The Trinity?

[epaminondas]

Quote:

Since when is a translation more accurate than the original?

Poor Hose. You just don't understand simple things. I'm not talking about the translation. I'm talking about the fact that Latin has two distinct words to use for what they regarded as a true god (deus) and anything elevated to godhood (divus) with clear rules when each is to be used. Both Greek (theos and its adjective) and English (god and divine) don't have that distinction. Theos can be a man, a lump of wood or God, so can god. Divine can refer to chocolate and God. Do you get it now? The two Latin words are more precise than their counterparts in Greek and English.

[Gerr]

ESV | Dt 19:15 “A single witness shall not suffice..... Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.

You have been quibbling about the absence of a definite article in Jn 1:1. Now, how about Heb 1:8,9 where it does occur?

ESV | Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. ý9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

v8 sy ho thronos ho theos eis ho aion kai ho aion ho

v9 dia houtos ho theos sy ho theos

[epaminondas]

ESV | Dt 19:15 “A single witness shall not suffice..... Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.

You have been quibbling about the absence of a definite article in Jn 1:1. Now, how about Heb 1:8,9 where it does occur?

ESV | Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. ý9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

v8 sy ho thronos ho theos eis ho aion kai ho aion ho

v9 dia houtos ho theos sy ho theos

[epaminondas]

Gibs, on that point we can agree. But I would not see it as only just now. This particular topic has been nearly 1800 posts of quibbling.

Many of the posts point out fact. To call them quibbling just because you don't like what they point out is a devious way to try and detract from their value. Another common trick is to call something simplistic if it's clear and simple and one cannot fault it.

[Gerr]

You may remember that you had all this a while ago. You most likely have forgotten that it was pointed out to you that it referred verbatim to Psalm 45:6,7. Read through the whole psalm and you will see that it does not refer to Jesus. The writer of Hebrews, whoever he may be, may think it does. But if it does, Hebrews 1:8 says Jesus is God and Hebrews 1:9 says Jesus has a God. This was also pointed out to you, but obviously the seed fell on rocky ground. A god who has a god? If god A is the god of god B, is A more of a god than B and B less of a god than A? This is where you're going. It's nonsense. In Psalm 45 it makes sense where the word translated God does not refer to a god, but a king. This is how the word elohim is used:

Quote:

NASB Translation

divine (1), divine being (1), exceedingly (1), God (2326), god (45), God's (14), goddess (2), godly (1), gods (204), great (2), judges (3), mighty (2), rulers (1), shrine* (1)

The number in parentheses is the number of times used in the NASB. A word that can mean more than one thing is not precise. That's just how it is. It's really sloppy writing by David and the writer of Hebrews to use one word in one sentence (Psalm 45:7 and Hebrews 1:9) to mean two different things. If it means the same thing then the entity referreto is his own god.

ESV | Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. ý9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

NASB95 | ‎Heb 1:8 But of the Son He says, “YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM. ‎9 “YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.”

ESV | ‎Is 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

NASB95 | ‎Is 9:6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: epaminondas

You may remember that you had all this a while ago. You most likely have forgotten that it was pointed out to you that it referred verbatim to Psalm 45:6,7. Read through the whole psalm and you will see that it does not refer to Jesus. The writer of Hebrews, whoever he may be, may think it does. But if it does, Hebrews 1:8 says Jesus is God and Hebrews 1:9 says Jesus has a God. This was also pointed out to you, but obviously the seed fell on rocky ground. A god who has a god? If god A is the god of god B, is A more of a god than B and B less of a god than A? This is where you're going. It's nonsense. In Psalm 45 it makes sense where the word translated God does not refer to a god, but a king. This is how the word elohim is used:

Quote:

NASB Translation

divine (1), divine being (1), exceedingly (1), God (2326), god (45), God's (14), goddess (2), godly (1), gods (204), great (2), judges (3), mighty (2), rulers (1), shrine* (1)

The number in parentheses is the number of times used in the NASB. A word that can mean more than one thing is not precise. That's just how it is. It's really sloppy writing by David and the writer of Hebrews to use one word in one sentence (Psalm 45:7 and Hebrews 1:9) to mean two different things. If it means the same thing then the entity referreto is his own god.

ESV | Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. ý9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

NASB95 | ‎Heb 1:8 But of the Son He says, “YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM. ‎9 “YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.”

ESV | ‎Is 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

NASB95 | ‎Is 9:6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

Any attempt to refute the above is futile. It states the truth so clearly about the divinity of Christ that all are under obligation to believe. Christ is God in the highest sense and so is the Holy Spirit.

sky

[Gibs]

Certainly, He was the Mighty One and Only God. No doubt about it, His Father was in Him fully and so He was Fully God in a body!

Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

He was not another God, the scripture is Adamant of but ONE God.

The Holy Spirit is not another God either but is THE God, that is what God is, read,!

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

You cannot escape God, He is Omnipresent in the total of His endless creation of which there is no place any can hide from Him.

