How to defend the trinity!

[D-D-W]

Circling back to the OP and my original post in this thread, you cannot arrive at an orthodox Trinitarian theology using sola Scriptura.

Not sure why one would want to do that anyway.

 

[jaybo]

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.

You wrote "No reason for foreigners to be there". There were Jews and Gentiles that traveled to Jerusalem from all over. Now you're trying to change the meaning and limit it to only devout Jews. Sorry but that doesn't work.

 

[Walpole]

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.

Are you saying this person is an Orthodox Jew who actually believes God is a Trinity of Persons?

 

[Walpole]

Not sure why one would want to do that anyway.

Because one of the core tenets of mainstream Protestantism is their doctrine of sola Scriptura, which one poster defined as the belief that the Scriptures are the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.

The Council Fathers at Nicea did not use the Scriptures alone to define the dogma of the Trinity, which I should remind you is the dogma upon which the entire Christian religion is based.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Because one of the core tenets of mainstream Protestantism is their doctrine of sola Scriptura, which one poster defined as the belief that the Scriptures are the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.

The Council Fathers at Nicea did not use the Scriptures alone to define the dogma of the Trinity, which I should remind you is the dogma upon which the entire Christian religion is based.

Nicea?
Where is that?
Why should anything that happened there have a bearing on my life today?
Is any Scripture from Nicea or are you just elevating human beings above the rest of us?
The pope is pretty high on the list.
Do you believe him?
Who's better, St. Augustine or John Calvin?
Got any other ideas we can learn from?

 

[Walpole]

Nicea?

Yes, Nicea.

Where is that?

It was a town in northwestern Turkey. It is now known as İznik.

Why should anything that happened there have a bearing on my life today?

Because if it weren't for the Council Fathers at Nicea, you would be an Arian.

Is any Scripture from Nicea or are you just elevating human beings above the rest of us?

No, the Council Fathers did not write Scripture. Rather, they defended and defined the dogma of the Trinity for the Church. They declared that Christ is homooúsios (ὁμοούσιος) with the Father.

The pope is pretty high on the list.

Yes, in fact he's the highest on the list.

Do you believe him?

It depends on what he's talking about.

Who's better, St. Augustine or John Calvin?

St. Augustine. He's a Doctor of the Church, whereas Calvin was a heretic.

Got any other ideas we can learn from?

Sure. What are you curious about?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Yes, Nicea.

It was a town in northwestern Turkey. It is now known as İznik.

Because if it weren't for the Council Fathers at Nicea, you would be an Arian.

No, the Council Fathers did not write Scripture. Rather, they defended and defined the dogma of the Trinity for the Church. They declared that Christ is homooúsios (ὁμοούσιος) with the Father.

Yes, I’m fact he's the highest on the list.

It depends on what he's talking about.

St. Augustine. He's a Doctor of the Church, whereas Calvin was a heretic.

Sure. What are you curious about?

I've always been curious about James.
There were two James' as Apostles, there was James in charge of the church in Jerusalem, there was James the brother of Jesus, and there was James the writer of the letter in the Bible.
How do we distinguish them from one another?

 

[Edward]

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.

Anathema? To the Jews or to you? You said as a Christian You (meaning I) interpret it as such. What about you?
Scripture does say that Knowledge (of God) will be increased in the last days so maybe we just have a wee better grasp of doctrine than they did.

That verse in Isaiah that I posted...it's irrelevant who was being spoken to, read the verse and you tell me how many are spoken of in that verse. 1, 2, or 3?

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

That may be so, and maybe a lot of Jewish people or Rabbis did not realize it at the time. But some of Israelites did, take King David for example, Lord take not your Holy Spirit from me...(Psalm 51 I think)
And many OT scriptures certainly allude to the fact of a trinity Godhead. Let "us" make man in our image...That's not singular Brother. I heard a Pastors sermon once that said that scripture was the Three of them talking together about how to make man. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

I find it difficult to believe that a bunch of Jewish Rabbis can not comprehend the trinity, Everyone has heard Father-Son, For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son...that is, universally known I believe.

And the Holy Spirit is plainly talked about in the OT. So it seems clear in this day and age.

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."

That rings a bell now that you mention it. Now, I remember, Chuck Missler said it was a quote by St Augustine too and since it was Chuck's sermon I attributed it to him. Sorry.

Circling back to the OP and my original post in this thread, you cannot arrive at an orthodox Trinitarian theology using sola Scriptura.

And this statement is untrue. It's not really sola scriptura. It's been revealed by the Holy Spirit to diligent students of His word. Calling it Sola Scriptura is a buzz word at this point in time.

