is there trinity or not?

[for_his_glory]

It may just be your wording but this sounds like modalism, not trinitarianism.

The Holy Spirit is simply the Spirit of God and is referred to being part of the trinity that is Father, Son (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost. God is a Spirit and wants us to worship or another word for worship is to humble ourselves before him in spirit and truth. God is not flesh and blood that we can see and touch with our physical senses for he has no form but the Spirit that is God can take on many forms for us to hear him speak to us. Gods’ spirit spoke to many prophets throughout the Bible through pillars of clouds a burning bush, a donkey or spoke with visions through dreams to reveal his will for encouragement and instruction. Gods' spirit was and still is alive and moves through the hearts of his who are called by his name and have answered his call to salvation through Jesus.

The Spirit of God was made flesh (Jesus) to walk among us teaching us and showing signs and wonders for the people to repent of their evil ways and come back to God. Many came back to God and were made servants worthy to praise him and continue in his works but there were many (Pharisees and Priest) that despised what they were hearing for it came against their laws and traditions and they felt they needed to silence this man, not knowing that it was actually the Spirit of God they were trying to silence.

The Pharisees and Scribes thought they did away with this man named Jesus, but did not realize that one of the promises God made with Abraham was that he would never leave or forsake his own. Jesus also told his disciples about how he had to go and be with the Father and if they would keep his commandments the Father would give them another comforter that would be with them forever and teach them all things and bring those things back to their remembrance.

If you go to my website listed at the bottom of this post you can read the whole class I wrote on the Holy Spirit including scripture.

 

[Free]

For Free, #15

Sharp’s rule was invented in the 18th century by a Trinitarian searching for “absolute grammatical proof of the trinity.â€

He declared that a NT Greek construction wherein two nouns (persons) are joined by the word “and†[kai] and the first noun has the article [‘the’] but the second does not, always show that the two are the same person (e.g., “the son and heirâ€). He found 5 such examples to ‘prove’ that Jesus is God: Titus 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:12; 1 Tim. 5:21; Eph. 5:5


The trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris devotes a section to 2 Thess. 1:12 in his book Jesus as God, pp. 265-266, Baker Book House, 1992. He admits, in effect, that the argument for a trinitarian interpretation (“according to the grace of our God and Lord, namely Jesus Christâ€) is less probable and more poorly supported than the non-trinitarian interpretation (“according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christâ€). He admits that, although “the first rendering has a few supporters,†no English translation supports that trinitarian rendering, and, in fact, the trinitarian NAB, LB, GNB, MLB, NLV, Douay, KJIIV, andWeymouth translations most clearly refute it by rendering “the grace of our God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.†This alone destroys the assertion that this is an “absolute rule.†If it doesn’t work at 2 Thess. 1:12, and most trinitarian scholars and translators indicate this, there is no reason to insist that it works in any other scripture!

The Roman Catholic scholar, Karl Rahner, commenting on 2 Peter 1:1, says that ‘God’ “here is clearly separated from ‘Christ’.†- Theological Investigations, Karl Rahner, pp. 136, 137, Vol.1, 3rd printing: 1965.

2 Peter 1:1 "Simon Peter, a bondservant and Apostle of Jesus Christ: To those to whom there has been allotted the same precious faith as that which is ours through the righteousness of our God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ." - Weymouth NT.

Famed British NT scholar and trinitarian clergyman Henry Alford wrote: “I would submit that [a translation which clearly differentiates God from Christ at Titus 2:13] satisfies all the grammatical requirements of the sentence: that it is both structurally and contextually more probable, and more agreeable to the Apostle’s [Paul’s] way of writing.â€- The Greek Testament, p. 421, Vol. 3.

“Of the Glory of the great God and of our Saviour Christ Jesus†- Titus 2:13, The Bible, A New Translation by Dr. James Moffatt, Professor of New Testament Greek at Oxford University.

And notice Eph. 5:5 - one of the examples Sharp himself chose to “prove†Christ’s deity which Wallace completely ignores. Most trinitarian Bibles translate this example of Sharp’s Construction: “in the kingdom of Christ and of God†- KJV; NRSV; RSV; NIV; NEB; REB; NAB; Douay; MLB; LB; GNB; TEV; The Amplified Bible; Third Millenium Bible; New Living Translation; New Century Version; God’s Word; Holman Christian Standard Bible; Wesley’s New Testament; Phillips; and the Webster Bible. This is not the way it would be translated if the two descriptions were of the same person! Trinitarian scholars themselves clearly reject Sharp’s rule here! If it doesn’t work here, there is no reason to believe it works at the other “Sharp’s Constructions†including those in Titus and Peter!

This is what I mean by clearly and repeatedly stated. The Greek allows for different interpretations, and just because most Trinitarians choose a Trinitarian interpretation does not mean that it is the correct one. It is not a clear, undisputed (by Trinitarians themselves), oft-repeated statement.

