Is God Three, or Two?

[ARBITER01]

The same can be said of your argument. You have Scripture that says there are three people being mentioned at one time, but you don't have any Scripture that reveal explicitly Jesus is the deity, nor any Scripture calling those same three people "God" because they don't exist.

Therefore, while the arguments presented against you are opinions, they are not any more opinion than your own argument.

If you aren't actually concerned about being right, then you would be at peace leaving these fine folks to their inconsequential opinions.

FYI, the Trinity is historically accredited to the apostolic fathers (post-canon authors) and the institutional church. Scripture supporting the notion may be found it hindsight in the Scriptures, but the theology didn't originate there. You didn't learn the Trinity theology from the Bible, but I completely understand why you think you did. The teaching has saturated our Christian culture with as much fervor as hellenization or post-modernism.

You're doing the same thing the other guy is doing, only trying to appear smarter.

I've asked for scripture that specifically teaches against the triune nature of GOD, as seen in the passage I've presented, as well as others. Do you have it?

 

[cubinity]

You're doing the same thing the other guy is doing, only trying to appear smarter.

I've asked for scripture that specifically teaches against the triune nature of GOD, as seen in the passage I've presented, as well as others. Do you have it?

Eat your accusation. I don't have the Scripture you're asking for because it doesn't exist. All I'm saying is that you don't have the Scripture for the counter-argument, so we're both playing with an empty deck on this one. That's all I'm saying.

 

[ARBITER01]

Eat your accusation. I don't have the Scripture you're asking for because it doesn't exist. All I'm saying is that you don't have the Scripture for the counter-argument, so we're both playing with an empty deck on this one. That's all I'm saying.

Well if you don't have the scripture to counter the scripture I presented, then probably you are entering this with opinion only, and that won't do you justice in solidifying anything my friend.

Paul was perfect in doctrine because he was a careful student of scripture, and very mature in spirit, as well as can be said for Jesus of course.

 

[cubinity]

Well if you don't have the scripture to counter the scripture I presented, then probably you are entering this with opinion only, and that won't do you justice in solidifying anything my friend.

Paul was perfect in doctrine because he was a careful student of scripture, and very mature in spirit, as well as can be said for Jesus of course.

What Scripture are you even referring to in all these quotes? Are you claiming that 2 Corinthians 13:14 is proof of the Trinity, and then condescendingly accusing me of being a poor student of Scripture?

What does it say?

"Finally, brothers, good-by. Aim for perfection, listen to my appeal, be of one mind, live in peace. And the God of love and peace will be with you. Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the saints send their greetings. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

Where does it say anything about what you are claiming? Where is the Trinity? Where is the connection that the three entities listed are God? If anything, the verse refutes that claim, since it identifies God separately from the other two entities listed.

You've got a verse that tells us that the author believed three entities were actively involved in the Spiritual lives of the saints. They each gave blessings this author hoped would reside with his audience. From Jesus, grace. From God (a separate entity from the other two), love. From the Holy Spirit, fellowship. There is nothing about them all being God.

Is this really the "rock" you're standing on in degrading the genuine convictions of your fellow believers as they share about God? If so, you're missing something.

Opinions have done me a world of justice, particularly as I am honest about them. They help me not be blind to situations where I read into a simple verse a bunch of convoluted theology that isn't actually there.

Read the verse a few times, pretend it doesn't say anything but what it actually says, and then come back and tell us what we're missing. I think, if you're honest with the Scripture, you'll find that you and I are doing what the others are doing--seeing what we want to see.

If what you see in the Scriptures helps you commune with God, I have nothing against it. I'm a Trinitarian, too. I know where you're coming from. I'm just pointing out that you're asking for more from your opponents then you've actually got in your own deck. You're being more critical of their arguments then you are being of your own, and that is hypocrisy.

Become a better student of the verses you're quoting. That would improve your argument far better than simply insisting from your opponents verses you and I know don't exist.

 

[cubinity]

If the doctrine of the triune nature of GOD is wrong, then scripture will easily prove it as such.

