The Trinity?

[epaminondas]

Originally Posted By: epaminondas

If begotten falls away, trinitarians will lose one of the prime weapons in their armory.

KJV 1900 | ýAc 26:14 it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

This is totally irrelevant and not even related. Most trinitarians know how to bring in what is related but irrelevant to draw the attention away from solid points against the trinity and the weakness of their arguments. Learn from them.

[epaminondas]

Originally Posted By: John317

There is only 1 Deity, One God and Father of all.

And the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the one, 1 Deity.

There are not 2 or three Deities. Definitely NOT.

Originally Posted By: Epaminondas

That means the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not deities individually. Only the composite entity is.

You see where the trinity takes you?

You failed to understand what I wrote.

Col 2: 9 says that "the ALL the fullness of Deity [the Godhead] lives continuously in Christ's body."

The Father is not part-Deity or 1/3 Godhead. Neither is Christ or the Holy Spirit. Each one is "all the fullness of the Godhead."

Ellen White says the same thing in Evangelism 616-617.

Passages like Col 2:9 must have been what Peter had in mind when he said some of what Paul wrote is hard to understand. This is typical of trinitarians to use passages like this. No one can say with 100% certainty what Paul meant, most likely not even Paul. Passages like this are the foundation of the trinity. But of course, the trinitarians know exactly what it means - it means there's a trinity of gods who are really all one god.

The numbers still stack up as I explained. 1 + 1 + 1 is not 1. And your three rolled together into Yahweh, as you said, form a fourth entity. This is also rock-solid logic in keeping with God's mathematics.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

No, "Yahweh" is the name of the living God. Who is the living God? The living God is the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The living God who created the universe is not just a single, sole Person. The self-existent One we call the Father was never all alone-- He has always loved (and been loved by) the Son and the Holy Spirit.

So you say Yahweh is the name of the group consisting of the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Together, this group, consisting of three gods, is one god, not a group consisting of three gods. This doesn't make sense.

And where did you get it from that Yahweh is the group name of the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit? I've never seen it in my Bible. One learns every day. In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit doesnt' mention Yahweh as this name. It is an extremely tenuous thread to hang your theory on.

[Kevin H]

Quote:

No, "Yahweh" is the name of the living God. Who is the living God? The living God is the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The living God who created the universe is not just a single, sole Person. The self-existent One we call the Father was never all alone-- He has always loved (and been loved by) the Son and the Holy Spirit.

So you say Yahweh is the name of the group consisting of the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Together, this group, consisting of three gods, is one god, not a group consisting of three gods. This doesn't make sense.

And where did you get it from that Yahweh is the group name of the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit? I've never seen it in my Bible. One learns every day. In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit doesnt' mention Yahweh as this name. It is an extremely tenuous thread to hang your theory on.

In the Old Testament it talks about one God, however it is revealed as El or Elohim as God being a great impersonal power, and as Yahweh, the angel of Yahweh which ends up being Yahweh himself. And Yahweh represents God as personal friend, and the Old Testament goes to great lengths to let us know that these are not two different gods but the same God, and there is the Spirit of God working on the subjective aspects.

We now know that Jews, trying to explain this concept to the Greeks came up with the description of the trinity, which the New Testament picked up saying that Jesus was the personal aspect of God.

God is infinite outside of time and space, however reveals himself inside time in space in the three aspects of God as great unapproachable power, the bright light/deep darkens, and God as friendly and approachable, and God working with our subjective.

[o2bwise]

I admit to my present non-trinitarian position to include reason more than it once did. Either way, it being biblical to my understanding.

Anyway, my reason got to this place.

From dogs to humans to angels to God, oneness is synonymous with one person. For example, I have a brother. He's that person over there while I am this person over here.

I have a German Short-Haired Pointer dog (wonderful, beautiful dog!). She is that being there, I am this being here.

The significance is not our mass or our chemistry or our physical appearance.

It is our person. I am my individual conscious existence. My brother's is his. My dog's is hers.

God's is His.

Did you notice I did not say "God's ARE His?"

The reason is obvious. Who in the world would believe that God is made up of more than one independent conscious existence?

