Is Trinity in the Bible?

[sojourner]

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

Regards,
Scott

My father can walk and quack like a duck. My father is not a duck.

 

[Popeyesays]

My father can walk and quack like a duck. My father is not a duck.

Probably not, but the statement was that "chances are" it's a duck--it bears further examination.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Quiddity]

Probably not, but the statement was that "chances are" it's a duck--it bears further examination.

Regards,
Scott

How do you further examine a mystery?

 

[alamxudos]

All of the Christians that I have talked to have said that the plurality of God is always the Trinity in one form or another in reference to the Bible. But it is not it is Elohim. And all of the We, and Our pronouns used for God are Elohim so where is the Trinity? Literally not an interpretation. In literal translation if not direct. Truth is you know and I know its not there.

 

[Popeyesays]

How do you further examine a mystery?

Not the mystery, the question as to whether your father is or is not a duck.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Francine]

My father can walk and quack like a duck. My father is not a duck.

"If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck -- shoot it!" -- Vice President Richard B. Cheney

 

[sojourner]

"If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck -- shoot it!" -- Vice President Richard B. Cheney

Cheney is overrated and not cogent to anything that has to do with reality.

 

[sojourner]

All of the Christians that I have talked to have said that the plurality of God is always the Trinity in one form or another in reference to the Bible. But it is not it is Elohim. And all of the We, and Our pronouns used for God are Elohim so where is the Trinity? Literally not an interpretation. In literal translation if not direct. Truth is you know and I know its not there.

Either you haven't talked to a great number of Christians, or you're misunderstanding what they're saying. No orthodox Christian believes in a plurality of God. God is One. The Trinity is One, as well.

Here we have a real good example of how the Jews, in the Shema, moved beyond the henotheism of their forebears who wrote Genesis, into monotheism. It is that monotheism that informs Christian theology, not the henotheism exemplified in Genesis.

 

[sojourner]

Probably not, but the statement was that "chances are" it's a duck--it bears further examination.

Regards,
Scott

There is not only very little chance that my father is a duck, there is no chance he is a duck. Roll the dice and take your chance. Pull the handle on the slot. You will lose, because the fact of "human being" will show up without fail, every single time. The statement is a fallacy. Especially in the case of the argument at hand.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There is not only very little chance that my father is a duck, there is no chance he is a duck. Roll the dice and take your chance. Pull the handle on the slot. You will lose, because the fact of "human being" will show up without fail, every single time. The statement is a fallacy. Especially in the case of the argument at hand.

Your example isn't quite analogous to the larger question. You're starting with the a priori conclusion that your father is not a duck... which I'm certain you have very strong support for, and which I think is a completely reasonable one to make. However, if you were to examine something for which you had no knowledge, how it looks and behaves is a vital part of determining what its is. Outward signs can give us clues to something's inner nature: "knowing a tree by its fruits", if you like.

And this holds true even in the case of your father: you know that he's not a duck by the way he's appeared and acted in the whole time you've known him. You know that he's not a duck because you've seen him "walk and talk" as a human being, right? If you're not using appearance and behaviour as the basis for conclusions about the world, what exactly are you using?

Also, I'm fairly certain that no matter how your father walks and quacks, he wouldn't ever appear to be three ducks all at once.

 

[alamxudos]

EL is the father Elohim is plural. Jesus prayed to EL. "Eli, Eli lamachabethany. "My God, my God"...you know the rest. There is no way to express Trinity without plurality. The only plurality of God expressed in the Bible is Elohim. You cant get around the facts. Customs do not alter the nature of truth. Just because you dont believe in th plurality of God doesnt mean its not right there all throughout the Bible. Belief is not fact. And yes Ive talked to many Christians and they all will say gen. 1:26 and all other occasions when pronouns like us, our, and we are used for God and they will say it was God talking to Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Denoting to the Trinity. But the truth is the literal translation is Elohim. My point is since weve been dancing around it. Trinity is not in the Bible.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Either you haven't talked to a great number of Christians, or you're misunderstanding what they're saying. No orthodox Christian believes in a plurality of God. God is One. The Trinity is One, as well.

Here we have a real good example of how the Jews, in the Shema, moved beyond the henotheism of their forebears who wrote Genesis, into monotheism. It is that monotheism that informs Christian theology, not the henotheism exemplified in Genesis.

How did Christians move beyond henotheism to monotheism when in the NT you still have people referring to others as gods?

1 Corinthians 8:5
For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth -- as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords" --

2 Corinthians 4:4 (in part)
In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers..........

:sarcastic

 

[sojourner]

Your example isn't quite analogous to the larger question. You're starting with the a priori conclusion that your father is not a duck... which I'm certain you have very strong support for, and which I think is a completely reasonable one to make. However, if you were to examine something for which you had no knowledge, how it looks and behaves is a vital part of determining what its is. Outward signs can give us clues to something's inner nature: "knowing a tree by its fruits", if you like.

