• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Why there is no clear mention of trinity in the old testament?

Discussion in 'Christian Apologetics' started by Godistruth1, Mar 14, 2019.

  1. David Neos

    David Neos Catechumen

    +3,654
    Ecuador
    Christian
    Single
    US-Republican
    The Church believed in it
     
  2. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    No, not lost on me, just missed by me. Had I seen it earlier I would have replied earlier. See my next post.
     
  3. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    At first glance there appear to be two Yahwehs, one in heaven and one somewhere near Sodom and Gomorrah. This is merely a figure of speech peculiar to the Hebrew language, an idiom. Similar idioms are seen in Ezekiel 11:24 (two Spirits) and my favorite, 1 Kings 8:1 (two Solomons).

    1Ki 8:1 Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel, and all the heads of the tribes, the chief of the fathers of the children of Israel, unto king Solomon in Jerusalem, that they might bring up the ark of the covenant of YHWH out of the city of David, which is Zion. ​

    Here, YHWH is speaking to Satan through the Angel of YHWH who is standing right in front of Satan.
     
  4. Al Masihi

    Al Masihi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,865
    Saudi Arabia
    Christian
    Private
    Actually according to the doctrine of the Trinity the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all the One True God, so calling the Father the Only True God isn't a contradiction to it. If the Spirit is merely the force of God then it is not eternal and should be created, the Bible tells us the Spirit is uncreated and eternal and is also God. and judging by your words your basically saying the Father put himself in Jesus which isn't possible, and if its not the Father who is this other person called God. And its obvious the Holy Spirit is an individual not a thing, because it has feelings and thoughts of its own. If Yasue is the literal begotten Son of Elohim then he is equal to God according to John in which case he's also God or you believe he's a lesser deity of sorts in which case your a Polytheist. There aren't multiple gods, there are gods in a figurative sense, and there is god in literal meaning. Jesus claimed the literal title of Elohim has used for God, and Thomas said to him My Lord and My God, what Thomas meant by God is obvious here judging by his previous phrase My Lord.

    And to your claim that none of the quotes say that the Persons of the Trinity are co-equal or co-eternal:


    Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

    "In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).

    This quote makes it clear that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all share the same glory and power making them co-equal. And since the Son claimed to exist with the Father before the world then thats co-eternal for you along with the fact the Spirit is called eternal aswell. And just to end this argument with a big bang the command for Baptism in the names of the three persons of the Trinity in Matthew 28:19 and the Didache would be a violation of the first commandment and idolatry if the Son and Holy Spirit weren't God.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2019
  5. Al Masihi

    Al Masihi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,865
    Saudi Arabia
    Christian
    Private
    I didn't get your question.
     
  6. Al Masihi

    Al Masihi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,865
    Saudi Arabia
    Christian
    Private
    That is actually what they teach Muslims about Christianity as I have personality witnessed it countless times.
     
  7. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    When Yeshua said that, he excluded himself as being part of the "only true God".

    God IS Spirit. Since God is eternal, His Spirit is eternal and uncreated.

    John 14:10c but the Father that dwells in me, He does the works.

    2 Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and has committed unto us the word of reconciliation. ​

    This does not say Christ was God or God was Christ, but that God (Yeshua's Father) was IN His Son. The same holds true for us (John 14:23; Romans 8:11).

    They are the Father's thoughts and feelings, not a third person's.

    "Elohim" is a title. So is "President". Is the son of the President also President? No. Neither does Yeshua being God's Son make him God/Elohim. Yeshua is not a lesser deity, but a lesser elohim.

    In what verse? Yeshua never said he was God.

    There are many men who are "Lords" in Scripture including Abraham, Esau, Pharaoh, king Agrippa, etc.

    The Father is the one who GAVE Yeshua his glory and power. Why? Because Father YHWH is the greatest, most glorious, most powerful being in the universe. NONE can compare to Him. That is why, in the end, Yeshua himself will be SUBJECT to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24-28).

    In which verse did he say that? BTW, you would save everyone a lot of time if you would quote verses you are using.

    Your argument is about as valid as the "Big Bang" theory. Matthew 28:19 says nothing about co-eternal or co-equality. One can only violate the first commandment if one worships another being as the only true God. That is what Christians do. I do not worship Yeshua as such. I bow down to him and honor him as YHWH's Messiah and appointed King and Savior over me. No where in Scripture are we ever told to worship the Son as the only true God.
     
