Three person God identified in the Bible?

[Free]

That's all fine and good, but you would have to produce a bit of Scripture that "teaches" a trinity concept for God. Nobody can just claim a concept about the Bible without the Bible's "teaching" that concept.

I have, but you have so far left all those things unaddressed.

Sorry.

Matt. 28:19 is interesting, but proves nothing about the trinity because there is no example of baptism in the Bible that shows anybody baptizing in that fashion. All baptisms in the Bible use the 'in the Name of Jesus Christ' model.

There again, you must have Biblical support for any claim. People love to claim that Matt. 28:19 proves the trinity, but are very saddened to discover that none of the Apostles obeyed that specific direction from Christ. I can only wonder why. It is most likely, based on the evidence that we do have from Scripture, because they all understood what He was actually saying. He was saying that He IS the Father, Son and Holy Ghost - certainly not that He is just among them. Thus, they baptized in HIS Name.

It is just as likely that "in the name of Jesus" is just a shortened form of "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." It could also mean that since the three persons are the one God, the one name, YHWH, then baptizing into one is the same as baptizing into all three. That would explain why it is legitimate to use a shortened form.

Even just two verses prior to Acts 2:38, Peter clearly shows that the Father is distinct from the Son:

Act 2:36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” (ESV)

And just a few verses before that, all three are mentioned, and are spoken of as distinct:

Act 2:32 This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
Act 2:33 Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. (ESV)

In no way whatsoever does it mean that Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is especially important that Peter is speaking to Jews, who already believed in the Father and the Spirit of God. The whole point is that they needed to believe Jesus was the Messiah and the the Son of God, the very one whom he had just said the Jews had rejected. Unless I am mistaken, all the mentions of being "baptized in the name of Jesus" only occur when Jews are being baptized.

Remember, the three persons are continually made distinct throughout the NT, not the least of which are Matt 3:16-17 and John 1:1-18. Taking things piecemeal will lead to wrong conclusions probably every time. One must take into account all that the Bible reveals on a matter to gain a proper understanding.

I have had specific members' posts not show up in notifications many times on other sites. It happens.


No, I don't just go back and check to see if the last person I posted to responded. Other threads, other things going on. That's kinda the point of the notifications.

Same here, but I still check.

And your case for the trinity, with absolutely zero 'teaching' of the concept found anywhere in Scripture, is a stronger argument?

And yet you have left most of my arguments unaddressed.

 

[theWind]

I have, but you have so far left all those things unaddressed. ...

And yet you have left most of my arguments unaddressed.

What exactly is it that you keep 'claiming' I have not addressed.

I know for a verifiable fact that you have not presented a "teaching" from Scripture of the "concept" of God being three people.

So if you're referring to a slew of verses that you are 'claiming' refer to a concept that does not exist in the Bible, you are being dishonest.

My position: The trinity doctrine is taught nowhere in the Bible.

Your position: Yes, it is. See all these verses that are referring to it?

Do you not see the faulty logic with which you are conducting this discussion/debate?

It is just as likely that "in the name of Jesus" is just a shortened form of "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." It could also mean that since the three persons are the one God, the one name, YHWH, then baptizing into one is the same as baptizing into all three. That would explain why it is legitimate to use a shortened form.

Even just two verses prior to Acts 2:38, Peter clearly shows that the Father is distinct from the Son:

Act 2:36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” (ESV)

And just a few verses before that, all three are mentioned, and are spoken of as distinct:

Act 2:32 This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
Act 2:33 Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. (ESV)

And Acts 4:12 makes crystal clear that the Name of Jesus Christ is THE ONLY NAME GIVEN UNDER HEAVEN AMONG MEN BY WHICH WE MUST BE SAVED.

NO OTHER NAME. There's no getting around that.

No other name.

Remember, the three persons are continually made distinct throughout the NT

No. They are not.

There are multiple verses that show the Father and Son to be anything but distinct.

Show some verses that make the Spirit distinct from the Father or Son and we'll discuss.