And this holds true even in the case of your father: you know that he's not a duck by the way he's appeared and acted in the whole time you've known him. You know that he's not a duck because you've seen him "walk and talk" as a human being, right? If you're not using appearance and behaviour as the basis for conclusions about the world, what exactly are you using?

Also, I'm fairly certain that no matter how your father walks and quacks, he wouldn't ever appear to be three ducks all at once.

Is it your contention that the Bible definitively does not portray God"s acts and voices as those of a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit?
The Bible does portray those acts and voices in these ways. Therefore, even though God may act in the way of a Father at times, as a Son at times, as Holy Spirit at times, we have perceived that God (in the words of Shema) is One.

 

[sojourner]

EL is the father Elohim is plural. Jesus prayed to EL. "Eli, Eli lamachabethany. "My God, my God"...you know the rest. There is no way to express Trinity without plurality. The only plurality of God expressed in the Bible is Elohim. You cant get around the facts. Customs do not alter the nature of truth. Just because you dont believe in th plurality of God doesnt mean its not right there all throughout the Bible. Belief is not fact. And yes Ive talked to many Christians and they all will say gen. 1:26 and all other occasions when pronouns like us, our, and we are used for God and they will say it was God talking to Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Denoting to the Trinity. But the truth is the literal translation is Elohim. My point is since weve been dancing around it. Trinity is not in the Bible.

The plurality of God, as portrayed in Genesis, is not Trinitarian in nature, however, since the writers had no concept of Jesus. We really don't know why God is expressed as plural. Our best guess is that it is in reference to "the heavenly court," which would have been a common concept at that time. But by the time Jesus would have uttered that phrase, the religion of the Jews had changed drastically from that of the Patriarchs. No longer was the religion henotheistic, it was monotheistic.

Your argument is not cogent here.

 

[sojourner]

How did Christians move beyond henotheism to monotheism when in the NT you still have people referring to others as gods?

1 Corinthians 8:5
For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth -- as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords" --

2 Corinthians 4:4 (in part)
In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers..........

:sarcastic

They adopted the monotheism of their mother Judaism, as expressed in the Shema: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord, our Lord is One."
What Paul refers to in his letters to Corinth, is the gods of the Gentiles -- not the God of Israel.

 

[alamxudos]

Sojourner Judaism has always been monotheistic. This is what links Abraham to the three great religions. He was the first to call on the one True name of God. The religion of Abrahams fathers is not Judaism. This is why El told him to come out from them. And we dont have to guess as to why it is plural if we pull our conclusions from the literal translations. Elohim means gods or these beings. Which certainly does not mean the majesty of God, or "the heavenly court." This is far from factual. Theres no need to guess about something that has a definition that is right and exact. Scholars have habitually lied about the true meaning of the plurality. And Im just saying about the phrase, Jesus knew Gods name to be EL, the most high. Who is singular to the Elohim. Tri. is not mono it is poly. There is just no denying it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is it your contention that the Bible definitively does not portray God"s acts and voices as those of a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit?

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.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

They adopted the monotheism of their mother Judaism, as expressed in the Shema: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord, our Lord is One."
What Paul refers to in his letters to Corinth, is the gods of the Gentiles -- not the God of Israel.

With the exception of 2 Coritnthians 4:4. He acknowledged there is a god of this world that has blinded the mind of the believers. Most scholars, including christian scholars, believe this verse to be describing satan but I can clearly see where 1Corinthians doesn't fit the bill..

 

[Dirty Penguin]

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.

Better yet...if we are to consider three to be one then why not just consider the one. Why must a person give acknowledgement to three if God is one? It would be pointless.

The best way to see how Yeshua described himself seperate from God is to look and find the verses that gives information to his character (before) he was sent. I have done that in a few other posts. Additionally how did his followers perceive him? Martha did not believe he was God. His follwers, when asked by Yeshua who do that believe he is, they believed he was the son of their gods'. They didn't take him to be God.

His own mother didn't even think him to be God. After he was born, according to the law, she had to go through a certain period of purification. Now she just supposedly gave birth to God so what was so impure?......but that's not even the kicker....the scripture says after his mother's purification "they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the LORD".....

But if he is God in the flesh who were they supposed to be presenting him to???? So as we can see he was NOT God. His own family and even his followers didn't think him to be....

 

[sojourner]

Sojourner Judaism has always been monotheistic. This is what links Abraham to the three great religions. He was the first to call on the one True name of God. The religion of Abrahams fathers is not Judaism. This is why El told him to come out from them. And we dont have to guess as to why it is plural if we pull our conclusions from the literal translations. Elohim means gods or these beings. Which certainly does not mean the majesty of God, or "the heavenly court." This is far from factual. Theres no need to guess about something that has a definition that is right and exact. Scholars have habitually lied about the true meaning of the plurality. And Im just saying about the phrase, Jesus knew Gods name to be EL, the most high. Who is singular to the Elohim. Tri. is not mono it is poly. There is just no denying it.

:cover: Oh, for Pete's sake!