubt he'd accept.