Taking things piecemeal will lead to wrong conclusions probably every time. One must take into account all that the Bible reveals on a matter to gain a proper understanding.

Wow. Did you learn that from me?

Doing just that would render your trinity position moot.

 

[justbyfaith]

Just a reminder, as per the ToS you must post your sources and Bible version (if necessary).

Geoff Primanti

Geoff Primanti is on Facebook. Join Facebook to connect with Geoff Primanti and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected.

www.facebook.com

I posted a link to his facebook page. However, the link may only allow you to log into facebook.

 

[justbyfaith]

Of course. That is a statement of monotheism.


This is the crux of your argument: "And if one Lord, then one Person." But it falls apart by presuming a certain meaning of "one," just as theWind 's argument on the absolute unity of God falls apart for the very same reason.

You provided a lot of information about the word "one," but have missed one vital detail--it can also mean a compound unity:

Rom 12:4 For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function,
Rom 12:5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

1Co 6:16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.”

1Co 10:17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

1Co 12:12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
1Co 12:13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
1Co 12:14 For the body does not consist of one member but of many.
...
1Co 12:18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose.
1Co 12:19 If all were a single member, where would the body be?
1Co 12:20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—

Col 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful.

(All ESV.)

All the uses of "one" that I highlighted are heis. It looks similar to our English word "one" and the Hebrew echad, both of which simply mean "one." They can refer to an absolute unity, but they also can refer to a compound unity, as I have shown. That simply means that diversity within the unity that is God cannot be ruled out by the use of "one."

Jas 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! (ESV)

And, so, here is heis again. As per the above, it cannot say anything about the ontological makeup of God, and so is a reference to monotheism only.

All that to say, if there is one Lord, it does not necessarily mean there is one person. Here is some of what the Athansian Creed states:

"Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity."

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm


I maintain the doctrine of the Trinity best takes into account all that God reveals of himself in the Bible: there is only one God who consists of three coequal, coeternal persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. There has never been a time, even in "eternity past," when none of the persons did not exist.


Just a reminder, as per the ToS you must post your sources and Bible version (if necessary).

Yes, God is a compound unity, I do not deny that.

God the Father is a Spirit without flesh inhabiting eternity.

God the Son is the same Spirit (and therefore the same Person) dwelling in human flesh within the domain of time.

The fact that God the Son dwells in flesh affects His personality and makes Him, in essence, a distinct Person.

If you contend that Jesus is not the Father come in human flesh, then what Spirit dwells in Him?

A Spirit not the Father?

That would be a separate Spirit who is not the Father.

And thus you would have two Spirits, contrary to scripture (Ephesians 4:4).

But if they ate the same Spirit, then they are in essence the same Person, the same God.

I believe that God wants to unify the Oneness Pentecostals with the rest of the body of Christ as concerning the doctrine of the Trinity.

So, I am using language that appeals to their theology.

But I hope that you can see that I am not denying that there are three distinct members of the Godhead; and am therefore also not denying the Trinity.

As a matter of fact, what I am preaching forces them to acknowledge the Trinity.

For in it, they must acknowledge that there is a distinction between the Father and the Son or else deny that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

If they did that, it would make them of the spirit of antichrist (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

 

[justbyfaith]

There are multiple verses that show the Father and Son to be anything but distinct.

Show some verses that make the Spirit distinct from the Father or Son and we'll discuss.

1Jo 4:1, Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jo 4:2, Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Jo 4:3, And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

2Jo 1:7, For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Jhn 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jhn 1:2, The same was in the beginning with God.
Jhn 1:3, All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Jhn 1:14, And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Isa 57:15, For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

I hope that you can see that the Father inhabits eternity and therefore cannot exist in human flesh in the Person of the Father.

But the Son, who carries the name of Everlasting Father (Isaiah 9:6), is the same Spirit as the Father, existing in human flesh.

 

[jasonc]

That’s MODALISM, Patrick!

Lol my pastor posted that one years ago

 

[justbyfaith]

In no way whatsoever does it mean that Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

And of course we should take your word for ir.

