Biblical Christianity

[Rob Bowman]

Nominee,

What happened? I had written:

"...the Bible teaches that the Three are one God."

You had commented:

The Bible does not teach this....

Now, though, you say:

I also interpret "one God" to mean "one God;" however, I do not interpret "one God" to be made by combining three individuals.

So, does the Bible teach that one God made and rules the world, or not?

Edited January 13, 2012 by Rob Bowman

[Nominee]

Nominee,

What happened? I had written:

"...the Bible teaches that the Three are one God."

You had commented:

Now, though, you say:

So, does the Bible teach that one God made and rules the world, or not?

Do you interpret what is written in the Bible that way? Yes, probably. You do the best you can with what you use. I think you do well considering that you are here and concern yourself with such matters while continuing to deny modern day revelation from today's prophets of God. I pray you continue to stay close to our Savior, Jesus Christ, while talking continually to our Heavenly Father and asking direction and wisdom from the Holy Spirit.

I read the same Bible (which is good ) and I read that God even to Jesus the Christ, My Heavenly Father, stood with Jesus and directed him saying, "Let us make man in our image" and chose Jesus to rule as God over our world.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Nominee

[CQUIRK]

By "biblical Christianity" we evangelicals (who are the ones who typically use the term) mean Christian doctrine and practice that is consistent with the Bible.

By which you mean, your interpretation of the Bible.

[Lance in TX]

The Bible says many times that there is one God that made and rules the world, and never says that there are three Gods that do so..

Can you please explain the voice from God while Jesus was standing on the Earth in the following passages:

Matthew 3:17

Matthew 17:5

Mark 1:11

Mark 9:7

Luke 3:22

Like 9:34-36

2 Peter 1:17

Or when Christ says he was taught by His Father in John 8:28. Did He teach Himself?

Those that believe in the Creedal (non-biblical) belief of the Trinity cannot easily explain these items and ALL the MANY times Jesus talks to His Father directly.. Is He talking to Himself? Is He crazy?

The Nicea Council had a problem that they had to resolve. At the time, the Pagan groups were growing and they needed to set themselves apart. They could not believe in a Godhead of three beings (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). They had to have a single all-powerful, all-knowing God to keep everyone in line. The creation of the Creeds was to organize the multiple factions of Christians into a single political body that was under Constantine (who was a Pagan!). They used threats, murder, exile, etc to force a SINGLE vision of what Christianity should be. It was a show of power. The politicaly strongest Bishop took charge and went on a rampage to kill and exile anyone that was against him.

Read the history.

[zerinus]

The Bible says many times that there is one God that made and rules the world, and never says that there are three Gods [or more] that do so. . . .

O yes it does:

"And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: . . ." (Genesis 3:22).

One of whom, the devils?

[Storm Rider]

By "biblical Christianity" we evangelicals (who are the ones who typically use the term) mean Christian doctrine and practice that is consistent with the Bible. By this definition, it is not necessary for the first Christians to have had a complete "Bible" to have been "biblical" Christians. But it should be noted that Christians in the second century had essentially the same Scriptures that we have in the Bible today. They had the full slate of scriptures in the Old Testament, and they had the four Gospels, Paul's epistles, and most if not all of the other New Testament writings.

We also often use the term "historic" Christianity to mean the basic Christian beliefs and practices that have dominated most of Christian history and are shared by the three major streams of Christianity--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Protestantism.

Biblical Christianity is a highly subjective term. First, which bible? Is it the Catholic bible with significantly more books or the the Protestant bibles? The vast majority of Christians use a bible with the Deuterocanical books included; because they are the majority should that be the bible used as the standard? Stating that Christians had all the books by the 2nd century is not correct. Could you provide a reference that states that there was even a single location where a group of Christians had all the books at once? I don't think it was possible. Groups of Christians kept their sacred books and none were so well traveled or rich enough to maintain a complete library in the 2nd century. However, I could be wrong; I await the reference.

Historic Christianity is also a loaded term of subjective meaning. Which beliefs get included and which are excluded? The majority of Christians believe in the saints, Tradition, and apostolic succession which have all been abandoned by Protestants. Beliefs segregated down to a belief in the Trinity as the sole required element of faith to merit the term Christian is a rather new concept. I think it is the desiccated remains of the Catholic church's much broader requirements or elements of the true faith.

