Is Trinity in the Bible?

[Quiddity]

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

Alright...

 

[sojourner]

So the other two persons are NOT God? Is that so hard to undersand?

Regards,
Scott

Actually...they are. And there is scriptural support for it, as well as support handed down within the Tradition. God is equally expressed in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each person coequal with the others, forming a Trinity of one God.

Problem is, we tend to overanalyze everything. It gets us in trouble when dealing with mysteries of the Faith.

 

[McBell]

In what way can it be defined as "not monotheism?" The doctrine asserts that there is one God, present in three Persons. Not more than one god, or a plethora of gods, or a gaggle of gods, or a pantheon of gods. There is one God. What's so difficult to understand?

So then you claim that Jesus is not God.
That the Holy Spirit is also NOT God.
But then you claim that they are God.

I say it is henotheism.
And every time someone tries to explain the Trinity, all they do is reinforce that it is, in fact, henotheism.

 

[Popeyesays]

Actually...they are. And there is scriptural support for it, as well as support handed down within the Tradition. God is equally expressed in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each person coequal with the others, forming a Trinity of one God.

Problem is, we tend to overanalyze everything. It gets us in trouble when dealing with mysteries of the Faith.

But it is no mystery to Judaism, Islam or Baha`i belief. Even Hinduism does not accept the Christian notion and reserves worship for the Godhead.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Francine]

But it is no mystery to Judaism, Islam or Baha`i belief. Even Hinduism does not accept the Christian notion and reserves worship for the Godhead.

Christians reserve worship for the Godhead alone as well, but there's a threeness about it.

 

[Popeyesays]

Christians reserve worship for the Godhead alone as well, but there's a threeness about it.

And if i do not believe that God can be multiplied or dived?

Regards,
Scott

 

[Francine]

And if i do not believe that God can be multiplied or dived?

1 times 1 times 1 equals 1

 

[Popeyesays]

1 times 1 times 1 equals 1

Exactly! It does not equal three. Are we going to continue these closing quips til they lose all relevance?

Regards.
Scott

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Mat 28:19!

I see. I honestly thought you were going to find me a definitive quote. Maybe I should say "Genuine Quote". So far I think you might be the ONLY person here who has brought that quote.

Here's your problem. We have Eusebius Pamphilus quoting Matthew 28:19 in his writings without any trinitarian formula.

Eusebius Pamphilus quoted it as;

“Mt. 28:18: And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Mt. 28:19: Go ye, and make disciples of all nations in my name:
Mt. 28:20: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.”

Quotation found in his “Oration in praise of the Emperor Constantine,” Chapter XVI, (335 A.D.), in “The Church History of Eusebius”, Book III, Chapter V (324 A.D.). in his Demonstratio Evangelica Book III, Chapter 6 (318 A.D.), in his Theophania

:sarcastic

In reference to the Trinity, Jesus is God having come down from Heaven into a human body. The Father is sending Himself down to be Jesus. Jesus has no separate will from the Father other than the will of the flesh which He has no problem overcoming.

Then it is your understanding of that verse that is skewed. This is not how Yeshua presents himself to his followers while describing his nature in heaven. He most certaily said his will was separate from his god's will in John 6:38. We know that to be true because later he has this to say....


John 8:28
............I do nothing of myself; but as my Father (hath taught me), I speak these things.

How can an omniscient, before coming to earth, bet taught?

John 8:38
............I speak that which I have seen (with) my Father:

Whatever he saw, he saw it before coming here, while he was with his god. How can God be shown anything if he is omniscient?

John 17:4
I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work which you gave me to do.


Intresting enough is that prior to that verse (Matthew 28:19) Yeshua says (in 28:18) his power was given to him in heaven and in earth. In order to be given there must be a giver. If Yeshua is (God the almighty - God the omnipotent) then how can he be given power?

Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth

How can an omnipotent be given power?

Now if he is God then we certainly don't see ANY reason why he would make the following prayer to his god.....:

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.

Yeshua even tells us he speaks for his god that sent him and who bestowed the holy spirit upon him.

John 3:34
For he (Yeshua) whom God has sent utters the words of God, for it is not by measure that he (GOD) gives the Spirit;


I also find it interesting that your beloved Paul shows us that Yeshua has a god (2 Corinthians 1:3) as confirmed by Yeshua in John 20:17.

 

[sojourner]

So then you claim that Jesus is not God.
That the Holy Spirit is also NOT God.
But then you claim that they are God.

I say it is henotheism.
And every time someone tries to explain the Trinity, all they do is reinforce that it is, in fact, henotheism.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that Jesus is not God. Nor did I say that the Holy spirit is not God. What I said was that there are three persons in one God.

I think where the confusion lies is in the way God is conceptualized. some folks think of God only as the Father -- the guy in the white robe and the long beard who created the Garden of Eden. while that's true, God can also equally be thought of as Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem. God can also equally be thought of as the Holy spirit, who descended as tongues of fire and rested on the disciples' heads at Pentecost.
This happens because we are so used to calling the Father "God," while we're not used to calling the other two Persons "God."