But may I ask, what is the point you are trying to make from post #1? That many devout Jews don't get it yet? Or is it that, you do not grasp a doctrinal trinity yourself?

 

[Walpole]

I've always been curious about James.
There were two James' as Apostles, there was James in charge of the church in Jerusalem, there was James the brother of Jesus, and there was James the writer of the letter in the Bible.
How do we distinguish them from one another?

James the Less (called such in Mark 15:40):

• The “brother” of the Lord mentioned in Mark 6:3, Matthew 13:55, and Gal 1:19
• He is the brother of Joseph (Joses), Jude and Simon (Matthew 13:55)
• He is the son of Clopas (Cleophas) and Mary the wife of Clopas (Matthew 27:56, John 19:25)
• Because Mary of Clopas is listed as his mother (Matthew 27:56) and this same Mary of Clopas is listed as the Virgin Mary’s sister (John 19:25), we know that he could not be an actual uterine sibling of Jesus. This demonstrates "brother" had a much wider meaning in Jewish antiquity than simply a uterine or agnate sibling.
• He wrote the Catholic epistle which bears his name
• Tradition teaches he became the first bishop of Jerusalem and was martyred there
• His feast day, along with St. Philip, is May 3rd

James the Greater:

• He is the son of Zebedee (Matthew 26:37)
• He is the brother of the Apostle John (Matthew 17:1)
• He is the James often singled out with Peter and John (e.g. at the Transfiguration)
• Tradition teaches he took the Gospel to Hispana (modern day Spain)
• His feast day is July 25th

 

[Walpole]

Anathema? To the Jews or to you? You said as a Christian You (meaning I) interpret it as such.

The idea that God is Three Persons is anathema to Jews.

What about you?

I am a Christian.

Scripture does say that Knowledge (of God) will be increased in the last days so maybe we just have a wee better grasp of doctrine than they did.

Yes, and we know from history that doctrine develops. It took the Church over three hundred years to develop the dogma of the Trinity and over four hundred years to develop her Christological dogmas.

That verse in Isaiah that I posted...it's irrelevant who was being spoken to, read the verse and you tell me how many are spoken of in that verse. 1, 2, or 3?

It is relevant as the prophet's audience were the Jewish people.

That may be so, and maybe a lot of Jewish people or Rabbis did not realize it at the time. But some of Israelites did, take King David for example, Lord take not your Holy Spirit from me...(Psalm 51 I think)

There is no verse in Scripture where King David speaks of the Holy Spirit as a separate and distinct Person from God the Father. That is the point I am making.

And many OT scriptures certainly allude to the fact of a trinity Godhead. Let "us" make man in our image...That's not singular Brother. I heard a Pastors sermon once that said that scripture was the Three of them talking together about how to make man. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Indeed, but "us" also does not specify three. Us is plural, meaning more than one. Thus "us" can be two, three, four, five, ten, one hundred or even one thousand.

It is only Christian revelation by which we know that God is Three Persons.

I find it difficult to believe that a bunch of Jewish Rabbis can not comprehend the trinity, Everyone has heard Father-Son, For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son...that is, universally known I believe.

And the Holy Spirit is plainly talked about in the OT. So it seems clear in this day and age.

But nowhere is the Holy Spirit spoken of as a separate and distinct Person. That again is the point.

That rings a bell now that you mention it. Now, I remember, Chuck Missler said it was a quote by St Augustine too and since it was Chuck's sermon I attributed it to him. Sorry.

No need to apologize. I was just pointing out the quotation is quite ancient.

And this statement is untrue. It's not really sola scriptura. It's been revealed by the Holy Spirit to diligent students of His word. Calling it Sola Scriptura is a buzz word at this point in time.

It's been revealed by Jesus Christ becoming man and revealing it to man. Again, the OP asks how you can defend it using sola Scriptura. I posit that it is impossible to arrive at an orthodox Trinitarian theology using sola Scriptura.

Incidentally the early heretics (the Arians) who opposed the Trinity did so using sola Scriptura. The charge they repeatedly used against the Catholics was that the Catholic bishops could not find the Trinity in the words of Scripture!

But may I ask, what is the point you are trying to make from post #1? That many devout Jews don't get it yet? Or is it that, you do not grasp a doctrinal trinity yourself?

My points are now thus:

1. The Jews do not believe God is a Trinity of Persons. This idea is anathema to them.
2. That God is a Trinity of Persons was revealed by Jesus Christ.
3. You cannot arrive at an orthodox Trinitarian theology using sola Scriptura.

 

[Edward]

But nowhere is the Holy Spirit spoken of as a separate and distinct Person. That again is the point.

So does Psalm 51 not count for some reason?

Psalm 51:11-12
11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.