This is the reality:

Col 2:9, For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Notice that even if you go to another version in order to deny the terminology here of "the Godhead", you have this (I will use the nly since it is my favorite non-kjv version):

Col 2:9, For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body.

"All the fulness of God"...

I ask you, is the Father and the Holy Ghost not included in this terminology also?

 

[BPPLEE]

One can post a hundred of those type lists. They are rendered completely irrelevant without a "teaching" in the Scriptures of the concept of God being three persons.

trinitarians do this all the time. They cherry-pick verses from the Bible and say "See, see! This is talking about the trinity!!"

None of them establish the concept Biblically by first producing a verse/passage that even "teaches" the concept to begin with.

Useless.

I could use the Bible to support all kinds of made-up doctrines, but without an actual "teaching" of that doctrine somewhere in Scripture, I am just spreading False Doctrines.

You know who else has used this method of utilizing Scripture to prove a doctrine that doesn't exist anywhere in the Bible?

CULTS

What does that say about trinitarianism?

It says it sounds like you are in a cult. Most of them deny that Jesus is God.

 

[Free]

What exactly is it that you keep 'claiming' I have not addressed.

I pointed them out once before. You didn't address most of post #119, you didn't at all address post #125, you didn't answer my question about scholarly support in post #162, you only addressed the last sentence in post #163, you didn't address my points about Jesus being an advocate, that the Father sends his Son, and what "God is love" necessarily entails in post #181, you haven't dealt with the difference between yachid and echad in post #184, you didn't respond to my refutation of your argument that the Father came in the flesh in post #227, and once again, you didn't address the difference between yachid and echad in post #240.

How is that? And that is just what I noticed by skimming through.

I know for a verifiable fact that you have not presented a "teaching" from Scripture of the "concept" of God being three people.

I certainly have. It seems the issue is that you want verses that explicitly state a trinitarian formula, such as, "I am three persons in one," "I am triune," "I am a trinity," or "Within the one being that is God, there exists three coequal, coeternal persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."

You won't find one but that does not mean all the foundations aren't there. I have given several arguments, supported by Scripture, that show these foundations are taught.

So if you're referring to a slew of verses that you are 'claiming' refer to a concept that does not exist in the Bible, you are being dishonest.

No, because I have given many that show the foundations of the Trinity are taught in the Bible.

My position: The trinity doctrine is taught nowhere in the Bible.

Your position: Yes, it is. See all these verses that are referring to it?

Do you not see the faulty logic with which you are conducting this discussion/debate?

Where, exactly, is the faulty logic? You have not only done the very same thing, you have left several of my arguments unaddressed, while I have addressed all of yours.

And Acts 4:12 makes crystal clear that the Name of Jesus Christ is THE ONLY NAME GIVEN UNDER HEAVEN AMONG MEN BY WHICH WE MUST BE SAVED.

NO OTHER NAME. There's no getting around that.

No other name.

And? This neither supports or refutes the Trinity. Jesus is the one who died for our sins, so obviously his is the only name by which we are saved.

No. They are not.

There are multiple verses that show the Father and Son to be anything but distinct.

Not a single one that I have seen.

Show some verses that make the Spirit distinct from the Father or Son and we'll discuss.

I have given some in those posts that you didn't address. It really is just the fact that the Holy Spirit is mentioned at all. Why mention the Holy Spirit apart from the Father or the Son if the Holy Spirit is the Father, who also is the Son? Why not just always mention the Father? That is a God of confusion if I have ever seen one.

Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Mat 10:20 For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

Mat 12:18 “Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.

Luk_10:21 In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.

Luk 11:13 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”

Luk_12:10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
Joh 14:17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.

Joh 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me.
Joh 15:27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
Joh 16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer;
...
Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

Joh_20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.

Etc.

Doing just that would render your trinity position moot.

