THE Trinity can Now be discussed.

[Brakelite]

I don't classify myself as a trinitarian in the strict sense of the concept as fleshed out in the various creeds, and the countless versions since. However, I do believe there are 3 persons in the Godhead, Father, Son, and Spirit. How those 3 persons are united is not explained in scripture. That each one of the 3 can be justifiably addressed as God, I have no issue with. The question I ask myself, is why? On what basis do we call Jesus God? 2 things. First, the declaration of the Father Himself, on 2 separate occasions, that Jesus as A. His Son, and B. the Father addressed His Son as God. Matt.3:17, and Hebrews 1:8. For me, the strongest evidence, and the one most easily accepted by everyone, is the fact that Jesus is God's Son. For the Son not to be God, means God begat another species, something totally contradictory to the principle laid down in Genesis, like begets like.
Why can I not accept the creeds? First because they are too stringent , as if the creators of them were infallible, and there was no further truth to be found or understood. And second, because I have issues with the accepted theory among Christians that the union between the members of the trinity is indivisible. If that were the case, then Jesus never died, the sacrifice was a farce, and the atonement based on a false premise.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I'm sorry but nothing you quote even references the concept of a triune God, let alone proves it. See the trinity verse I wrote below in red.

it may not fit YOUR interpretation.

But it proves the following

1. Jesus was the God of Israel
2. Jesus was sent by the father
3. Jesus was also sent by the spirit

call it what you will. That to me is a triune God

 

[Wrangler]

I wrote a 7-page piece chock full of not only Scripture but analysis of the topic, in addition to the ABC and 123's on this. To start off slow, please answer these 2 questions.

1. How do you reconcile the trinity, in general, and the claim that Jesus is God, in particular, with Jesus’ own explicit statements that he has a God (John 20:17, Revelation 3:12), and Jesus’ God is the only true God (John 17:3)?

2. What is Biblically more important:
A. 1 Timothy 1:17 (NLT) All honor and glory to God forever and ever! He (singular) is the eternal King, the unseen one (singular) who never dies; he (singular) alone (singular) is God. Amen. (emphasis added)
B. Divide glory, even among God’s servants (explicitly stated to include Jesus @ Acts 3:13)?

@Ritajanice, did you answer these 2 questions?

 

[St. SteVen]

If he was in the beginning with God when did he "become " the Logos?

In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. (John 1:1)

This tells us three things about the Logos.
1) The Logos was from the beginning.
2) The Logos was with God.
3) The Logos was God.

Our knee-jerk thought is to jump to the meaning that Christ was the Logos. (true by extension)
But what was the Logos BEFORE the Logos became flesh?

Strong's Greek 3056 3056. logos Strong's Concordance logos: a word (as embodying an idea)

I want to focus on this "as embodying an idea" definition.
The Logos as embodying an idea, the logic, the reason, the meaning.

So, returning to the topic title question: Is the Logos meaningful, or meaningless?
Especially as it relates to all of humankind.

[

 

[Wrangler]

it may not fit YOUR interpretation.

But it proves the following

1. Jesus was the God of Israel
2. Jesus was sent by the father
3. Jesus was also sent by the spirit

call it what you will. That to me is a triune God

It's not an interpretation. The verse you cite does not even mention Jesus.

There is only one God, the Father (1 for 8:6), whose spirit is holy. The attribute of holiness is not a different person. The very fact that you admit that Jesus was sent proves he is NOT God. God does the sending; he is not sent.

 

[Ritajanice]

@Ritajanice, did you answer these 2 questions?

Brother, it’s far to complicated a question for me to even understand, let alone answer, sorry for the delay in answering.

You have obviously studied the triune in depth, and why you don’t agree with the trinity...I have not I’m afraid...I’m not even getting any heart/spirit knowledge of it from the Holy Spirit either, some things God does not give us heart knowledge of, like the trinity ...further up I just gave my simple thoughts on the trinity...,it’s far to big for me to comprehend that Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 in one...imo....@Wrangler .

