Michael SERVETUS and John Calvin who burned himMarch 10 2017 at 5:20 PM
|Ken Sublett (Login Ken.Sublett)|
from IP address 188.8.131.52
Michael Servetus on the Errors of the Trinity
"Any discussion of the Trinity should start with the man. That Yahshua, surnamed Christ, was not a hypostasis4
4 Hypostatic Union: A theological term used with reference to the Incarnation to express the revealed truth that in Christ one person subsists in two natures, the Divine and the human. Hypostasis means, literally, that which lies beneath as basis or foundation. Hence it came to be used by the Greek philosophers to denote reality as distinguished from appearances (Aristotle, "Mund.", IV, 21). It occurs also in St. Paul's Epistles (2 Corinthians 9:4; 11:17; Hebrews 1:3-3:14), but not in the sense of person. Previous to the Council of Nicæa (325) hypostasis was synonymous with ousia, and even St. Augustine (De Trin., V, 8) avers that he sees no difference between them. The distinction in fact was brought about gradually in the course of the controversies to which the Christological heresies gave rise, and was definitively established by the Council of Chalcedon (451), which declared that in Christ the two natures, each retaining its own properties, are united in one subsistence and one person (eis en prosopon kai mian hpostasin) (Denzinger, ed. Bannwart, 148). They are not joined in a moral or accidental union (Nestorius), nor commingled (Eutyches), and nevertheless they are substantially united. For further explanation and bibliography see: INCARNATION; JESUS Christ; MONOPHYSITISM; NATURE; PERSON. John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
"but a human being is taught both by the early Fathers and in the Scriptures, taken in their literal sense, and is indicated by the miracles that he wrought. He, and not the Word5 is also the miraculously born Son of Yahweh in fleshly form, as the Scriptures teach – not a hypostasis, but an actual Son. He is an elohim, sharing Yahweh’s divinity in full; and the theory of a communicatio idiomatum is a confusing sophistical quibble. This does not imply two Yahwehs, but only a double use of the term elohim, as is clear from the Hebrew use of the term. Christ, being one with Yahweh his Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man. In short, all the Scriptures speak of Christ as a man.
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit as a third separate being lands us in practical tritheism6 no better than atheism, even though the unity of Yahweh is insisted on. Careful interpretation of the usual proof –texts shows that they teach not a union of three beings in one but a harmony between them. The Holy Spirit as a third person of the Godhead7 is unknown in Scripture. It is not a separate being, but an activity of Yahweh himself. The doctrine of the Trinity can be neither established by logic nor proved from Scripture and is in fact inconceivable. There are many reasons against it. The Scriptures and the Fathers teach on Yahweh the Father and Yahshua Christ his son; but scholastic philosophy has introduced terms which are not understood and do not accord with Scripture.
Yahshua taught that he himself was the Son the end he held true to his convictions. Arrived at the place of execution he fell upon his face and continued long in prayer, while Farel seized the opportunity to make an edifying address to the spectators. Again exhorted to say something, he cried, ‘O God, O God; what else can I speak of but God.’ Then he asked the people to pray for him. Being led to a pile of wood made up of small sticks and bundles of green oak with the leaves still on, he was seated on a log with his feet touching the ground, his body chained to a stake, and his neck bound to it by a coarse rope; his head covered with straw or leaves sprinkled with sulphur, and his book tied to his thigh. He besought the executioner not to prolong his torture; and when the torch met his sight he uttered a terrible shriek, while the horrified people threw on more wood and he cried out, ‘0 Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy on me.’ After about half an hour life was extinct. He had died and made no sign.”
Michael Servetus (also Miguel Servet or Miguel Serveto; 29 September 1511 – 27 October 1553)
was a Spanish (Aragonese) theologian, physician and humanist. His interests included many sciences: astronomy and meteorology; geography, jurisprudence, study of the Bible, mathematics, anatomy, and medicine. He is renowned in the history of several of these fields, particularly medicine and theology.
He participated in the Protestant Reformation, and later developed a nontrinitarian Christology, which led to his condemnnation by Catholics and Protestants alike. He was burnt at the stake by order of the protestant Geneva governing council, which was led by Calvin, as a heretic. “He desired forgiveness of his mistakes and ignorance and sins, though he could never be got to confess Christ as the eternal Son of God; and to
the end he held true to his convictions. Arrived at the place of execution he fell upon his face and continued long in prayer, while Farel seized the opportunity to make an edifying address to the spectators. Again exhorted to say something, he cried, ‘O God, O God; what else can I speak of but God.’