Not at all. Taking everything together, we see that:

1. There was, is, and ever will be only one God
2. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God
3. All are spoken of as distinct "persons"
4. The Word, the Son, has intimately existed with God, yet was God, for eternity past

 

[justbyfaith]

4. The Word, the Son, has intimately existed with God, yet was God, for eternity past

The Word was also the Father, being God, and not 1/3 of God, and not a 2nd God (being the Son only).

For God can be defined either as the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6, James 3:9 (kjv));

Or, He can be defined as the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost (the Trinitarian version of God).

But in John 1:1, realize that you cannot change up what God means in each instance.

If the Word was with the Father, then the Word was the Father.

If He was with the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, then He was the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

But none of this nonsense about Him being with the Father and being the Son. That is inconsistent; and you are reading your theology into the verse. You are also dividing God so that either the Son / Word is 1/3 of God or else a 2nd God.

God means God. If the Son, being with the Father, is not the Father, then the definition of God in John 1:1 is "God the Son" to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Ghost.

Then to be consistent with that definition, you have to say that the Word was with God the Son.

Consider Isaiah 9:6-7.

Isa 9:6, For a child is born to us,
a son is given to us.
The government will rest on his shoulders.
And he will be called:
Wonderful Counselor,[fn] Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isa 9:7, His government and its peace
will never end.
He will rule with fairness and justice from the throne of his ancestor David
for all eternity.
The passionate commitment of the LORD of Heaven’s Armies
will make this happen!

 

[jasonc]

 

[BPPLEE]

1) There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5).

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for “us” is used. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun “us” are plural forms, definitely referring in the Hebrew language to more than two. While this is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote the aspect of plurality in God. The Hebrew word for "God," "Elohim," definitely allows for the Trinity.

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17describes the event of Jesus’ baptism. Seen in this passage is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are other examples of passages that present three distinct Persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “LORD” is distinguished from “Lord” (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). The Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17). This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also the other instances when Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another Person in the Trinity—the Father.

4) Each member of the Trinity is God. The Father is God (John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2). The Son is God (John 1:1, 14; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8; 1 John 5:20). The Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 3:16).

5) There is subordination within the Trinity. Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father. This is an internal relationship and does not deny the deity of any Person of the Trinity. This is simply something our finite minds cannot understand concerning the infinite God. Concerning the Son see Luke 22:42, John 5:36, John 20:21, and 1 John 4:14. Concerning the Holy Spirit see John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, and especially John 16:13-14.

6) The individual members of the Trinity have different tasks. The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; Revelation 4:11); divine revelation (Revelation 1:1); salvation (John 3:16-17); and Jesus’ human works (John 5:17; 14:10). The Father initiates all of these things.

continued (Source Got Questions)

 

[BPPLEE]

1) There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5).

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for “us” is used. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun “us” are plural forms, definitely referring in the Hebrew language to more than two. While this is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote the aspect of plurality in God. The Hebrew word for "God," "Elohim," definitely allows for the Trinity.

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17describes the event of Jesus’ baptism. Seen in this passage is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are other examples of passages that present three distinct Persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “LORD” is distinguished from “Lord” (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). The Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17). This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also the other instances when Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another Person in the Trinity—the Father.

4) Each member of the Trinity is God. The Father is God (John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2). The Son is God (John 1:1, 14; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8; 1 John 5:20). The Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 3:16).

5) There is subordination within the Trinity. Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father. This is an internal relationship and does not deny the deity of any Person of the Trinity. This is simply something our finite minds cannot understand concerning the infinite God.
continued

The Son is the agent through whom the Father does the following works: the creation and maintenance of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; John 1:3; Colossians 1:16-17); divine revelation (John 1:1, 16:12-15; Matthew 11:27; Revelation 1:1); and salvation (2 Corinthians 5:19; Matthew 1:21; John 4:42). The Father does all these things through the Son, who functions as His agent.

The Holy Spirit is the means by whom the Father does the following works: creation and maintenance of the universe (Genesis 1:2; Job 26:13; Psalm 104:30); divine revelation (John 16:12-15; Ephesians 3:5; 2 Peter 1:21); salvation (John 3:6; Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 1:2); and Jesus’ works (Isaiah 61:1; Acts 10:38). Thus, the Father does all these things by the power of the Holy Spirit.