 

[Wrangler]

Our knee-jerk thought is to jump to the meaning that Christ was the Logos. (true by extension)

It's not true by extension. Reaching that conclusion can only be made by reading into the text what is not there.

The text reads, "the word was god." It does not read that Jesus is the word. The reason this must be read into the text is because there is no support for the trinity in Scripture. Once you allow reading into the text, you can "support" any doctrine.

The text goes on to say the word was WITH God. This presents a logic problem for trinitarians. How can something BE something and WITH that same thing. Let's use tennis ball. The tennis ball is with me AND the tennis ball IS me. How does this make sense? There is only one logical way.

But because this singular logical way does not support the trinity, trinitarians invent a non-logical way to make sense of this apparent duality. Not only is this not logical, it actually contradicts other text.

What I find fascinating about trinitarianism is the ignoring of text that does not support their doctrine. To listen to a trinitarian, the Bible is exclusively ambiguous on the point, forcing us to read into the text. Neither of these assertions are true. Imagine the whereabouts of your sister is ambiguous in some texts. Why would you read into these ambiguous texts an inherently contradictory explanation rather than except the explicit text of your sister's whereabouts?

 

[St. SteVen]

Jesus was sent proves he is NOT God. God does the sending; he is not sent.

What do you make of this?

Matthew 1:23 NIV
“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”[a] (which means “God with us”).

Isaiah 7:14 NIV
Therefore the Lord himself will give you[a] a sign: The virgin[b] will conceive and give birth to a son, and[c] will call him Immanuel.[d]

[

 

[Behold]

Reader,


Their are many way to understand the "Trinity"..>>Here is maybe the easiest way to understand it..


GENESIS : "Let US... make Man....In OUR Image"...

So, do the math.......= just count to "2".

So, we see that there is "OUR... and US">... .. and that is God and Jesus pre-incarnate... and that is 2.

Now, who is Left?

A.) The Holy Spirit.


So, that is "US", and The Holy Spirit".

That is 3.............3 : Who are ONE.

= TRINITY

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Our knee-jerk thought is to jump to the meaning that Christ was the Logos. (true by extension)

It's not true by extension. Reaching that conclusion can only be made by reading into the text what is not there.

The text reads, "the word was god." It does not read that Jesus is the word. The reason this must be read into the text is because there is no support for the trinity in Scripture. Once you allow reading into the text, you can "support" any doctrine.

Everyone is familiar with verse 14.
The Logos was God. (John 1:1) The Logos became flesh. (John 1:14)
Jesus is the Logos of God. Therefore Jesus is God. Not rocket science.

John 1:14 NIV
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son,
who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

The text goes on to say the word was WITH God. This presents a logic problem for trinitarians. How can something BE something and WITH that same thing. Let's use tennis ball. The tennis ball is with me AND the tennis ball IS me. How does this make sense? There is only one logical way.

But because this singular logical way does not support the trinity, trinitarians invent a non-logical way to make sense of this apparent duality. Not only is this not logical, it actually contradicts other text.

Why would we try to apply human logic to the nature of God. That seems laughable.

The people Jesus was speaking to understood what he meant
when he said he was the I am and that he was before Abraham.
They picked up stones to stone him for blasphemy.

John 8:56-59 NIV
Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself,
slipping away from the temple grounds.

[

 

[Behold]

The text reads, "the word was god." It does not read that Jesus is the word.

Guess again....

John 1:14

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

New Living Translation
So the Word became HUMAN and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son.

English Standard Version
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Berean Standard Bible
The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Berean Literal Bible
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. And we beheld His glory, a glory as of an only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

King James Bible
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

New King James Version
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

New American Standard Bible
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

NASB 1995
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

[Wrangler]

You have obviously studied the triune in depth, and why you don’t agree with the trinity.

