The Trinity

[Anchorman]

It has been argued that only the Johanine accounts in Scripture hint (or, in the case of the fourth Gospel, trumpet the fact of) Jesus' divinity.
HHere's a very basic, though useful, site, giving some of the proofs of His divinity in the synoptics:
http://www.kylemcdanell.com/2013/08/12-proofs-of-jesus-deity-from-synoptic.html


(I think they've missed a few, by the way)

[2Corrie]

God put all creation under him and that means he will eventually put himself back under God

Where did you get that last bit, please??

Sounds like 1 Corinthians 15:28 to me ?

[~TW~]

Gentlemen and Ladies can we keep Sass in our prayers and thank you all,for your concern.
   
                         ~TW~

[Alien]

God put all creation under him and that means he will eventually put himself back under God

Where did you get that last bit, please??

Sounds like 1 Corinthians 15:28 to me ?

Yes, it does. Sass will be able to confirm.

So what does 1 Cor 15:28 say. There may be a bit of a problem in, say, the NIV translation, which is, "When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject (hypotassō) to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." It can equally validly read, "When he has done this, then the Son himself will subject himself to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all", i.e. middle voice rather than passive.

For some other uses of the verb hypotassō, see Luke 2:51, "Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart." This speaks of Jesus being subject/obedient to Joseph and Mary. I wouldn't think Sass would argue that Jesus was inferior to Joseph and Mary. Similarly, Ephesians 5:21 says, "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." This uses the same verb as Luke 2:51 and 1 Cor 15:28. With people submitting to each other they can't all be inferior to each other.

See http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_jesus_subject.htm for more details

[Sassy]

So Sass says she is C of E {As I said I am church of England } and does not accept the deity of Christ.

 Is the C of E teaching that bad.

                        ~TW~

Nope. I thought Sass said once she was Christadelphian. Have I remembered that incorrectly, Sass?

You did NOT remember anything... At NO time has it ever been so.
I am Church of England.

[Sassy]

Really? How about John 5:18, which says, "For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.". John seems pretty clear what Jesus was saying here.

John 5:18King James Version (KJV)

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

By saying that God was his Father they said he was making himself equal to God.
However that does not say he was making himself to be God.
Christ taught us to pray

"Our Father", in saying that as Gods Children does that make us equal to God or make us God?

Read the passage correctly...

King James Bible
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

Had you read the bible then you would not have used that verse out of context.
It is clear that the verse did not say Christ was God. But that because he called God his Father that he was making himself equal to God in their eyes...

Where did you get that last bit, please??

1 Corinthians 15:28King James Version (KJV)

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Eh? You are using the word Trinity in a sense that Trinitarians don't mean. Get your own word!

No! I am referring to the actions of the Trinity what it means to be in the trinity.

In fact just by looking at the actual bible passages you can see that God is God and Jesus is the Son of God. You like many others DO NOT read and know what the bible actually says.

[Alien]

So Sass says she is C of E {As I said I am church of England } and does not accept the deity of Christ.

 Is the C of E teaching that bad.

                        ~TW~

Nope. I thought Sass said once she was Christadelphian. Have I remembered that incorrectly, Sass?

You did NOT remember anything... At NO time has it ever been so.
I am Church of England.

Sorry, my mistake then.

As Church of England you subscribe then to the following Articles of Religion?

I. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity
There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the Maker, and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible. And in the unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

VI. Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation
Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church."

[Alien]

Really? How about John 5:18, which says, "For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.". John seems pretty clear what Jesus was saying here.

John 5:18King James Version (KJV)

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

By saying that God was his Father they said he was making himself equal to God.
However that does not say he was making himself to be God.

That's what John says he was doing. John as in the writer of this piece inspired, authoritative Scripture. Not the Jews alone, but John. It is what Scripture teaches.

Christ taught us to pray
"Our Father", in saying that as Gods Children does that make us equal to God or make us God?

No, because Jesus was using the term in a different manner. John distinguishes that manner from the way Jesus used the term in John 5:18.

Read the passage correctly...

Yes. I always try to do that.