And of course your argument appears to be an argument of convenience, as it is very selective in which passages it chooses to ignore Granville Sharp's rule. 2 Pet 1:11 has the exact same grammatical construction, so would you translate it the same way?

2Pe 1:1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: (ESV)

2Pe 1:11 for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you. (ESV)

http://vintage.aomin.org/GRANVILL.html

These texts are clear, whether you think it or not. Not to mention the fact they are in agreement with many other passages and the larger theme found in the OT. As soon as one starts saying otherwise, there is significant contradiction.

 

[Free]

The Holy Spirit is simply the Spirit of God and is referred to being part of the trinity that is Father, Son (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost. God is a Spirit and wants us to worship or another word for worship is to humble ourselves before him in spirit and truth. God is not flesh and blood that we can see and touch with our physical senses for he has no form but the Spirit that is God can take on many forms for us to hear him speak to us. Gods’ spirit spoke to many prophets throughout the Bible through pillars of clouds a burning bush, a donkey or spoke with visions through dreams to reveal his will for encouragement and instruction. Gods' spirit was and still is alive and moves through the hearts of his who are called by his name and have answered his call to salvation through Jesus.

The Spirit of God was made flesh (Jesus) to walk among us teaching us and showing signs and wonders for the people to repent of their evil ways and come back to God. Many came back to God and were made servants worthy to praise him and continue in his works but there were many (Pharisees and Priest) that despised what they were hearing for it came against their laws and traditions and they felt they needed to silence this man, not knowing that it was actually the Spirit of God they were trying to silence.

The Pharisees and Scribes thought they did away with this man named Jesus, but did not realize that one of the promises God made with Abraham was that he would never leave or forsake his own. Jesus also told his disciples about how he had to go and be with the Father and if they would keep his commandments the Father would give them another comforter that would be with them forever and teach them all things and bring those things back to their remembrance.

If you go to my website listed at the bottom of this post you can read the whole class I wrote on the Holy Spirit including scripture.

I'm a little confused by your wording. Do you agree that the Trinity is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? Do you agree that it is the Son who took on human flesh as Jesus?

 

[Levi]

God is one! But....

God created the spirit realm and the spirits

and He also created the physical realm

call them dimensions or what ever you like, quite clearly there are several layers to the creation,heaven earth etc...

God exists wether the creation exists or not but the creation is finite and has its boundaries.

Within the creation God has shown He exists as Spirit and later on also as a man of likeness to us and we know that He also exists outside of the creation, so we have three different representations of God right there.

many would like to say the Bible doesn't clearly state the trinity but I would refer them to the book of John and ask them to read quite carefully what Jesus states numerous times.

The reason that the Jewish leaders of the day wanted to kill Jesus so badly was because He quite out rightly claimed divinity.

unfortunately the extreme junking down of communication and language in this day and age has made it near on impossible for people to understand what used to be quite plain statements.

 

[for_his_glory]

I'm a little confused by your wording. Do you agree that the Trinity is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? Do you agree that it is the Son who took on human flesh as Jesus?

yes as all have no beginning and no end as it's all Gods Spirit

 

[Free]

yes as all have no beginning and no end as it's all Gods Spirit

Do you agree that the Father is not the Son and that neither of them are the Holy Spirit?

 

[for_his_glory]

Do you agree that the Father is not the Son and that neither of them are the Holy Spirit?

Three personifications of Gods Spirit manifested in three different ways, but yet are that of Gods Spirit indwelling different formation as Spirit=God, son=Spirit of God in the form of flesh who is our mediator between us and God as God can not look upon the sinful flesh of man, Holy Spirit=the comforting teaching factor of God. All have no beginning and no end.

 

[Free]

Three personifications of Gods Spirit manifested in three different ways, but yet are that of Gods Spirit indwelling different formation as Spirit=God, son=Spirit of God in the form of flesh who is our mediator between us and God as God can not look upon the sinful flesh of man, Holy Spirit=the comforting teaching factor of God. All have no beginning and no end.

That doesn't answer my question. Yes or no will do, along with any reason you feel is necessary.

 

[WIP]

I may not fully comprehend it but then, there's a lot about God I don't nor can I fully comprehend. I do believe my eyes will be open eventually.

 

[teddy trueblood]

Free:

“And of course your argument appears to be an argument of convenience, as it is very selective in which passages it chooses to ignore Granville
Sharp's rule. 2 Pet 1:11 has the exact same grammatical construction, so
would you translate it the same way?

“2Pe 1:1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
(ESV)

“2Pe 1:11 for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of
our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.
(ESV)




http://vintage.aomin.org/GRANVILL.html

“These texts are clear, whether you think it or not. Not to mention the fact they are in agreement with many other passages and the larger theme found in the OT. As soon as one starts saying otherwise, there is
significant contradiction.â€

The many Trinitarian scholars who have disputed the “God is Jesus†interpretation of the 5 Sharp’s ‘proofs’ make this an obvious disputed (not clear) interpretation. They not only CAN be translated differently, but these many trinitarian scholars believe they SHOULD be.