Ac 28:26 Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:

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.

[skyblue888]

Who said that Christ or the Holy Spirit were "another" God?

We believe in One God in Three Persons.

sky

[Gordon1]

It states the truth so clearly about the divinity of Christ that all are under obligation to believe. Christ is God in the highest sense and so is the Holy Spirit.

Sky/Laval: You may not realize the charge you make concerning God.

The Father is not bound by limitations you place upon him.

If the Father, the Ancient of Days, the Only True God, wishes to bring forth a Son,

that Son will be Divine. He can be nothing else.

You may charge God, along with the unread, "He's not really your Son!"

Or "If the Son came from you He can't be Divine."

Throw off that last and strongest cord of Roman Catholicism.

[skyblue888]

Come on Gordon! I believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. On God in Three Persons. This is the Godhead. Don't you believe this?

sky

[o2bwise]

Hi sky,

Come on Gordon! I believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. On God in Three Persons. This is the Godhead. Don't you believe this?

As for me, I do not believe in contradictions.

What you assert is like saying there are triangular rectangles.

Blessings,

Tony

[o2bwise]

We believe in One God in Three Persons.

Who do you speak for?

[skyblue888]

All who believe in the Godhead, that is, in the one God in Three Persons. It is not something we can explain but we can accept it by faith as the Scriptures are plain as to the divinity of the Father, the divinity of the Son, and the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

sky

[Gibs]

It is clear Sky many believe that but it is very untrue. The Father is the only Deity, which came in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, 2 Cor 5:19.

And so Christ Jesus was not another God with us but the ONE AND ONLY GOD with us in the body prepared Him.

The Holy Spirit is what The Father is and not another God, JOH 4:24!

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.

[skyblue888]

So when the Father addresses His Son and says, "Thy Throne O God is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom," He is actually speaking to Himself? (Hebrews 1:8)

sky

[o2bwise]

Hi sky,

First off, I believe the Son is divine in the same way I am human. He is the Son of God after all and as such is composed of divine uncreated essence. This makes Jesus "God," but not the one true God (true = original) and while this makes Jesus God, it is biblically apparent that God loves us to refer to Christ as His Son - Son of God. I have never seen Him endorse the phrase "God the Son."

I suggest the vast majority of the time, "theos" carries the intended meaning "the one true God."

So when the Father addresses His Son and says, "Thy Throne O God is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom," He is actually speaking to Himself? (Hebrews 1:8)

If the above single text was all I had, I would believe Father and Son together make up "the one true God."

But, there are OTHER texts and in my own search, which included reading the entire NT for passages referring to "theos," the preponderance of evidence supporting the view that Father alone is "the one true theos" is simply vast.

Here are a couple:

Philippians 1:1-8

1 Paul and Timothy, bondservants of Jesus Christ, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops a and deacons: 2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 3 I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, 4 always in every prayer of mine making request for you all with joy, 5 for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now, 6 being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ; 7 just as it is right for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart, inasmuch as both in my chains and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers with me of grace. 8 For God is my witness, how greatly I long for you all with the affection of Jesus Christ.

Notice that every time "theos" is used, 1)the text refers to Father only and 2)Jesus Christ is referred to, but as someone other than the one referred to as theos. You will see the same flavor in the beginning of virtually every single NT book from Romans through to Revelation.

Revelation 1:1

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants--things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John,

This text is nonsensical if Jesus is also the one true God.

John 17:3

3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

1 Corinthians 8:6-7a

6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. 7 However, there is not in everyone that knowledge;

If I were trinitarian, I sure would wish the above two texts away. Each text explicitly declares the one God to be the Father while also mentioning the Son as One other than the One referred to as God.

Whichever side of the divide one is on, considering ONLY those texts that seem to support one's view will NEVER bring one to the truth. It is a altogether unsatisfactory process.

Back to Father being the one true God:

However, there is not in everyone that knowledge...

Blessings,

Tony

[Gordon1]

All who believe in the Godhead, that is, in the one God in Three Persons. It is not something we can explain but we can accept it by faith as the Scriptures are plain as to the divinity of the Father, the divinity of the Son, and the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

Laval, Is there even one person here doubting Christ's Divinity?

Could the Father beget anything not Divine?

Christ is God's Dear Son, brought forth in the days of eternity.

This is Christ's stamp of Divinity.

He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name [character] than the angels. (Hebrews 1:4)

[Gibs]

If the man Jesus Christ was divine then Divinity died when He died. The Divinity in Him was the Father in Him and Deity cannot and did not die.

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

The truth is laid plain out if one can see.

You are missing the fact He was a man, the body prepared for the indwelling Father. It had to be so as for the fact the overcoming had to be of a man taking no more power than was Adam's with the deficit of taking on Him our fallen nature.

Get this! The overcoming had to be of a man and not a God! He was God with us as the Father dwelt in Him in all fullness. Fully God in the body of a man!