Even if these definitions are accepted, what is absolutely clear is that none of the first apostles and all the disciples would be condemned as actual Christians because none of them believed in the Trinity. None of them understood Jesus to be the same as the Father. Jesus taught them clearly that he was the Son of the Father and to pray to the Father, not himself.

These definitions fail quickly once anyone begins to focus on them and understand their true implications. It would seem far wiser to use the requirements of the Bible to define what a disciple of Christ is, rather than the invented requirements of man.

[orion88]

Evangelical Christians, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses all claim to derive their doctrine

from the Bible where possible.

Evangelicals believe that somehow one God exists in 3 distinct personages. Mormons believe

that these three are 3 Gods, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses believe in only 1 God, where Jesus

is only Michael the Archangel and the holy spirit is a force. JWs also deny Christ's physical

resurrection using the Bible too.

For those Latter-day Saints on the forum, do you believe Jehovah's Witnesses practice a

true version of "biblical Christianity" (by that I mean they practice or teach doctrine that is clearly

revealed without making an error in interpretation - and at the same time exclude speculative

teachings)?

Thanks,

Tony

[zerinus]

Evangelical Christians, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses all claim to derive their doctrine

from the Bible where possible.

Evangelicals believe that somehow one God exists in 3 distinct personages. Mormons believe

that these three are 3 Gods, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses believe in only 1 God, where Jesus

is only Michael the Archangel and the holy spirit is a force. JWs also deny Christ's physical

resurrection using the Bible too.

For those Latter-day Saints on the forum, do you believe Jehovah's Witnesses practice a

true version of "biblical Christianity" (by that I mean they practice or teach doctrine that is clearly

revealed without making an error in interpretation - and at the same time exclude speculative

teachings)?

No, any more than the Evangelicals do. What conclusion do you intend to draw from that?

[CV75]

By "biblical Christianity" we evangelicals (who are the ones who typically use the term) mean Christian doctrine and practice that is consistent with the Bible. By this definition, it is not necessary for the first Christians to have had a complete "Bible" to have been "biblical" Christians. But it should be noted that Christians in the second century had essentially the same Scriptures that we have in the Bible today. They had the full slate of scriptures in the Old Testament, and they had the four Gospels, Paul's epistles, and most if not all of the other New Testament writings.

We also often use the term "historic" Christianity to mean the basic Christian beliefs and practices that have dominated most of Christian history and are shared by the three major streams of Christianity--Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Protestantism.

Nor is it necessary that Christians in the 19^th century and onward limit themselves exclusively to the Bible.

Perhaps the definition of "Biblical Christianity" needs to be changed to "...Christian doctrine and practice that is consistent with an interpretation of the Bible by that small cohort of Christians who typically use this term..."

[Storm Rider]

Evangelical Christians, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses all claim to derive their doctrine

from the Bible where possible.

Evangelicals believe that somehow one God exists in 3 distinct personages. Mormons believe

that these three are 3 Gods, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses believe in only 1 God, where Jesus

is only Michael the Archangel and the holy spirit is a force. JWs also deny Christ's physical

resurrection using the Bible too.

For those Latter-day Saints on the forum, do you believe Jehovah's Witnesses practice a

true version of "biblical Christianity" (by that I mean they practice or teach doctrine that is clearly

revealed without making an error in interpretation - and at the same time exclude speculative

teachings)?

Thanks,

Tony

It is really a matter of degree. Some teach a great deal of truth and some a lesser degree, but all teach some degree of truth. It is erroneous to lump groups into "false" religion because of the presence of some truth. Both Catholics and LDS say they have a fulness of the truth. This is an honest, real disagreement between the two groups. Protestants male no claim to a fulness of truth, but I suspect they feel that they have it, it is just not a form of claim they make as the first two do.

The Bible leads to a host of denominations, some 36,000, and all fo them claim to teach "the" truth, which in any logical sense is an impossibility for "the" truth to exist in all of them.

[Vance]

Evangelical Christians, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses all claim to derive their doctrine

from the Bible where possible.

Thanks,

Tony

Technically inaccurate.

Mormons derive our doctrine from revelation from God.

It just happens to agree our interpretation of the Bible.