This is where the issue really is:

In addition to your above standard, the counter must also be true:
If the doctrine of the triune nature of God is right, then scripture will easily prove it as such.

The point is, you're both lacking the evidence you need to make a case under your standard. Your standard is what's faulty.

There's no "easily proven as such" on either side of the debate. My personal opinion is this is because it doesn't really matter that much. My only Scriptural evidence for that opinion is the lack of Scripture "easily proving it."

Like I said above, you're being more critical of your opponents' arguments then you're being of your own.

 

[ARBITER01]

This is where the issue really is:

In addition to your above standard, the counter must also be true:
If the doctrine of the triune nature of God is right, then scripture will easily prove it as such.

The point is, you're both lacking the evidence you need to make a case under your standard. Your standard is what's faulty.

There's no "easily proven as such" on either side of the debate. My personal opinion is this is because it doesn't really matter that much. My only Scriptural evidence for that opinion is the lack of Scripture "easily proving it."

Like I said above, you're being more critical of your opponents' arguments then you're being of your own.

I'm looking for your scripture submissions that prove that doctrinal stance is wrong, if you have scripture to prove otherwise, present it.

 

[cubinity]

I'm looking for your scripture submissions that prove that doctrinal stance is wrong, if you have scripture to prove otherwise, present it.

Over and over, I have admitted agreement that such Scripture does not exist.

I'm not even saying the doctrinal stance is wrong: never have and never will.

What I have said, which you have contended, is that it is a doctrinal stance resulting from tradition, and not the explicit result of Scripture.

Our conversation (between you and I) is that you claim the Trinity was learned from the Scripture, and not the result of institutional tradition. However, even now, all you contend is that it is doctrinal, which I do not deny.

So, "I'm looking for your scripture submissions that prove that doctrinal stance is [explicitly the result of Scripture], if you have scripture to prove otherwise, present it."

Otherwise, we are in the same boat, aren't we?

 

[ARBITER01]

Over and over, I have admitted agreement that such Scripture does not exist.

I'm not even saying the doctrinal stance is wrong: never have and never will.

What I have said, which you have contended, is that it is a doctrinal stance resulting from tradition, and not the explicit result of Scripture.

Our conversation (between you and I) is that you claim the Trinity was learned from the Scripture, and not the result of institutional tradition. However, even now, all you contend is that it is doctrinal, which I do not deny.

So, "I'm looking for your scripture submissions that prove that doctrinal stance is [explicitly the result of Scripture], if you have scripture to prove otherwise, present it."

Otherwise, we are in the same boat, aren't we?

Well then we don't really have anything to talk about on the subject. I'm not interested in chit chat, just the subject, and if you are unable to fulfill the request of mine, then there is nothing more to say between us.

 

[cubinity]

Well then we don't really have anything to talk about on the subject. I'm not interested in chit chat, just the subject, and if you are unable to fulfill the request of mine, then there is nothing more to say between us.

You've claimed something that isn't valid (that the Trinity is explicitly Scriptural), and then made it everyone else's responsibility to disprove it while offering nothing to defend your case.

Why is it anyone else's responsibility to prove the counter-argument of your claim, but not your responsibility to defend the validity of your own claim?

Here's a Scripture for you: "Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory for ever and ever." Gal. 1:3-5

And another: "If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." John 14:7

And another: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." 1 Cor. 8:5-6

Now, consider these verses. For the anti-Trinitarian, they are fodder against the claims of the Trinitarian. However, for the Trinitarian, they are Scriptural evidence for what he or she already believes.

Who is right? Who is the one being a better student of the Scripture? What validity is one person's claim over the other?

As Trinitarians, we have the benefit of a doctrine reinforced by thousands of years of institutional tradition. Sadly, if you disassociate yourself from that tradition, you take the wind out of the sails of your argument for the Trinity, since that is where the Trinity comes from. Reclaim tradition as your source, and then your argument will set sail once again. Otherwise, all you've got is your opinion, which (to agree with you) isn't going to prove very effective.