Then he asked the people to pray for him. Being led to a pile of wood made up of small sticks and bundles of green oak with the leaves still on, he was seated on a log with his feet touching the ground, his body chained to a stake, and his neck bound to it by a coarse rope; his head covered with straw or leavessprinkled with sulphur, and his book tied to his thigh. He besought the executioner not to prolong his torture; and when the torch met his sight he uttered a terrible shriek, while the horrified people threw on more wood and he cried out, ‘0 Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy on me.’ After about half an hour life was extinct. He had died and made no sign.”1
“THE BURNING OF SERVETUS settled only one of the questions raised by his appearance on the stage at Geneva. He himself was indeed now removed from the stage, and could no longer spread his ideas in person. But the burning of the man, as Calvin and other champions of the faith soon discovered, by no means put an end to his ideas; while it did bring to the front a much broader, more important and more vital question, that of religious toleration. Calvin’s critics, in centering their attention on his responsibility for this tragedy, have largely overlooked the fact that in this case he was but the conspicuous embodiment of a policy toward heretics that was at the time universally accepted in principle by Protestants no lessthan by Catholics. It ought therefore to cause no surprise that from the most influential leaders of the Reformation this shocking occurrence called forth an all but unanimous response of approval.
All this, however, was solely on an ex parte presentation of the case by Calvin, who had drawn the terms of the indictment of Servetus which formed the basis of the prosecution and sentence, and had taken the pains to prepare their minds for it. This approval was given by men not one of whom had had a fair opportunity to read and judge the book on which his conviction had been founded, if indeed they had even seen it, but who nevertheless endorsed all that vas done, without apparent hesitation or further inquiry.
Bullinger notonly had approved of the death of Servetus in advance, but two years later he wrote that he was persuaded that if Satan were to return from hell and preach to the world as he pleased, he would employ many of
Servetus’s expressions. Years afterwards he still firmly held that the Geneva Council had done its duty in this case. Peter Martyr Wrote in 1556, ‘I have nothing to say of the Spaniard Servetus except that he was a veri son of the Devil, whose poisonous and detes doctrine should everywhere be hunted down; and the magistrate that condemned him to death should not be blamed, seeing that there was no hope of his amendment, and that his blasphemies were quite intolerable.”
The same FOREORDAINED did the same thing because He DENIED the Trinity which According to 1 John makes them ANTICHRISTS and by Jesus BLASPHEMERS.
The American Restoration Movement was based on SPEAKING where the Bible speaks and just shutting up where it does not speak:
John 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for BLASPHEMY; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
John 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
John 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world,
Thou BLASPHEMEST; because I said, I am the SON OF GOD?
John 10:37 If I do not the works of MY FATHERbelieve me not.
John 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 184.108.40.206 on Mar 26, 2017 5:00 PM|
Re: Michael SERVETUS said what Jesus Said.
|March 11 2017, 1:36 PM |
Michael Servetus explains fully the fact that the Spirit OF God or man is the MIND of God or mand and is never a person REQUIRED according to the trinitarians to ENABLE the SON to speak what the FATHER conveys to Him by His BREATH (watch our for parables: Joe's bad breath is NOT a person.)
Paul: 1Cor. 2:16 For who hath known the MIND OF the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the MIND OF Christ.
THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST: Isaiah 40:13 Who hath directed the SPIRIT OF the LORD, or being his counsellor hath TAUGHT him?
Only those who >have ASKED FOR A good conscience or consciousness or a CO-PERCEPTION of the WORD can be clandestinely informed. 1 Peter 3:21
In 2 Corinthians 3 Paul told the Jews that they could not READ the Old Testament nor could they HEAR it when they attended synagogue ONLY to hear the WORD preached by being READ. If they turned to Christ, or be converted or be baptized they would understand that THE LORD IS THAT SPIRIT. Jesus said MY WORDS are SPIRIT.
BAPTISM SAVES US because that was prophesied in Isaiah 1 and ordained by Jesus the Christ as the iNSTRUMENTAL MEANS of getting a free gift. Those who debunk baptism believe that their FAITH earns their salvation even as they blaspheme Christ.
