If the wages of sin is death, and Jesus died, does that make Jesus a sinner?

[Aus22]

THe dctrines of the early church were proclaim bfore the Bible was written THe trinity has been defined by the church cearly but s prefigured inin matt 3.16,10.20;17.5.;28,20,luklike4,18 where Jesus said "THE SPIRIT OF the LORD ISupon mt brcausehe has anointed me to bring good news to the poor he has sent rto provclainto captives releasedto set the liberty theoppressedtoprovlaim the LOrd and the day of recompense. and john 5,19 in answer therefore Jesus said to them AMEN AMEN I say to you te Son can do othing of himself but ony what he sees the FAther do

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

THe dctrines of the early church were proclaim bfore the Bible was written THe trinity has been defined by the church cearly but s prefigured inin matt 3.16,10.20;17.5.;28,20,luklike4,18 where Jesus said "THE SPIRIT OF the LORD ISupon mt brcausehe has anointed me to bring good news to the poor he has sent rto provclainto captives releasedto set the liberty theoppressedtoprovlaim the LOrd and the day of recompense. and john 5,19 in answer therefore Jesus said to them AMEN AMEN I say to you te Son can do othing of himself but ony what he sees the FAther do

The Trinity doctrine was implemented more than 300 years after Jesus died so you might want to revise your history.

Perhaps I can help you with that.

Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.

Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

http://home.pacific.net.au/~amaxwell/bdigest/bd12bbs.tx

Even a Trinitarian scholar admits the Earliest & Original beliefs were NOT Trinitarian!

The trinity formulation is a later corruption away from the earliest & original beliefs!

"It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed".

Dr. W R Matthews, Dean of St Paul's Cathedral, "God in Christian Thought and Experience", p.180

"In order to understand the doctrine of the Trinity it is necessary to understand that the doctrine is a development, and why it developed. ... It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament".

R Hanson: "Reasonable Belief, A survey of the Christian Faith, p.171-173, 1980

The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament.

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306.

"The formulation `One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective"

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299.

"The formulation `One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299).

"Fourth-century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary a deviation from this teaching" (The Encyclopedia Americana, p. 1956, p. 2941).

Was Jesus God to Paul and other early Christians? No. . . . .

(Source: How the Bible became the Bible by Donald L. O'Dell - ISBN 0-7414-2993-4 Published by INFINITY Publishing.com)

Constantine's Victory Arch says it all.

http://www.simchajtv.com/movie-secrets-of-christianity-selling-christianity/

Regards
DL

 

[Aus22]

whle the full trinity doctrine was not proclaimed as an article of faith by the catholic church some aspects such asJjEsus was both GOD and Man was proclaimed in the first two centuries.