There have been many attempts to develop illustrations of the Trinity. However, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate. The egg (or apple) fails in that the shell, white, and yolk are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves, just as the skin, flesh, and seeds of the apple are parts of it, not the apple itself. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not parts of God; each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but it still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor, and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration.

The doctrine of the Trinity has been a divisive issue throughout the entire history of the Christian church. While the core aspects of the Trinity are clearly presented in God’s Word, some of the side issues are not as explicitly clear. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God—but there is only one God. That is the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Beyond that, the issues are, to a certain extent, debatable and non-essential. Rather than attempting to fully define the Trinity with our finite human minds, we would be better served by focusing on God’s greatness and His infinitely higher nature. “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” (Romans 11:33-34). Source. Got Questions

 

[Free]

The Word was also the Father, being God,

The Word was not the Father. John 1:1 makes that an impossibility, as do other verses, as I have dealt with a few times already.

and not 1/3 of God, and not a 2nd God (being the Son only).

Of course not. Neither of those have anything to do with the doctrine of the Trinity.

For God can be defined either as the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6, James 3:9 (kjv));

Or, He can be defined as the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost (the Trinitarian version of God).

God is a title and is often used in the NT to refer to just the Father, but that doesn't mean God is only the Father. God cannot be defined as either the Father or the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Either God is only the Father or he is not; it cannot be both ways (maybe that's what you mean).

And when we take all that God reveals of himself in Scripture, the strongest conclusion is that he is triune.

But in John 1:1, realize that you cannot change up what God means in each instance.

Actually, the grammar demands it. Beginning in 1:1a, "In the beginning was the Word," means that the Word was already in existence when the beginning began, that is, before time and space were created, before anything was created. This means the Word is not something that was created and has always existed. That is supported by John 1:3.

In 1:1b, "the Word was with God," the article is present ("the God"), which means that the Word was with (direction towards, as in intimate relationship or communion) the Father. In 1:1c, the article is absent (simply just "God"), which means, in the end, that it is a qualitative statement; it is saying that the Word was divine, or deity. If John had repeated "the God," then yes, it would have been referring to Father in both instances. And that would have equated "the Word" with "God," so that the two would be interchangeable, but John purposefully avoided that.

If the Word was with the Father, then the Word was the Father.

Does that really make sense? Are you yourself and with yourself?

If He was with the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, then He was the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Does this really make sense?

But none of this nonsense about Him being with the Father and being the Son. That is inconsistent; and you are reading your theology into the verse.

Not at all. It is the only thing that makes sense. If you say that you are yourself and with yourself, that isn't at all rational. However, if you are a son and you are with your father, that makes complete, coherent sense with reality. People are with other people; sons are with their fathers. We also know that sons are of the same nature as their fathers, always.

And that is precisely what we see in John 1:1. The Word was with the Father and the Word was in nature God.

There is a reason why God reveals himself, in part, as a Father and Son in relationship--because we can fully understand what that means; it communicates something to us and has meaning. However, if God actually means that as the Father he is also his own Son, and vice versa, then his use of the Father/Son relationship is meaningless and it communicates nothing to us.

What you seem to want to believe, as theWind believes, is that a son can be his own father and a father his own son. But that is irrational. A son, by definition, cannot be his own father, nor a father his own son, even when it comes to God. As C.S. Lewis said, nonsense is still nonsense even when it is spoken of about God.

You are also dividing God so that either the Son / Word is 1/3 of God or else a 2nd God.

Not at all. Again, neither of those is what the doctrine of the Trinity teaches. To say otherwise is a straw man.

God means God.

I have shown that that is not always the case. Grammar matters.

If the Son, being with the Father, is not the Father, then the definition of God in John 1:1 is "God the Son" to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Ghost.

Then to be consistent with that definition, you have to say that the Word was with God the Son.