  8. Sanoy

    Sanoy Well-Known Member

    +1,188
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    This is merely 1 of many such examples. While your example may sound similar, it is not similar when you investigate the grammar. Two Solomon's are not required by the grammar here, or in Ezekiel. In Genesis 19:24 two distinct individuals are required, because one Yahweh has the mark of the accusative and the other does not. It's not a "Jewish figure of speech". The second temple era is full of speculation over this second power. Even later the author of Genesis rabbah, seeing the same thing in the grammar, pins this second Yahweh on Gabriel. Second temple writings include a great deal of speculation over this second power found all throughout the Tanakh. That only ceased in the latter rabbinic period where these things were washed away from view through later interpretive explanations.

    You will also notice that Zechariah 3:2 uses the same format as the assumption of Moses does, as recalled in Jude 9, where Michael appeals to a higher power when rebuking the adversary. That format is not a coincidence, but represents a system.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2019
  9. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    Please show me the accusative mark you are referring to. Also, speculations continue through Christians as well. I try not to build doctrines on speculation.
     
  10. Sanoy

    Sanoy Well-Known Member

    +1,188
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    It's not speculation to say the second power is also called Yahweh, because that is what's in the text. It is speculation to try and attribute another personage to the text, as in Gabriel or the many others appealed to during that time period.

    "Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from (מֵאֵ֥ת) Yahweh out of heaven."

    Mark of the accusative in bold.

    Amos 4:11 also reflects the same duality.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2019
  11. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    "From" is merely telling us who the direct object is (the second "Yahweh" in the verse). That Yahweh sent sulfur and fire down from heaven, but so did the first "Yahweh". That is because they are the same being. "From" does not tell us there is a "second power".

    However, even if there was a second power, to say it is the Son is to read him into the text just as Jews read Gabriel into the text. It is all speculation.

    Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel, ... unto king Solomon in Jerusalem,
    Just because there is no accusative marker in this verse does not mean two Solomons cannot be erroneously read into the text.
     
  12. Sanoy

    Sanoy Well-Known Member

    +1,188
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Given the accusative case the Yahweh here is the direct object of the verb. You have 1 Yahweh as the doer, and one as the direct object of that action. And as I said, Amos repeats the duality of the grammar. Replace Yahweh with Gabriel and you will read it just as I suggest. Don't let the recurrence of names hold you back from seeing what is here.

    You can deny the Son and call the second Yahweh Fred if you want, but you're still left with Binatarianism. It's not as if there are any other viable candidates floating around to fill the position, but even a hypothesised place holder still leaves a second power.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2019
  13. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    The first Yahweh is raining fire and sulphur and the second Yahweh is raining fire and sulphur. The verb is "rained". Which Yahweh is raining stuff? Both, because they are the same person.

    It seems to me that your view leads to Binatarianism since I only see one Yahweh.
     
  14. Sanoy

    Sanoy Well-Known Member

    +1,188
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    You must follow the grammar, not the English words. Because of the accusative case Yahweh here is the direct object of the action being performed by the other Yahweh who is the subject. If there are two Teds in a room I might write 'Ted planted the seed from Ted in the ground.' Why would we assume there is only 1 Ted here when the accusative necessitates 2. The mark of the accusative necessitates that they are distinct individuals. And as I said Amos 4:11 repeats that same duality.

    Correct, this verse only leads to Binatarianism. The Spirit is noncontroversial, you even brought up one of the relevant scriptures. There is a multitude of verses I could have chosen because this is systematic in the Tanakh. (Which is why we see the speculation in 2nd temple and early Rabbinic discussion wholely apart from Christianity) I choose these two verses and go no further because without exception the people I present them to have already refused me on the face of it. Even now you are fine to leave it at Binatarianism so long as it is short of Trinitarianism. That shows more interest in what scripture concludes, than what it actually says.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2019
  15. Al Masihi

    Al Masihi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,865
    Saudi Arabia
    Christian
    Private
    No he didn’t because calling another person One True God doesn’t exclude him from being God, as he’s not a different God from the Father. If your baptizing in the name of a man then that is Idolatry. Idolatry is when you have more then One God. Worshipping the same God existing in more then one place isn’t Idolatry you certainly have committed Idolatry if you baptize in the name of a man and not God. The following was taken from the catholic Encyclopedia:

    The evidence from the Gospels culminates in the baptismal commission of Matt., xxviii, 20. It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known to the Twelve step by step. First He taught them to recognize in Himself the Eternal Son of God. When His ministry was drawing to a close, He promised that the Father would send another Divine Person, the Holy Spirit, in His place. Finally, after His resurrection, He revealed the doctrine in explicit terms, bidding them go and teach all nations, “baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matt., xxviii, 19). The force of this passage is decisive. That “the Father” and “the Son” are distinct Persons follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the other by the conjunctions “and … and”, is evidence that we have here a Third Person coordinate with the Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures. The phrase “in the name” (eis to onoma) affirms alike the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature. Among the Jews and in the Apostolic Church the Divine name was representative of God.

