My take on Trinity

[JLB]

Already answered it.

What was your answer?

I didn’t see it.


What is the name of the LORD you called on to be saved?


Go ahead and answer it here and now so we can know the name of the LORD that saved you.





JLB

 

[JLB]

There aren't 3 in that statement.

It was written by a John something in Greek. The third which is the messiah testifying in the heaven is not stated. There is not a requirement to state all 3.

There are 2 items. Again, Greek doesn't have punctuation.


I doubt you even know Calculus.

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 plainly state THREE, not two.


You man made opinion says two, the truth of scripture says THREE.



JLB

 

[7thMoon]

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 word is the Father, since there is no KAI nor punctuation to separate it in the Greek.
ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· While this is not punctuated at all, you can see how KAI is not there, and that the punctuation was misleading.

And the rest is καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν which means, "And others a three, the one they are." The three that testify on earth are things which the christ did, was and is.

 

[Free]

The word is the Father, since there is no KAI nor punctuation to separate it in the Greek.
ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· While this is not punctuated at all, you can see how KAI is not there, and that the punctuation was misleading.

Can you provide a source to support your claim?

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God. (ESV)

Who is God and who is the Word in the above passage?

 

[GodsGrace]

The word is the Father, since there is no KAI nor punctuation to separate it in the Greek.
ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· While this is not punctuated at all, you can see how KAI is not there, and that the punctuation was misleading.

And the rest is καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν which means, "And others a three, the one they are." The three that testify on earth are things which the christ did, was and is.

Hi 7thMoon
Just a word because you're pretty new here.
Most persons don't speak Koine Greek so if you're going to do the above you need to post the source of your statement. This is true for any statement that is not your own. This is also true for the Theology Forum.
*******************************

Could you please explain your last sentence better?
Thanks.

 

[tigger 2]

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 plainly state THREE, not two.


You man made opinion says two, the truth of scripture says THREE.



JLB

.................................
See post #15 above.

 

[7thMoon]

Can you provide a source to support your claim?

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God. (ESV)

Who is God and who is the Word in the above passage?

In the English, it pretends to be the Messiah. But the word is still the God the father. ουτος then indicates there is another word which the messiah, but not God.

Do you want me to brake it down for you?

 

[Free]

In the English, it pretends to be the Messiah. But the word is still the God the father. ουτος then indicates there is another word which the messiah, but not God.

Do you want me to brake it down for you?

Sure, and then please provide at least one legitimate scholarly source to support your position.

 

[Runningman]

My take on Trinity​

The doctrine is not directly described or explained in the Bible.

 

[GodsGrace]

The doctrine is not directly described or explained in the Bible.

Right.
But do you see the Trinity/Godhead in the NT?

 

[Runningman]

Right.
But do you see the Trinity/Godhead in the NT?

I do not see the Trinity in the Bible. I have seen the word "Godhead" in the Bible, but I do not see it means Trinity.

 

[GodsGrace]

I do not see the Trinity in the Bible. I have seen the word "Godhead" in the Bible, but I do not see it means Trinity.

Interesting because I do.
What does GODHEAD mean to you?

BTW
Welcome!

 

[7thMoon]

Sure, and then please provide at least one legitimate scholarly source to support your position.

It says θεος ην the God it was, not ιησους χριστος ην Jesus Christ it was.

 

[JLB]

.................................
See post #15 above.

THREE.


You do understand that the scripture you are in denial of plainly says
THESE THREE are one?


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





JLB

 

[Free]

It says θεος ην the God it was

Where does it say that? And I still haven't seen any scholarly support for your position.

John 1:1

1 En archē ēn ho Logos kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos
1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος , καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν , καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος .
1 In [the] beginning was the Word and the Word was with - God and God was the Word .

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1.htm

In the third clause, the Word (ὁ Λόγος) is the subject and God (Θεὸς) is the predicate nominative. That is, this is a predicate nominative construction (https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/predicate_nominative.htm), but more specifically, an anarthrous predicate nominative since Θεὸς doesn't have the article.

In the final analysis, the only way the last clause can be understood is qualitatively--the Word was in nature God.

https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/jehovahs-witnesses/john-11-meaning-and-translation/

 

[Runningman]

What does GODHEAD mean to you?

BTW
Welcome!

