How to defend the trinity!

[JLB]

There is some faulty logic! The newer translations are based on more and better manuscripts, coupled with many non-Biblical documents that aid in understanding the ancient languages and cultures. The KJV is both dated and inaccurate.

What does "If your study of scripture leads you to conclude that the Eternal Godhead, the Elohim is not Three" mean? On what do you base this conclusion?

Do you believe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one?





JLB

 

[jaybo]

Says who?

Says I (obviously); I am in agreement with the best modern Biblical scholarship.

 

[jaybo]

Do you believe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one?





JLB

They are one, but also three.

 

[OzSpen]

Do you believe that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one?


I believe we can all have a common belief that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one, and therefore find common ground.




I don’t know what “Erasmus” compiled or when he compiled it, or who decided he did what he did. I certainly can’t prove from scripture when he compiled the “Textus Receptus”, and would have to rely on someone’s opinion as to whether he did or didn’t or when he did or didn’t.


JLB

JLB,

Again, If your study of scripture leads you to conclude that the Eternal Godhead, the Elohim is not Three, then so be it.

Nowhere did I state or suggest the eternal Godhead is not three in one. You are arguing from silence - a logical fallacy.

Some commentary that you tend to favor isn’t going to change what I believe by studying the whole counsel of God.

I said not a word about a commentary but the United Bible Societies Greek Text used for contemporary translations. Please don't drag in your presuppositions to add to what I wrote.

Some commentary that you tend to favor isn’t going to change what I believe by studying the whole counsel of God.

You are imposing your value system on what I did not say. I also study the whole counsel of God: "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15 NIV). I "correctly handle" God's word by study in the original language of the Greek NT.

Do you believe that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one?

Of course I do but I also believe the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. That's the Bible's teachings of 3 persons in the Godhead.

I don’t know what “Erasmus” compiled or when he compiled it, or who decided he did what he did. I certainly can’t prove from scripture when he compiled the “Textus Receptus”, and would have to rely on someone’s opinion as to whether he did or didn’t or when he did or didn’t.

It's time for you to come up to speed with the Greek text on which the KJV and NKJV are based - the Textus Receptus (Received Text). It was compiled by Erasmus about 1500, so the scribes had plenty of time to add or subtract typos (variants) to the text. It is NOT that newer translations have added words and texts. The changes in texts started with the English translation of the Textus Receptus in the Bishop's Bible, Geneva Bible, KJV, and other Bibles of the KJV era.

Therefore, the text that is copied less often (United Bible Societies Greek Text) is less likely to have as many variants as the Textus Receptus. The KJV and NKJV have added to or subtracted from the original Greek text, based on the earliest texts we have.

Oz

 

[JLB]

They are one, but also three.

These three are one.


I think we can agree on this.



JLB

 

[JLB]

Of course I do but I also believe the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. That's the Bible's teachings of 3 persons in the Godhead.

Actually my question was —


Do you believe the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one?



If you do, then we agree.


I see no reason to insinuate, that some person introduced some new Textus Receptus that made the King James Bible somehow inferior.


That only sows discord and division.



Lets just agree and be in unity with what the scripture does say, instead of trying to erode the validity of one version or another.




JLB

 

[Walpole]

So, what other information do we need and from where do you obtain that information?

Oz

From the Church, which is “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (cf. 1 Tim 3:15)

 

[Walpole]

What is trinitarian theology?

That Christ is homooúsios with the Father.

 

[OzSpen]

From the Church, which is “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (cf. 1 Tim 3:15)

Walpole,

Have you ever learned Greek grammar, syntax and vocabulary that way?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Actually my question was —


Do you believe the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one?



If you do, then we agree.


I see no reason to insinuate, that some person introduced some new Textus Receptus that made the King James Bible somehow inferior.


That only sows discord and division.



Lets just agree and be in unity with what the scripture does say, instead of trying to erode the validity of one version or another.




JLB

JLB,

When will you own up to the NT text on which the KJV and NKJV are based?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

They are one, but also three.

So, do you believe in tri-theism since they are "also three"?

 

[JLB]

JLB,

When will you own up to the NT text on which the KJV and NKJV are based?

Oz

Do you believe the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one?

 

[D-D-W]

Do you believe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one?

New to this thread but have to jump in on this question.

I will say "YES!;" but will also say it depends on your understanding of what is meant by "one." The earliest scripture I can find that relates to this is in Deut 6:4, called the "Shema."

4 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!

Or in the Hebrew: Shema Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu, Adonai echad.

God is addressed 3 times. But the operative word here is "echad." One. If we look elsewhere in Books of Moses to see how he used that word, we find it is not used as an absolute singularity; rather, it is a composite unity. Consider this verse:

Genesis 2:24
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one [echad] flesh.

