A terrific TRINITY Scripture passage

[Stormcrow]

John 14:

16 And I will pray (to) the Father, and He will give you another Helper,
that He may abide with you forever—

17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him
nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.

18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

23 … and We (God) will come to him and make Our home with him.

26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name,
He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

The Greek word here for â€another†is â€allos†meaning â€another of the same kindâ€.

A Question for you: Does the “We (God)†refer to …
2 Persons: Jesus and the Holy Spirit, or 3 Persons: all of the Trinity?

Actually, there are clearer, more direct verses that address this:

{16} After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, {17} and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." Matthew 3:16-17 (NASB)

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all present at the baptism of Jesus.


But here's the one I like to get non-trinitarians on:


{19} "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 (NASB)

Not names. Name.

 

[Asyncritus]

But here's the one I like to get non-trinitarians on:


{19} "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 (NASB)

Not names. Name.

A simple point.

If I arrest you in the name of the king and queen of this country, what am I doing?

I'm arresting you by the authority vested in me by the king and queen of this country.

Same here.

I'm baptising you for the remission of your sins, and I'm doing so by the authority vested in me by the Father, the Son and the HSp.

Simple, isn't it? No need for any heavy trinitarian overlaying. None was intended by the Lord, that's for sure.

 

[Asyncritus]

Here try this one former,

Deut 6:4 "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE.". In Hebrew it is known as the Sh'ma: "Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai ekhad".

For those that know Hebrew, the words Adonai, Eloheinu, and ekhad, are all plural. A direct translation is "Hear Israel, my Lords our Gods my Lords one." This is not a matter of semantics or a play on words, for if our God were not triune the Hebrew would read "Sh'ma Israel, Adoni Elenu, Adoni yakhid".

There is no word ADONAI in the passage. The word is YHWH, who is One.

And again, in Ex 34:6 we read in Hebrew "YHWH, YHWH, Elohim": "He is, He is, Gods". which also points to the trinity, for if it did not it would read "YHWH, YHWH, Eli".

No it does not. It points to a multitude of gods, if you want to be precise. 'Gods' can refer to any number greater than one. Many more if necessary. How do you arrive at 3?

As in Gen 1: Let US make man... US is a plural pronoun and can mean any number greater than one. So are we going to have a zillion? Or more?

There's something very wrong with your Hebrew 'scholarship'.

 

[Stormcrow]

I'm baptising you for the remission of your sins, and I'm doing so by the authority vested in me by the Father, the Son and the HSp.

Simple, isn't it? No need for any heavy trinitarian overlaying. None was intended by the Lord, that's for sure.

Were that the case, why use all three titles of the Godhead when one would've sufficed?

In the name of or by the authority of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit does not change what is implied by the phrase "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."

For what it's worth.

 

[John Zain]

The biggest problem I have with the idea of a Trinitarian God is not in the many Biblical verses interpreted to prove the idea. Many of which have nothing to do with the essence or nature of God at all. It’s seen in this:
“Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands. Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing. Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture. Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and bless his name. For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.” (Psalm 100 KJV)
Note the pronouns: “HIS presence”, “the Lord (Jehovah) HE is God”, “it is HE that made us”, “we are HIS people”, “the sheep of HIS pasture”, “enter into HIS gates”, “into HIS courts”, “be thankful unto HIM”, “bless HIS name”, “HIS mercy”, “HIS truth”.
This agrees more with the idea of God in Judaism, Islam, Christian Modalists, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. That God is a person. Yet the Trinitarian God is composed of three persons. A person with three persons. Can someone explain this to me? On the surface, it sounds like personality disorder. Considered a form of insanity among humans.

I'm hoping that I can reveal some deep truths to you here.

God had NO reason to reveal the Triune Godhead in the OT.
He had His plate full with the Jews just dealing with more important basics.
His #1 issue was to PROVE that man is a hopeless sinner who cannot please God.
Then He promised to send a Redeemer-Savior.
And He promised a new and much superior covenant (the NT).