In Acts 2:38 the Gift of THE Holy Spirit is the Gift OF our UNholy spirit made holy after our sins are "washed away" by Grace.
A holy spirit (ours) is A good conscience (ours) after baptism without which you cannot Read, Hear or Speak the LOGOS or Regulative Principle.
The Ecumenical or kingdom of the Devil in most groups promotes what they sell as A CHRISTIAN WORLD VIEW. At the same time they think that A spirit gives them their SELF-WILL.
SPIRIT is always the MIND or mental disposition of God or His elect: those who gladly RECEIVED the Word and were baptized. God gives US a Holy Spirit THAT WE MIGHT KNOW the things OF God which cannot be SOLD.
Paul agrees with Peter showing that we must RECEIVE the SPIRIT which is from God that we MIGHT KNOW.
1Cor. 2:12 Now we have received, not the SPIRIT OF the world, but the SPIRIT WHICH is of God;
that WE MIGHT KNOW the things that are FREELY GIVEN to us OF God.
"Jesus of Nazareth" appeared to Paul to guide Him into all truth. Peter and others affirm that they left us A Memory of what Jesus affirmed about HOLY SCRIPTURES which includes the Prophets and other prophecies about Him. That is no longer to be private interpreted or further expounded which would DESPISE the Spir
God has once for all delivered that to the saints PAST TENSE. Never feed anyone who claims that THEY are progressive and have received a NEW set of Scriptures.
Mark: 1Cor. 2:13 Which things also we SPEAK, not in the WORDS which man’s WISDOM teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
Spiritual is 4152.pneumatikos, pnyoo-mat-ik-o from 4151; non-carnal, i.e. (humanly) ethereal (as opposed to gross), or (daemoniacally) a spirit (concretely), or (divinely) supernatural, regenerate, religious: — spiritual. Compare 5591.
In 1 Corinthians 10 Paul called the Instrumental-Trinitian-Perverted worship the worship of DEMONS or DEVILS.
Paul MINISTERED Holy Spirit by TEACHING the WORDS (Logos) of The Spirit OF God. The demonic is the only OPPOSITE.
Man's Wisdom is g4672 Sophia a practiced skill (legalism) of any art but especially of singing or playing instruments especialliy in a "holy place.."
Re: Michael SERVETUS said what Jesus Said.
|March 11 2017, 3:03 PM |
“God is mysterious,” or “If you believe in the Trinity you will lose your mind, but if you don’t believe in it you will lose your soul.”
Sophia-Zoe-Lucifer and Eve or Evah the FEMINISTS gods.
|March 12 2017, 11:19 AM |
Sophia and not LOGOS is the goddess of all effeminate-trinitarian worship of the Babylon Mother of Harlots. This was the folly of the Synagogues of Satan which plagued and plague Christian groups and about which John Wrote many centuries after Christ to correct.
And before Adam of Light had withdrawn in the chaos, the authorities [females] saw him and laughed at the prime parent because he had lied when he said, "It is I who am God. No one exists before me." When they came to him, they said, "Is this not the god who ruined our work?" He answered and said, "Yes. If you do not want him to be able to ruin our work, come let us create a man out of earth, according to the image of our body and according to the likeness of this being, to serve us; so that when he sees his likeness, he might become enamored of it. No longer will he ruin our work; rather,we shall make those who are born out of the light our servants for all the duration of this eternal realm."
Now all of this came to pass according to the forethought of Pistis [Pistis Sophia], in order that man should appear after his likeness, and should condemn them because of their modeled form. And their modeled form became an enclosure of the light. Then the authorities received the knowledge (gnosis) necessary to create man.
Sophia Zoe - she who is with Sabaoth - had anticipated them. And she LAUGHED at their decision. For they are blind: against their own interests they ignorantly created him. And they do not realize what they are about to do.
The reason she anticipated them and made her own man first,
was in order that he might instruct their modeled form how to despise them, and thus to escape from them.
Now the production of the instructor came about as follows. When Sophia let fall a droplet of light, it flowed onto the water,
and immediately a human being appeared, being androgynous.
That droplet she molded first as a female body.
Afterwards, using the body she molded it in the likeness of the mother, which had appeared. And he finished it in twelve months.