[Vance]

The Bible says many times that there is one God that made and rules the world, and never says that there are three Gods that do so.

The Bible separates, many times the Lord Jesus Christ FROM that "one" God.

So, now what?

So yes, I plead guilty to interpreting "one God" to mean "one God" rather than meaning "three Gods." I have no problem agreeing enthusiastically that I do so. But your insinuation is that I am somehow going beyond the Bible by drawing the conclusion that "one God" means "one God."

Not exactly. It is that you go beyond the Bible to get your definition of what exactly "one God" means.

In any case, to "interpret" the Bible's words about "one God" to mean "one God" seems far more plausible than to interpret them to mean three Gods.

Ok, so what is the "more plausible" interpretation of these verses?

Eph. 1:2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

• • •

17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

1 Thes. 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Cor. 1: 2 Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;

Col. 1: 2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,

1 Thes. 3:11 Now God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you.

• • •

13 To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.

2 Thes. 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, aunto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:

2 Grace unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Rom. 1: 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Rom. 15: 6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Cor. 1:3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Cor. 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

2 Cor. 11:31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.

Gal. 1: 3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,

Eph. 5:20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;

Eph. 6:23 Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Philip. 1:2 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Philip. 2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

2 Thes. 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

1 Tim. 1:2 Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.

2 Tim. 1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

Titus 1:4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

Philem. 1:3 Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Pet. 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

2 Jn. 1:3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.

[Storm Rider]

Great scriptures that demonstrate the fallacy and motivation of the doctrine of the Trinity. If Jesus was divine and there is only one God then he must some how, mysteriously be the Father in some way. Thus we get three distinct persons, but one substance; a position wholly invented to allow Jesus to be divine and making the Father and Jesus one. Jesus and the early disciples had no problem with declaring that God was God and Jesus was his Son; thus no problem with there being two, seperate and distinct Gods. Yet, Jesus always declared that we pray and worship the Father. He never, NEVER, came close to teaching any form of substance, essence or any other construct to explain his godhood or his divinity. Why orthodoxy falls all over this simple truth still amazes me. Why create something rather than teach what Jesus taught?

[Kenngo1969]

Can you please explain the voice from God while Jesus was standing on the Earth in the following passages:

Matthew 3:17

Matthew 17:5

Mark 1:11

Mark 9:7

Luke 3:22

Like 9:34-36

2 Peter 1:17 ...

Yes. Jesus is a ventriloquist!

[Rob Bowman]

Nominee,

You didn't answer my question.

Do you interpret what is written in the Bible that way? Yes, probably. You do the best you can with what you use. I think you do well considering that you are here and concern yourself with such matters while continuing to deny modern day revelation from today's prophets of God. I pray you continue to stay close to our Savior, Jesus Christ, while talking continually to our Heavenly Father and asking direction and wisdom from the Holy Spirit.

I read the same Bible (which is good ) and I read that God even to Jesus the Christ, My Heavenly Father, stood with Jesus and directed him saying, "Let us make man in our image" and chose Jesus to rule as God over our world.

[Rob Bowman]

CQUIRK,

You wrote:

By which you mean, your interpretation of the Bible.

No. My interpretation of the Bible is fallible and non-authoritative, and my activity of reading and interpreting the Bible is irrelevant to the definition of biblical Christianity. Rob Bowman is not in any sense a part of the definition of biblical Christianity. Biblical Christianity existed before I was born.

Tell me, what is Latter-day Saint Christianity?

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

You wrote, regarding the Bible referring to three Gods:

O yes it does:

"And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: . . ." (Genesis 3:22).

One of whom, the devils?

I always appreciate your desire to get into the Bible itself.

Genesis 3:22 does not refer to a plurality of Gods. There is no reference to "Gods" as a numerical plural in this verse. Orthodox Christians traditionally have understood the plural pronouns in Genesis 1:26 and 3:22 to refer to the plurality of divine persons in the one God, though some have suggested other interpretations. In any case, the text does not actually speak of a plurality of Gods.

[Rob Bowman]

Lance,

You wrote:

Can you please explain the voice from God while Jesus was standing on the Earth in the following passages:

Matthew 3:17

Matthew 17:5

Mark 1:11

Mark 9:7

Luke 3:22

Like 9:34-36

2 Peter 1:17

Or when Christ says he was taught by His Father in John 8:28. Did He teach Himself?