Going further ...
The Trinity is NOT involved in Jesus' gospel; He did NOT preach it to the multitudes.
What's "good news" about the Trinity? Absolutely nothing.
He did speak of it to His disciples (who respected Him) ...
... so it would be written for us in the 4 gospels.

Excuses ...
Muslims and many others REJECT the gospel because of the Trinity.
It's a very convenient excuse for NOT believing.

Please understand this ...
The doctrine of the Trinity is total nonsense to the unsaved.
The gospel is "foolishness" (1 Corinthians 1:18 ... read the whole chapter).
The Holy Spirit must reveal it to whomever He wishes to believe it.
Exception: those born into it, brainwashed into it, etc.
This is explained here ...
http://www.christianforums.net/f17/bible-explains-who-god%92s-people-why-37607/

 

[Rageprophet]

Here try this one former,

Deut 6:4 "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE.". In Hebrew it is known as the Sh'ma: "Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai ekhad".



There is no word ADONAI in the passage. The word is YHWH, who is One.



No it does not. It points to a multitude of gods, if you want to be precise. 'Gods' can refer to any number greater than one. Many more if necessary. How do you arrive at 3?

As in Gen 1: Let US make man... US is a plural pronoun and can mean any number greater than one. So are we going to have a zillion? Or more?

There's something very wrong with your Hebrew 'scholarship'.

Did the bible mention a zillion? I am pretty sure we only were made aware of 3.

Is it a plural or singular?

 

[jasoncran]

if you are going to quote the shemah its not the word for yhwh as the one. its the Lord our God is one, the word yhwh is one.

and i believe in the kjv that word is capitalised.

let see

4Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

yup. that means wherever that is used in the ot that also can be substituted, this presents a problem as isaiah 44 and revalation is a place where jesus claims what the father said

 

[Rageprophet]

Here try this one former,

Deut 6:4 "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE.". In Hebrew it is known as the Sh'ma: "Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai ekhad".



There is no word ADONAI in the passage. The word is YHWH, who is One.

what?

 

[Stormcrow]

He had His plate full with the Jews just dealing with more important basics.

I think God can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

[Potluck]

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
John 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.



Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulcher.
Acts 13:30 But God raised him from the dead:


Either one is lying or both are right. I don't think either was lying.

 

[Rageprophet]

​

The Hebrew word for 'one' in the sh'ma is ehhad (eh-hhad, the 'hh' is pronounced hard like the 'ch' in the name Bach). The word ehhad (noun) comes from the verbal root ahhad meaning "to unite." Ehhad is best translated with the word 'unit,' something that is part of the whole, a unit within a community. In the Hebrew mind everything is, or should be, a part of a unity. There is not one tree but a tree composed of units within the unity - roots, trunk, branches and leaves. A tree is also in unity with the other trees – the forest. A son is a unit within the brotherhood. From this we can conclude that the sh'ma is not speaking of Yahweh as a 'one and only' but as a unit of the whole.

A different word, but related to ehhad, is the word yahhiyd (ya-hheed) and is often thought to mean 'one' in the sense of 'one and only." The word yahhiyd comes from the verbal root yahhad meaning "to come together to be united." Yahhad is best translated as 'together,' in the sense of not being separated from the whole (See Genesis 22:6). The word yahhiyd is used for Isaac's son in Genesis 22:2 and is best translated as 'solitary,' something that is not united with the whole such as we can see in the following verse. "God sets the 'solitary' (yahhiyd) in families" (Psalm 68:6). An 'only' son is a 'solitary' son.
If ehhad means a unit and yahhiyd means solitary, then what is the Hebrew word for 'one' in the sense of a single entity or the number one?

originally posted by Jeff Benner

I have no idea what his theology is but this makes the most sense to me and my clearly lacking scholarly skills

 

[Free]

The biggest problem I have with the idea of a Trinitarian God is not in the many Biblical verses interpreted to prove the idea. Many of which have nothing to do with the essence or nature of God at all. It’s seen in this:

“Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands. Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing. Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture. Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and bless his name. For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.” (Psalm 100 KJV)

Note the pronouns: “HIS presence”, “the Lord (Jehovah) HE is God”, “it is HE that made us”, “we are HIS people”, “the sheep of HIS pasture”, “enter into HIS gates”, “into HIS courts”, “be thankful unto HIM”, “bless HIS name”, “HIS mercy”, “HIS truth”.