An androgynous human being was produced, whom the Greeks call Hermaphrodites; and whose mother the Hebrews call Eve of Life (Eve-Zoe), namely, the female instructor of life. Her offspring is the creature that is lord. Afterwards, the authorities called it "Beast", so that it might lead astray their modeled creatures. The interpretation of "the beast" is "the instructor". For it was found to be the wisest of all beings.
We have noted and history agrees that the BEAST was the Female Instructing Principle. The Serpent is defined as a musical enchanter(ess) and the Spirit OF Christ calls Lucifer (Zoe, Venus, vires or Venom). The Serpo speaks of a slowly spreading fire or a slowly winding (crooked) singing and playing instruments.
"The Serpent: We cannot conceive Eve as holding converse with a snake, but we can understand her being fascinated (*2) by one, apparently "an angel of light" (i.e. a glorious angel), possessing superior and supernatural knowledge.
When Satan is spoken of as a "serpent", it is the figure Hypocatastasis (see Ap. 6) or Implication; it no more means snake than it does when Dan is so called in Gen. 49:17; or an animal when Nero is called a "lion" (2Tim. 4:17), or when Herod is called a "fox" (Luke 13:32); or when Judah is called "a lion's whelp". It is the same figure when "doctrine" is called "leaven" (Matt. 16:6). It shows that something much more real and truer to truth is impressively; and is intended to be a figure of something much more real than the letter of the word.
"The word "beast" also, in Gen. 3:1, chay, denotes a living being, and it is as wrong to translate zoa "beasts" in Rev. 4, as it is to translate chay "beast" in Gen. 3. Both mean living creature. Satan is thus spoken of as being "more wise than any other living creature which Jehovah Elohim had made". Even if the word "beast" be retained, it does not say that either a serpent or Satan was a "beast", but only that he was "more wise" than any other living being.?
Re: Michael SERVETUS said what Jesus Said.
|March 12 2017, 3:51 PM |
I am certain that Michael Serveto was about the only true Bible Student at the time John Calvin had him burned at the stake. John Calvin has used the same PATTERN which is used at the highest level of scholarship: If he found a verse that said what he wanted to say he ignored the context. Erasmus wrote a lot about the proof texting of the monks and priests.
Servetus must have been reading CM which simply quotes Scripture. Lots of people will burn for their willful or FOREORDAINED false teaching.
I am working on his writings and I will post a version soon: CM wont read it but may others will.
Any discussion of the Trinity should start with the MAN. That Jesus, surnamed Christ, was not a hypostasis4 but a human being is taught both by the early Fathers and in the Scriptures, taken in their literal sense, and is indicated by the miracles that he wrought. He, and not the Word 5 is also the miraculously born Son of Yahweh in fleshly form, as the Scriptures teach – not a hypostasis, but an actual Son. He is an elohim, sharing Yahweh’s divinity in full
We have noted that Godhead or Theotes means the Divine Nature: Jesus the man was filled with Divine Nature. Believers who have been CLOTHED with Christ also share in that Divine Nature. The concept of A holy spirit or A good conscience or consciousness gives one the ability to READ the Word or HEAR the Word WHEN it is READ in the synagogue-ekklesia.
and the theory of a communicatio idiomatum is a confusing sophistical quibble. This does not imply two Yahwehs, but only a double use of the term elohim, as is clear from the Hebrew use of the term. Christ, being one with Yahweh his Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man. In short, all the Scriptures speak of Christ as a man.
Christ is God's agent or anointed: The ROCK in the wilderness was CHRIST.
He notes that elohim is used as "god" but not of Yahweh: any ruler could be an elohim but not THE Lord-God or Yahwah the only REAL God.
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit as a third separate being lands us in practical tritheism6 no better than atheism, even though the unity of Yahweh is insisted on. Careful interpretation of the usual proof –texts shows that they teach not a union of three beings in one but a harmony between them. The Holy Spirit as a third person of the Godhead7 is unknown in Scripture. It is not a separate being, but an activity of Yahweh himself. The doctrine of the Trinity can be neither established by logic nor proved from Scripture and is in fact inconceivable. There are many reasons against it. The Scriptures and the Fathers teach on Yahweh the Father and Jesus Christ his son; but scholastic philosophy has introduced terms which are not understood and do not accord with Scripture. Jesus taught that he himself was the Son
3 0430 Myhla ‘elohiym el-o-heem’ 1) (plural) 1a) rulers, judges 1b) divine ones 1c) angels 1d) gods; In the beginning, Elohim [God] created the heavens and the earth. Gen. 1:1
Believed by Catholics and Trinitarians but Christ and those He revealed the Word too are largely ignored in favor of gnosticism.