Those that believe in the Creedal (non-biblical) belief of the Trinity cannot easily explain these items and ALL the MANY times Jesus talks to His Father directly.. Is He talking to Himself? Is He crazy?

Lance, the doctrine of the Trinity does not teach that Jesus is the Father. It distinguishes the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three distinct persons. Jesus was not talking to himself when he prayed, and the Father was not talking to himself or about himself when he spoke from heaven and referred to Jesus as his beloved Son. We have absolutely no trouble at all explaining or accepting these biblical texts. We simply maintain that the three persons are one God, not three Gods.

You wrote:

The Nicea Council had a problem that they had to resolve. At the time, the Pagan groups were growing and they needed to set themselves apart. They could not believe in a Godhead of three beings (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). They had to have a single all-powerful, all-knowing God to keep everyone in line. The creation of the Creeds was to organize the multiple factions of Christians into a single political body that was under Constantine (who was a Pagan!). They used threats, murder, exile, etc to force a SINGLE vision of what Christianity should be. It was a show of power. The politicaly strongest Bishop took charge and went on a rampage to kill and exile anyone that was against him.

Read the history.

I have, and what you have read apparently is propaganda, not history. Constantine was not a pagan when the Council of Nicea met. The creeds had nothing to do with setting Christianity apart from pagan groups, nor were they about uniting all Christians under Constantine. The individual in the fourth century who most famously suffered repeated exiles because of his belief was Athanasius, a champion of the doctrine of the Trinity. The rival beliefs that the Nicene creed excluded did not include anything remotely like Mormonism. As for your last sentence about a bishop going on a rampage and killing and exiling anyone who disagreed with him, I can't even imagine what fact you might be distorting here. So on this point I will issue a CFR.

[Nominee]

Nominee,

You didn't answer my question.

I thought that I did. You asked:

So, does the Bible teach that one God made and rules the world, or not?

and my answer was:

I read that God even to Jesus the Christ, My Heavenly Father, stood with Jesus and directed him saying, "Let us make man in our image" and chose Jesus to rule as God over our world.

But to clarify, this statement says that there is Heavenly Father and there is Jesus Christ ~ two separate individuals. God, the Father, stood beside his son, Jesus Christ, and gave him support and direction as Jesus (the Creator) created this world for Jesus (the Ruler) to rule over and reign forever as King.

Yes, Heavenly Father is a God. Yes, Jesus is a God. No, they are not the same person. Yes, there is one God that created and rules over this world ~ Jesus. Because he was chosen by God, the Father, to do so. I find it easy to understand that the son of a God would be a God also. And just because only one God rules this world does not mean that we need to disregard or disrespect the other. Especially when it is made perfectly clear that Jesus takes no glory to himself but does the will of our Father and commands us to do the same.

* If any LDS feel that I have erred in my interpretation here please feel free to point out my mistakes. I am still a "work in progress."

[thesometimesaint]

Nominee:

Sounds fine to me.

[Ron Beron]

Nor is it necessary that Christians in the 19^th century and onward limit themselves exclusively to the Bible.

Perhaps the definition of "Biblical Christianity" needs to be changed to "...Christian doctrine and practice that is consistent with an interpretation of the Bible by that small cohort of Christians who typically use this term..."

It is interesting to note that on top of what you have said is that the OT was never a closed canon. The earliest Christians felt the same thing in regards to their own letters which eventually became the canon of the Christian Church. Along with readings of the OT there were also readings of the pratistic letters and even when the bible was canonized there were still additional materials that were edged out. It is only with later Christianity that Christian canon became closed, and then to political influence.

[altersteve]

Yes, there is one God that created and rules over this world ~ Jesus.

Jesus does not rule over just this world, He created and rules over the universe as God (not just "a God"). He and His Father, with the Holy Ghost, are united as one God. They are one. From what has been revealed to us, we should all understand that Jesus Christ is God, not just "a God." He is God the Son, the Creator.

I have always argued that the LDS understanding of the oneness of God is very similar to the doctrine of the Trinity. The Trinity does not say that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are literally one being, it says they are one God; nor does it the "one in substance" concept mean that they are literally composed of the same material. All it means is that they are united as one divine being called God. This is similar to how we describe it: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are in perfect unity as one God, members of one Godhead who rule over all. Unfortunately, the way the doctrine of the Trinity is explained is what makes people misunderstand it. This is why Mormons and evangelicals constantly talk past each other, because neither understands the other's doctrines at all.