King James Bible
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

Had you read the bible

I have read my bible. Lots of times. Perhaps you mean, "If you (Alien) had read it and understood it correctly."

then you would not have used that verse out of context.
It is clear that the verse did not say Christ was God. But that because he called God his Father that he was making himself equal to God in their eyes...

John 10:33-39 (quoting Psalm 82:6)

"We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods” 
If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—
what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father.
But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp."

This is 5 chapters later. Here the Jewish leaders recognised that Jesus was claiming to be equal with the Father, that he himself was God. Jesus replies that in the OT God spoke to some people and could refer to them as elohim (or in the LXX Greek theos), the word used for God himself as well as judges and other powerful people. It seems to me that he is saying that, heck, if God could refer to people like that he were merely humans, then surely the title of theos/elohim should be applied to Jesus. Importantly, he then goes on to speak of how that term should be applied to him, i.e. the he was in the Father and the Father in him. The Jews knew what that meant. That's why they again tried to seize him and stone him, not because he was elohim/theos only in the sense used of people/judges/whatever in Psalm 82:6, but as being one in substance with the Father."

Where did you get that last bit, please??

1 Corinthians 15:28King James Version (KJV)

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Acknowledged. 2Corries realised that and I have already responded to this above.

Eh? You are using the word Trinity in a sense that Trinitarians don't mean. Get your own word!

No! I am referring to the actions of the Trinity what it means to be in the trinity.

You are using the term Trinity in a sense not meant by Trinitarians throughout the centuries. This will lead to unnecessary confusion, even if your understanding of it is correct (which it isn't).

In fact just by looking at the actual bible passages you can see that God is God and Jesus is the Son of God. You like many others DO NOT read and know what the bible actually says.

It is by looking at the Scriptures, Hebrew and Greek, that we come to the conclusion that the Son is part of the Trinity in the classical sense.

[Sassy]

So Sass says she is C of E {As I said I am church of England } and does not accept the deity of Christ.

 Is the C of E teaching that bad.

                        ~TW~

Nope. I thought Sass said once she was Christadelphian. Have I remembered that incorrectly, Sass?

You did NOT remember anything... At NO time has it ever been so.
I am Church of England.

Sorry, my mistake then.

As Church of England you subscribe then to the following Articles of Religion?

I. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity
There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the Maker, and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible. And in the unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

The last sentence is a telling sentence...
It is duly noted that it does not say that God is three persons. Nor does the bible.
In the unity of the Godhead there is three Persons not one Person being all three.
One substance? What substance, the power is easy and eternity.
So explain the Substance... If God is a Spirit then who is the Holy Spirit?
If a Godhead is all equally co-existent then how can a man be guilty of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit without being guilty of blasphemy against the Father and Son. And vice versa how can a Man be guilty of Blasphemy against God and Christ but not the Holy Spirit?
You are bandying words and even tenets of a FAITH which is not biblical and was not taught by Christ or the Prophets.

VI. Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation
Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church."

Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts.

King James Bible
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

The New Covenant according the Prophet Jeremiah.
Jeremiah 31:31-34King James Version (KJV)

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Being a believer is about living according to EVERY word that proceeds from the mouth of God.. Not the hearts and minds of men.

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the Trinity...
But the truth is known to man by God being in them by the truth of Christ and the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

No man needs written tenets who are part of the body of Christ unto salvation in the sense of the living word within.

[Anchorman]

so: not CofE then, Sass?

[~TW~]

  Being a believer is about living according to EVERY word that proceeds from the mouth of God..
-----------------------------
But Sass you want Genesis 1:1,John 1:3,Rev 1:8,Rev 22:13.Rev 1:17-18 deleted from the bible

 so not EVERY word Sass,because you do not believe them,these scriptures must be deleted.

             ~TW~

[Spud]

Really? How about John 5:18, which says, "For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.". John seems pretty clear what Jesus was saying here.

John 5:18King James Version (KJV)

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

By saying that God was his Father they said he was making himself equal to God.
However that does not say he was making himself to be God.

That's what John says he was doing. John as in the writer of this piece inspired, authoritative Scripture. Not the Jews alone, but John. It is what Scripture teaches.

Christ taught us to pray
"Our Father", in saying that as Gods Children does that make us equal to God or make us God?