12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.../

 

[D-D-W]

Are you saying this person is an Orthodox Jew who actually believes God is a Trinity of Persons?

I did not say "Trinity."
But in his book he is seriously questioning the standard model of absolute singularity, based on Daniel chapter 7.

 

[D-D-W]

The idea that God is Three Persons is anathema to Jews.
....
1. The Jews do not believe God is a Trinity of Persons. This idea is anathema to them.

So what? You are saying that people like Moshe Rosen of Jews for Jesus; notable Messianic leaders like Dan Juster, Asher Intrater, Dr. Mitch Glazer, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Joel and David Chernoff, etc. are all NOT actually Jews?

 

[JLB]

The idea that God is Three Persons is anathema to Jews.

For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 1 John 5:7


The scripture actually says these three are one.


The idea that this one is three is the heresy of Modalism or Oneness.


https://www.gotquestions.org/Modalistic-Monarchianism.html

 

[D-D-W]

You wrote "No reason for foreigners to be there". There were Jews and Gentiles that traveled to Jerusalem from all over. Now you're trying to change the meaning and limit it to only devout Jews. Sorry but that doesn't work.

Foreigner = non Jew. That is used throughout the OT.
And a small village on the outskirts of Jerusalem had no reason for the Romans or Greeks to be there at all. And the Samaritans were confined to the area we now call the West Bank.

In the large cities and the port towns, yes there were foreigners who were either part of the military occupation or traders. But not a small town like Bethany.

But if you are using Acts 2 to prove the existence of NON JEWS, it simply does not work. The text itself says they were devout Jews. And every devout Jew from anywhere on earth had to be in Jerusalem on that day.
See Deut. 16:16.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

James the Less (called such in Mark 15:40):

• The “brother” of the Lord mentioned in Mark 6:3, Matthew 13:55, and Gal 1:19
• He is the brother of Joseph (Joses), Jude and Simon (Matthew 13:55)
• He is the son of Clopas (Cleophas) and Mary the wife of Clopas (Matthew 27:56, John 19:25)
• Because Mary of Clopas is listed as his mother (Matthew 27:56) and this same Mary of Clopas is listed as the Virgin Mary’s sister (John 19:25), we know that he could not be an actual uterine sibling of Jesus. This demonstrates "brother" had a much wider meaning in Jewish antiquity than simply a uterine or agnate sibling.
• He wrote the Catholic epistle which bears his name
• Tradition teaches he became the first bishop of Jerusalem and was martyred there
• His feast day, along with St. Philip, is May 3rd

James the Greater:

• He is the son of Zebedee (Matthew 26:37)
• He is the brother of the Apostle John (Matthew 17:1)
• He is the James often singled out with Peter and John (e.g. at the Transfiguration)
• Tradition teaches he took the Gospel to Hispana (modern day Spain)
• His feast day is July 25th

Mary and her sister were not both named Mary.
The comma separates that.

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1158837/jewish/The-Laws-of-Jewish-Names.htm

Walpole says, "He wrote the Catholic epistle which bears his name"
NO Scripture here to back it up, only your opinion.
I have opinions too.

 

[Walpole]

Mary and her sister were not both named Mary.
The comma separates that.

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1158837/jewish/The-Laws-of-Jewish-Names.htm

Aramaic and Greek did not contain punctuation until centuries after Christ.

Walpole says, "He wrote the Catholic epistle which bears his name"
NO Scripture here to back it up, only your opinion.
I have opinions too.

It is based on tradition. It is also the opinion of many Protestant scholars as well.

 

[Walpole]

So does Psalm 51 not count for some reason?

Psalm 51:11-12
11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.

12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.../

I'm not sure how you are trying to make the leap from David's prayer of repentance in Psalm 51 to demonstrating he believed God is Three Persons. Can you elaborate?

 

[D-D-W]

I've always been curious about James.
There were two James' as Apostles, there was James in charge of the church in Jerusalem, there was James the brother of Jesus, and there was James the writer of the letter in the Bible.
How do we distinguish them from one another?

Actually if you look at the Greek, the name was NOT "James" at all, but rather Jacob.
Just one of the intentional errors in the KJV. King Jimmy want his own name inserted in the text.

iakōbos G2385

Where do you get "James" from that?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Aramaic and Greek did not contain punctuation until centuries after Christ.

It is based on tradition. It is also the opinion of many Protestant scholars as well.

Even your opinions don't hold up too well.
Maybe you should be quick to listen and slow to speak.




By the fifth century BC, Greek playwrights were using some basic symbols to show where actors should pause, and the scholar Aristophanes of Byzantium (c257– c185 BC) invented a formal system of punctuation.