How to defend the trinity!

[Walpole]

You have 3 different issues there. I will deal only with this one.

MOST (not all) Messianic Jews believe in the Trinity.
Are you saying they (in your opinion) are no longer Jews? On what basis?

Someone who believes in Jesus Christ (and the Trinity) is a Christian.

When I speak of Jews, I am speaking of those who are adherents of the religion of Judaism. In Judaism, the thought of God being Three Persons is anathema.

 

[D-D-W]

Someone who believes in Jesus Christ (and the Trinity) is a Christian.

When I speak of Jews, I am speaking of those who are adherents of the religion of Judaism. In Judaism, the thought of God being Three Persons is anathema.

We do not use the terms "christian" or "Christ." We use Messianic and Messiah.

While the Hebrew Mashiach and the Greek Christos are similar in meaning - anointed one - they differ in degree. Christos is anointed by dabbing a drop of oil on the forehead. Mashiach is anointed by pouring oil over the head so it drips off the clothes.

Psalm 133:2
It is like the precious oil upon the head,
Coming down upon the beard,
Even Aaron’s beard,
Coming down upon the edge of his robes.

 

[Walpole]

We do not use the terms "christian" or "Christ." We use Messianic and Messiah.

While the Hebrew Mashiach and the Greek Christos are similar in meaning - anointed one - they differ in degree. Christos is anointed by dabbing a drop of oil on the forehead. Mashiach is anointed by pouring oil over the head so it drips off the clothes.

Psalm 133:2
It is like the precious oil upon the head,
Coming down upon the beard,
Even Aaron’s beard,
Coming down upon the edge of his robes.

Understood. For purposes of this discussion, when I am speaking about a Christian, I am referring to a person who believes in Jesus Christ. When I am speaking about a Jew, I am referring to an adherent of Judaism.

 

[jaybo]

We do not use the terms "christian" or "Christ." We use Messianic and Messiah.

While the Hebrew Mashiach and the Greek Christos are similar in meaning - anointed one - they differ in degree. Christos is anointed by dabbing a drop of oil on the forehead. Mashiach is anointed by pouring oil over the head so it drips off the clothes.

Psalm 133:2
It is like the precious oil upon the head,
Coming down upon the beard,
Even Aaron’s beard,
Coming down upon the edge of his robes.

What is your reference for this, beyond a quote from Psalm 133?

FYI, here is the Psalm in its entirety...

Look! How good and how pleasant it is
when brothers truly live in unity.
It is like fine oil poured on the head,
which flows down the beard—
Aaron’s beard,
and then flows down his garments.
It is like the dew of Hermon,
which flows down upon the hills of Zion.
Indeed, that is where the Lord has decreed
a blessing will be available—eternal life.

Also, Psalm 45:7, "You love justice and hate evil. For this reason God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of joy, elevating you above your companions."

and Mark 14:3-7, "Now while Jesus was in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, reclining at the table, a woman came with an alabaster jar of costly aromatic oil from pure nard. After breaking open the jar, she poured it on his head. But some who were present indignantly said to one another, “Why this waste of expensive ointment? It could have been sold for more than 300 silver coins and the money given to the poor!” So they spoke angrily to her. But Jesus said, “Leave her alone. Why are you bothering her? She has done a good service for me. For you will always have the poor with you, and you can do good for them whenever you want. But you will not always have me! She did what she could. She anointed my body beforehand for burial. I tell you the truth, wherever the gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her.”

So clearly, your statement that Christos is anointed by dabbing a drop of oil on the forehead is not scriptural.

 

[JLB]

What's the difference? Three people -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit -- are one Godhead; one Godhead is comprised of three people.

One is the modalist (oneness) doctrine, and the other is biblical doctrine.





Modalism is a heresy that denies the doctrine of the Trinity. Often surprising to some Christians, United Pentecostals ascribe to this ancient heresy. Modalism teaches that God is a single person who has eternally existed and yet He has revealed himself in three modes or forms. Modalism rejects the Trinitarian belief that God exists at all times as three distinct persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Rather, the modalist believes that God is one person made known in three modes.

https://oneminuteapologist.com/what-is-modalism/


JLB

 

[jaybo]

One is the modalist (oneness) doctrine, and the other is biblical doctrine.





Modalism is a heresy that denies the doctrine of the Trinity. Often surprising to some Christians, United Pentecostals ascribe to this ancient heresy. Modalism teaches that God is a single person who has eternally existed and yet He has revealed himself in three modes or forms. Modalism rejects the Trinitarian belief that God exists at all times as three distinct persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Rather, the modalist believes that God is one person made known in three modes.

https://oneminuteapologist.com/what-is-modalism/


JLB

Interesting and informative!

