Debating the Trinity

[Butch5]

That is the whole point. A sinless man suffering for the sinner. It is the wronged party, God, sufferring for man and hence forgiving them while maintaining justice. Your objection is only relevant if you do not take the whole conception of Atonement into account or deny the trinity, neither of which I do.

As I pointed out if one person is punished for another it is not justice. Man is the one who sinned. If there is to be justice the man must suffer the punishment. God, the Father, didn't die, Jesus did. So God didn't take the wages of sin on Himself. If you say it was Jesus as God then you have Modalism which was refuted very early on in the Christian faith.

What is this punishment that you're talking about?

Not at all. It is not a logical fallacy of any form, after all the Church Fathers were trained in Aristotlean logic.
Its like the US government. Three separate branches, but all are a part of the Government. The Administrative is no less the government than the Legislative, but all are part of one Government. This is how English works.
Another example is multicellular organisms. One cell is still a living organism, like a single cell bacterium would be, but multiple cells make up a living creature. In essence they are colonies of millions of beings cooperating to form one being.

But they're not three cells making up one cell. They are not three presidents making up one president. You're comparing apples to oranges. The administrative and legislative branches are two different branches that are a part of the government. You don't have three administrative branches making up one administrative branch. Three different people cannot be one person, it is a logical contradiction.

 

[miknik5]

Butch

Are you a Christian
Do you believe in The Gospel thst The Son came forth from The Father and into the world for the salvation of the souls of men who would believe

 

[Butch5]

The extremely strong averse Jewish reaction to the doctrine when it did finally emerge indicates that it was alien to Israel's concept of God as revealed via holy spirit in the OT.

True, at no time during the first century did the Jews accuse the Christians of promoting a Trinity doctrine for the simple reason that it did not exist. Had the early Christians been proposing it during that time, the Jews would have immediately pointed out their doctrinal error and condemned it as heresy. In short, their silence speaks for itself.

The idea of a God consisting of three persons came quite a bit later.

 

[miknik5]

The idea of a God consisting of three persons came quite a bit later.

the "idea" came because men born of the Holy Spirit had to put into word to explain their restored relationship to God, The Father, in The Son, and through The Holy Spirit to men not born of The Spirit. And they could not and would not remove from the equation The One who is the subject and very reason of that restored relationship

 

[Butch5]

the "idea" came because men born of the Holy Spirit had to put into word to explain their restored relationship to God, The Father, in The Son, and through The Holy Spirit to men not born of The Spirit. And they could not and would not remove from the equation The One who is the subject and very reason of that restored relationship

Really? Then why did they change the original explanation? No, what they came up with was something different than what the earlier Christians believed.

 

[Butch5]

Butch

Are you a Christian
Do you believe in The Gospel thst The Son came forth from The Father and into the world for the salvation of the souls of men who would believe

Sure!

 

[Anto9us]

Now I like THAT, Butch:
A one-word creed:

"Sure!"

Now we're cookin' with Crisco!

 

[Butch5]

Now I like THAT, Butch:
A one-word creed:

"Sure!"

Now we're cookin' with Crisco!

Still gathering that evidence?

 

[Anto9us]

Nah.

Got all caught up in "gender of God" stuff...

And as far as "are WE all gods?"

Yeah.

Says so in Psalms, and Jesus quoted it:

YE ARE GODS

 

[Anto9us]

The "quick creed" SURE...
SAVES MUCH CONTROVERSY

 

[Radrook]

The idea of a God consisting of three persons came quite a bit later.

One would assume that if indeed the Trinity concept is as essential to salvation as Trinitarians say it is, then it would have been immediately revealed to his chosen people Israel.

After all, in all his dealings with Israel, God goes out of his way to describe himself. This can be seen in his communication with Moses where he revealed himself as the ""I Am" and later described his own personality to him.

Then prophets received visions in which he represents himself in heaven sitting on a thrown surrounded by myriads of angels. In all these revelations, and even in the Revelation to John the Apostle-he never reveals himself as triune God.

Here let me show you:

Daniel 7:9-14 (NKJV)
Vision of the Ancient of Days
9
“I watched till thrones were put in place,
And the Ancient of Days was seated;
His garment was white as snow,
And the hair of His head was like pure wool.
His throne was a fiery flame,
Its wheels a burning fire;

10
A fiery stream issued
And came forth from before Him.
A thousand thousands ministered to Him;
Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him.
The court[a] was seated,
And the books were opened....


13
“I was watching in the night visions,
And behold, One like the Son of Man,
Coming with the clouds of heaven!
He came to the Ancient of Days,
And they brought Him near before Him.

14
Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,
That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
Which shall not pass away,
And His kingdom the one
Which shall not be destroyed

In that scripture God is depicted sitting on his heavenly throne.
Then his Son, whom we know is Jesus appears.
A clear distinction is made between the twain.
So if indeed the Jews perceived this Son as the foretold Messiah-there is nothing it that description which would lead them to conclude that he is the one sitting on the throne or God himself.

If indeed God were a trinity, then the vision would not have separated the Son from the one on the throne and would definitely have included the Holy Spirit as the Third person of the Trinity somewhere in that scenario. Yet not a hint is provided of this idea.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

As I pointed out if one person is punished for another it is not justice. Man is the one who sinned. If there is to be justice the man must suffer the punishment. God, the Father, didn't die, Jesus did. So God didn't take the wages of sin on Himself. If you say it was Jesus as God then you have Modalism which was refuted very early on in the Christian faith.