No, the Word was the pre-incarnate Son in intimate relationship with the Father, as one would expect in a Father/Son relationship.

Consider Isaiah 9:6-7.

Isa 9:6, For a child is born to us,
a son is given to us.
The government will rest on his shoulders.
And he will be called:
Wonderful Counselor,[fn] Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isa 9:7, His government and its peace
will never end.
He will rule with fairness and justice from the throne of his ancestor David
for all eternity.
The passionate commitment of the LORD of Heaven’s Armies
will make this happen!

What about it?

Job 29:16 I was a father to the needy, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know.

Isa 22:20 In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah,
Isa 22:21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.

That the son, who is given, will be called "Everlasting Father," refers to the Messiah's benevolent reign as king.

 

[justbyfaith]

I give up.

Sometimes prayer is the only factor that will help a man to see the truth.

 

[Free]

Sometimes prayer is the only factor that will help a man to see the truth.

Indeed.

 

[jaybo]

The Word was also the Father, being God, and not 1/3 of God, and not a 2nd God (being the Son only).

For God can be defined either as the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6, James 3:9 (kjv));

Or, He can be defined as the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost (the Trinitarian version of God).

But in John 1:1, realize that you cannot change up what God means in each instance.

If the Word was with the Father, then the Word was the Father.

If He was with the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, then He was the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

But none of this nonsense about Him being with the Father and being the Son. That is inconsistent; and you are reading your theology into the verse. You are also dividing God so that either the Son / Word is 1/3 of God or else a 2nd God.

God means God. If the Son, being with the Father, is not the Father, then the definition of God in John 1:1 is "God the Son" to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Ghost.

Then to be consistent with that definition, you have to say that the Word was with God the Son.

Consider Isaiah 9:6-7.

Isa 9:6, For a child is born to us,
a son is given to us.
The government will rest on his shoulders.
And he will be called:
Wonderful Counselor,[fn] Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isa 9:7, His government and its peace
will never end.
He will rule with fairness and justice from the throne of his ancestor David
for all eternity.
The passionate commitment of the LORD of Heaven’s Armies
will make this happen!

The concept of the trinity is not easy to understand, but it has revealed to many people, including Free and myself. My prayer is that your spiritual eyes will be opened and that you will come to an understanding of the truth.

 

[jaybo]

I give up.

Sometimes prayer is the only factor that will help a man to see the truth.

Don't give up. Remain in prayer.

 

[Cooper]

A tripod has three legs, but is one.
.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Does the Bible really mention a three person God or is this notion imagined into the Bible?

Where does the Bible mention a three person God?

The Bible certainly doesn't say three separate individual beings are one God, that would be absurd.


Scripture explicitly says Yahweh God is a "complex One" (0259 אֶחָד 'echad), not a "simple One". There is a difference.

Christians take the difference into account because it is logically unsound to ignore such differences, a logical fallacy known as a hasty generalization.


In a "complex one" two or more" can be "one", "One Flesh" or "One God"

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one (0259 אֶחָד 'echad) flesh. (Gen. 2:24 NKJ)

"Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one (0259 אֶחָד 'echad) Yahweh!" (Deut. 6:4)

Therefore, when presented with scripture that says the Father is God, The Son is God, The Holy Spirit is God, and there is only one infinite ocean of essence, a single Being who is a "complex one" who is God, the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is the only logically sound conclusion.

the impeccable incontrovertible conclusion the Father is Yahweh, the Son is Yahweh, the Holy Spirit is Yahweh, The One (0259 אֶחָד 'echad) God whose Name is Yahweh.

So when Jesus commands we be baptized in God, who Name is One in a complex unity, sound thinkers conclude Jesus taught the Holy Trinity because in Scripture a "Name" is a "description of what is named", a "list of ingredients" as it were:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)

Observe carefully. Jesus commanded we be baptized in the One God whose Name is One (singular), yet He names Three Persons all of whom are in the One Name in a complex unity = Jesus saw God in a Holy Trinity of Persons, One God Three Persons in the One God.