Is Trinity in the Bible?

[sojourner]

I certainly get the impression from what Jesus says in the Gospels that He did not want people to consider Him God.

And personally, I don't really see how the Father, Son and Holy Spirit described in the Bible could be all considered a single entity.

Jesus -- the fully human person -- was not to be worshiped. Remember, humans are not God. But Jesus was both. It was not until he had ascended that he was to be worshiped as God.

Personally, I do see how Father, Son and Holy Spirit described in the Bible could be all considered (not a single entity -- remember, there are three distinct Persons) One God.

 

[Francine]

What Paul refers to in his letters to Corinth, is the gods of the Gentiles -- not the God of Israel.

On the contrary, it is written:
Rom.3:[29] Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:

 

[sojourner]

I certainly get the impression from what Jesus says in the Gospels that He did not want people to consider Him God.

And personally, I don't really see how the Father, Son and Holy Spirit described in the Bible could be all considered a single entity.

Jesus -- the fully human person -- was not to be worshiped. Remember, humans are not God. But Jesus was both. It was not until he had ascended that he was to be worshiped as God.

Personally, I do see how Father, Son and Holy Spirit described in the Bible could be all considered (not a single entity -- remember, there are three distinct Persons) One God.

 

[Muffled]

No, it's the opinion of Jews and Muslims, a minority of Christians and others. It is also Abdu'l Baha's opinion:
"THE TRINITY

Question. -- What is the meaning of the Trinity, of the Three Persons in One?

Answer. -- The Divine Reality, which is purified and sanctified from the understanding of human beings and which can never be imagined by the people of wisdom and of intelligence, is exempt from all conception. That Lordly Reality admits of no division; for division and multiplicity are properties of creatures which are contingent existences, and not accidents which happen to the self-existent.

The Divine Reality is sanctified from singleness, then how much more from plurality. The descent of that Lordly Reality into conditions and degrees would be equivalent to imperfection and contrary to perfection, and is, therefore, absolutely impossible. It perpetually has been, and is, in the exaltation of holiness and sanctity. All that is mentioned of the Manifestations and Dawning-places of God signifies the divine reflection, and not a descent into the conditions of existence.[1]
[1 Cf. "Pantheism," p. 290.]

God is pure perfection, and creatures are but imperfections. For God to descend into the conditions of existence would be the greatest of imperfections; on the contrary, His manifestation, His appearance, His rising are like the reflection of the sun in a clear, pure, polished mirror. All the creatures are evident signs of God, like the earthly beings upon all of which the rays of the sun shine. But upon the plains, the mountains, the trees and fruits, only a portion 114 of the light shines, through which they become visible, and are reared, and attain to the object of their existence, while the Perfect Man [1] is in the condition of a clear mirror in which the Sun of Reality becomes visible and manifest with all its qualities and perfections. So the Reality of Christ was a clear and polished mirror of the greatest purity and fineness. The Sun of Reality, the Essence of Divinity, reflected itself in this mirror and manifested its light and heat in it; but from the exaltation of its holiness, and the heaven of its sanctity, the Sun did not descend to dwell and abide in the mirror. No, it continues to subsist in its exaltation and sublimity, while appearing and becoming manifest in the mirror in beauty and perfection.
[1 The Divine Manifestation.]

Now if we say that we have seen the Sun in two mirrors -- one the Christ and one the Holy Spirit -- that is to say, that we have seen three Suns, one in heaven and the two others on the earth, we speak truly. And if we say that there is one Sun, and it is pure singleness, and has no partner and equal, we again speak truly.

The epitome of the discourse is that the Reality of Christ was a clear mirror, and the Sun of Reality -- that is to say, the Essence of Oneness, with its infinite perfections and attributes -- became visible in the mirror. The meaning is not that the Sun, which is the Essence of the Divinity, became divided and multiplied -- for the Sun is one -- but it appeared in the mirror. This is why Christ said, "The Father is in the Son," meaning that the Sun is visible and manifest in this mirror.

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God which becomes visible and evident in the Reality of Christ. The Sonship station is the heart of Christ, and the Holy Spirit is the station of the spirit of Christ. Hence it has become certain and proved that the Essence of Divinity is absolutely unique and has no equal, no likeness, no equivalent. 115

This is the signification of the Three Persons of the Trinity. If it were otherwise, the foundations of the Religion of God would rest upon an illogical proposition which the mind could never conceive, and how can the mind be forced to believe a thing which it cannot conceive? A thing cannot be grasped by the intelligence except when it is clothed in an intelligible form; otherwise, it is but an effort of the imagination.

It has now become clear, from this explanation, what is the meaning of the Three Persons of the Trinity. The Oneness of God is also proved."

(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 114)

That it differs from your opinion is all it really is. I am perfectly willing to accept that.

Regards,

Scott

Regards,
Scott

I like this analogy but it does tend to depersonalize God. God is a spirit and we don't know what that is but it could be like light. The difference is that God has intelligence and light does not. It is not a reflected intelligence in Jesus such as you would find with Prophets but the intelligence of God is in Jesus ordering His thoughts and speaking His words. It is the same thing with the Paraclete. He is in me, ordering my thoughts and speaking my words. It is evident from the words of Jesus that He believed that the Father ws the reality in Him not just a reflection.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

On the contrary, it is written:
Rom.3:[29] Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:

Yep...that verse too right along with 2 Corinthians 4:4.........I think henotheism was very much the practice (way of thinking)....here....contray to what others think....