I do not believe that there are other "Christs" for other worlds. The scriptures say that Jesus Christ created and atoned for all the worlds God has created, and "the inhabitants thereof are sons and daughters unto God" through faith in Christ. When it is said that there are other "gods," I believe it in light of what Paul said, that there are beings "that are called gods" -- divine beings who act under the authority of God the Father. Jesus Christ is "a god" because He is a divine being, but He is also God. He has been and will be God forever.

I feel it's important for Latter-day Saints to understand this. Jesus Christ is not just "a god." He is God. There is a huge difference there that needs to be understood.

Edited January 13, 2012 by altersteve

[Rob Bowman]

Nominee,

Your answer to my question appears to be that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three Gods, but that only one of them, the Son Jesus Christ, made and rules over this world:

But to clarify, this statement says that there is Heavenly Father and there is Jesus Christ ~ two separate individuals. God, the Father, stood beside his son, Jesus Christ, and gave him support and direction as Jesus (the Creator) created this world for Jesus (the Ruler) to rule over and reign forever as King.

Yes, Heavenly Father is a God. Yes, Jesus is a God. No, they are not the same person. Yes, there is one God that created and rules over this world ~ Jesus. Because he was chosen by God, the Father, to do so. I find it easy to understand that the son of a God would be a God also. And just because only one God rules this world does not mean that we need to disregard or disrespect the other. Especially when it is made perfectly clear that Jesus takes no glory to himself but does the will of our Father and commands us to do the same.

Perhaps you could explain how your answer here compares to or fits with what some of your leaders have taught. Here are some examples, all taken from lds.org:

"The Church's first article of faith states, 'We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.' These three beings make up the Godhead. They preside over this world and all other creations of our Father in Heaven" ("Godhead," Study by Topic).

"The first article [in the Articles of Faith] anchors our belief in God, our Eternal Father, in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. How grateful we are for a knowledge of Supreme Beings that rule and govern this world. Our belief does not come from the speculations of men about the existence and nature of God, but from firsthand experience from the Prophet Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove. His experience clarified for mankind the existence of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. Thus to the world came the vision that three personages comprise this great presiding council of the universe and have revealed themselves to mankind as three separate beings, physically distinct from each other as demonstrated by the accepted records of their divine dealings with mankind" (L. Tom Perry, "The Articles of Faith," general conference address, April 1998).

These statements affirm that all three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, rule over the world.

[Ron Beron]

'Rob Bowman writes,

We simply maintain that the three persons are one God, not three Gods.

This was certainly not the case in the OT nor was it the feeling among the earliest Christians, but trinitarianism was an evolution of doctrine that allowed the assimilation of Jesus and Hokhma (spirit) into a form of godhood. This was accomplished through an appeal not only of the pagan expressions of godhood at the time, but also the philosophical teaching of Neoplatonism.

Constantine was not a pagan when the Council of Nicea met.

While he declared himself a Christian at age 40 he, nonetheless, continued pagan practices that would seem to compromise his Christian status:

1. He continued to be called Pontifex Maximus, a term used to signify the godlike stature of a Roman emperor.
   
2. He built the Arch of Constantine which contained pagan symbols.
   
3. He instructed that Christians and pagans should unite in observing the "day of the sun" which was a eastern sun worshiping event. His coins continued to contain the sun motif until his death. And in the founding of Constantinople he wore the Apollian sun rayed diadem.
   

Moreover, his baptism was witheld until his immediate death. Constantine might have been a Christian, but an eclectic one.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Ron Beron

[CV75]

It is interesting to note that on top of what you have said is that the OT was never a closed canon. The earliest Christians felt the same thing in regards to their own letters which eventually became the canon of the Christian Church. Along with readings of the OT there were also readings of the pratistic letters and even when the bible was canonized there were still additional materials that were edged out. It is only with later Christianity that Christian canon became closed, and then to political influence.

Yes that is interesting.

By the way, I'm doing a web search of the term "Biblical Christianity" and all I'm getting is a patchwork of very diverse and mostly incoherent definitions from some very strange-looking websites.