No, because Jesus was using the term in a different manner. John distinguishes that manner from the way Jesus used the term in John 5:18.

Read the passage correctly...

Yes. I always try to do that.

King James Bible
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

Had you read the bible

I have read my bible. Lots of times. Perhaps you mean, "If you (Alien) had read it and understood it correctly."

then you would not have used that verse out of context.
It is clear that the verse did not say Christ was God. But that because he called God his Father that he was making himself equal to God in their eyes...

John 10:33-39 (quoting Psalm 82:6)

"We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods” 
If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—
what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father.
But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp."

This is 5 chapters later. Here the Jewish leaders recognised that Jesus was claiming to be equal with the Father, that he himself was God. Jesus replies that in the OT God spoke to some people and could refer to them as elohim (or in the LXX Greek theos), the word used for God himself as well as judges and other powerful people. It seems to me that he is saying that, heck, if God could refer to people like that he were merely humans, then surely the title of theos/elohim should be applied to Jesus. Importantly, he then goes on to speak of how that term should be applied to him, i.e. the he was in the Father and the Father in him. The Jews knew what that meant. That's why they again tried to seize him and stone him, not because he was elohim/theos only in the sense used of people/judges/whatever in Psalm 82:6, but as being one in substance with the Father."

One in substance with the Father? As Sass said, what do you mean by substance?
In John 10:33 John is reporting what the Jews said. What they said about him and what Jesus said about himself are not the same. They said 'you make yourself God'; Jesus said 'I said, I am the Son of God'.
So does Jesus actually claim to be God, in that passage? I'm not sure he does.
I think we need to understand the word 'Trinity'. 'Tri-unity' implies unity between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We need to ask, what kind of unity? Jesus says that when they see him doing the works of the Father, they will know that the Father is in him and he is in the father. This kind of unity demonstrates to people that Jesus is God's Son. It doesn't seem to be an attempt to say that Jesus is God, per se.
I know there are verses like John 20:28, where Thomas says, my Lord and my God. But John's primary purpose is to help people believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and so have eternal life through his name. What name? Jesus, Christ, the Son of God. So in my personal opinion, it is better to think of Jesus' identity that way.

[Spud]

...Although I don't have a problem with saying that the Father and the Son (and the Spirit) are both called by the same name (YHWH) and so are both, in that sense, God.

[ad_orientem]

One in substance with the Father. It means exactly what it says, that God is one, that the Son is not a created being and there was never a "time", even in eternity, when the Son (or the Holy Spirit for that matter) was not.

[Sassy]

so: not CofE then, Sass?

Either answer the points in my post and the scriptures or admit you cannot justify your position.

[Sassy]

Being a believer is about living according to EVERY word that proceeds from the mouth of God..
-----------------------------
But Sass you want Genesis 1:1,John 1:3,Rev 1:8,Rev 22:13.Rev 1:17-18 deleted from the bible

 so not EVERY word Sass,because you do not believe them,these scriptures must be deleted.

             ~TW~

If you cannot answer my post then you show that I am right and you are wrong. Already shown you have taken one out of context.

King James Bible
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

You have posted verses above. Already addressed Revelation 1:8

So as to be clear....

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

Revelation of Jesus Christ which GOD gave to Christ to shew his servants things to come. Which Christ sent an angel to reveal to John.


3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

John had told that God gave Christ the revelation and now the angel having given him the revelation writes to the seven churches.



5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Again made us KINGS AND PRIESTS unto God and his Father to him be the glory and dominion for ever and ever. Clearly John is now referring to God as Jesus Father and unto God be the Glory.
Note he is not saying God and his Father as two separate persons but referring to God being both Christs GOD and Father.





7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.


We know that what Christ has given to John is a Revelation froM God to give to his servants... Therefore when John states the above it is God talking about Jesus Christ in verse 7 and referring to himself in verse 8.

Now the first two verses show clearly that the words of this prophecy... is given to Christ from God. Therefore these words are God and where it refers to himself it is about God not Christ and where he refers to Christ it is about Christ not God.

But this whole Prophecy is God given to Christ to reveal to John through an angel....

