A case for the Trinity

[Mysteryman]

Ah heck, read the whole chapter of Hebrews 3. And all those other verses I gave you in the book of Hebrews.

Unless you are prepared to make your own case, and not just quote verses, we have nothing further to discuss.

And the fact that you refuse to even engage detailed Biblical arguments that challenge your position strongly suggests that those arguments have you cornered.

Drew

Apparently these verses are something you do not want to deal with. They refute your claims, and I think that is why you are avoiding them.

Trust me -- I understand ;)

 

[Drew]

Question from Drew : "Does the Old Testament not teach that the temple is place where the presence of God abides?"

Answer from MM :

I Kings 8:27

This text, of course, does not deny what is so clearly taught at several point in the Old Testament - that God's presence is indeed found in the temple.

Here is the text in the NASB

But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain You, how much less this house which I have built!

This is not a denial that God's presence is in the temple, it is a denial that his presence is only in the temple. It is a statement that God's is so great as not to be limited to the temple. But this is certainly not a denial of what is relevant to the issue at hand - that God indeed "fills" the temple, as this text from Isaiah clearly demonstrates:

In the year of King Uzziah's death I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple.

The important point is this: (1) The temple is the place (on earth) where God's presence is manifested. This is all over the place in the Old Testament - think of Moses encountering God in the "tent of meeting" (the pre-decessor to the temple) and getting his face almost burnt off. (2) Jesus claims to be the new temple.

The uncomfortable conclusion (for some here, anyway): Jesus is a "vessel" in which the very presence of God dwells.

 

[Drew]

So Drew,
What is your question for me with this post?

Stop playing games, shad. You know darn well that you need to engage this argument.

 

[Drew]

Ah heck, read the whole chapter of Hebrews 3. And all those other verses I gave you in the book of Hebrews.

Unless you are prepared to make your own case, and not just quote verses, we have nothing further to discuss.

And the fact that you refuse to even engage detailed Biblical arguments that challenge your position strongly suggests that those arguments have you cornered.

Drew

Apparently these verses are something you do not want to deal with. They refute your claims, and I think that is why you are avoiding them.

Trust me -- I understand ;)

OK let me have a try at the "MysteryMan" style of debate:

You want to know my reason for believing in the trinity?

Luke 19.

Wow, that sure was easy......

You need to make actual arguments, not just post verses.

 

[shad]

So Drew,
What is your question for me with this post?

Stop playing games, shad. You know darn well that you need to engage this argument.

Calm down Drew, you are losing your gentle spirit.

I only want to make sure your question since it is so darn long post.

 

[Sinthesis]

Take your time Drew, read over those verses I gave you in the book of Hebrews, while I await your reply.

I am not going to play this game with you.

Presenting verse references is not making a case. If you want to make an actual argument about those verses, please do so. Then I will respond.

Why are you not responding to my arguments? I suggest that the reason is this: you can find no error in them.

But please, prove me wrong - engage my arguments and explain to me and other posters how I have erred in arguing that Jesus is the embodiment of Israel's God, the new temple where the very presence of God dwells.

Did Jesus not say that he was the cornerstone of the new temple?

Does the Old Testament not teach that the temple is place where the presence of God abides?

Drew

I rest my case. I try an engage with you and you refuse. Hebrews 3:1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 and especially verses 8 and 10 and 11.

Why would you direct us to those particular verses in Hebrews 3? They, in no uncertain terms, prove Jesus is God. :rolling If you disagree, then make your case, but the clear meaning is against you.
:amen

 

[Mysteryman]

Question from Drew : "Does the Old Testament not teach that the temple is place where the presence of God abides?"

Answer from MM :

I Kings 8:27

This text, of course, does not deny what is so clearly taught at several point in the Old Testament - that God's presence is indeed found in the temple.

Here is the text in the NASB

But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain You, how much less this house which I have built!

This is not a denial that God's presence is in the temple, it is a denial that his presence is only in the temple. It is a statement that God's is so great as not to be limited to the temple. But this is certainly not a denial of what is relevant to the issue at hand - that God indeed "fills" the temple, as this text from Isaiah clearly demonstrates:

In the year of King Uzziah's death I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple.

The important point is this: (1) The temple is the place (on earth) where God's presence is manifested. This is all over the place in the Old Testament - think of Moses encountering God in the "tent of meeting" (the pre-decessor to the temple) and getting his face almost burnt off. (2) Jesus claims to be the new temple.

The uncomfortable conclusion (for some here, anyway): Jesus is a "vessel" in which the very presence of God dwells.

Drew

God does not dwell in temples made with hands. God talked to the High Priest and to the Prophets within the OT. Now God dwells in us , and "we" are the temple of God ! < I Corinth. 3:16 - 23 - "And ye are Christ's ; and Christ is God's.

For the head of the woman is the man, and the head of the man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God - I Corinth. 11:3

 

[Mysteryman]

Take your time Drew, read over those verses I gave you in the book of Hebrews, while I await your reply.

I am not going to play this game with you.

Presenting verse references is not making a case. If you want to make an actual argument about those verses, please do so. Then I will respond.

Why are you not responding to my arguments? I suggest that the reason is this: you can find no error in them.

But please, prove me wrong - engage my arguments and explain to me and other posters how I have erred in arguing that Jesus is the embodiment of Israel's God, the new temple where the very presence of God dwells.

Did Jesus not say that he was the cornerstone of the new temple?

