Is God a Trinity or Triune

[follower of Christ]

You would get the same response from a Jew as well.

Irrelevant...
Without being reborn the Jews do not understand what the scriptures even mean...

Therefore, having such hope, we use great boldness of speech-- and not as Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the end of what was passing away.
But their minds were blinded.
For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is removed in Christ.
But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. But whenever one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
(2 Corinthians 3:12-16 EMTV)

 

[follower of Christ]

The word "Trinity" or "Triune" is not found in the Bible. It is merely a CONCEPT, a one-word convenient term for Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and there are ample scriptures to support this concept.

Amen.
I certainly hope that some folks dont ever end up on a jury deciding my fate. Its clear that the concept of 'evidence is beyond comprehension for some.

Presenting Evidence
WmTipton

1.0
Heres a bit of a definition of the word 'evidence' from the web
[quote:3ps6ufz0]
Evidence;
2. something that makes another thing evident; indication; sign
3. something that tends to prove; ground for belief

http://www.yourdictionary.com/evidence

When we read Gods word, preferably ALL of His word and not just parts that seem to back what we want to believe, there are many items throughout that word that 'tend to prove' or 'indicate' and give one 'grounds for belief' certain things.

*IF* this were a jury trial and none of the jurors were biased in one direction or another the evidence laid before them would 'tend to prove' or 'indicate' that these things are true.

Evidence is just that. It 'indicates' or gives 'signs' that something believed is the case.

In a jury trial I suppose that one could decide to ignore the clear evidence as it is presented as a whole.
It would be easy enough for a man to dismiss 99 pieces of evidence that tend to show someone as being innocent and cling to that one piece that MIGHT seem to indicate guilt, but is that actually letting the evidence speak for itself ?
No, that is someone who seems to WANT things to mean what he wants them to and doesnt really care what the evidence actually says.

2.0

Support:
6. To furnish corroborating evidence for


corroborate:
To strengthen or support with other evidence; make more certain

An example would be if I say that Gods word states that we arent to judge those outside the church but are to expel anyone professing to be a brother in Christ who is living in open sin.
The statement alone doesnt mean an single thing without SUPPORT from Gods word...it is presently UNsupported

Here is that SUPPORT;

I wrote to you in the letter not to associate intimately with fornicators; yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then you must go out of the world.

But now I have written to you not to associate intimately, if any man called a brother and is either a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one not to eat. For what is it to me to also judge those who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But God judges those who are outside. Therefore put out from you the evil one.
(1Co 5:9-13 MKJV)

That is how to properly support an assertion. Without support the assertion itself is meaningless.

http://assembly-ministries.org/studies/ ... =1&t_id=38
.[/quote:3ps6ufz0]

 

[sk0rpi0n]

Who’s disputing that?... Nobody’s disputing that “God is oneâ€Â.

Yeah, but christian beliefs modify the original one-ness of God as taught in the OT by saying God is triune. You cant have it both ways by saying "trinity" and still insisting it still means "one".

Fact is that for 2000 years, OT characters did not know of any trinity, they believed God is one and made no mention of a trinity.

These are more than enough scriptures to support the concept of Trinity.
What else do you expect the Bible to say in order for YOU to be convinced?

Even if there are plenty of scriptures used to teach the trinity concept, they are all contradicted by the teachings of the OT or by Jesus who makes it clear in several places that he is not equal to God. ("of my own I can do nothing", "Only the father knows the hour" etc)

So in the light of this, one needs to either

a) View christianity as being disconnected to the OT, and a new religion as a whole.
or
b) Admit contradictions within the bible.

Please elaborate…. What do you mean “misinterpretation†? ………
As a Muslim, do you think your interpretation is superior to ours?

By misinterpretation, I mean the way some use Abrahams vision of 3 men as being proof of a trinity, when those 3 men were angels.

Superiority of interpretation is not based on whether one is a muslim, jew or christian. What matters is how we read verses to reach a conclusion. For example- If God makes it clear that He is one and if Jesus and the prophets repeat this teaching, we need to take it as an absolute truth and end it there.

What several verses do you claim that teach God is not a trinity ?

Wel, let me start with the words of Jesus....

For I have not spoken on my own authority; the Father who sent me has himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak.
-John 12:49


Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
-John 7:16


The Father is greater than I am.
-John 14:28

And he said unto him, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, [that is], God, but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments."
-Matthew 19:17

As you can see, Jesus makes it absolutely clear that God and him are 2 different entities. And that he is lower to God. Jesus is not joking, so why do you all still say 'trinity'?