And by independent, I don't mean that when referring to a hypothetical Trinity God, independence means one might choose sin, not always choose to be unconditional love, I mean in terms of autonomy of deliberation.

Like my dog can spot a cat independent of me and I can do so as well (independent of her) - that is what I mean by I am one person, she is her own being, my brother is his own person.

This is actually quite simple. Everyone can immediately identify personhood, including how many persons there are in a situation.

So, from a pure reasoning standpoint, all the while appreciating that I believe the Bible highly supports my present understanding...

Do you believe the one true God is composed of more than one independent conscious existence?

If YES, then I believe you believe in a fallacy and your position violates my reason.

OR...

If NO, you believe the one true God is made up of one independent conscious existence.

In which case I believe the independent conscious existence of the Father or the Son (I won't speak on the HS, not believing it is a literal person) is destroyed.

Which of course is foundational error of another kind.

Which is it? For those who are Trinitarian, I am just curious where you stand on this issue?

Oh, one other thought, and perhaps this is for only Gail.

I am uncertain what you declare about God to be a mystery, BUT, if it is related to the above, I am inclined to believe it is error, a fallacy, and proponents of Trinitarianism have instead declared such "a mystery."

The mystery being the fallacy that "one God" is compatible with "more than one conscious existence."

Blessings,

Tony

[Gerr]

This has been explained before, but for some reason the issue keeps coming up.

When Scripture says, ESV | ýGe 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

ESV | ýMt 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh

ESV | ýJn 17:22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they [believers] may be one even as we are one,

Is this logical? Is this against reason?

[Kevin H]

Tony: The problem with your reasoning is that it is limiting God to the one manifestation. If you were standing outside of a glass of water, and you put three of your fingers inside of that glass of water, would that require you to become three different people each with one finger in the water and a decision as to which one is Tony?

We are wrong in thinking that the trinity is all there is to God. When we get to heaven and see God, Jesus and having the Holy Spirit present, and if we think that is the fullness of God, we will have made God finite, into an idol and die for the sin of idolatry. What we will be experiencing are the three revelations inside time and space.

[Gibs]

Well I must say I see a lot of twisting and theology to make the one and only Deity 3 Gods.

I must believe the Word of God, That there is but one God and there is no more. And 1 is not 3 by no stretch of the imagination.

The Holy Spirit is the very person of God The Father, not another person or God.

Jesus Christ is another person, but the Father in Him is the Deity in Him. He at Bethlehem became God the Father with us in a Body prepared Him that Divinity would be covered with humanity!

And that covering was so thorough that men saw Him as a man only and didn't know the Highest was in Him. Ah, but yet the fullness of the Father dwelt in Him!

Our Redeemer is a union of Jesus Christ and His Father. He, Jesus was The Fathers only begotten Son and Jesus told Philip, you have seen me you have seen the Father.

So who is your Redeemer? Isaiah got it right,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Christ in you is the Father in you,

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gail]

Tony: The problem with your reasoning is that it is limiting God to the one manifestation. If you were standing outside of a glass of water, and you put three of your fingers inside of that glass of water, would that require you to become three different people each with one finger in the water and a decision as to which one is Tony?

We are wrong in thinking that the trinity is all there is to God. When we get to heaven and see God, Jesus and having the Holy Spirit present, and if we think that is the fullness of God, we will have made God finite, into an idol and die for the sin of idolatry. What we will be experiencing are the three revelations inside time and space.

And I suspect that what we CAN understand is just a pinprick of the reality, that God is far beyond what we can begin to comprehend.

If it involves something that is hard for us to grasp, I say, Well- it should be! If God is God then how can we finite humans even DARE to bicker over His nature? or even discuss it?

Well said, Kevin!

[Gail]

I think that when Paul identified God with the "unknown"-ness of the one God the Greeks had no idea who He was, he was on to something.

[Gibs]

Paul was solid onto something right enough here in his letter to the Saints at Ephesus,

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[o2bwise]

Hi Gerry, Kevin, and Gail...

Gerry:

I confess that your reasoning often violates my own. For example, you picked Adam and Eve being one flesh as your example. But, your implied parallel with God (one flesh packs the punch to be rightly paralleled with "one God") totally loses me. Doesn't work for me.