2 Peter 1:1 has the following footnote in the RSV and NRSV: “Or of our God and the savior Jesus Christâ€.

Instead of looking to 2 Peter 1:11 which obviously refers to one person only, why not look at the very next verse following 2 Peter 1:1?

2 Peter 1:2 is in the same ‘Sharp’s’ construction as 1:1 and also mentions “God†and “Jesus.â€

Here is how it is translated in Trinitarian Bibles:

Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - 21st Century King James Version.

…the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord - KJV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - ASV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NASB.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NRSV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NIV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - ESV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - REB.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NAB.

…knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - GNB.

As already shown in my previous post, there are numerous Trinitarian scholars themselves who do not accept the ‘Jesus is God’ interpretation in the 5 Sha’s Rule ‘proofs.’ That is the meaning of “unclear†and “disputed.â€

 

[Davies]

Do you agree that the Father is not the Son and that neither of them are the Holy Spirit?

Hi Free,

It's too bad you weren't there at what is was called the Elephant Conference 2 where T.D. Jakes was asked questions regarding the Trinity approximately 1-2 weeks ago. Many believe that Jakes hasn't progressed past his views of Modalism in his Oneness Pentecostalism, and because he hasn't broken his associations with his former denomination, many do not believe his current statement on the Trinity which is an acknowledgment of the three Persons of the Trinity, but prefers to use the term manifestation which is ambiguous at best. Dr. James MacDonald who hosted the conference, appears to be going a little soft, because he endorsed Jake's Trinity view. The importance of the doctrine of the Trinity use to be so serious that it was considered heresy if you didn't believe in it. Today the Trinity is not considered that critical.

The Trinity, our God, is three distinct Persons, yet one God. They are co-equal, co-eternal, and none of Them were created. It is easy to communicate what the Bible says regarding the Trinity, but God is not someone we will be able to grasp fully.

- Davies

 

[Ace1234]

I believe that the answer to this depends on whether a person believes what Scripture
clearly says ... most especially that Jesus Christ is God, equal to Father God,
the Creator of all things, the Sustainer of all things now, the Giver of eternal life, etc.

Despite 70+ verses (would you like the references?) which affirm the above,
some "Bible-believing Christians" just cannot say the words, "I believe Jesus is God".
Why is this? I believe it's because they simply do not have this revelation.

Can a person be born-again (with the Holy Spirit residing in him/her teaching all things),
and not have this revelation when he/she reads the NT?

What are your thoughts on verse that state Christ doesn't know things that God the father does, like when stated only the father knows the day of his return? If Christ is equal to God, how would he not know this?

 

[smaller]

What are your thoughts on verse that state Christ doesn't know things that God the father does, like when stated only the father knows the day of his return? If Christ is equal to God, how would he not know this?

Many a believer has stumbled over that verse in order to divide Jesus from God.

A good study on this matter is found in 1 Cor. 15, the fast track of same being that the intention of God in the summation is for God to be all in all. There is a basic principle of the Mystery of the Nature of God, permanently placing that matter as a mystery. Part of that view is that The Fulness and Entirety of God is known and knowable only unto Himself.

Since His Intention is to be all in all, only He knows what that is and consists of.

It was not then that Jesus didn't know. It's Him showing a principle of the Mystery of Gods Nature.

There are other positions that come into this as well, such as Gods relationship to time, the ending of time as shown in Revelation, etc etc. It's not 'easy' subject matter.

s

 

[for_his_glory]

That doesn't answer my question. Yes or no will do, along with any reason you feel is necessary.

No, God is not the Son nor the Holy Spirit, but Gods Spirit dwells in the two as each represents that of totally being that of Gods nature/character in all they do and say. What I have been trying to show here is that it is all of Gods Spirit through the perfection His son Jesus and the Holy Spirit who also have no beginning and no end.

John 10:30 I and my Father are one. (Spirit)

John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? (Spirit)

John 14:25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

 

[Free]

No, God is not the Son nor the Holy Spirit, but Gods Spirit dwells in the two as each represents that of totally being that of Gods nature/character in all they do and say. What I have been trying to show here is that it is all of Gods Spirit through the perfection His son Jesus and the Holy Spirit who also have no beginning and no end.

John 10:30 I and my Father are one. (Spirit)

John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? (Spirit)

John 14:25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

If you disagree that the Father is not the Son and neither are the Holy Spirit, but yet all three are the one Being that is God, then you do not believe the Trinity. Your position is closer to modalism, although it is still quite confusing. I don't understand why a simple, direct answer seems to be difficult.