Please reread my earlier posts, I have already explained this and see no need to do it ad nauseam.

What is this punishment that you're talking about?

The passion and Crucifixion of our Lord.

Please explain your view of the Atonement for I cannot see how you could possibly maintain justice.

But they're not three cells making up one cell. They are not three presidents making up one president. You're comparing apples to oranges. The administrative and legislative branches are two different branches that are a part of the government. You don't have three administrative branches making up one administrative branch. Three different people cannot be one person, it is a logical contradiction.

You missed the point. They aren't exact analogies, merely ways to show you that such use of language is not inconsistent nor illogical nor uncommon. Multiples are often spoken of as one thing or thought individually to contain the rest.

Besides three different Persons being One is not a logical contradiction - Personae and Hypostasis, the actual terms used, are not exactly equivalent to English person in the first place and have a far more metaphysical bent.
Secondly, what does 'Person' mean? In human terms, Psychology and Neuroscience has largely done away with the idea of a Self as one entity. We are a corporatist complex of multiple thoughts and processes, some conscious and some not. If anything, all persons are composed of multiple 'selves' interdependant upon one another.

No, what they came up with was something different than what the earlier Christians believed.

Please provide evidence for this statement.

 

[miknik5]

Really? Then why did they change the original explanation? No, what they came up with was something different than what the earlier Christians believed.

Are you talking about the early church fathers at the council of Nicene?

Or. Are you wanting to know where the "idea" of the trinity was Hidden in the Word of God

 

[miknik5]

And where by the way did you think Christ came forth from and into the world?

And by whose Spirit did Christ live?

 

[miknik5]

Mr Butch?

Are you a father?
Do you have children?
Are they perfect in that they never disobey and never fight and argue with one another?

If you are a father, do each of your children have the same type of personality and spirit?

Do each of your children, at some point do things that aren't really good and are against what you would do and want for them to do?

The reason I ask you this is because you mentioned God being just and how is it being just for Him to "punish" ONE for another's sins

 

[miknik5]

Mr Butch

Can I ask you to read Romans 3?

Your answer regarding God being just is in there

I hope you are a father and have a number of. Children who have all at one point or another disobeyed you


Multiply that by an infinite number and let me know if you can prpvide "another way" rather than judging by and against each of your disobedient children as if there is before a HOLY and PERFECT FATHER who has no sin and can not condone sin not can HE compromise HIS HOLY glory or conform HIS HOLY glory to HIS children/creation


So how can HE be just when HE judges?

If you as a father know how far from right it would be to compare one disobedient child by and against and before another disobedient to child so as to pick let's say the "better" of the two

Well GOD is better than any earthly father who knows that is wrong and HE has provided a better WAY

Which is the ONLY WAY

So as to be just when HE judges and the justified of all whose faith is in HIS SON

GOD gave the best
HE will not allow any man to bypass HIS SON

And in fact since it is declared that ALL the children have sinned. Then ALL the children can not open their mouths before HIM to somehow "justify" themselves

By doing that they are in a sense deeming themselves better than another of the disobedient children and in fact professing another self-professed way and not in need of The GIFT of GOD

But al mouths will be silenced before HIM and the whole world, ALL the children held accountable before HIM

 

[miknik5]

As to where was the trinity hidden in The Word, I point you to 1 John 5

I know. Many claim that verses 7 and 8 were "added" to the Word which is why I am NOT pointing you to verses 7 and 8 (which share true and truth) but to verse 6

I was wondering, do you know anyone who was born into the world of "WATER" only?

 

[miknik5]

Now if you wouldn't mind could you maybe reread John 3

In there is the Promise of God who did not withhold His own Son but gave Him who is the beauty and perfect and holy goodness of GOD made manifest, made in the likeness of our covering so that through faith in HIM we might be made into HIS LIKENESS

God did not withhold from us HIS SON but gave HIM in exchange for men. God who can see into one day one thousand years already knew both mankinds fall but more importantly the victory in HIS SON

And HE knew HE would have a set apart and marked new creation in HIS SON whose faith is in HIM who would believe THE TRUTH and the PROMISES of GOD and glorify HIM for HIS most excellent, unfathomable GIFT of HIS mercy and grace (and long suffering patience in His disobedient children who are ever and always going astray) most visibly and clearly found in HIS SON whom HE sent for the sins of the world

....for GOD soooooooo loved the world

 

[Anto9us]

Yes, miknik5, most biblical scholars readily admit that THE JOHANINE COMMA (verses7 and 8 as you point out)

Is a GLOSS and us Trinitarians avoid it like stink on a skunk in these types of debates, lest the non-trinnies pounce and say "gotcha!!" and think they have accomplished something...

 

[miknik5]

Yes, miknik5, most biblical scholars readily admit that THE JOHANINE COMMA (verses7 and 8 as you point out)

Is a GLOSS and us Trinitarians avoid it like stink on a skunk in these types of debates, lest the non-trinnies pounce and say "gotcha!!" and think they have accomplished something...

I know but who is born of water only? There would be no need to mention this unless it should be noted

This is He who came by water and blood. He did not come by water only. And it is the Spirit

(THAT...LIVING....WATER)
who testifies

I don't think there is any HIGHER TESTIMONY NEEDED

Even if they do not wish to believe 1John5:7-8