Thank you. I have studied it in depth. The more I studied it, the more absurd trinitarianism is revealed to be. That's the nature of IDOLATRY, isn't it?

More recently, I delved into the ubiquitous IDOLATRY in Christendom. (As a child, I thought idolatry was limited to statues. As I understood the 2nd Commandment better, I realize it is any manmade thing, including doctrine.) Next to the trinity, the biggest doctrinal IDOL in Christendom is the notion of burning in hell forever (ECT, eternal conscious torment). Looking at it from the outside, it is amazing how passionately people believe what the Bible does not teach.

For instance, the Bible teaches that Adam was created on the 6th day. It does not specify when Eve was created. We are able to handle that lack of specificity without inventing an arbitrary doctrine. Sadly, the above 2 IDOLS are worse because to embrace it, one must reject Scripture. Why doctrinally invest in the idea that Adam was created on some other day in light of the Scripture that states it was the 6th day? Straight up, the Bible says there is one God, not a 3-in-1 God.

it’s far to big for me to comprehend that Father, Son, Holy Spirit are 3 in one

It's not big at all but very small and simple. It's as simple as "square circles" or any other inherently contradictory construct. It is nonsense.

Brother, it’s far to complicated a question for me

I asked 2 questions. I agree the first is challenging but the second is a softball question. Let me suggest that your attempt to answer these questions will go further to help you understand the matter more than anything else anyone else writes.

 

[Behold]

Thank you. I have studied it in depth.

And yet, you learned nothing about it.

You could have not wasted all that time...just to end up WRONG....... by simply going to John 1:10, that says that Jesus made the WORLD., and this is confirmed by Colossians 1:16.

This is "my first week in bible class", when you are 10 yrs old, and you STILL have not even gotten that far regarding this topic, @Wrangler

I blame your TEACHERS.. .and that would be your denomination.......as you are just their victim.... regarding your lack of understanding.

 

[Wrangler]

What do you make of this?

Matthew 1:23 NIV
“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”[a] (which means “God with us”).

Isaiah 7:14 NIV
Therefore the Lord himself will give you[a] a sign: The virgin[b] will conceive and give birth to a son, and[c] will call him Immanuel.[d]

[

Not much. Who will give the sign? And do you realize that being given a name does not mean the person is literally that name, right? For instance, Peter is not literally a rock.

The expression "God with us" is common in Scripture. Never does it literally mean it is so.

 

[Wrangler]

Why would we try to apply human logic to the nature of God.

There is no such thing as human logic. There is only logic, which is a tool, the art of the non-contradictory identification of truth.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." — Galileo Galilei

 

[Wrangler]

Guess again....

Not a guess at all. But that's all you got, guesses. That the word became human does not make the human god for it is the word that is god.

I realize the passion for the trinity is the man-is-god thesis. However, your best guess does not reach the trinity. At best it invents 2 Gods, which contradicts Scripture, which states there is one God - and his name aint Jesus.

 

[Wrangler]

And yet, you learned nothing about it.

I learned this.

Straight up, the Bible says there is one God, not a 3-in-1 God.

 

[Behold]

I realize the passion for the trinity is the man-is-god thesis.

Think..

The NT taught God as 3, long before the Catholics tried to figure it out.
So, the idea that Jesus is the Word, who "was God" in John 1:1, who is God manifested in the Flesh in 1 Tim 3:16... is "who made the world".... in John 1:10.....is BIBLE........Is NT clarified.

So, when people like you, get caught up in "the trinity argument" then THAT is man-made., whereas the fact of God as "Trinity", is a NT reality.

 

[Ritajanice]

Not a guess at all. But that's all you got, guesses. That the word became human does not make the human god for it is the word that is god.

I realize the passion for the trinity is the man-is-god thesis. However, your best guess does not reach the trinity. At best it invents 2 Gods, which contradicts Scripture, which states there is one God - and his name aint Jesus.

Who was Jesus then ?

Do you believe in Jesus?