4 Hypostatic Union: A theological term used with reference to the Incarnation to express the revealed truth that in Christ one person subsists in two natures, the Divine and the human. Hypostasis means, literally, that which lies beneath as basis or foundation. Hence it came to be used by the Greek philosophers to denote reality as distinguished from appearances (Aristotle, "Mund.", IV, 21). It occurs also in St. Paul's Epistles (2 Corinthians 9:4; 11:17; Hebrews 1:3-3:14), but not in the sense of person. Previous to the Council of Nicæa (325) hypostasis was synonymous with ousia, and even St. Augustine (De Trin., V, 8) avers that he sees no difference between them.
The distinction in fact was brought about gradually in the course of the controversies to which the Christological heresies gave rise, and was definitively established by the Council of Chalcedon (451), which declared that in Christ the two natures, each retaining its own properties, are united in one subsistence and one person (eis en prosopon kai mian hpostasin) (Denzinger, ed. Bannwart, 148). They are not joined in a moral or accidental union (Nestorius), nor commingled (Eutyches), and nevertheless they are substantially united. For further explanation and bibliography see: INCARNATION; JESUS Christ; MONOPHYSITISM; NATURE; PERSONhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07610b.htm
5 See the supplement article on page 46 to 47 concerning “The Logos [Word] as Taught in Greek Metaphysical Philosophy.”
6 Tritheism is the belief that there are three distinct, each powerful gods, who form a triad.
7 The term ‘Godhead’ is the Greek word, ‘2320 yeothv theotes theh-ot’-ace, and is only used once in the scriptures, which is in Col. 2:9. The context of its usage has nothing to do with a Trinity. The word could be translated Godness as it is in the Word Study Greek – English New Testament by Paul R. McReynolds. A similar Greek word is theiotes, which is used in Romans 1:20. Theiotes means divinity, divine nature.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 220.127.116.11 on Mar 12, 2017 3:53 PM|
Re: Michael SERVETUS said what Jesus Said.
|March 12 2017, 9:37 PM |
Michael Servetus Quotes
|March 13 2017, 7:10 PM |
I do not agree or disagree in everything with either one party or the other. Because all seem to me to have some truth and some error, but everyone recognizes the other's error and nobody discerns his own. Michael Servetus
I will burn, but this is a mere incident. We shall continue our discussion in eternity. Michael Servetus
In the Bible, there is no mention of the Trinity. . . . We get to know God, not through our proud philosophical concepts, but through Christ. Michael Servetus
Man becomes weak or ill by accident as a consequence of the lack of resources. Even the most severally ill patients must be treated with the aim of restoring their health. Michael Servetus
Lutherans, whose arguments and mistakes will not be difficult to contest or discover, do not want to attribute any value to works, and they do not understand enough the scope of the justification. Michael Servetus
May the Lord destroy all the tyrants of the church. Amen. Michael Servetus
In the inhalation and exhalation there is an energy and a lively divine spirit, since He, through his spirit supports the breath of life, giving courage to the people who are in the earth and spirit to those who walk on it Michael Servetus
To seek truth and to utter what one believes to be true can never be a crime. No one must be forced to accept a conviction. Conviction is free. Michael Servetus
It is an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity for the destruction of all Christianity. Michael Servetus
May God in his mercy enable us without obstinacy to perceive our errors. Michael Servetus
If I have taken the word, by any reason, it has been because I think it is grave to kill men, under the pretext that they are mistaken on the interpretation of some point, for we know that even the chosen ones are not exempt from sometimes being wrong. Michael Servetus
Nothing can be found in the intellect if previously has not been found in the senses. Michael Servetus
This is the Rationalistic RACA word used by those who are psychologically violent by saying that the see visions or hear voices. They think this is Calvinism but Calvin calls those who get messages beyond Scripture FANATICAL. The Word or Logos is the way God works and speaks but ONLY to those who can read the text.
