The Trinity

[7thMoon]

But GOD did speak all things into being through HIS Word. Is that in agreement with what you've deduced in your scholarly endeavors?

He spoke it and the messengers of God did some of the work. Words are nothing if they don't have action.

 

[Free]

And it never will to any who chooses to compartmentalize things of faith and refuses to see the bigger picture. There is no distinction to be made. Read Isaiah. You insist on three. Why? What is your motive? Are you gathering or dividing?

There are three because that is what the totality of the evidence shows. I’ve been told by people smarter than me that I’m very logical and analytical. I pick things apart, analyze it all, and follow the evidence to where it leads. The Trinity is the bigger picture. It simply makes the most sense of who God is ontologically (love) and how he acts in creation for its redemption and the salvation of humans. If we get Christ wrong, he isn’t the Christ of the Bible and there is no salvation. This is a central, salcific issue.

 

[Free]

No it doesn't because monotheism means trust in one unique to the exclusion of others. There is only the one who created the planet, and it isn't Jesus the Christ.

Monotheism is the belief that there is only one God. Polytheism is the belief that there is more than one god. Believing or trusting in one or more isn’t relevant to those definitions.

Definition of monotheism from Merriam-Webster:

:the doctrine or belief that there is but one God

Verse 10?

Yes.

And yes, because John the apostle was as obtuse as Heraclitus the Stoic.

Obtuse? Now I know where the problem lies.

But it is clear one word could be Jesus, and the other the God YHWH.

There is only one Word in John 1 and indeed in the entire Bible—the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity.

 

[7thMoon]

There is only one Word in John 1 and indeed in the entire Bible—the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity.

The word LOGOS has many contexts. Even 1 John 5:7 calls the father LOGOS.

 

[7thMoon]

Monotheism is the belief that there is only one God. Polytheism is the belief that there is more than one god. Believing or trusting in one or more isn’t relevant to those definitions.

It is also the belief in a unique supreme God. Monos means unique in Greek.

Definition of monotheism from Merriam-Webster:

:the doctrine or belief that there is but one God

Who cares? The New Testament has polytheism by your lame definition. John 10:34 and 1 Corinthians 8:5
(Jhn 10:34 KJV) Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
(1Co 8:5 KJV) For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

Obtuse? Now I know where the problem lies.

John was weeding people out based on what I know of his introduction to "his gospel".

There is only one Word in John 1 and indeed in the entire Bible—the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity.

You are incorrect.

 

[Free]

The word LOGOS has many contexts. Even 1 John 5:7 calls the father LOGOS.

That is very clearly referring to three different persons--the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit.

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

Of course, that is most likely a later addition to the text since it is a very developed concept of the Trinity.

It is also the belief in a unique supreme God. Monos means unique in Greek.

It is belief in one God. Monos means "alone," "only one," or something along those lines. In that sense only can it have the idea of uniqueness, but it is never translated as "unique."

https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/monos.html

What does God himself say?

Deu 32:39 "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Isa 43:10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.

Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.

Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me,
...
Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.
Isa 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.

Isa 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

(All ESV.)

God sure seems to think there are no other real gods.

Who cares? The New Testament has polytheism by your lame definition. John 10:34 and 1 Corinthians 8:5
(Jhn 10:34 KJV) Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
(1Co 8:5 KJV) For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

My lame definition? You mean what Merriam-Webster and other dictionaries give as the definition? But, no, the NT doesn't teach polytheism.

John was weeding people out based on what I know of his introduction to "his gospel".

What do you mean by "weeding people out"? What do you mean by putting "his gospel" in scare quotes?

You are incorrect.

Can you cite one legitimate, scholarly source to support your position?

 

[7thMoon]

That is very clearly referring to three different persons--the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit.

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

5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
There is not any punctuation in Greek, thus the father is another word.

Deu 32:39 "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Isa 43:10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.

Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.

Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me,
...
Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.
Isa 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.

Isa 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

The context is that the pagan gods are not better.

 

[Free]

5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
There is not any punctuation in Greek, thus the father is another word.

That doesn't mean the Father is the Word. As I said, given that it is most likely a late addition to the text in support of the Trinity, it simply cannot be saying the Father is the Word. That idea is found nowhere in the Bible.

The context is that the pagan gods are not better.

That is not the context at all. God himself is clearly saying he doesn't know of any other gods and that there are no others. If that's what he says, then that is what we ought to believe.

 

[7thMoon]

That doesn't mean the Father is the Word. As I said, given that it is most likely a late addition to the text in support of the Trinity, it simply cannot be saying the Father is the Word. That idea is found nowhere in the Bible.

You cannot see that, and it is the most basic of Greek grammar and appositives? It can't support the trinity very well as it is. That much is obvious.

That is not the context at all. God himself is clearly saying he doesn't know of any other gods and that there are no others. If that's what he says, then that is what we ought to believe.

Yet ye are gods, and there are many gods and many lords. Why the obvious and total contradiction?

 

[Free]

You cannot see that, and it is the most basic of Greek grammar and appositives? It can't support the trinity very well as it is. That much is obvious.

Again, you need to provide legitimate, scholarly support for your position. It's a thoroughly Trinitarian verse, which it is considered to have been a later addition to the text, in part because it is far too advanced a Trinitarian formula. That has always been the debate around 1 John 5:7. I suspect there isn't a Bible scholar or theologian out there that believes this verse is saying the Father is the Word, nor that there are two Words in the NT.

Yet ye are gods, and there are many gods and many lords. Why the obvious and total contradiction?

Context, context, context. "You are gods." In John 10:34, Jesus was referring to the judges in Psalm 82, which are human people put in place by God with the power to judge. As for 1 Cor 8:5:

1Co 8:5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— (ESV)

"So-called gods." These are those idols and other things that people worship as gods, but they are not actual gods at all.