If the trinity is true, then please tell me ... how do you interpret those verses that contradict the concept of a trinity?? Are we to disregard the many instances where Jesus demonstrates that he is not part of any trinity?

That’s right…. It’s YOUR problem, not ours !
Please elaborate on the “contradictions†between Paul’s and Jesus’ teachings in another thread.

Well, simply choosing to ignore pauls contradictions does not mean you dont have a problem. In fact, you have a bigger problem because you are a christian!

We can have a thread to discuss this soon, but first just go through this page for a further elaboration on the problems with Pauls ideas ------>

http://nov55.com/rel/pau.html

Christians don't doubt God's Word.

They shouldnt. But there is nothing wrong in scrutinizing Pauls words a little further. I mean, does christianity teach that those disbelieving Paul end up in hell?
Just because Pauls work is in the bible used by christians, does not mean it is the word of God.

 

[francisdesales]

Yeah, but christian beliefs modify the original one-ness of God as taught in the OT by saying God is triune. You cant have it both ways by saying "trinity" and still insisting it still means "one".

Fact is that for 2000 years, OT characters did not know of any trinity, they believed God is one and made no mention of a trinity.

We believe that God has gradually given men His revelation to us, culminating in Jesus Christ, THE Word of God. For example, God's original plan for divorce, as Jesus tells the Jews. Or God's original plan for obeying the Decalogue (for example, adultery is committed not only with the body, but with the mind...). Furthermore, the concept that God's Suffering Servant would die for the sake of mankind. These are just some examples of how the Jews, as a whole, only received part of God's Revelation, to include WHO God is - a Triune Being, Father, Son, and Spirit. To claim that because the Jews before Christ were not aware of Trinity is inconsequential, as they also didn't recognize the Christ.

Even if there are plenty of scriptures used to teach the trinity concept, they are all contradicted by the teachings of the OT or by Jesus who makes it clear in several places that he is not equal to God. ("of my own I can do nothing", "Only the father knows the hour" etc)

This signifies two things.

First, Jesus was "inferior" in the sense that He was place in time, subject to the vigors that all men face; while maintaining His divinity, simultaneously, He still hungered. The Father didn't hunger for food, but Jesus, being united to mankind, did. Thus, in this sense, Jesus was "inferior". However, Scriptures clearly note that He was/is the Word and was/is God.

Secondly, Jesus humanity and divinity were not intermixed. Clearly, there is information that the Divinity did not relate to the Humanity of Jesus Christ. We just do not know the level of knowledge that Jesus' divinity informed His humanity. In some places, Scriptures tell us that He had "divine" knowledge of people's inner thoughts. He foreknew His fate, well before it was inevitable. He taught with authority, despite having no training. But as you note, there was some things that the humanity of Jesus was not privy to - OR not privy to tell others about.

So in the light of this, one needs to either

a) View christianity as being disconnected to the OT, and a new religion as a whole.
or
b) Admit contradictions within the bible.

You provide a false dilemna, because there is not a "C" in your choice - "I don't get it, please explain it..."

If Christianity was disconnected from the OT, it would have been tossed aside LONG ago when Marcion and his ilk stressed, as you do, the APPARENT contradictions (like the "wrathful" God vs. the "loving" God found in the two testaments). However, they are only apparent contradictions due to lack of understanding.

Christianity is not a "new" religion, it is the fulfillment of Judaism. A Jew who converts will say that he is a fulfilled Jew. Christ Himself said He did not come to change the law but to fulfill it. Thus, God's original intent is being fulfilled by the Christ and His established Church.

For I have not spoken on my own authority; the Father who sent me has himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak.
-John 12:49


Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
-John 7:16


The Father is greater than I am.
-John 14:28

And he said unto him, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, [that is], God, but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments."
-Matthew 19:17

As you can see, Jesus makes it absolutely clear that God and him are 2 different entities. And that he is lower to God. Jesus is not joking, so why do you all still say 'trinity'?

No, Jesus does not "absolutely make it clear that God and Jesus are two different 'entities'".

First, when Christ speaks of the Father's Will, it does not preclude that the Father's Will is not the Son's Will, as well. There can only be ONE divine will. There is not two Beings vying for superiority to express the Divine will. There is only One divine will, and the Father, Son, and Spirit all have it. Jesus has no authority to speak it APART from the Father, because there is only One Will. Thus, when Jesus speaks, so, too, does the Spirit and Father speak.

Furthermore, don't forget the passages that Jesus DOES say that show He indeed is more than a man - for example, when the JEWS on several occasions want to stone Him for what they understand as a claim to be equal to God.