Neither with those nor with the others, with all I agree and dissent; in all part of truth and part of error must be seen. Michael Servetus
I have seen with my own eyes how the pope was carried on the shoulders of the princes, with all the pomp, being adored in the streets by the surrounding people. Michael Servetus
Poor people always lose in struggles. Michael Servetus
There is therefore a tremendous mystery in the fact that God may be united with man and the man with God. Michael Servetus
Servetus quoting Tertullian c 213
|March 15 2017, 12:44 PM |
Servetus: 1 In investigating the holy mysteries of the divine Triad, I have thought that one ought to start from the man; for I see most men approaching their lofty speculation about the Word without having any fundamental understanding of Christ, and they attach little or no importance to the man and give the true Christ over to oblivion. But I shall endeavor to recall to their memories who the Christ is. However, what and how much importance is to be attached to Christ, the Church shall decide.
2 Seeing that the pronoun 1 indicates a man, whom they call the human nature, 2 I shall admit3 these three things:
first, this MAN is Jesus Christ;
second, he is the SON of Yahweh;
third, he is an elohim.
In Isaiah 9:6 the SON will be a mighty warrior or an Elohim.
I have interpreted Elohim as meaning God and his Word; and I say more plainly that Elohim was in Person man, and in Nature God [theotes]. And by this analogy they call great men and distinguished persons elohim, be they of men or of angels. Moreover, the Hebrews attribute this plural number to the usage of their language, but as usual they quench the Spirit. Yet of us greater things must be required, since we know that the testimony of JESUS Christ is the spirit of prophecy. 1 Peter 1:11; Revelation 19:1
Jesus will be the Prince of Peace and not a warrior. In the fulfilment Jesus is defined as Emmanuel or as Severtus says "third, he is an elohim"
That he was called Jesus at the beginning, who would deny? That is, in accordance with the angel’s command, the boy was on the day of his circumcision given a name, even as you were called John, and this man, Peter. Yahshua, as Tertullian says, 5 is a man’s proper name, and Christ is a surname.
Tertullian the first to speak of a Triad as Father-thought, Spirit-breath, Son-Word articulated.
CHAPTER 28 -- CHRIST NOT THE FATHER, AS PRAXEAS SAID. THE INCONSISTENCY OF THIS OPINION, NO LESS THAN ITS ABSURDITY, EXPOSED. THE TRUE DOCTRINE OF JESUS CHRIST ACCORDING TO ST. PAUL, WHO AGREES WITH OTHER SACRED WRITERS.
And so, most foolish heretic, you make Christ to be the Father, without once considering the actual force of this name, if indeed Christ is a name, and not rather a surname, or designation; for it signifies "Anointed." But Anointed is no more a proper name than Clothed or Shod; it is only an accessory to a name. Suppose now that by some means Jesus were also called Vestitus (Clothed), as He is actually called Christ from the mystery of His anointing, would you in like manner say that Jesus was the Son of God, and at the same time suppose that Vestitus was the Father? Now then, concerning Christ, if Christ is the Father, the Father is an Anointed One, and receives the unction of course from another. Else if it is from Himself that He receives it, then you must prove it to us. But we learn no such fact from the Acts of the Apostles in that ejaculation of the Church to God,
Acts 4:27 "Of a truth, Lord, against Your Holy Child Jesus, whom You have anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together."
even as you were called John, and this man, Peter. Jesus, as Tertullian says, is a man’s proper name, and Christ is a surname. The Jews all admitted that he was Jesus who is called Christ, and they put out of the synagogue those who confessed that he was Christ;
They will still put you out of the synagogue for confessing that Jesus was THE CHRIST of God and not God Himself.
After the ELDERS fired God 1Sam. 12:3 Behold, here I am: witness against me before the LORD, and before his anointed: whose ox have I taken? or whose ass have I taken? or whom have I defrauded? whom have I oppressed? or of whose hand have I received any bribe to blind mine eyes therewith? and I will restore it you.
Samuel was God's christ or anointed: 4899. mashiyach; from 4886; anointed; usually a consecrated person (as a king, priest, or saint); specifically, the Messiah:—anointed, Messiah.
