My take on Trinity

[tonychanyt]

Disclaimer: I am not against people using the term Trinity. I neither affirm nor deny Trinity.

Does the Bible support the concept of the Trinity?

Sure. The term was first used by Tertullian around 200 AD. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is this: I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

Moreover, there is plurality in unity within the divine being.

However, when it comes to doctrines, I prefer to adhere to the wording of Scripture. Trinitarians likely penned the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed, yet they did not include the word "Trinity" in their creeds.

Isaiah 9:

6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Do these titles refer to the same person?

When applied to the Divinity, the term person is loaded too much with anthropomorphism. I prefer to stick to the wording of the Scripture and use the term witness instead.

See

1. The Father is a witness
2. Jesus is God
3. The Holy Spirit is a witness
4. Hagar and the angel of the LORD.

The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible, so I'd avoid using it. I try to adhere to the Bible's words and wording as much as possible when it comes to doctrines.

Berean Literal Bible, Acts 17:

29 Therefore, being offspring of God, we ought not to consider the Divine Being [Θεῖον, Theion, G2304] to be like to gold or to silver or to stone, a graven thing of man's craft and imagination.

KJB translated Θεῖον as "Godhead"; NKJB used "Divine Nature."

The term Trinity is loaded and not in the Bible. The term Divine Being (G2304) is in the Bible. I would use that instead of Trinity.

See also

• The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one

 

[HTacianas]

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Do these titles refer to the same person?

The term person is loaded with anthropomorphism. I prefer to stick to the wording of the Scripture and use the term witness instead.

See

• The Father is a witness
• The Holy Spirit is a witness

The word "Trinity" is not written in the Bible. I'd avoid using the term. I try to stick to the words and wording of the Bible as much as possible. The term was first used by Tertullian around 200 AD. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is that I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

On the other hand, Berean Literal Bible, Acts 17:29 Therefore, being offspring of God, we ought not to consider the Divine Being [Θεῖον, Theion, G2304] to be like to gold or to silver or to stone, a graven thing of man's craft and imagination.

KJB translated Θεῖον as "Godhead"; NKJB used "Divine Nature".

The term Divine Being (G2304) is in the Bible. I would use that instead of "Trinity".

Actually the first use of the Trinity comes from Philo of Alexandria, who lived during the time of Christ and the Apostles. Philo used the term "divine triad" to describe the nature of God. Philo, John the Apostle, Paul, and the writer of Hebrews all used the same language to describe God, though there is no known relationship between Philo and any of the Apostles.

According to Philo God exists as God the Father and His two powers. One is the divine creative power, the Word, through which God creates and sustains all things. His other power is His regent power through which he reigns. Philo describes the Word as the first-born son of God. It is through the Word that God created all things, see also John 1, "in the beginning was the Word...". According to Philo the icon of God is the Ark of the Covenant. God the Father sits on the Mercy Seat between His two powers, each power represented by the cherubim on each side. But the Ark, the cherubim, and the Mercy Seat are not God unless God the Father is present. To the uninitiated it appears as three, but to the initiated He appears as One. A Divine Triad, a Trinity.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Do these titles refer to the same person?

The term person is loaded with anthropomorphism. I prefer to stick to the wording of the Scripture and use the term witness instead.

See

• The Father is a witness
• The Holy Spirit is a witness

The word "Trinity" is not written in the Bible. I'd avoid using the term. I try to stick to the words and wording of the Bible as much as possible. The term was first used by Tertullian around 200 AD. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is that I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

On the other hand, Berean Literal Bible, Acts 17:29 Therefore, being offspring of God, we ought not to consider the Divine Being [Θεῖον, Theion, G2304] to be like to gold or to silver or to stone, a graven thing of man's craft and imagination.

KJB translated Θεῖον as "Godhead"; NKJB used "Divine Nature".

The term Divine Being (G2304) is in the Bible. I would use that instead of "Trinity".

Though I somewhat agree, if a Christian does not use the term "Trinity" while explaining the Godhead , Father, Son and Holy Spirit, there is a risk of promoting the Oneness Movement ,aka Modalism, who are in error. There is an important subtle difference between Divine Being and Trinity . The term Divine Being refers to God in general, while the term Trinity refers to the specific Christian doctrine that God is three persons in one "Divine Being", the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Additionally Jesus Christ of Nazareth did reveal the Trinity to His Body as one " name" just as Isaiah prophesied.

Matthew 28:19, Jesus says, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

Blessings

 

[tonychanyt]

Though I somewhat agree, if a Christian does not use the term "Trinity" while explaining the Godhead , Father, Son and Holy Spirit, there is a risk of promoting the Oneness Movement ,aka Modalism, who are in error.

Good point. I added "Modalism" to my OP

 

[GaryAnderson]

Here's my take on Trinity:

 

[tonychanyt]

Here's my take on Trinity:

Can you give some highlights from the link?

 

[GaryAnderson]

Can you give some highlights from the link?

Oh sorry, it's a short 5 minute video which is based on the book Flatland.
It's basically an analogy which talks about dimensions.
First, it talks about how a two dimensional object perceives a three dimensional object and then it goes to higher dimensions.

I imagine Trinity similar to this concept.

 

[Soyeong]

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Do these titles refer to the same person?

The term person is loaded with anthropomorphism. I prefer to stick to the wording of the Scripture and use the term witness instead.