Kevin:

May I assume your point is that God is made up of multiple independence of consciousnesses and your justification for this includes the assertion that to not believe in such a possibility is tantamount to limiting God and thus to idolatry?

Well, my reason is totally violated and I reject such an assertion. Regardless, I appreciate you taking the time to spell out your sense of things.

Gail:

Very similar to Kevin, it seems to me. Thanks for your inputs as well.

My view is that the Bible uses "God" to refer to the Father only almost all the time and likely because God and His Son are fine with referring to Jesus as His Son.

I am "safest" on the side of keeping with that confession in the sense that I believe it literally and actually. That God begat a Son who inherited the nature of His Father on that basis (from - well - way far back as Waggoner puts it in the Minneapolis GC Session in 1888).

Blessings,

Tony

[joeb]

Joeb, you have not read my posts well at all. Actually your comments about me don't make sense.

Yes for sure ALL the visible creation was put in His hands I've stated many times and He is the creator of ALL the Hosts, hense his name before Bethlehem, Yahweh of Hosts, Isa 44:6.

Again you ALL, there is but one God and one person who is God, His name is Yahweh King of Israel.

Jesus always addressed Him as His God. The Holy Spirit is not another person but is the very Person of Yahweh King of Israel.

Read this straight out forthright statement by the very one who would know!

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Neither was another God formed in Jesus Christ, read,

Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

It was Yahweh Himself who came in Him and so Jesus was vested with the fullness of the Father!

Joh 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

No other Gods formed, born or created, Read,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Jesus Christ is the Father with us, for sure, for sure!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

Gibs,

If you can't agree with the first chapter of Patriachs and Prophets you cannot agree with the SDA theme of the Great Controversy, and you most definitely do not agree with that chapter. Why? Because Ellen White's views on the nature of Christ differ from yours as does her stand on the Godhead and her stand on this two subjects is integral to the theme of the Great Controversy.

I've posted her comments on those two subjects again and again and you have simply ignored them and/or said that I'm just trying to make her say something other than she does. So, don't tell me I haven't read what you've had to say.

Does the above mean I think you're an apostate or not a brother in Christ? Not at all. It just means we disagree, and that your views are not in line with the SDA positions on these subjects.

[Gibs]

I still don't find you take in consideration the meaning of all the texts I've given on this topic and you are not alone. All trinitarians do the same run around.

I have just given out scripture and with a few simple explanations.

I don't use EGW much on this subject as some of hers is unclear on this as to how to take it. She did state the following and also she never made one statement to any in her day who were solid non trinitarian! Trinity in SDAdventism is an invention after Her and all the old men were gone. Leroy Froom was the lead man of it and some with him.

"With what firmness and power he uttered these words. The Jews had never before heard such words from human lips, and a convicting influence attended them; for it seemed that divinity flashed through humanity as Jesus said, "I and my Father are one." The words of Christ were full of deep meaning as he put forth the claim that he and the Father were of one substance, possessing the same attributes. The Jews understood his meaning, there was no reason why they should misunderstand, and they took up stones to stone him. Jesus looked upon them calmly and unshrinkingly, and said, "Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of these works do ye stone me?" {ST, November 27, 1893 par. 5}

One substance! That is how Jesus could also state "I am the first". You see none are before the Father.

And one day the Father in Him will be returned! 1 Cor 15:28.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Guest]

Before then, He was not literally the Son. But after His conception and birth, He became the Son of God in a new sense, because then the Father in heaven became Christ's literal daddy.

That's a neat way to try to explain it away, but it doesn't hold up. The Old Testament speaks about the Son of God in more than one place.

Also, Ellen White says He was the Son of God, BEFORE He came to earth as a man:

The statement is made that the devil believed and trembled. While he was in heaven, he believed that Christ was the Son of God, and when upon this earth he was in conflict with Him here on the field of battle. {CTr 220.3}

There are more statements that say the same thing. That He was the begotten Son of God, before being born of a woman.