Servetus: These then testified both that Jesus was the Son of God, and that being the Son, He was anointed by the Father. Christ therefore must be the same as Jesus who was anointed by the Father, and not the Father, who anointed the Son. To the same effect are the words of Peter: "Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ," that is, Anointed. John, moreover, brands that man as "a liar" who "denies that Jesus is the Christ;" whilst on the other hand he declares that "every one is born of God who believes that Jesus is the Christ." Wherefore he also exhorts us to believe in the name of His (the Father's,) Son Jesus Christ, that "our fellowship may be with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ." Paul, in like manner, everywhere speaks of "God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ."
Fellowship is with the ONE GOD THE FATHER and His SON: the Spirit is that BREATH that passes from Father and Son. John brands as ANTICHRIST those who do not have the Father AND the Son.
When writing to the Romans, he gives thanks to God THROUGH our Lord Jesus Christ. To the Galatians he declares himself to be "an apostle not of men, neither by man, but through Jesus Christ AND God the Father." You possess indeed all his writings, which testify plainly to the same effect, and set forth Two -- God the Father, AND our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father.
(They also testify) that Jesus is Himself the Christ, and under one or the other designation the Son of God. For precisely by the same right as both names belong to the same Person, even the Son of God, does either name alone without the other belong to the same Person. Consequently, whether it be the name Jesus which occurs alone, Christ is also understood, because Jesus is the Anointed One; or if the name Christ is the only one given, then Jesus is identified with Him, because the Anointed One is Jesus. Now, of these two names Jesus Christ, the former is the proper one, which was given to Him by the angel; and the latter is only an adjunct, predicable of Him from His anointing, -- thus suggesting the proviso that Christ must be the Son, not the Father.
How BLIND, to be sure, is the man who fails to perceive that by the name of Christ some other God is implied, if he ascribes to the Father this name of Christ! For if Christ is God the Father, when He says, "I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God," He of course shows plainly enough that there is above Himself another Father and another God
If, again, the Father is Christ, He must be some other Being who "strengthens the thunder, and creates the wind, and declares to men His Christ." And if "the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against His Christ," that Lord must be another Being, against whose Christ were gathered together the kings and the rulers.
And if, to quote another passage, "Thus saith the Lord to my Lord Christ," the Lord who speaks to the Father of Christ must be a distinct Being. Moreover, when the apostle in his epistle prays, "That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ may give to you the spirit of wisdom and of knowledge," He must be other (than Christ), who is the God of Jesus Christ, the bestower of spiritual gifts. And once for all, that we may not wander through every passage, He "who raised up Christ from the dead, and is also to raise up our mortal bodies," must certainly be, as the quickener, DIFFERENT from the dead Father, or even from the QUICKENED FATHER if Christ who died IS the Father.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 18.104.22.168 on Mar 15, 2017 8:00 PM|
Re: Servetus quoting Tertullian c 213
|March 19 2017, 1:29 PM |
Theophilus was the first to use the trias: he as John had done earlier wrote to rebuke the Gnostic trinity which denied that Jesus CAME FULLY IN THE FLESH with the power of God which He refused to use.
In various ways has the devil rivaled and resisted the truth. Sometimes his aim has been to destroy the truth by defending it. He maintains that there is one only Lord, the Almighty Creator of the world, in order that out of this doctrine of the unity he may fabricate a heresy. He says that the Father Himself came down into the Virgin, was Himself born of her, Himself suffered, indeed was Himself Jesus Christ. Here the old serpent has fallen out with himself, since, when he tempted Christ after John's baptism, he approached Him as "the Son of God;" surely intimating that God had a Son, even on the testimony of the very Scriptures, out of which he was at the moment forging his temptation: "If you are the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." Again: "If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down from here; for it is written, He shall give His angels charge concerning you" -- referring no doubt, to the Father -- "and in their hands they shall bear you up, that you not hurt your foot against a stone."
Or perhaps, after all, he was only reproaching the Gospels with a lie, saying in fact: "Away with Matthew; away with Luke! Why heed their words? In spite of them, I declare that it was God Himself that I approached; it was the Almighty Himself that I tempted face to face; and it was for no other purpose than to tempt Him that I approached Him. If, on the contrary, it had been only the Son of God, most likely I should never have condescended to deal with Him." However, he is himself a liar from the beginning, and whatever man he instigates in his own way; as, for instance, Praxeas. For he was the first to import into Rome from Asia this kind of heretical pravity, a man in other respects of restless disposition, and above all inflated with the pride of confessorship simply and solely because he had to bear for a short time the annoyance of a prison; on which occasion, even "if he had given his body to be burned, it would have profited him nothing," not having the love of God, whose very gifts he has resisted and destroyed. For after the Bishop of Rome had acknowledged the prophetic gifts of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla, and, in consequence of the acknowledgment, had bestowed his peace on the churches of Asia and Phrygia, he, by importunately urging false accusations against the prophets themselves and their churches, and insisting on the authority of the bishop's predecessors in the see, compelled him to recall the pacific letter which he had issued, as well as to desist from his purpose of acknowledging the said gifts.