But there is nothing wrong in scrutinizing Pauls words a little further. I mean, does christianity teach that those disbelieving Paul end up in hell? Just because Pauls work is in the bible used by christians, does not mean it is the word of God.

The entire contents of Sacred Scriptures is part of the Word of God. The Church, the People of God, have been guided by the Spirit to vouch for the written word of God. Thus, when the first century Christians saw the writings of Paul, they identified it with the Word of God. Authority has granted it so and the People have accepted this determination. As the Spirit has been promised to the Church to have it come to the knowledge of truth, we are confident that the Pauline corpus is indeed God's Word.

Paul himself does not state that the Gospel is HIS teachings. He tells the Galatians that he is giving GOD'S gospel. He tells other communities that they are to judge that his teachings are actually from God, not himself. Based on his authority, power exhibited, and his Christian walk, people believed Paul - and accepted his writings and oral teachings as coming from God. Thus, we accept the teachings that Paul meant for the entire Church as teachings that are formulative for us, as well. Living the teachings he has given us vouch for their authenticity, as God's Spirit continues to live and guide us.

Regards

 

[urbanii]

I always like the analogy to God's understanding of Himself and His creation as a good glimpse into the Trinity (in my opinion Trinity is a noun while Triune is an adjective for the same meaning)...but nevertheless, here it goes.

God's understanding understands by no other representation than His own substance; nevertheless, that substance is a likeness of all things. Consequently, the conception in God's understanding when he understands himself--his Word--is not only a likeness of the very God he is understanding (in fact it is identical) but also of all those things of which God's substance is a likeness. And so it is that by one object-representation--God's substance--and by one understood conception--God's Word--God can know everything simultaneously. God's substance and God's word share a mutual relationship, filial from the Word to the substance and paternal from the Substance to the Word, this mutual relationship must not be a separate existence in the simple oneness that is God, and therefore it is also one with God.

Consider the substance to be the Father
Consider the word to be the Son
Consider the mutual relationship of filiation and paternity to be the Spirit

Thus the trinity is at least glimpsed upon from our limited understanding, although it is still infinitely more mysterious and infinitely knowable. But I think the above represents the farthest our intellect can pierce the mystery.

 

[bodhitharta]

I always like the analogy to God's understanding of Himself and His creation as a good glimpse into the Trinity (in my opinion Trinity is a noun while Triune is an adjective for the same meaning)...but nevertheless, here it goes.

God's understanding understands by no other representation than His own substance; nevertheless, that substance is a likeness of all things. Consequently, the conception in God's understanding when he understands himself--his Word--is not only a likeness of the very God he is understanding (in fact it is identical) but also of all those things of which God's substance is a likeness. And so it is that by one object-representation--God's substance--and by one understood conception--God's Word--God can know everything simultaneously. God's substance and God's word share a mutual relationship, filial from the Word to the substance and paternal from the Substance to the Word, this mutual relationship must not be a separate existence in the simple oneness that is God, and therefore it is also one with God.

Consider the substance to be the Father
Consider the word to be the Son
Consider the mutual relationship of filiation and paternity to be the Spirit

Thus the trinity is at least glimpsed upon from our limited understanding, although it is still infinitely more mysterious and infinitely knowable. But I think the above represents the farthest our intellect can pierce the mystery.

No Mystery and no trinity or triune God

Deuteronomy 6 (King James Version)

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

One Lord is only one "person" and this One Lord is our God

This One Lord who is our God anointed(christened) a man to be lord of his fellow men

Acts 2 (King James Version)

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

And the reason is because....


Hebrews 1
9Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

This is the truth.

 

[urbanii]

bodhitharta, your argument doesn't make any sense to me. Are you saying that the doctrine of the Trinity (one of the oldest and most basic Christian doctrines that I can think of) is false? What is your concept of the Father and the Son, that there is no differentiation in their personhood? That doesn't seem biblical nor in the Tradition to me. Please clarify; I understand the Bible quotes you are using. But I am not saying that God is not one.

Remember that nothing can be said of the Father that can't be said of the Son, save that He is the Father. Nothing can be said of the Son that can't be said of the Father, save that He is the Son. And nothing can be said of the Father nor the Son that can't also be said of the Holy Spirit, save that He is the Holy Spirit. One God, three persons, Divine Trinity...This is Christianity's most basic tenant.

Or, for the more learned in the Tradition, you might recognize this: "Non es Patres, Non es Filius, Non es Spiritus Sancti, es Deus"

 

[Tina]

^
Bodhitharta is in the wrong forum.. He's a Muslim.


"Eid Mubarak" ..... abang .... akhoya

Assalaamu Alaikum !


:xmas :christmas