It was decreed in the councils of God that the only-begotten Son of God must leave His high command in heaven, and clothe His divinity with humanity, and come to the world. {4BC 1153.5}

[joeb]

Quote:

The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in his work of beneficence. He had an

associate—a co-worker who could appreciate his purposes, and could share his joy in

giving happiness to created beings. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was

with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” John 1:1,

2. Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father—one in

nature, in character, in purpose—the only being that could enter into all the counsels

and purposes of God. “his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty

God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6. His “goings forth

have been from of old, from everlasting.” Micah 5:2. And the Son of God declares

concerning himself: “The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting.... When he appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him.” Proverbs 8:22-30. Patriarchs and Prophets p.34

What I bolded that was written by Solomon, that Ellen White declares came from Christ Himself, is the proof that what Gibs is talking about is not Biblical.... "As one brought up" with the Father. In other words there never was a time Christ did not exist as the Son of God, and as a separate being. He was no manifestation of the Father. He was His own manifestation of God.

Edit: forgot to give attribution for PandP quote.

[Gibs]

This is when the Word came forth extended from the Father,

Pr 8:22 ¶ The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

God the Father was first and He did not form or create another god.

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

And also reveals who is the Saviour.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gerr]

Hi Gerry, Kevin, and Gail...

Gerry:

I confess that your reasoning often violates my own. For example, you picked Adam and Eve being one flesh as your example. But, your implied parallel with God (one flesh packs the punch to be rightly paralleled with "one God") totally loses me. Doesn't work for me.

Well, I was not the author of Genesis and Matthew, so if they violate your reason, deal with it.

[Ted Oplinger]

Kevin,

In the Old Testament it talks about one God, however it is revealed as El or Elohim as God being a great impersonal power, and as Yahweh, the angel of Yahweh which ends up being Yahweh himself. And Yahweh represents God as personal friend, and the Old Testament goes to great lengths to let us know that these are not two different gods but the same God, and there is the Spirit of God working on the subjective aspects.

What gets passed over in many conversations like these is the fact the Old Testament applies YHWH and Elohim to mean specifically the Father in some verses, and specifically the Son in many others. There are several OT quotes by Paul and Peter where, in referencing the context of those quotes, apply the name YHWH Elohim specifically to Christ. One of those passage (1 Cor 10:1-5) Paul explicitly applies the YHWH Elohim who led Israel out of Egypt to be none other than the Divine Christ, not the Father (nor an "extended" Father), with Paul's tying Christ to the Exodus events. Paul was close enough to God to know the truth about who and what Christ was...and it was not the Father who led Israel out of Egypt with a mighty Divine hand.

That is but one reason I would dismiss any non-Trinitarian belief which denies Christ's pre-Incarnation Divinity in His own right. It is why modalism and Arianism are rejected as true Christological models.

Blessings,

[epaminondas]

Quote:

The mystery being the fallacy that "one God" is compatible with "more than one conscious existence."

This is so self evident and clear, that it is unlikely that people who don't agree with this can be swayed by evidence or logic.

[Gibs]

epaminondas, yes you are right on the ones who have been coming in and defending the trinity teaching.

But know this there is those who have read and now are no longer caught up in that teaching.

The subject has been aired well and I am not responding no more at this time. Later when new to the subject have come on it may be time to set the record straight again.

It will ever be and no other way can be true, as follows,

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

What gets passed over in many conversations like these is the fact the Old Testament applies YHWH and Elohim to mean specifically the Father in some verses, and specifically the Son in many others. There are several OT quotes by Paul and Peter where, in referencing the context of those quotes, apply the name YHWH Elohim specifically to Christ. One of those passage (1 Cor 10:1-5) Paul explicitly applies the YHWH Elohim who led Israel out of Egypt to be none other than the Divine Christ, not the Father (nor an "extended" Father), with Paul's tying Christ to the Exodus events. Paul was close enough to God to know the truth about who and what Christ was...and it was not the Father who led Israel out of Egypt with a mighty Divine hand.

To come to a valid conclusion about a postulate (the trinity paradigm, in this instance) one has to evaluate all the relevant facts, even if they appear to clash. Here is the passage you say evaluates to the statement that Jesus is the god who led Israel out of Egypt, therefore Jesus is God.

Quote:

ACV: I Corinthians Chapter 10

[1] But I want you not to be ignorant, brothers, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea,

[2] and all in Moses were immersed in the cloud and in the sea.