The Father is not the son. The son is not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not the Father. But these three Persons are God.
It's not henotheism, because there aren't a multiplicity of gods -- there is only one God.

 

[Popeyesays]

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that Jesus is not God. Nor did I say that the Holy spirit is not God. What I said was that there are three persons in one God.

I think where the confusion lies is in the way God is conceptualized. some folks think of God only as the Father -- the guy in the white robe and the long beard who created the Garden of Eden. while that's true, God can also equally be thought of as Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem. God can also equally be thought of as the Holy spirit, who descended as tongues of fire and rested on the disciples' heads at Pentecost.
This happens because we are so used to calling the Father "God," while we're not used to calling the other two Persons "God."

The Father is not the son. The son is not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not the Father. But these three Persons are God.
It's not henotheism, because there aren't a multiplicity of gods -- there is only one God.

Sorry, that is one of the most blatant circular arguments I have ever seen.

Regards,
Scott

 

[sojourner]

But it is no mystery to Judaism, Islam or Baha`i belief. Even Hinduism does not accept the Christian notion and reserves worship for the Godhead.

Regards,
Scott

But then...Jews, Muslims, Baha'i and Hindus aren't Christians, are they? Why should they enter into the mystery of someone they don't espouse as God made flesh?

Unless your post is a cop-out: "This doesn't make sense to us, so we're just going to ignore it and pretend that it's not real."

 

[sojourner]

Exactly! It does not equal three. Are we going to continue these closing quips til they lose all relevance?

Regards.
Scott

Have you ever heard of "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts?"

 

[sojourner]

Sorry, that is one of the most blatant circular arguments I have ever seen.

Regards,
Scott

I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't see it as a circular argument. I see it as mystery.

 

[Popeyesays]

I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't see it as a circular argument. I see it as mystery.

But one cannot exp-lain mysteries or they are not mysteries.

I know for certain that God is One, everything from the Schma to Baha`u'llah tells me--Christ, too.

I also know for certain that the Nature of God is beyond my understanding, or anyone else's. He, after all is the Greatest Mystery, the Creator, and I am not.

Therefore if I have a concrete picture of what God is like beyond the Essence of His Oneness, I can be sure I am wrong.

Technically speaking when the premise is the same as the conclusion, that defines a circular argument. Yours is a circular argument.

Regards,
Scott

 

[alamxudos]

From what I have read here recently it seems that the definition of trinity is being used to validate the authentic proof that Elohim translates into Trinity. Of which it certainly does not. Genesis 1:26 is not the Trinity it is Elohim. As a matter of fact El and Elohim are the most frequently used names for God in Genesis.

Question: What does Trinity translate to?
Answer : Nothing its already an English word. Certainly nothing in the Hebrew Concordance. This word is of the very people who tried to kill Jesus.....Rome.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

From what I have read here recently it seems that the definition of trinity is being used to validate the authentic proof that Elohim translates into Trinity. Of which it certainly does not. Genesis 1:26 is not the Trinity it is Elohim. As a matter of fact El and Elohim are the most frequently used names for God in Genesis.

Question: What does Trinity translate to?
Answer : Nothing its already an English word. Certainly nothing in the Hebrew Concordance. This word is of the very people who tried to kill Jesus.....Rome.

Yep......but a better example is the next verse that shows God is one...

Genesis 1:27
So Elohim created man in his own image, in the image of Elohim created he him; male and female created he them.

 

[sojourner]

But one cannot exp-lain mysteries or they are not mysteries.

I know for certain that God is One, everything from the Schma to Baha`u'llah tells me--Christ, too.

I also know for certain that the Nature of God is beyond my understanding, or anyone else's. He, after all is the Greatest Mystery, the Creator, and I am not.

Therefore if I have a concrete picture of what God is like beyond the Essence of His Oneness, I can be sure I am wrong.

Technically speaking when the premise is the same as the conclusion, that defines a circular argument. Yours is a circular argument.

Regards,
Scott

This is exactly why the explanation "sounds like" a circular argument. We can't really explain the mystery, we can only proclaim it. God is One. And in that Oneness are three Persons.

 

[sojourner]

From what I have read here recently it seems that the definition of trinity is being used to validate the authentic proof that Elohim translates into Trinity. Of which it certainly does not. Genesis 1:26 is not the Trinity it is Elohim. As a matter of fact El and Elohim are the most frequently used names for God in Genesis.

Question: What does Trinity translate to?
Answer : Nothing its already an English word. Certainly nothing in the Hebrew Concordance. This word is of the very people who tried to kill Jesus.....Rome.

Proper Trinitarian thought does not seek to translate "Elohim" of Genesis into the Trinity. We understand that the Trinity is different from the Elohim of Gen.

 

[Popeyesays]

This is exactly why the explanation "sounds like" a circular argument. We can't really explain the mystery, we can only proclaim it. God is One. And in that Oneness are three Persons.

If it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, chances are; it is a duck.

Regards,
Scott