To me the word Godhead refers to God. Some translations just refer to Godhead as the Deity. I think it's a way of saying the fullness of God lives in Jesus.

However, I don't see it as a nod to Trinitarianism since that should be something unique to Jesus, but it can also apply to other people as well. Ephesians 3:19 for example "...of the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God."

 

[tigger 2]

THREE.


You do understand that the scripture you are in denial of plainly says
THESE THREE are one?


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





JLB

.................................................
Even most trinitarian scholars admit that 1 John 5:7 (as found in the KJV) is a late addition to text and not in any early NT Greek manuscript.

There is no way that Jesus would pray at Jn 17:22 that Christians may be one "just as we (Jesus and the Father) are one" if he were truly God. In that case he would be praying that these Christians become "equally God" with him and the Father!

But even more important is the fact that John did not write the words found at 1 Jn 5:7 in the KJV! And we must consider why trinitarian scholars and copyists felt compelled to add it to the Holy Scriptures.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/08/1-john-57-kjv.html

 

[tigger 2]

Where does it say that? And I still haven't seen any scholarly support for your position.

John 1:1

1 En archē ēn ho Logos kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos
1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος , καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν , καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος .
1 In [the] beginning was the Word and the Word was with - God and God was the Word .

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1.htm

In the third clause, the Word (ὁ Λόγος) is the subject and God (Θεὸς) is the predicate nominative. That is, this is a predicate nominative construction (https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/predicate_nominative.htm), but more specifically, an anarthrous predicate nominative since Θεὸς doesn't have the article.

In the final analysis, the only way the last clause can be understood is qualitatively--the Word was in nature God.

https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/jehovahs-witnesses/john-11-meaning-and-translation/

.............................................
Probable mistranslation:

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/john-11c-primer_21.html

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/definite-john-11c.html

 

[Free]

.................................................
Even most trinitarian scholars admit that 1 John 5:7 (as found in the KJV) is a late addition to text and not in any early NT Greek manuscript.

Correct.

There is no way that Jesus would pray at Jn 17:22 that Christians may be one "just as we (Jesus and the Father) are one" if he were truly God. In that case he would be praying that these Christians become "equally God" with him and the Father!

Your conclusion doesn't follow. This is especially true since of what John has already stated and recorded throughout his gospel. Right from the start, John 1:1-18, he shows us who Jesus is, and everything else he says about Jesus must keep that as its foundation. Also, even in chapter 17, he has already stated:

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed. (ESV)

God stated that he will not give his glory to another (Isa 48:11), yet Jesus not only states that he shared in the Father's glory, but that he did so "before the world existed," that is, before creation.

But even more important is the fact that John did not write the words found at 1 Jn 5:7 in the KJV! And we must consider why trinitarian scholars and copyists felt compelled to add it to the Holy Scriptures.

Because it agrees with the rest of the NT. Still doesn't justify adding it though.

.............................................
Probable mistranslation:

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/john-11c-primer_21.html

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/definite-john-11c.html

Not likely a mistranslation. John's grammar is very specific so that it avoids Arianism, polytheism, and Modalism, at a minimum. It also fits very well with everything else he states about Jesus and records Jesus saying about himself.

Just so you know, most people aren't going to go to your blog and read.

 

[tigger 2]

Correct.


Your conclusion doesn't follow. This is especially true since of what John has already stated and recorded throughout his gospel. Right from the start, John 1:1-18, he shows us who Jesus is, and everything else he says about Jesus must keep that as its foundation. Also, even in chapter 17, he has already stated:

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed. (ESV)

God stated that he will not give his glory to another (Isa 48:11), yet Jesus not only states that he shared in the Father's glory, but that he did so "before the world existed," that is, before creation.


Because it agrees with the rest of the NT. Still doesn't justify adding it though.


Not likely a mistranslation. John's grammar is very specific so that it avoids Arianism, polytheism, and Modalism, at a minimum. It also fits very well with everything else he states about Jesus and records Jesus saying about himself.

Just so you know, most people aren't going to go to your blog and read.

..................................
I'd be surprised if any go there and actually read/study what it truly reveals about John's clear, consistent usage and John 1:1c. I believe you and I discussed John 1:1c a while back. But, like everyone else, you didn't actually read it all or you didn't like what it factually proved.

Yes, it takes too much effort for the majority to study the many steps to prove that John did not intend "God" at John 1:1c.