[3] And they all ate the same spiritual food,

[4] and they all drank the same spiritual drink, for they drank from a spiritual rock that followed them. And the rock was the Christ.

[5] However with most of them God was not well pleased, for they were strewn in the wilderness.

A rock that followed the Israelites in the desert? I know of a column of fire and a cloud. Here Paul is talking in riddles again.

Let's confine us to Paul as a source of data. On the question of who is and who isn't god, which is very relevant to the trinity question, Paul had the following to say:

Quote:

ACV: I Corinthians 8:6. yet to us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we for him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.

Notice that this comes from the same letter as your passage. Furthermore, Paul had this to say:

Quote:

ACV: I Timothy 2:5. For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ,

6. who gave himself a ransom for all, the testimony for their own times.

First of all, Lord does not mean God. Both these passages really seem to say there is only one God, the Father in the 1 Cor 8:6 and not Jesus, who is the mediator between God and men because he was the sacrifice for all, in 1 Tim 2:5.

Now if we have what seems to be conflicting data from a source we regard as reliable, there are only two possibilities:

• the source is not really reliable
• our interpretation of one set of data is wrong and the data doesn't really conflict

Now, hands up, who think Ted's understanding (Jesus is the god who led Israel out of Egypt, therefore Jesus is God) of 1 Cor 10: 1-5 is correct?

And who thinks the reading as it appears in the Bible (there is only one God, the Father in the 1 Cor 8:6 and not Jesus, who is the mediator between God and men because he was the sacrifice for all, in 1 Tim 2:5.) of 1 Cor 8:6 and 1 Tim 2:5 is correct?

The kindest words to describe Ted's understanding of 1 Cor 10:1-5 are "what nonsense."

Anyone who wants to defend Ted's understanding of 1 Cor 10:1-5 will have to nullify all passages like the two mentioned as well as John 17:3 and many others. We can't have conflicting statements in the Bible.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

And I suspect that what we CAN understand is just a pinprick of the reality, that God is far beyond what we can begin to comprehend.

If it involves something that is hard for us to grasp, I say, Well- it should be! If God is God then how can we finite humans even DARE to bicker over His nature? or even discuss it?

You embrace and welcome mystery and magic as an explanation of the trinity. You will most likely agree that you would have preferred a more solid and clear explanation to vindicate the trinity.

You will also most likely agree - it would be foolish to do otherwise as it's so self evident - that if mystery and magic can be invoked to validate that which has no fact or logic going for it, the same mystery and magic can be invoked to validate any nonsense. You do want to be consistent, don't you? Or was Verdi right with La Donna e mobile?

It's not really satisfactory to have to call on something to validate the trinity that can also be used to validate any nonsense, and therefore clearly has no validating power, is it?

[Gail]

Mystery and magic? Uh, no. Just saying that if humans can grasp what God is, then God is not that far higher than what we can think up.

[phkrause]

Kevin,

Originally Posted By: Kevin H

In the Old Testament it talks about one God, however it is revealed as El or Elohim as God being a great impersonal power, and as Yahweh, the angel of Yahweh which ends up being Yahweh himself. And Yahweh represents God as personal friend, and the Old Testament goes to great lengths to let us know that these are not two different gods but the same God, and there is the Spirit of God working on the subjective aspects.

What gets passed over in many conversations like these is the fact the Old Testament applies YHWH and Elohim to mean specifically the Father in some verses, and specifically the Son in many others. There are several OT quotes by Paul and Peter where, in referencing the context of those quotes, apply the name YHWH Elohim specifically to Christ. One of those passage (1 Cor 10:1-5) Paul explicitly applies the YHWH Elohim who led Israel out of Egypt to be none other than the Divine Christ, not the Father (nor an "extended" Father), with Paul's tying Christ to the Exodus events. Paul was close enough to God to know the truth about who and what Christ was...and it was not the Father who led Israel out of Egypt with a mighty Divine hand.

That is but one reason I would dismiss any non-Trinitarian belief which denies Christ's pre-Incarnation Divinity in His own right. It is why modalism and Arianism are rejected as true Christological models.

Blessings,

Excellent post Ted and right on.