Does the Old Testament not teach that the temple is place where the presence of God abides?[/quote]


Drew

I rest my case. I try an engage with you and you refuse. Hebrews 3:1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 and especially verses 8 and 10 and 11.[/quote]
Why would you direct us to those particular verses in Hebrews 3? They, in no uncertain terms, prove Jesus is God. :rolling If you disagree, then make your case, but the clear meaning is against you.
:amen[/quote]

-------------------------------------------
Hi

You are correct again, amazing ! These verses prove that Jesus is the Son of God, and not God. Now all you need to do, is not harden your hearts, and enter into his rest. Jesus Christ is also the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, in Christ Jesus (The Revealed Mystery - The Last Adam)

 

[Mysteryman]

Ah heck, read the whole chapter of Hebrews 3. And all those other verses I gave you in the book of Hebrews.

Unless you are prepared to make your own case, and not just quote verses, we have nothing further to discuss.

And the fact that you refuse to even engage detailed Biblical arguments that challenge your position strongly suggests that those arguments have you cornered.

Drew

Apparently these verses are something you do not want to deal with. They refute your claims, and I think that is why you are avoiding them.

Trust me -- I understand ;)[/quote]
OK let me have a try at the "MysteryMan" style of debate:

You want to know my reason for believing in the trinity?

Luke 19.

Wow, that sure was easy......

You need to make actual arguments, not just post verses.[/quote]
-------------------------------------------
Drew

And you need to stop making unwarranted commets that you cannot support with scripture !

I tried to engage you, and you refused. Thus, your comments here are moot.

 

[shad]

Edit postReport this postReply with quoteRe: A case for the Trinity
by shad on Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:41 pm

"Jesus and His Father are equal" is one of trinity doctrine. So one of them is clearly in error.

I edited my typo.
Originally I typed God and I edited to Jesus.

 

[shad]

1. Jesus implements the promised return of YHWH to Zion and is therefore to be understood as the embodiment of Israel's God;

The verse please.

2. Before Caiaphus, Jesus invokes Daniel 7 and sets Himself in the role of the Son of Man figure. And Daniel 7 has the son of man figure established as sharing a throne with Israel's God.

The verse please.

 

[Drew]

1. Jesus implements the promised return of YHWH to Zion and is therefore to be understood as the embodiment of Israel's God;

The verse please.

There is no single "verse", its more complicated than that. The argument is what it is and it invokes a numver of texts I cannot think how to make it any clearer.

[

2. Before Caiaphus, Jesus invokes Daniel 7 and sets Himself in the role of the Son of Man figure. And Daniel 7 has the son of man figure established as sharing a throne with Israel's God.

The verse please.

See the last post on page 3. The fact that you are asking these questions suggests that you have simply not read my posts.

That is your right, of course, but if we are going to have a fruitful dialog, you need to read my posts.

 

[Drew]

So Drew,
What is your question for me with this post?

Stop playing games, shad. You know darn well that you need to engage this argument.

Calm down Drew, you are losing your gentle spirit.

I only want to make sure your question since it is so darn long post.

OK. There is no single "question" for you. The argument is what it is - a case that Jesus is acting as the embodiment of Israel's God.

 

[Drew]

You are correct again, amazing ! These verses prove that Jesus is the Son of God, and not God. Now all you need to do, is not harden your hearts, and enter into his rest. Jesus Christ is also the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, in Christ Jesus (The Revealed Mystery - The Last Adam)

Sinthesis did not suggest that these verses show that Jesus is "Son of God", He suggested that they show that Jesus is God.

 

[Drew]

God does not dwell in temples made with hands.

He most certainly did! And the fact that He did is exactly what makes my case.

Don't construct strawmen - I never indicated that God lives in the temple post resurrection.

The point, of course, is this:

1. In the Old Testament, the temple was the place where God's presence was manifested;

2. That presence left the temple before the Babylonian exile;

3. The Old Testament is full of the promised return of YHWH to His temple;

4. Jesus claims to be the new temple;

5. Therefore, Jesus is the embodiment of the YHWH - the place where God's presence abides.

That's a tough one for you, of course, since you are denying this clear Biblical story.

 

[Drew]

I tried to engage you, and you refused.

No.

You posted verses and did not make an argument.

That is not engagement.

 

[shad]

The argument is what it is - a case that Jesus is acting as the embodiment of Israel's God.

You are right, Jesus is the embodiment of God. that does not make Him equal with His Father.

I am avoiding using the word "God" because there seems to be much confusion about it.

 

[Drew]

The argument is what it is - a case that Jesus is acting as the embodiment of Israel's God.

You are right, Jesus is the embodiment of God. that does not make Him equal with His Father.

I am avoiding using the word "God" because there seems to be much confusion about it.

There is a chance that we may agree after all.

Perhaps others are suggesting that, in every sense, Jesus is "equal" to the Father. I would not agree - there is at least one sense in which "God the Son" places Himself under the authority of "God the Father".

But I am in no way suggesting that Jesus is not "God" in terms of essence.

 

[shad]

- there is at least one sense in which "God the Son" places Himself under the authority of "God the Father".

Yes, Jesus is always under His Father. Jesus is sitting at the right hand of His Father; and even the right hand is second in command.

But I am in no way suggesting that Jesus is not "God" in terms of essence.

The word divinity is not in the Bible. That's why I stay away from this expression.

 

[Sinthesis]

The argument is what it is - a case that Jesus is acting as the embodiment of Israel's God.

You are right, Jesus is the embodiment of God. that does not make Him equal with His Father.

I agree; this statement is correct, and it also supports the Trinity.