See

• The Father is a witness
• The Holy Spirit is a witness
• Jesus is God

The word "Trinity" is not written in the Bible. I'd avoid using the term. I try to stick to the words and wording of the Bible as much as possible. The term was first used by Tertullian around 200 AD. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is that I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

On the other hand, Berean Literal Bible, Acts 17:29 Therefore, being offspring of God, we ought not to consider the Divine Being [Θεῖον, Theion, G2304] to be like to gold or to silver or to stone, a graven thing of man's craft and imagination.

KJB translated Θεῖον as "Godhead"; NKJB used "Divine Nature".

The term Divine Being (G2304) is in the Bible. I would use that instead of "Trinity".

It is possible that a term refers to a concept that is taught by the Bible even though is was not used by the Bible, so our concern should be whether the concept of the Trinity is taught by the Bible not with when the term was first used.

In Colossians 1:15, the Son is the image of the invisible God, and in Hebrews 1:3, the Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact image of His nature, so the Son is who we see when we look at the Father. In other words, if God were to take all of the aspects if His nature such aa holiness, righteousness, goodness, justice, mercy, faithfulness and so forth and personify them into a human body that we can see, then that would be the Son. Aspects of God's nature are also the fruits of the Spirit. The problem with idolatry is that it misrepresents the nature of God, so if the Son were anything less than the exact image of God's nature, then worshiping him as God would have been idolatry.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Do these titles refer to the same person?

The term person is loaded with anthropomorphism. I prefer to stick to the wording of the Scripture and use the term witness instead.

See

• The Father is a witness
• The Holy Spirit is a witness
• Jesus is God

The word "Trinity" is not written in the Bible. I'd avoid using the term. I try to stick to the words and wording of the Bible as much as possible. The term was first used by Tertullian around 200 AD. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is that I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

On the other hand, Berean Literal Bible, Acts 17:29 Therefore, being offspring of God, we ought not to consider the Divine Being [Θεῖον, Theion, G2304] to be like to gold or to silver or to stone, a graven thing of man's craft and imagination.

KJB translated Θεῖον as "Godhead"; NKJB used "Divine Nature".

The term Divine Being (G2304) is in the Bible. I would use that instead of "Trinity".

My take on the trinity and why it matters.

 

[tonychanyt]

It is possible that a term refers to a concept that is taught by the Bible even though is was not used by the Bible,

Not only it is possible, but also I agree that the concept is in the Bible. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is that I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

That makes sense if you're into apologetics, since only born again people can begin to understand trinity.

 

[tonychanyt]

only born again people can begin to understand trinity.

Verse?

 

[Soyeong]

This short video is relevant to any discussion on the Trinity:

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Verse?

John 17.

Jesus prays to the Father, may those who believe through their (the apostles) words be one as we are one.

This type of oneness is only understandable to those to whom the parable is given.

 

[tonychanyt]

This short video is relevant to any discussion on the Trinity:

Can you provide some highlights from the link?

 

[Soyeong]

Can you provide some highlights from the link?

It discuss bad analogies for the Trinity.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Do these titles refer to the same person?

The term person is loaded with anthropomorphism. I prefer to stick to the wording of the Scripture and use the term witness instead.

See

• The Father is a witness
• The Holy Spirit is a witness
• Jesus is God

The word "Trinity" is not written in the Bible. I'd avoid using the term. I try to stick to the words and wording of the Bible as much as possible. The term was first used by Tertullian around 200 AD. I am not against the concept of the Trinity. I am not even against the word "Trinity". My point is that I prefer not to use the term Trinity in argumentation.

On the other hand, Berean Literal Bible, Acts 17:29 Therefore, being offspring of God, we ought not to consider the Divine Being [Θεῖον, Theion, G2304] to be like to gold or to silver or to stone, a graven thing of man's craft and imagination.

KJB translated Θεῖον as "Godhead"; NKJB used "Divine Nature".

The term Divine Being (G2304) is in the Bible. I would use that instead of "Trinity".

I don’t see a problem with using the word Trinity, it’s just a word that was chosen to easily refer to the three different persons of the Godhead.

 

[tonychanyt]

I don’t see a problem with using the word Trinity, it’s just a word that was chosen to easily refer to the three different persons of the Godhead.

I prefer to stick to words that are found in the Bible as much as possible.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Just say Trinity.

There's a reason why we have used this word and what it means when talking about God.

Saying "Godhead" or "Divine Being" instead of "Trinity" isn't helpful. Musliims, Jews, and heretics all believe in the Godhead. What makes Christians distinct is our belief that God is a Trinity of Persons.

Let's stop trying to dumb down Christianity. There's enough biblical and theological illiteracy today as it is.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

I prefer to stick to words that are found in the Bible as much as possible.

That sounds nice in theory, the problem is that heretics can use those same words and mean radically different things. Which is why the Christian Church spent the time and effort to express the truth of Scripture in good and precise language.

The Bible doesn't use the word homoousios, but that is a biblically accurate statement to describe the Son's ontological relationship with the Father. The Son is homoousian with the Father, the Son is of the Same-Being with the Father: the Son is God. Not a different god, not god-like, but is Himself really, truly, and actually God even as the Father is really, truly, and actually God. And the same with the Holy Spirit, He too is really, truly, and actually God, homoousian--Same-Being--with the Father and the Son.

We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confusing the Persons nor dividing the Essence.

There is a foundation of good theology that all Christians should aspire to have. And we don't do our ourselves or our religion any favors by trying to dumb it down or play games with it.

Learn the faith, believe the faith, confess the faith, live the faith, and earnestly contend for the faith. Be prepared to give answer to the hope that is in you, with respect and gentleness.

-CryptoLutheran