I agree. But we also have things such as in the Creation account--"God said 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness'" (1:26a) and "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them" (1:27, ESV).

We see that "our image" and "our likeness" becomes "his own image", "the image of God" and "in the image of God he created him...he created them."

This agrees more with the idea of God in Judaism, Islam, Christian Modalists, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. That God is a person. Yet the Trinitarian God is composed of three persons. A person with three persons. Can someone explain this to me? On the surface, it sounds like personality disorder. Considered a form of insanity among humans.

FC

And yet with Modalism we have God praying to himself, yet another form of insanity among humans.

Definitions of the Trinity specifically avoid saying things such as "three persons in one person" or "three Gods in one God," precisely because that would be contradictory. It is generally stated as "three persons in one God"--three who are all God in nature, yet distinct in some way from each other. This is both a limitation of our language and a limitation of language to explain the infinite God.

This is the issue: The Bible clearly states that there is one God (that is beyond dispute) but the Bible also reveals that Jesus is God, in that he is equal with the Father in nature but yet not the Father. It is implied about the Holy Spirit but if we cannot get to understand that Jesus is God, there is not much point in going further.

So any theology proper must address all that the Bible states without excluding anything or doing violence to the text. The doctrine of the Trinity, IMO, has by far the best explanatory power for all that Scripture reveals about God.

 

[John Zain]

The biggest problem I have with the idea of a Trinitarian God is not in the many Biblical verses interpreted to prove the idea. Many of which have nothing to do with the essence or nature of God at all. It’s seen in this:
“Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands. Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing. Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture. Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and bless his name. For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.” (Psalm 100 KJV)
Note the pronouns: “HIS presence”, “the Lord (Jehovah) HE is God”, “it is HE that made us”, “we are HIS people”, “the sheep of HIS pasture”, “enter into HIS gates”, “into HIS courts”, “be thankful unto HIM”, “bless HIS name”, “HIS mercy”, “HIS truth”.
This agrees more with the idea of God in Judaism, Islam, Christian Modalists, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. That God is a person. Yet the Trinitarian God is composed of three persons. A person with three persons. Can someone explain this to me? On the surface, it sounds like personality disorder. Considered a form of insanity among humans.

Why was the Triune God NOT taught to the ordinary people through the entire Bible?
(The ordinary people do not include a few Jewish leaders and Jesus' disciples.)

Most of this is explained in the thread ... http://www.christianforums.net/f17/trinity-included-jesus%92-gospel-36938/

But, I'll summarize it bluntly:
The unsaved would think a person teaching the Trinity is totally and completely crazy.
(The saved are born again with the Holy Spirit "in" them, teaching them "all things".)

 

[Asyncritus]

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
John 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulcher.
Acts 13:30 But God raised him from the dead:

Either one is lying or both are right. I don't think either was lying.

No need to be so dramatic, potluck. Just pay a bit more careful attention to what Jesus actually says. Here:

Jn.10: 17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

Simple, isn't it?

 

[Jacy]

Reading these posts I couldn't help but chime in here...

If in fact there are three persons to a "Trinitarian God" which I in fact do not believe based on my own relationship with God and sound scripture studies, then you have to admit that they need to be co-equal.
If they are co-equal, explain to me how the Holy Ghost overshadowed Mary and she became pregnant with Jesus?
That means that if there are three persons, then the Holy Ghost is the father of Jesus and not the other Father...