Clearly husband and wife are still 2 individual people, but Moses says they are one, echad.
Since our Lord quotes this verse as well, He also considers married couples as echad, a composite unity.

BTW: Hebrew does have a word for an absolute singularity: Yachad.

The Trinity is NOT just a New Testament doctrine.

 

[Walpole]

Walpole,

Have you ever learned Greek grammar, syntax and vocabulary that way?

Oz

What is “that way” to which you are referring?

What does Scripture call the pillar and foundation of the truth?

 

[stovebolts]

SB,

Why not? Every doctrine needs to be expounded biblically.

Why is there such a reluctance to defend the sound doctrine of Scripture in this thread?

Oz

I did not see Jesus consistently going to his accusers to defend himself. No, instead, Jesus spent the majority of his time ministering to those who were eager to receive him.

If somebody is actively coming against the Trinity, and all they want to do is win a theological argument, then when we argue against them, all we do is sharpen their argument and tact. In reality, all we are doing is equipping them to prey on the weak.

 

[stovebolts]

New to this thread but have to jump in on this question.

I will say "YES!;" but will also say it depends on your understanding of what is meant by "one." The earliest scripture I can find that relates to this is in Deut 6:4, called the "Shema."

4 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!

Or in the Hebrew: Shema Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu, Adonai echad.

God is addressed 3 times. But the operative word here is "echad." One. If we look elsewhere in Books of Moses to see how he used that word, we find it is not used as an absolute singularity; rather, it is a composite unity. Consider this verse:

Genesis 2:24
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one [echad] flesh.

Clearly husband and wife are still 2 individual people, but Moses says they are one, echad.
Since our Lord quotes this verse as well, He also considers married couples as echad, a composite unity.

BTW: Hebrew does have a word for an absolute singularity: Yachad.

The Trinity is NOT just a New Testament doctrine.

So true. In Hebrew, “one” means complete.
Also, YHVH our Elohim. Aka Lord our God. Many do not understand this.

 

[JLB]

New to this thread but have to jump in on this question.

I will say "YES!;" but will also say it depends on your understanding of what is meant by "one." The earliest scripture I can find that relates to this is in Deut 6:4, called the "Shema."

4 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!

Or in the Hebrew: Shema Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu, Adonai echad.

God is addressed 3 times. But the operative word here is "echad." One. If we look elsewhere in Books of Moses to see how he used that word, we find it is not used as an absolute singularity; rather, it is a composite unity. Consider this verse:

Genesis 2:24
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one [echad] flesh.

Clearly husband and wife are still 2 individual people, but Moses says they are one, echad.
Since our Lord quotes this verse as well, He also considers married couples as echad, a composite unity.

BTW: Hebrew does have a word for an absolute singularity: Yachad.

The Trinity is NOT just a New Testament doctrine.

We are introduced to the Godhead, in the first verse of the Bible.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1


As we continue on in Genesis we see that God refers to Himself as Us and Our.


Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” Genesis 1:26


The word Elohim is plural of the singular El; God


I really don’t use the word Trinity, since it is not found in scripture. I prefer Godhead, or Elohim.




JLB

 

[D-D-W]

We are introduced to the Godhead, in the first verse of the Bible.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1

Indeed. Indeed we are teased with a certain plurality. But it is in Deut 6 that we see 3 references come into play.

 

[Quantrill]

JLB,

When will you own up to the NT text on which the KJV and NKJV are based?

Oz

You mean the Majority Text, Textus Receptus?

Modern translations are based upon a minority text. Westcott/Hort

Point being, just because a manuscript is 'earlier' doesn't alone prove its correctness. This is done, or should be done, by comparing all of the manuscripts, or copies, or versions.

Concerning the Trinity, I certainly believe it when I read of it in the Scriptures. Do I understand it enough to attempt to describe it? Not in the least. But, it's hard for me to understand why a Christian would not believe it.

Quantrill

 

[Walpole]

New to this thread but have to jump in on this question.

I will say "YES!;" but will also say it depends on your understanding of what is meant by "one." The earliest scripture I can find that relates to this is in Deut 6:4, called the "Shema."

4 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!

Or in the Hebrew: Shema Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu, Adonai echad.

God is addressed 3 times. But the operative word here is "echad." One. If we look elsewhere in Books of Moses to see how he used that word, we find it is not used as an absolute singularity; rather, it is a composite unity. Consider this verse:

Genesis 2:24
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one [echad] flesh.

Clearly husband and wife are still 2 individual people, but Moses says they are one, echad.
Since our Lord quotes this verse as well, He also considers married couples as echad, a composite unity.

BTW: Hebrew does have a word for an absolute singularity: Yachad.

The Trinity is NOT just a New Testament doctrine.

This is a great post.

However, the Trinity IS just a New Testament doctrine, as the Jews are not Trinitarians.