2 Cor 13:14 has been effectively vetoed as "easy proof" by both an anti-Trinitarian and this Trinitarian (me). Do you have anything else?

 

[ARBITER01]

You've claimed something that isn't valid (that the Trinity is explicitly Scriptural), and then made it everyone else's responsibility to disprove it while offering nothing to defend your case.

Why is it anyone else's responsibility to prove the counter-argument of your claim, but not your responsibility to defend the validity of your own claim?

Here's a Scripture for you: "Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory for ever and ever." Gal. 1:3-5

And another: "If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." John 14:7

And another: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." 1 Cor. 8:5-6

Now, consider these verses. For the anti-Trinitarian, they are fodder against the claims of the Trinitarian. However, for the Trinitarian, they are Scriptural evidence for what he or she already believes.

Who is right? Who is the one being a better student of the Scripture? What validity is one person's claim over the other?

As Trinitarians, we have the benefit of a doctrine reinforced by thousands of years of institutional tradition. Sadly, if you disassociate yourself from that tradition, you take the wind out of the sails of your argument for the Trinity, since that is where the Trinity comes from. Reclaim tradition as your source, and then your argument will set sail once again. Otherwise, all you've got is your opinion, which (to agree with you) isn't going to prove very effective.

2 Cor 13:14 has been effectively vetoed as "easy proof" by both an anti-Trinitarian and this Trinitarian (me). Do you have anything else?

Ok, so you have no scripture to disprove it, fine, next.

 

[2ducklow]

If you actually have scripture that specifically speaks against the triune nature of GOD, you can present it, I'm not concerned with your personal ramblings about it.

what I'm getting from you is that the only way I can disprove your triune nature of God doctrine is to find a scripture that says God doesn't have a triune nature. anything short of that isn't proof.

 

[2ducklow]

there's only one verse in the entire bible that even hints at god having a nature, as far as I know.

(Rotherham) 2 Peter 1:4 Through which, his precious, and very great, promises, have, unto us, been given, in order that, through these, ye might become sharers in a divine nature(5449)--escaping the corruption that is in the world by coveting.

the word translated nature here means kind or sort or genusis, according to Strongs (5449). It is translated as kind not nature in james 3.7


James 3:7 For every kind(5449) of beasts and birds, of creeping things and things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed by mankind.

so the meaning of nature as used in 2 pet. 1.4 is that we are to be partakers of the divine kind, i.e. god.


(Rotherham) Ephesians 5:18 And be not getting drunk with wine, in which is dissoluteness, but be getting filled in Spirit;--

(Rotherham) John 4:24 God is, spirit; and, they that worship him, in spirit and truth, must needs worship.


that's how we take on or partake of the divine kind/nature, by being filled with the spirit which is God.


So really no scripture speaks of god having a nature.

 

[ARBITER01]

what I'm getting from you is that the only way I can disprove your triune nature of God doctrine is to find a scripture that says God doesn't have a triune nature. anything short of that isn't proof.

Scripture is a Christian foundation, and being that it was written by The Holy Spirit, it is certainly able to provide correct teachings of truth to us. If you can find scripture that teaches differently than the stated triune nature of GOD, present it.

 

[2ducklow]

Scripture is a Christian foundation, and being that it was written by The Holy Spirit, it is certainly able to provide correct teachings of truth to us. If you can find scripture that teaches differently than the stated triune nature of GOD, present it.

your question is faulty. no scripture states the triune nature of god, your question is unanswerable.

 

[ARBITER01]

your question is faulty. no scripture states the triune nature of god, your question is unanswerable.

Good dodge, but that is not helping you.

 

[2ducklow]

Good dodge, but that is not helping you.

I had a 1980 dodge colt long time ago. there is no scripture that contradicts another scripture and there is no scripture that states a triune god. But numerous scriptures contradict your triune nature of god doctrine, such as deut. 6.4.