Note! When the sin and rebellion problem is completed The Fathers Deity vested in Him, Jesus is returned and the FATHER IS ALL IN ALL AGAIN!

1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in 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.

[Gerr]

"Worship God." Rev 19:10

"Worship God." Rev 22:9

ESV | ýMt 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “ ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’

ESV | ýHeb 1:6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.”

ESV | ýHeb 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.

ESV | ýPhp 2:10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

ESV | ýRe 5:13 And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!” ý14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped.

[Gerr]

If the man Jesus Christ was divine then Divinity died when He died. The Divinity in Him was the Father in Him and Deity cannot and did not die.

ESV | ýRe 5:13 And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!” ý14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped.

[Gibs]

Re 5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

He who is on the Throne is The Father and the Lamb is Jesus Christ who when He has conquered all sin and rebellion returns to The Father His Vested in Him Deity and the Father will then be ALL IN ALL AGAIN!

Yes of course All Blessings and honor and Glory be to Both. The Father gave Himself in humiliation to come and dwell with us in His Son born of woman, Mary,- and the Son laid down His Life and shed His Blood that we might be saved.

He also endured the harshest treatment at our hands! Would we have done any better than they? Are we not all guilty?

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]

All who believe in the Godhead, that is, in the one God in Three Persons. It is not something we can explain but we can accept it by faith as the Scriptures are plain as to the divinity of the Father, the divinity of the Son, and the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

sky

Exactly, it makes no sense and has to resort to magic to be accpetable. As for "divinity," what do you mean by it? It can mean both the Father, the only true God, if Jesus is to be believed, or something else. It's an ambiguous word - not meaning one thing and one thing only.

The trinity is for the purple grass, green sounds and pink elephants crowd.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

Could the Father beget anything not Divine?

As you don't even know exactly what "beget" in the sense of the Father being responsible for the existence of Jesus means, this is pure speculation by the trinitarian philosophers in Lala Land. And to put the cherry on the cake, "divine" is an ambiguous word. Two uncertainties in one short sentence. You'll get your PhD in Theology Summa cum laude.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

What you assert is like saying there are triangular rectangles.

Of course there are. You're talking of Lala Land where the trinitarians live. There are also circular triangles, square circles and much more. 1 + 1 + 1 can be one, but it can also be five or even a number with fractions. What's so strange about that? If you believe in the trinity you'll believe anything, except that the idea of the trinity is false. And do you see those nice young men with their clean white coats coming to take the trinitarians away? No. Why not? Because they're right after all. Just ask them.

[epaminondas]

This is how it works

When we want to know if a statement, a position, a paradigm, a postulate, an idea, a theory or any of those are correct, we call in the twin gods - no, not Castor and Pollux - fact and logic. More precisely, a set of all the relevant facts and the right logic to apply to those facts.

The thing about any fact is that it must be incontestably true. One will get wrong results if one feeds in what is not fact as fact. When it comes to Biblical passages, that means anything which is not absolutely clear and anything which there is any difference of opinion on how it should be translated or a difference of opinion about what it really means, should be discarded. Ambiguity is the friend of wrong conclusions. One must also consider all relevant facts, both those supporting and those against the position.

We start with the theory or idea or whatever. It must be fully qualified. That's to say it must not be vague, but all its attributes should be well defined. It can't be tested if it's not falsifiable. Let's use the trinitarian dogma as an example. A few (not all) of this idea's attributes are as follows:

• The Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are each one full, true god
• There is only one God - trinitarians don't like to be called polytheists
• These three are equal - one is not greater than the other

What we should now do is gather all the facts relevant to all these attributes. If we find equally strong points both supporting and falsifying the theory in question our methodology is flawed, our results not to be trusted or our source corrupt. Only one fact that 100% scuttles a theory is needed for it not to be true.

As far as basic arithmetic is concerned, we know three of any one entity added together don't add up to one of that same entity. That is enough to scuttle the trinitarian dogma.

We also know Jesus said the Father is his (Jesus's) God and our (mankind's) God. There is no single passage in the Bible where Jesus said anyone else is God. Another nail in the trinitarian coffin. This is already overkill.

We know that Jesus also said the Father is the only true God. This is superfluous, the trinity has already been clearly shown to be a false idea.

And of course, Jesus also said the Father was greater than him (Jesus)...

And Paul said for us there is only one God, the Father...

We also know that all passages used by trinitarians don't pass the test for usable fact. E.g. Hebrews 1:8 is a quote from Psalm 45 which refers to a king, not to Jesus. If it does refer to Jesus, Hebrews 1:9 says Jesus has a god. Only trinitarians will see this as legitimate fact pointing to Jesus being truly God. A true God with a God.

The case is bad for the trinitarians. They know it. What they now do is invoke magic to make their case not falsifiable. Now we must all believe it and shut up. This is not the way honest people work.

Any true court will find against the trinity if the facts are clearly presented and the judge is not corrupt or a moron. What can we say about the fact that the trinitarian dogma is still so widely accepted, yet so clearly not true?