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." Matthew 1:18

It seems more confusing to believe in three persons then three titles. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all roles that God has. You can also think of these three roles as the Creator, the Savior and the Spirit. Scripture is constantly referring to the oneness of Jesus and the Father, how they are one in the same:

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one." John 10:29-30

Also, God has many titles and roles, but that doesn't mean He is different persons. For example, I'm a wife, sister and daughter. At different points in my life, I have been given these roles but I am not three people. I'm only one with many hats, and only One name...much like our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

 

[Free]

Reading these posts I couldn't help but chime in here...

If in fact there are three persons to a "Trinitarian God" which I in fact do not believe based on my own relationship with God and sound scripture studies, then you have to admit that they need to be co-equal.
If they are co-equal, explain to me how the Holy Ghost overshadowed Mary and she became pregnant with Jesus?
That means that if there are three persons, then the Holy Ghost is the father of Jesus and not the other Father...

Not at all. The term "Father" is not necessarily a reference to the birth of Christ but rather what best describes the relationship between two persons in the Godhead.

It seems more confusing to believe in three persons then three titles. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all roles that God has. You can also think of these three roles as the Creator, the Savior and the Spirit. Scripture is constantly referring to the oneness of Jesus and the Father, how they are one in the same:

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one." John 10:29-30

The level of confusion is not a good method to determining the truth of a matter. This verse is not at all saying that they are one and the same, especially since Jesus is clearly differentiating the Father from himself, unless you really think that Jesus gave "them" to himself. And indeed there is a sense in which the Father is greater than him, but how can Jesus be greater than himself?

Jesus is certainly differentiated from the Father far more than any reference to their "oneness," and as such, any meaning of "oneness" must keep this in mind. They are not and cannot be the same person.

Also, God has many titles and roles, but that doesn't mean He is different persons. For example, I'm a wife, sister and daughter. At different points in my life, I have been given these roles but I am not three people. I'm only one with many hats, and only One name...much like our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

That may be true for you and most everyone but the Bible clearly keeps Jesus distinct from the Father, so that the two cannot be said to be the same person just playing different roles.

 

[Potluck]

No need to be so dramatic, potluck. Just pay a bit more careful attention to what Jesus actually says. Here:

Jn.10: 17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

Simple, isn't it?

Yes, simple.
Jesus could do nothing but the will of the Father. How could He? He is God manifest in the flesh. Is God so divided into individuals capable of doing anything other than the will of the Father? Some would have us believe that is so. Is it not yourself that commands an action or response to the decisions you make? I certainly hope so.

Acts 3:14 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
Acts 3:15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

1Co 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

John.10: 17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

Yep, simple.

 

[Former Christian]

Free

“Definitions of the Trinity specifically avoid saying things such as "three persons in one person" or "three Gods in one God," precisely because that would be contradictory.â€

That succinctly states why I asked the question. If God is a person, and has persons within, it’s more than contradictory. It’s insane. At least by the standards of human experience. And what other standard do we really have. If the Bible contradicts human experience, the problem is with the Bible, written 2000+ years ago. And if a doctrine contradicts human experience, the problem is with the doctrine. In this case, a doctrine that was initially formulated 1500+ years ago.

The Bible says that mankind is created in the image and likeness of God, yet mankind isn’t a person with many persons within. Rather, mankind is a species of life, as the scientists would categorize homo sapiens. And the species isn’t a person. But within the species are many persons. Not just three, by the way.


“This is the issue: The Bible clearly states that there is one God (that is beyond dispute)â€

Actually Rageprophet, in his attempt to show his understanding of the Trinity, proceeded to dismantle the chief verse (Dt 6:4) that states the unity, or at least the oneness, of God. Remarkable isn’t it? So apparently it isn’t completely beyond dispute. Not knowing Hebrew, I’m not sure how much of what he said is true.


“but the Bible also reveals that Jesus is God, in that he is equal with the Father in nature but yet not the Father.â€

Not explicitly. Anyone can string a bunch of verses together and prove just about anything. The Jehovah’s Witnesses did that to show that Satan is Jesus’ brother. They change their doctrines so often that I don’t know if they still believe that. Trinitarians do that to prove the Trinity and that Jesus is God. Not a good way to prove the validity of a doctrine. Especially since so many of the verses they string together have nothing at all to do with the nature of God or of Christ.