 

[ARBITER01]

I had a 1980 dodge colt long time ago. there is no scripture that contradicts another scripture and there is no scripture that states a triune god. But numerous scriptures contradict your triune nature of god doctrine, such as deut. 6.4.

There is no scripture that contradicts another scripture is correct, only our understanding that can be wrong, keep that in mind,....

Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD:

Is this a condemnation of the triune nature of GOD? Let's see,..

Joh 10:29 My Father, which hath given them unto me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Joh 10:30 I and the Father are one.

Here Jesus identifies GOD as greater than all, as His father, as well as Jesus being equally GOD as GOD is. The jews took up stones to kill Him for this statement.

Let's look at another section,..

1Pe 1:11 searching what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.

Here we see Peter identifying The Holy Spirit equally as The Spirit of Christ within the OT saints.

Therefore, Deut 6:4 can only be understood in the context of 3 equal beings without contradicting the full weight of scripture. Jesus is equal with The Father, as well as The Holy Spirit is equal with The Son, according to the scripture posted.

 

[2ducklow]

There is no scripture that contradicts another scripture is correct, only our understanding that can be wrong, that is very correct, keep that in mind,....

Is this a condemnation of the triune nature of GOD? Let's see,..

Here Jesus identifies GOD as greater than all, as His father, as well as Jesus being equally GOD as GOD is. The jews took up stones to kill Him for this statement.

Jesus says he and his Father are one and prays that the church would be one just like the Father and the son, therefore, I and my father are one means they are one in purpose not being. just as the church was prayed for by Jesus to be one in purpose just like the father and the son.

Let's look at another section,..

Here we see Peter identifying The Holy Spirit equally as The Spirit of Christ within the OT saints.

No, you are assuming that the spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit. I believe it means either the human spirit of Christ or just in the sense of being of the same spirit, i.e. that christ has the holy spirit and we have the holy spirit. Christ has the holy spirit without measure. no scripture says, and no one believes, even trinitarians, that Christ is the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, Deut 6:4 can only be understood in the context of 3 equal beings without contradicting the full weight of scripture.

ONLY IF you use your interpretations of those scriptures, not my interpretations of those scriptures.

 

[ARBITER01]

Jesus says he and his Father are one and prays that the church would be one just like the Father and the son, therefore, I and my father are one means they are one in purpose not being. just as the church was prayed for by Jesus to be one in purpose just like the father and the son.

Sorry, the Jews wanted to stone Jesus for making Himself out as GOD. They understood the words perfectly.

No, you are assuming that the spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit. I believe it means either the human spirit of Christ or just in the sense of being of the same spirit, i.e. that christ has the holy spirit and we have the holy spirit. Christ has the holy spirit without measure. no scripture says, and no one believes, even trinitarians, that Christ is the Holy Spirit.
ONLY IF you use your interpretations of those scriptures, not my interpretations of those scriptures.

So you are attempting to suggest that the prophets prophesied by their human spirit instead of The Holy Spirit?

 

[ARBITER01]

Let's reiterate here,..

You used a section of scripture that identifies GOD as one, then you said Jesus was not GOD, then you attempted to suggest that the prophets of old only prophesied by their spirit instead of The Holy Spirit since you didn't believe The Holy Spirit was who Peter identified.

That creates some contradictions.

1) Only The Holy Spirit prophesied not unregenerate men, and Peter specifically mentions that The Spirit of Christ "testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ" ie prophesied or foretold. Mankind has never known that information. Additionally, scripture does not address anyone receiving a reborn spirit without The Holy Spirit.

2) Why would the Jews specifically say that Jesus made Himself equal with GOD,.. Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

3) We have other places where Jesus and The Holy Spirit are listed equally with GOD,..(Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost:) So the idea that the passage in Deut 6:4 could only mean GOD was of one nature or essence would be wrong, unless we was to forcibly ignore those other sections like matthew, and 2 Cor 13:14, but that creates further contradictions on top of the ones we already have.

The contradictions through are removed when we understand the weight of scripture in the context of 3 equal beings of the same nature, ie triune. That is the only way OT and NT agree.