By this Praxeas did a twofold service for the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, and he crucified the Father. Praxeas' tares had been moreover sown, and had produced their fruit here also, while many were asleep in their simplicity of doctrine; but these tares actually seemed to have been plucked up, having been discovered and exposed by him whose agency God was pleased to employ. Indeed, Praxeas had deliberately resumed his old (true) faith, teaching it after his renunciation of error; and there is his own handwriting in evidence remaining among the carnally-minded, in whose society the transaction then took place; afterwards nothing was heard of him. We indeed, on our part, subsequently withdrew from the carnally-minded on our acknowledgment and maintenance of the Paraclete. But the tares of Praxeas had then everywhere shaken out their seed, which having lain hid for some while, with its vitality concealed under a mask, has now broken out with fresh life. But again shall it be rooted up, if the Lord will, even now; but if not now, in the day when all bundles of tares shall be gathered together, and along with every other stumbling-block shall be burnt up with unquenchable fire.
John Calvin's Trinity informed Thomas Campbell
|March 26 2017, 5:13 PM |
I assume that all but a hundred or so readers have been RAPTURED so being left behind I have had time to study the trinity of Thomas Campbell who imitated John Calvin both of who seemed to be confused. Lacking modern research tools would not be a problem if they could just accept Jesus' word that He was a Son of God "a little lower than the angels" and not His OWN FATHER.
John Calvin was a truly modern "proof text" preacher. Even Erasmus warned about those who read a verse and then fabricate their own message. He wrote a lot but was not honest. That is why he was willing to pull the Catholic trick and burn anyone who dared to disagree with him.
Thomas Campbell was not the scholar equal to Alexander Campbell and while a Presbyterian-Baptist wrote a Circular Letter to explain the Calvinistic-Baptist position. Alexander, on the other hand, and the true Restoration Leaders rejected the trinity like Barton W. Stone.
Here is a sample of Calvin's claim that when God SENT a prophet or an angel that angel WAS in fact Jehovah-Elohim or the only true God among the thousands of others worshipped. This discusses part of Judges.
Ken 9 - World/Readership 0
|March 27 2017, 8:45 AM |
From March 10 to March 26 it appears Ken has been winning the monologue proving how relevant this place is.
Servetus vs. Catholic & Protestant Trinitarians
|March 29 2017, 1:27 AM |
Michael Servetus (/sərˈviːtəs/; Spanish: Miguel Serveto), also known as Miguel Servet, Miguel Serveto, Revés, or Michel de Villeneuve (29 September 1509 or 1511 – 27 October 1553), was a Spanish theologian, physician, cartographer, and Renaissance humanist. He was the first European to correctly describe the function of pulmonary circulation, as discussed in Christianismi Restitutio (1553). He was a polymath versed in many sciences: mathematics, astronomy and meteorology, geography, human anatomy, medicine and pharmacology, as well as jurisprudence, translation, poetry and the scholarly study of the Bible in its original languages. He is renowned in the history of several of these fields, particularly medicine and theology. He participated in the Protestant Reformation, and later developed a nontrinitarian Christology. Condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike, he was arrested in Geneva and burnt at the stake as a heretic by order of the city's Protestant governing council. [emph. mine: d.c.]
Re: Servetus vs. Catholic & Protestant Trinitarians
|March 29 2017, 11:51 AM |
And unlike Calvin he never gains points by just listing a verse and then lying about it knowing that most people will never check him out. Erasmus understood that to be the way almost all theologians (the science of Apollon) use Holy Scriptures.
I agree that Scripture should moderate and unveil his great knowledge. After 15 or 16 years with "that man with 50 names" I don't intend to approve or respond. I'm tired and I could use some rest.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 22.214.171.124 on Mar 30, 2017 10:38 AM|