I already addressed the issue in my post.
When John wrote this the NT did NOT and I repeat did not exist.
The ONLY  scripture which God,Christ, the Prophets, and the Disciples referred to as SCRIPTURE were the Old Testament teachings.
That which were given unto the Prophets especially the Law to Moses.

Paul warned everyone including you that you needed to check everything taught by HIM and anyone else by the Scriptures to see if it was so.

It is a fact the Jews held different beliefs the Pharisee and the Sadducee because Christ was to give them the correct teaching...
If you do not answer the points raised in my last post then you ignore the teachings of God, Jesus Christ, the Prophets, and the Disciples.

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Does not even have anything to do with the issue.
It has never been denied GOD the Father created the world by speaking the WORD.
That ALL things came into being because God spoke them into being.
But that verse does not and will never make Christ God in flesh.
For the bible tells you that Jesus Christ came in the flesh...

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

You cannot change the truth that God himself is the power of the highest. That the Holy things is and cannot be changed the Son of God.
God himself is Holy and Christ belongs to God which makes him a Holy Thing. It does not make him God.

Now you lost your argument in my last post... You know as this progresses you are not liking the truth because you cannot change it.
God in three persons not God is three persons.

[Sassy]

One in substance with the Father. It means exactly what it says, that God is one, that the Son is not a created being and there was never a "time", even in eternity, when the Son (or the Holy Spirit for that matter) was not.

No it doesn't....


As God is a Spirit John 4:24King James Version (KJV)

24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

It is a fact God is a Spirit and Christ taught this. Worshipped in Spirit and Truth...
Jesus Christ is on the right hand of God.


55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

You cannot escape that Jesus Christ is NOT God and that Stephen sees by the power of the Holy Ghost what he witnessed and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. Not literally standing on Gods hand was he?
But stood next God in heaven.

You can literally give biblical references from the NT but at no time do you have any reference from the OT to support what you think you know. And even the NT you take out of context.

[Sassy]

...Although I don't have a problem with saying that the Father and the Son (and the Spirit) are both called by the same name (YHWH) and so are both, in that sense, God.

Isaiah 42:8 (KJ21) | In Context | Whole Chapter

8 I am the Lord; that is My name. And My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images.

When Stephen looked up into heaven the writer of Acts tells us something very clearly.

55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

What Glory do you think Stephen saw?

You have read what I wrote Spud and now you too are beginning to see what the Disciples taught and what man taught are two different things. THE Roman Catholic Church are the worse offenders. Hence Christs Church is built on two things... Spirit and Truth the words of God. So that man may go against the Church of Rome and it can fall. But the Church of Christ born of Spirit and Truth cannot be touched because the Kingdom is not of this world or manmade.

There was NO NT and No REVELATION when the Disciples received the Holy Spirit as spoken about in Acts. Just as when Peter spoke about Jesus Christ in Acts 10 the people believed on the name of Jesus, gentiles who have never studied the word of God.
Jesus said: " I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by me."
These words were said... Christ did not need to write them down because the disciples knew the OT and they knew what the OT said about the Messiah.

Peter makes it clear:

38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

God with Christ not God is Christ...

7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.

9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

Even then people were saying God had come in the flesh... But as you see the truth is that Jesus Christ came in the flesh.
Christ said:- " I have not come to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me."

If you go beyond the teachings of Christ then you do not have Christ or God.

The doctrines of CHrist are revealed through the four gospels.
John shows that Christ is the one whose words needed to be heeded.
2 John 1:2King James Version (KJV)

2 For the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever.

John 16:13King James Version (KJV)

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Jesus said that the Spirit could not come to us until he had left...

[Hope]

You can literally give biblical references from the NT but at no time do you have any reference from the OT to support what you think you know. And even the NT you take out of context.

I would suggest that you are doing much the same, Sass;  not just in this case, but in many others as well.  The OT is full of references to the tri-une nature of God, and one doesn't even have to rely on the original language to get this understanding.

In fact, the first reference is in the first verse of Genesis.  The word that is translated 'God' in Genesis 1:1 is plural, not singular.  Later in the same chapter, God says 'Let us make man ... '.  I assume that you think this is a just a Biblical form of the 'royal "we"'?

[trippymonkey]

Wasn't there a time when the 'ancients' believed in more than one god anyway?
Before they had the proverbial kicked out of them?