“So any theology proper must address all that the Bible states without excluding anything or doing violence to the text.â€

That would be a reasonable approach. But what I presented, plus the basic idea of Trinitarianism itself, three persons in one God, shows that Trinitarians don’t take that approach.

The only answer so far to the question that I asked has been to present reasons why Trinitarians believe in the Trinity. And that doesn’t answer the question. And this,

“The doctrine of the Trinity is, IMO, has by far the best explanatory power for all that Scripture reveals about God.â€

unfortunately, isn’t an answer either. In fact, the Trinity is apparently NOT the best explanation for all that the Scripture reveals about God, simply because it doesn’t deal with the Scriptural question I asked.

So far the answers don’t deal with the question I asked. They just continue an attempt to prove the validity of the Trinity. There are even implications that I’m not a Trinitarian. That I’m not saved if I don’t believe in the Trinity. I’m a Trinitarian. Whether that will continue I’m beginning to doubt. And I don’t believe that one’s Salvation is dependent on believing in the Trinity. If I believed that it did, it being a doctrine authoritatively formulated by the Church in the fourth century, I would be an Orthodox or Catholic.

Let me ask the question in different words. How do the pronouns in Psalms 100 that clearly reveal God as a person relate to Biblical idea of the plurality of God (i.e., “us†and “Elohim†as a plural word for God) and the Trinitarian idea that God has more than one person within? Without a reasonable solution to this question, I’m afraid that I’ll have to think of this apparent conundrum as just another discrepancy in the Bible.

FC

 

[Asyncritus]

Yes, simple.
Jesus could do nothing but the will of the Father. How could He? He is God manifest in the flesh. Is God so divided into individuals capable of doing anything other than the will of the Father? Some would have us believe that is so. Is it not yourself that commands an action or response to the decisions you make? I certainly hope so.

Acts 3:14 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
Acts 3:15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

1Co 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

John.10: 17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

Yep, simple.

So you do believe that the Father is greater than His Son?

 

[Asyncritus]

Let me ask the question in different words. How do the pronouns in Psalms 100 that clearly reveal God as a person relate to Biblical idea of the plurality of God (i.e., “us” and “Elohim” as a plural word for God) and the Trinitarian idea that God has more than one person within? Without a reasonable solution to this question, I’m afraid that I’ll have to think of this apparent conundrum as just another discrepancy in the Bible.

There's no need to do so, FC. Ps 100, like all the others, speaks of ONE God, in the several verses where the singular pronoun (ie He, Him, His) is used here as else where.


1 ¶ «A Psalm of thanksgiving.» Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands.
There is absolutely no evidence that YHWH refers to more than One Person. Quite the opposite in fact:

14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

[Three times, in one verse, the pronoun ‘I’ is used. And while Free and Drew can argue to their heart’s content that ‘echad’ might mean something like ‘one team’ or 'one collective', it is impossible to sustain that view in the face of the multitudes of passages where the Lord refers to Himself as ‘I’, and ‘me’.

Those are singular pronouns in every language, and their force cannot be evaded.

This is absolutely elementary grammar, and there's no need to invoke anything unusual. And so it is in the scriptures. There is ONE God, and He speaks as described above, and there is no mistaking it.

Ge 28:13 And, behold, the LORD stood above it, and said, I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac:

Ex 6:2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD

Isa 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

This last verse is possibly even more unequivocal than the previous two, and unmistakably asserts God’s singularity.

The use of the possessive pronouns also points unequivocally in the same direction.

‘My’, ‘mine’ are common pronouns used by YHWH in the singular, and so is the reflexive, intensive form: ‘myself’. Never does YHWH say ‘our, our’s and ‘ourselves’.

‘By MYSELF have I sworn’ saith the Lord. 'Because He could swear by no greater, He swore by HIMSELF, ... Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.' (Heb.6.13)

I can see no real escape from or avoidance of this very plain speaking.