 

[Consecrated Life]

For me , questions like this stem from the fact that there are some aspects of God that are beyond human comprehension .
Asking for a defendable description of the actual transaction that took place between Jesus and the Father as He hung between earth and heaven would be another example of this .
While we have been informed of all the crude nails & blood basics of the Lord's execution, and we know what was accomplished by his sacrifice, Amen , no Gospel writer attempted to explain what was actually transpiring at that moment between The Father and the Son.
The human mind is incapable of comprehending it , then and now, let alone putting it into words and sentences.
And though the luminous spiritual energy resulting from that transaction burns just as brightly today as it did 2000 years ago in the heart of every person who has anchored their hope in Christ, proclaiming it's reality, it is
not surprising to me that God shrouded that incomprehensible transaction that gave birth to it by covering the entire earth in the pitch black darkness of night .
Human eyes were not even allowed to gaze upon it lest some woefully ignorant attempt at a defendable description of what was transpiring would be put into words.
" ...and there was a darkness over the whole earth until the ninth hour."
( Luke 23:44 )

 

[D-D-W]

So clearly, your statement that Christos is anointed by dabbing a drop of oil on the forehead is not scriptural.

Scripture does not come with a dictionary defining how words were used in the vernacular. That is one reason I am NOT sola scriptura. You have to look at the cultural use.

As to the woman in Mark 14, was her culture Hebraic or Greek? Hebraic to be sure. But since there is no exact equivalent in Greek for the nuance of "anointed" in Hebrew and Aramaic, they used the closest Greek word which was to dab some oil on the forehead; christos.

 

[jaybo]

Scripture does not come with a dictionary defining how words were used in the vernacular. That is one reason I am NOT sola scriptura. You have to look at the cultural use.

As to the woman in Mark 14, was her culture Hebraic or Greek? Hebraic to be sure. But since there is no exact equivalent in Greek for the nuance of "anointed" in Hebrew and Aramaic, they used the closest Greek word which was to dab some oil on the forehead; christos.

What are your credentials? I read several excellent translations which, along with translators' notes, explain many things in detail.

So, words used "in the vernacular" are clear explained if there is any obfuscation.

You're just assuming that the woman in Mark 14 was "Hebraic". Assumptions are not valid exegesis.

 

[D-D-W]

You're just assuming that the woman in Mark 14 was "Hebraic". Assumptions are not valid exegesis.

In Luke 7 we see that this person was a Pharisee, who apparently at one point had leprosy but had recovered.
Would a Pharisee (which means separated ones) let a non-Jew into his house? NO.

 

[jaybo]

In Luke 7 we see that this person was a Pharisee, who apparently at one point had leprosy but had recovered.
Would a Pharisee (which means separated ones) let a non-Jew into his house? NO.

Again, what are your credentials? Are you an expert in NT translation? Are you an expert in NT cultures?

The Pharisee apparently let all kinds of people into his house. My Bible says "a woman of that town, who was a sinner" and " Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.”, along with this note: The Pharisees believed in a form of separationism that would have prevented them from any kind of association with such a sinful woman.

 

[D-D-W]

Again, what are your credentials? Are you an expert in NT translation? Are you an expert in NT cultures?

The Pharisee apparently let all kinds of people into his house. My Bible says "a woman of that town, who was a sinner" and " Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.”, along with this note: The Pharisees believed in a form of separationism that would have prevented them from any kind of association with such a sinful woman.

"Of that town," Do you think the towns in Eretz Israel were of mixed ethnicity?

 

[jaybo]

"Of that town," Do you think the towns in Eretz Israel were of mixed ethnicity?

Yes.

Matthew 15:21-28, "After going out from there, Jesus went to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that area came and cried out, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is horribly demon-possessed!” But he did not answer her a word. Then his disciples came and begged him, “Send her away, because she keeps on crying out after us.” So he answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But she came and bowed down before him and said, “Lord, help me!” “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs,” he said. “Yes, Lord,” she replied, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, your faith is great! Let what you want be done for you.” And her daughter was healed from that hour."

Tyre and Sidon were two cities in the region God had assigned to the tribe of Asher to conquer when the Jews settled in the promised land.

 

[D-D-W]

Yes.

Matthew 15:21-28, "After going out from there, Jesus went to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that area came and cried out, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is horribly demon-possessed!” But he did not answer her a word. Then his disciples came and begged him, “Send her away, because she keeps on crying out after us.” So he answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But she came and bowed down before him and said, “Lord, help me!” “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs,” he said. “Yes, Lord,” she replied, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, your faith is great! Let what you want be done for you.” And her daughter was healed from that hour."