Nick

[Anchorman]

so: not CofE then, Sass?

Either answer the points in my post and the scriptures or admit you cannot justify your position.

Hold the bus - you're the one who claimed to be CofE, not me.
Since, as Alien, an ordained reader in that denomination, kindly posted the Articles confirming that the CofE accepts only One God who is Triune in nature, did you join that denomination, taking vows of membership, under false pretences?
Or did you join, believing that the church you joined, was in error, and, therefore, given your stance, not preaching your idea of the Gospel?
Either way, there is a discrepency there.

[ad_orientem]

One in substance with the Father. It means exactly what it says, that God is one, that the Son is not a created being and there was never a "time", even in eternity, when the Son (or the Holy Spirit for that matter) was not.

No it doesn't....


As God is a Spirit John 4:24King James Version (KJV)

24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

It is a fact God is a Spirit and Christ taught this. Worshipped in Spirit and Truth...
Jesus Christ is on the right hand of God.


55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

You cannot escape that Jesus Christ is NOT God and that Stephen sees by the power of the Holy Ghost what he witnessed and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. Not literally standing on Gods hand was he?
But stood next God in heaven.

You can literally give biblical references from the NT but at no time do you have any reference from the OT to support what you think you know. And even the NT you take out of context.

I have nothing to say to rank heretics. Now go away.

[Alien]

so: not CofE then, Sass?

Either answer the points in my post and the scriptures or admit you cannot justify your position.

Hold the bus - you're the one who claimed to be CofE, not me.
Since, as Alien, an ordained reader in that denomination, kindly posted the Articles confirming that the CofE accepts only One God who is Triune in nature, did you join that denomination, taking vows of membership, under false pretences?
Or did you join, believing that the church you joined, was in error, and, therefore, given your stance, not preaching your idea of the Gospel?
Either way, there is a discrepency there.

Time to pick some nits. Readers (aka Licensed Lay Ministers) get "admitted to the office of Reader". We don't get ordained. We are normal.

Becoming a member of the C of E, for good or ill, involves living in the parish or worshipping at a church for 6 months or more. You can formally transfer from another Trinitarian denomination without fuss and a few do, but not many. We have baptists, Methodists and URC who are active members in our main congregation. You can be on the church electoral role without transferring. People tend to only formally transfer if they are going to go forward for Readership or ordination or stuff like that.

[~TW~]

That's OK but some do believe ALL in the Bible happened.

I don't. In fact I just watched a very well made film, EXODUS, last week & marvelled at how ANYONE can think good of this horrendous creature forcing people to worship it under pain of death & destruction ?!!?!?!?

 So now the film has become the bible.Do you know what verse this applied to,have you checked.

 No of course you have not checked.

~TW~

[Anchorman]

so: not CofE then, Sass?

Either answer the points in my post and the scriptures or admit you cannot justify your position.

Hold the bus - you're the one who claimed to be CofE, not me.
Since, as Alien, an ordained reader in that denomination, kindly posted the Articles confirming that the CofE accepts only One God who is Triune in nature, did you join that denomination, taking vows of membership, under false pretences?
Or did you join, believing that the church you joined, was in error, and, therefore, given your stance, not preaching your idea of the Gospel?
Either way, there is a discrepency there.

Time to pick some nits. Readers (aka Licensed Lay Ministers) get "admitted to the office of Reader". We don't get ordained. We are normal.

Becoming a member of the C of E, for good or ill, involves living in the parish or worshipping at a church for 6 months or more. You can formally transfer from another Trinitarian denomination without fuss and a few do, but not many. We have baptists, Methodists and URC who are active members in our main congregation. You can be on the church electoral role without transferring. People tend to only formally transfer if they are going to go forward for Readership or ordination or stuff like that.

The words we use in making readers are "setting apart" rather than ordination.
And, being the Hirk, they/we are nothing if not red-tape engulfed.
Even if someone is a certified reader in the Methodist or CofE/Episcopalian church, the Kirk expects them to be assessed and trained in the CofS.
At least I didn't have to jump through hoops before being accepted.
Only elders (ruling and teaching aka ministers) and ruling, are ordained.