 

[Free]

What are your thoughts on verse that state Christ doesn't know things that God the father does, like when stated only the father knows the day of his return? If Christ is equal to God, how would he not know this?

This highlights the significant problem with these discussions that I have stated already. People pick this verse and that verse while ignoring the rest, essentially ignoring the context of the entirety of Scripture. Of course, I am not saying that is what you have done, as you may just be asking out of curiosity. But it happens, and it happens far too often. We simply cannot just take one such verse and suggest that it shows Jesus couldn't have been God.

Among other passages, Phil 2:5-8 is absolutely key in understanding such verses:

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant,being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (ESV)

 

[Free]

Hi Free,

It's too bad you weren't there at what is was called the Elephant Conference 2 where T.D. Jakes was asked questions regarding the Trinity approximately 1-2 weeks ago. Many believe that Jakes hasn't progressed past his views of Modalism in his Oneness Pentecostalism, and because he hasn't broken his associations with his former denomination, many do not believe his current statement on the Trinity which is an acknowledgment of the three Persons of the Trinity, but prefers to use the term manifestation which is ambiguous at best. Dr. James MacDonald who hosted the conference, appears to be going a little soft, because he endorsed Jake's Trinity view. The importance of the doctrine of the Trinity use to be so serious that it was considered heresy if you didn't believe in it. Today the Trinity is not considered that critical.

The Trinity, our God, is three distinct Persons, yet one God. They are co-equal, co-eternal, and none of Them were created. It is easy to communicate what the Bible says regarding the Trinity, but God is not someone we will be able to grasp fully.

- Davies

Interesting. I didn't know he was distancing himself from his former denomination. Perhaps with time he will come around. As you probably know, it is exceedingly difficult to change one's views on a given doctrine. And I agree that that is what is happening here. Ambiguous language does not lend itself well to theological discussion. There must be clarity.

 

[John Zain]

What are your thoughts on verse that state Christ doesn't know things that
God the father does, like when stated only the father knows the day of his return?
If Christ is equal to God, how would he not know this?

The Second Person of the Godhead (the Logos, the Word) was manifested to us!
(Note that it wasn't Jesus who was manifested to us ... John 1:1-14).
But, the Logos was GREATLY limited by being in a human body.

Don't forget that the 3 Manifestations of the Triune Godhead all have different functions.
So, I'm not too surprised to read that ONLY the Father (the CEO) knew something or other.

One reason the Logos came to us was to show us how to live our lives!
Jesus prayed to Father God all the time for guidance ... what to say and do, etc.
And the NT says the Holy Spirit was present to perform the miracles.
HEY ... sounds like what we should be doing, relying on, having faith in, etc.

Yes, if we have the baptism with the Holy Spirit,
and the special powerful gift of faith (1 Corinthians 12:9),
and the special powerful gift of miracles (1 Corinthians 12:10),
we are also able to be used to perform all kinds of miracles.
Just like how Jesus was used to perform miracles.
He said we would perform greater miracles than He did,
but He was referring to quantity, not quality.

 

[Free]

Free:


The many Trinitarian scholars who have disputed the “God is Jesus” interpretation of the 5 Sharp’s ‘proofs’ make this an obvious disputed (not clear) interpretation. They not only CAN be translated differently, but these many trinitarian scholars believe they SHOULD be.

2 Peter 1:1 has the following footnote in the RSV and NRSV: “Or of our God and the savior Jesus Christ”.

A footnote that has words added in--without any actual basis for doing so-- that don't appear in the Greek text and which completely change the meaning of the text. At least the translations still read "our God and Savior Jesus Christ."

Instead of looking to 2 Peter 1:11 which obviously refers to one person only, why not look at the very next verse following 2 Peter 1:1?

Seeing as how verses 1 and 11 are grammatically identical, on what actual basis can you say that verse 11 is clearly speaking of one person and verse 1 is not? There really is no basis for doing so.

2 Peter 1:2 is in the same ‘Sharp’s’ construction as 1:1 and also mentions “God” and “Jesus.”

Here is how it is translated in Trinitarian Bibles:

Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - 21st Century King James Version.

…the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord - KJV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - ASV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NASB.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NRSV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NIV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - ESV.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - REB.

…the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - NAB.

…knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord - GNB.

As already shown in my previous post, there are numerous Trinitarian scholars themselves who do not accept the ‘Jesus is God’ interpretation in the 5 Sharp’s Rule ‘proofs.’ That is the meaning of “unclear” and “disputed.”

A handful isn't numerous and neither of us has the resources to conclude whether numerous scholars believe this or that regarding the matter.

And I believe you are wrong about 2 Pet 1:2 being a Sharp construction; "Lord" has the article as well.

 

[Hitch]

That this important doctrine was not laid out all that clearly speaks strongly to the idea that the church is here to mature, in sight of the enemy as per M13.