 

[Popeyesays]

I like this analogy but it does tend to depersonalize God. God is a spirit and we don't know what that is but it could be like light. The difference is that God has intelligence and light does not. It is not a reflected intelligence in Jesus such as you would find with Prophets but the intelligence of God is in Jesus ordering His thoughts and speaking His words. It is the same thing with the Paraclete. He is in me, ordering my thoughts and speaking my words. It is evident from the words of Jesus that He believed that the Father ws the reality in Him not just a reflection.

Whatcha know, a flash of agreement. Abdu'l Baha also talks of of the flash of innovation that comes from consultation and the presence of conflicting views.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Captain Civic]

On the contrary, it is written:
Rom.3:[29] Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:

He's referring to the "gods" that they worshipped, like images of animals, and depictions of "gods" that controlled the seasons, weather, crops, etc.

 

[alamxudos]

Three will never add up to one. There is only one true god. If Jesus was to be prayed to after his alleged death than who was he praying to while in the flesh?

 

[vandervalley]

Three will never add up to one. There is only one true god. If Jesus was to be prayed to after his alleged death than who was he praying to while in the flesh?

He might be praying to his own "God nature" which everyone possesess

 

[Dirty Penguin]

He might be praying to his own "God nature" which everyone possesess

Or he could just simply be praying to his god. The same god he said was our god as well.....

Matthew 11:25
At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank you, O Father, Master of heaven and earth, because you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them to babes.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Jesus -- the fully human person -- was not to be worshiped. Remember, humans are not God. But Jesus was both. It was not until he had ascended that he was to be worshiped as God.

So... when Jesus was in human form, he wasn't God?

Personally, I do see how Father, Son and Holy Spirit described in the Bible could be all considered (not a single entity -- remember, there are three distinct Persons) One God.

In my mind, an entity is something that is distinct - if the three Persons of God are all different entities, how can they be one God? I have real difficulty with what I see as a bit of sleight-of-hand with definitions (i.e. "He is one" one minute and "He is three" the next) that seem to me to be an attempt to reconcile conflicting ideas derived from the New Testament (i.e. the Trinity) with ideas in the Old Testament (i.e. the First Commandment).

 

[sojourner]

So... when Jesus was in human form, he wasn't God?

He was both. fully both. The fully human part was not to be worshiped. The fully Divine part is to be worshiped as one person of the Triune God.

if the three Persons of God are all different entities, how can they be one God?

The three Persons are one entity -- God.

 

[Popeyesays]

He was both. fully both. The fully human part was not to be worshiped. The fully Divine part is to be worshiped as one person of the Triune God.

The three Persons are one entity -- God.

If one believes that the Cuncil of Nicaea was based upon anything other than clashing personalities, perhaps. But it is obvious that the Council was not much more than a purging of unpopular bishops, and the made up doctrine of the Trinity was just another knife used to excise the "unrighteous".

Regards,
Scott

 

[Francine]

But it is obvious that the Council was not much more than a purging of unpopular bishops, and the made up doctrine of the Trinity was just another knife used to excise the "unrighteous".

The Council was in 325 AD. However, in 216 AD Turtullian wrote in Against Praxeas:

"And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the three are the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in being, but in form; not in power, but in kind; of one being, however, and one condition and one power, because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" .

So you err when you say the Trinity was invented at Nicaea.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

100% man and 100% God
There is no proof of this concept in the four gospels. It is speculation at best.

Yeshua gave up his power before coming here
There is not proof of this theory in the four gospels. The gospels show he did have power and it shows his power was given to him by his god.

The four gospels reveal Yeshua to be God
This "proof" is not in any of the four gospels. Yeshua says otherwise.

His followers believed he was God
This is incorrect. NONE of them thought him to be God. They called him son of God or son of the living God. (emphasis on the "of" or "of the").

 

[Popeyesays]

The Council was in 325 AD. However, in 216 AD Turtullian wrote in Against Praxeas:

"And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the three are the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in being, but in form; not in power, but in kind; of one being, however, and one condition and one power, because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" .

So you err when you say the Trinity was invented at Nicaea.

As official doctrine it was invented at Nicaea.

Tertullian's view was hotly disputed by Athanasius, Arius and others.

Regards,
Scott

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

His followers believed he was God
This is incorrect. NONE of them thought him to be God. They called him son of God or son of the living God. (emphasis on the "of" or "of the").

John 20:28 is borderline: Thomas' "My Lord and my God" could be taken to be directed to Jesus (i.e. "Jesus, you are my Lord and my God"). However, it could also be taken to just be an exclamation (like "oh my goodness") or an expression of something else (e.g. "behold the power of God").

 

[Francine]

As official doctrine it was invented at Nicaea.

Official doctrine is never "invented" it is defined. Did the Council of Trent "invent" the book of 2 Maccabees in the 1500s?

 

[Popeyesays]

Official doctrine is never "invented" it is defined. Did the Council of Trent "invent" the book of 2 Maccabees in the 1500s?

To anyone who knows the history of the Council of Nicaea, etc. to say that doctrine is not invented is only fooling themselves.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Quiddity]

To anyone who knows the history of the Council of Nicaea, etc. to say that doctrine is not invented is only fooling themselves.

Regards,
Scott

Are you being fecetious? Cause I can't tell......

The idea that the Trinity was invented at Nicea is so dubious that it's hard to take serious.