    John 14:10 refers to the nature of the Father not the Father himself. Same goes for 2 Corinthians 5:19, John 14:23, and Romans 8:11. Elohim means deity so if Yeshua is a lesser Elohim then he’s a lesser deity which is Polytheism. God isn’t just a title it’s a nature, the Son of a human is also a human not a horse.

    If Jesus has glory and power from the Father then he’s a sharer in divinity with the Father. 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 isn’t a contradiction to Christ’s divinity because God the Son is subject to God the Father in the trinity in terms of authority. The term Lord along with the next term God highlights what Thomas meant by each word, by God Thomas meant the heavenly Lord, by Lord Thomas meant his own God, hence the term My God. You said yourself that Thomas called Jesus Elohim and I made the claim that he used Elohim as used for God judging by his precocious statement of Lord.
     
  16. devolved

    devolved Newbie

    +363
    Seeker
    Married
    There isn't a clear mentioning of Trinity in NT. Trinity is a conceptual perspective on God as it's described functionally by NT.

    For example, I am a father. I am also a son. And part of my function leaves certain "memetic trace" that propagates through the culture. Those three are different dimensions of my being when we look at what "I am" through various lens of focusing on my activity. There are no three versions of me running around. It's a conceptual description about how I relate to different aspects of my reality.

    That's the proper context for Trinity.
     
  17. gadar perets

    gadar perets Messianic Hebrew

    +1,023
    United States
    Unitarian
    Single
    US-Others
    If the Son is God and the Father is God and the Son is not the Father as the trinity doctrine proclaims, then you have two Gods - idolatry.

    Which is why, among many other reasons, I left Catholicism.

    Wishful thinking.

    Totally false. The word "elohim" was used of men who are not deity (Psalm 82:6 for example). The Son would be perhaps be deity if two deities procreated as in two horses procreating, but that is not how the Son was created. YHWH spoke him into existence (John 1:14).

    Moses was given glory and power. Is he divine as well?

    If the Son is subject to the Father, then the Son is NOT co-equal. You have to divide the Son into all your little categories to make him fit into the trinity.

    I did not say Thomas called Yeshua "Elohim". Yeshua is an "elohim", not "Elohim". There is only one true Elohim, the Father.
     
  18. Al Masihi

    Al Masihi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,865
    Saudi Arabia
    Christian
    Private
    The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, where do you see the the saying the Father is a god, the Son is a god, and the Holy Spirit is a god? They are all the same God and deity yet are multiple in form, self awareness, and individuality. Yet they all share in the same deity and will therefore making them one God in essence, nature, and spirit.

    Maybe it’s the Bible’s wishful thinking when it says no one has seen the Father except the Son:

    No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

    John 6:46

    The only way to see and know the Father is to see and know the Son:

    Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?

    John 14:9

    No one comes to the Father except through the Son:

    Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

    John 14:6


    You know the early Church was Catholic and called itself Catholic, so you left Catholicism because the Bible teaches the divinity of Christ. I don’t even know what you leaving Catholicism has to do with what the Bible or more specifically the New Testament says.

    The entire chapter of Psalm 82 was meant to be a petition to God to judge the wicked rulers of the world who failed to keep his peace and follow his law on earth and which is why God calls them gods in mockery of their authority on earth. Regardless elohim means deity or used figuratively to refer to human rulers according to the Biblical Lexicon:

    Strong's Hebrew: 430. אֱלֹהִים (elohim) -- God, god

    God procreates without a spouse or companion, yes the Son was spoken into existence from God’s essence and nature thus he was also God begotten of God the Father. What is begotten of something can only be the same as the thing it was begotten from.

    Moses was not glorified like God was and Moses wasn’t glorified before the world was created:

    And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

    John 17:5

    The word co-equal means equal in nature and power not in authority. The persons of the trinity are all equal in nature and essence, but not in authority. The same way you boss is higher in authority then you, but equal in humanity and mortality.
     
  19. Godistruth1

    Godistruth1 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +145
    India
    Muslim
    Single
    I've been aware of Christian theology for years now. Can you please answer the question and not divert the question?
     
  20. Godistruth1

    Godistruth1 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +145
    India
    Muslim
    Single
    You know that John or other writers are not divine or not like Jesus that you accept their teachings like they are words of God himself or even Jesus!!!
     
Loading...