Tyre and Sidon were two cities in the region God had assigned to the tribe of Asher to conquer when the Jews settled in the promised land.

Tyre and Sidon were coastal cities in what is now Lebanon, north of the Sea of Galilee. They were ports used by the Romans and Greeks.

The events of Mark 16 were in Bethany (see v 3) on the outskirts of Jerusalem. No reason for foreigners to be there.

 

[Edward]

Again, plural simply means more than one. What Old Testament context do you get three?

If that is the case, can you provide one single OT prophet who taught God is One in Three Persons?

Here is an Old Testament scripture which clearly is talking trinity.

Isaiah 48:16
16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God (Father), and his Spirit (Holy Spirit), hath sent me (Yashua the son).../

Now this scripture is not a hard core doctrinal trinity teaching. The doctrinal teaching of the Trinity didn't come until the New Testament. However, one would have to be asleep to not see that there is three identified in this scripture.

Like Chuck Missler says, the NT is concealed in the OT...the OT is revealed in the NT.
So one does have to read between the lines to find everything NT, in the OT. But in Isaiah 48 it doesn't take reading between the lines much at all if any, lol.

 

[JLB]

Here is an Old Testament scripture which clearly is talking trinity.

Isaiah 48:16
16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God (Father), and his Spirit (Holy Spirit), hath sent me (Yashua the son).../

Now this scripture is not a hard core doctrinal trinity teaching. The doctrinal teaching of the Trinity didn't come until the New Testament. However, one would have to be asleep to not see that there is three identified in this scripture.

Like Chuck Missler says, the NT is concealed in the OT...the OT is revealed in the NT.
So one does have to read between the lines to find everything NT, in the OT. But in Isaiah 48 it doesn't take reading between the lines much at all if any, lol.

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





JLB

 

[Walpole]

Here is an Old Testament scripture which clearly is talking trinity.

Isaiah 48:16
16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God (Father), and his Spirit (Holy Spirit), hath sent me (Yashua the son).../

Now this scripture is not a hard core doctrinal trinity teaching. The doctrinal teaching of the Trinity didn't come until the New Testament. However, one would have to be asleep to not see that there is three identified in this scripture.

As a Christian, you interpret it as such. However, to the Jews - those whom Isaiah is addressing - the idea that God is Three Persons is anathema.

Once again, the Trinity was revealed when God became man in the Person of Jesus Christ.

Like Chuck Missler says, the NT is concealed in the OT...the OT is revealed in the NT.
So one does have to read between the lines to find everything NT, in the OT. But in Isaiah 48 it doesn't take reading between the lines much at all if any, lol.

I'm not sure who Chuck Missler is, but he did not originate that quotation. It is from St. Augustine...

"Novum testamentum in vetere latet, vetus testamentum in novo patet."


Circling back to the OP and my original post in this thread, you cannot arrive at an orthodox Trinitarian theology using sola Scriptura. At Nicea, the Council Fathers did not simply point to a verse(s) in Scripture and say, "Voilà! See here Arius, this is the verse which states Christ is homooúsios with the Father!"

 

[jaybo]

Tyre and Sidon were coastal cities in what is now Lebanon, north of the Sea of Galilee. They were ports used by the Romans and Greeks.

The events of Mark 16 were in Bethany (see v 3) on the outskirts of Jerusalem. No reason for foreigners to be there.

I repeat... Tyre and Sidon were two cities in the region God had assigned to the tribe of Asher to conquer when the Jews settled in the promised land.

Mark 16:3 says, " They had been asking each other, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” I'm sure that you don't mean this verse.

Foreigners often came to Jerusalem. Acts 2:5-7, "Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven residing in Jerusalem. When this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was in confusion, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Completely baffled, they said, “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans?"

 

[D-D-W]

Foreigners often came to Jerusalem. Acts 2:5-7, "Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven

Not foreigners in the sense you mean; Ex-pats living in the diaspora. Please note they were DEVOUT JEWS. They were required to be in Jerusalem at that feast every year. And Passover and Tabernacles as well.

 

[D-D-W]

As a Christian, you interpret it as such. However, to the Jews - those whom Isaiah is addressing - the idea that God is Three Persons is anathema.

How about 2 persons?

I suggest you read Daniel Boyarin's book "The Jewish Gospels." He is an Orthodox Jew and professor of Talmudic times and culture at UC Berkley. He is NOT a christian or a Messianic. But his ideas have had an undercurrent in Judaism for quite some time and are gaining more traction.