Notice also verse 6:

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

If "from whom are all things" speaks of the eternal nature of the Father, then it necessarily follows that "through whom are all things" speaks of the eternal nature of the Son.

 

[Free]

5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
There is not any punctuation in Greek, thus the father is another word.

I should have pointed out that this is where your other misunderstanding of Greek comes in again to cause substantial confusion. According to you, the verse should read:

1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, a Father, a Word, and a Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

So, now there are multiple Fathers, multiple Words, and multiple Holy Spirits. John says “there are three” and he also says “these three.” So, he is clearly speaking a particular three. Which three?

According to the actual rendering you have yet another issue:

1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

You say that this verse says the Father is the Word, but the verse says there are three. So, if the Father is the Word, then together that is one and the Holy Spirit makes two. Yet, twice John says there are three.

 

[7thMoon]

I should have pointed out that this is where your other misunderstanding of Greek comes in again to cause substantial confusion. According to you, the verse should read:

1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, a Father, a Word, and a Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

So, now there are multiple Fathers, multiple Words, and multiple Holy Spirits. John says “there are three” and he also says “these three.” So, he is clearly speaking a particular three. Which three?

According to the actual rendering you have yet another issue:

1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

You say that this verse says the Father is the Word, but the verse says there are three. So, if the Father is the Word, then together that is one and the Holy Spirit makes two. Yet, twice John says there are three.

The misunderstanding is yours not mine.

 

[7thMoon]

That is very clearly referring to three different persons--the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit.

The son is already mentioned in verse 6, so John felt it redundant to note anyone except God.

Yet, twice John says there are three.

The 3 which testify on the earth of course.

 

[Free]

The misunderstanding is yours not mine.

And yet you haven’t provided a single scholarly source to support what you have said, not have have provided a refutation of the points I made.

The son is already mentioned in verse 6, so John felt it redundant to note anyone except God.

The 3 which testify on the earth of course.

No, that is in verse 8. Look again at verse 7:

1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
1Jn 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Grammatically, there is nothing to suggest that John is saying the Father is the Word. Logically, if John says there are three, then there must be three, not two, so the Father cannot be the Word. Theologically, there is only one Word in the NT.

 

[7thMoon]

Grammatically, there is nothing to suggest that John is saying the Father is the Word.

There is no KAI between pathr and logos. This isn't English and a KAI would be required to divide the objects. This makes them into appositives. They are one in the same.

 

[7thMoon]

Free In other words, it would be ο πατηρ και ο λογος και το αγιον πνευμα not ο πατηρ ο λογος και το αγιον πνεθμα.

 

[Free]

There is no KAI between pathr and logos. This isn't English and a KAI would be required to divide the objects. This makes them into appositives. They are one in the same.

They are not one and the same. You need to start providing scholarly references to support your claims. First, John says three twice, so he’s talking about three, not two. Second, there is only one Word in the NT, and he isn’t the Father. Third, the only debate about this passage is whether or not it belongs in the Bible, precisely because it is so strongly Trinitarian. No one, that I have ever come across, has claimed that it is saying the Father is the Word.

 

[7thMoon]

They are not one and the same. You need to start providing scholarly references to support your claims. First, John says three twice, so he’s talking about three, not two. Second, there is only one Word in the NT, and he isn’t the Father. Third, the only debate about this passage is whether or not it belongs in the Bible, precisely because it is so strongly Trinitarian. No one, that I have ever come across, has claimed that it is saying the Father is the Word.

There are plenty of LOGOI in the New Testament.
(Rev 19:9 KJV) And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed [are] they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings [Strong's G3056 λογοι] of God.

1 John 5:7-8
ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα·
How that the three they are; a which testify in the heaven. A father a word and a Holy Spirit. But Jesus was only worded about in verse 6.

καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
And others a three to the one, they are.

καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἕν(should be επι?) τῇ γῇ
And the three they are, a which testify in the earth:
τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα three masculine articles and the feminine nouns, three neuters.
a spirit and a water and a blood.
καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἐν εἰσὶν
And a three into a one they are.

I don't think it makes sense the trinitarian way.

No one, that I have ever come across, has claimed that it is saying the Father is the Word.

He is his own word just like you have your own name.

 

[Angelical]

I think we can see some of this in the term “Sons of God” in Genesis, and then Genesis 6:3 says that God’s Spirit will not contend with Man and he will live 120 Years. And then Spirit and Flesh, this then gets into kind of what Sin does.

Jesus was all God and all Man, Spirit and Flesh, Past and Future, Masculine and Feminine, he was like a Meteor and its Closest Relative Star Dust Particles on Earth from the Big Bang. Like, if you take a New kind of Tree and plant it in a Forest, it changes the Forest in all the ways it does over the Years. And those Trees then are related to other Trees elsewhere, but have a different lineage. So Jesus was most closely related to the Sky than the rest of us, that is what we have all agreed on in many ways.

 

[Randy]

But the Holy Spirit isn't the Father. That is consistently and continually made clear.


Is that so?

That's like stating my spirit isn't me. Its not the nature of the Spirit of God in question but the distinct personhood of the Spirit. For the Fathers Spirit would have His nature.

Matthew 10:20

Fathers promise
In the last days I will pour out "My Spirit"...

The Spirit of the One who sent Him.
The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners,....

For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken.

Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit but Jesus never referred to that Spirit as a person (Father) nor did He ever pray to the Spirit but only to the Father.

Its not those who listen to the Spirit and learn from Him its those who listen to the Father and learn from "Him" God is on His throne in heaven so its by "His Spirit" He bears this witness.

It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.