Defending the Trinity

[justaname]

Regarding the doctrine of incarnation:

"The Definition of incarnation was scarcely a solution; it only determined the limits to orthodoxy. Within these limits further refinements were added in the later patristic and medieval periods. Orthodox theologians held that the duality of natures entailed a duality of wills. They also emphasized that the Incarnation was an act of the whole Godhead, not of one Person acting independently." The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church

What you believe is not in the Bible its something which history has recorded as being formulated and refined; filtered through theologians and philosophers and its a process still at work today. Ironically in this forum, unlike others, I am yet to find a Trinitarian who can honestly state their faith has been founded upon the early beliefs of those EFC's who you just quoted.

In terms of your above quote where Jesus said "he and his Father were one"; Jesus also said John 17:22.

Does this mean all Gods children are God?

God manifestation is the key to the Bible and if you want to understand how God reveals himself through His children you only need to read your Bible.

You can add this post to http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/19981-defending-the-trinity/?p=225278 which is still unanswered.

(By the way, good evening Wormwood 12:36am here in Melbourne...I trust you are comfortable there in the back?)

It seems you no longer care to discuss the preexistence of Jesus the Christ...Logos...Word...since you are switching subjects.

I will take this as your act of concession.

Okay, simply because something is "not in the Bible," does not create a valid argument. Also because classifications, titles, and systems for understanding are refined through history does not invalidate them. In fact this form of thinking hindered the Church throughout history. The Bible is not exhaustive in nature, yet it is fully sufficient in it's roles for salvation and revelation.

Do you believe the earth to be round? This is not in the Bible, yet I believe it to be true.
There was a certain model for the solar system that has been refined through history.

Looking to the early Church, not every man fully agreed with every other man on every issue. So many have some misconceived perception of perfect unity, yet the book of Acts shows Peter and Paul at odds, epistles proving churches being chastised, books in the Bible describing events happening where matters needed discussion and closure.

When thinking of the greatest event in history including all it's implications (death, burial, and resurrection of Christ), I do not believe we will ever fully understand everything in our current state.

When thinking of the Godhead, He who can never be fully comprehended, it is valid that godly men endowed with the HolySpirit gain a more refined understanding through great deliberation. Through this we can glean greater intimacy in or knowledge of God.

John 17:22 speaks of the body of believers as being one, not that we are One with the Godhead.

 

[Purity]

Okay, simply because something is "not in the Bible," does not create a valid argument.

It just happens to be the one thing which is not in the bible you call salvic knowledge, right?

Your concession is rather pathetic to be frank...and your treatment of John 17:21,22 compared to John 10:30 is seriously woeful.

Again you do not understand God manifestation and by this you are in total ignorance of God and his plan of salvation in Christ Jesus.

Its all I can say - I hate saying it but its true.

Not switching subjects - you introduced incarnation so I will continue to deal with this related subject.

This is what you believe:

Jesus was incarnate in a human body; incarnate in a human mind; and incarnate in a human specific culture.

However for Jesus to be an acceptable sacrifice he need to be fully human like his brothers in every way.

Heb 2:17 - In every way he was fully man
Heb 4:15 - He was tempted in every way / aspect as we are testifying to him possessing sinful nature.

Can you see the problem with your incarnation theory?

 

[justaname]

It just happens to be the one thing which is not in the bible you call salvic knowledge, right?

Your concession is rather pathetic to be frank...and your treatment of John 17:21,22 compared to John 10:30 is seriously woeful.

Again you do not understand God manifestation and by this you are in total ignorance of God and his plan of salvation in Christ Jesus.

Its all I can say - I hate saying it but its true.

Not switching subjects - you introduced incarnation so I will continue to deal with this related subject.

This is what you believe:

Jesus was incarnate in a human body; incarnate in a human mind; and incarnate in a human specific culture.

However for Jesus to be an acceptable sacrifice he need to be fully human like his brothers in every way.

Heb 2:17 - In every way he was fully man
Heb 4:15 - He was tempted in every way / aspect as we are testifying to him possessing sinful nature.

Can you see the problem with your incarnation theory?

And I agree Jesus was fully human... no holes in my theology. It is your theology that is lacking. Your theology will not take into account the divinity aspect of the Christ. You believe Jesus had to "become" the Christ. Scripture simply does not present this and neither does the Church.

My treatment of John 17:21-22 is completely valid. Jesus is not making the Church equal with God, He is presenting the Church as one.

Father, Son, HolySpirit...One God forevermore.

 

[Floyd]

And I agree Jesus was fully human... no holes in my theology. It is your theology that is lacking. Your theology will not take into account the divinity aspect of the Christ. You believe Jesus had to "become" the Christ. Scripture simply does not present this and neither does the Church.

My treatment of John 17:21-22 is completely valid. Jesus is not making the Church equal with God, He is presenting the Church as one.

Father, Son, HolySpirit...One God forevermore.

Father, Son, HolySpirit...One God forevermore. (Amen).
Floyd.

 

[lforrest]

Jesus went from being a normal man, then displayed the Glory of God, then went back to being a normal man again. The transfiguration must be difficult to believe as it is written if you think Jesus was only human.

 

[Purity]

And I agree Jesus was fully human... no holes in my theology. It is your theology that is lacking. Your theology will not take into account the divinity aspect of the Christ. You believe Jesus had to "become" the Christ. Scripture simply does not present this and neither does the Church.

My treatment of John 17:21-22 is completely valid. Jesus is not making the Church equal with God, He is presenting the Church as one.

Father, Son, HolySpirit...One God forevermore.

You havnt told the whole truth have you justaname? While you say you believe Jesus was fully human you also believe he is/was fully God.

Like I said its hard to find an honest Trinitarian.

Jesus went from being a normal man, then displayed the Glory of God, then went back to being a normal man again. The transfiguration must be difficult to believe as it is written if you think Jesus was only human.

Iforrest

Can you expand I am not sure what you are saying here.
Thanks
Purity

 

[lforrest]

Can you expand I am not sure what you are saying here.
Thanks
Purity

If Jesus was only glorified after his death how do you propose he was able to do what he did in the following accounts:

Matthew 17:1-13
Mark 9:2-13
Luke 9:28-34

 

[Purity]

If Jesus was only glorified after his death how do you propose he was able to do what he did in the following accounts:

Matthew 17:1-13
Mark 9:2-13
Luke 9:28-34

Well if a sinner in Moses had to hid his face for the glow from the shekinah glory being so bright was the radiant glow from his face (Exo 34:33) how much more a sinless man who being strengthened by His Father and being granted a taste of immortality and a Kingdom vision be transfigured momentarily?

The question you should be asking is why did Jesus need strengthening with such an experience if he was God? Makes no sense! Pointless in fact.

The word is “Metamorphoomai”. Rendered “transformed” Rom. 12:2, “Are changed” II Cor. 3:18. Jesus was changed of form while He was praying Luke 9:29.

But if you believe Jesus is fully human (dwelling in sins flesh) and fully God simultaneously to what was he momentarily change from and to?

Also did you notice how Jesus' experience was similar to Moses?

It states his “Face did shine as the sun” Mat. 17:2 also Rev. 1:16.
“Sun of Righteousness” Mal 4:2

Contrast....

The reflection of the Law in Moses’ face Ex. 34:29-35. Compare II Cor. 3:11-13; 4:6.

I will leave it there as I rarely see any engagement at all from the Christians here concerning Gods Word - getting rather depressing actually.

Its like you all a mentally shackled to something - for the life of me I don't know what.

By the way Iforrest your inference in this post makes a mockery of the voice out of the cloud!

“This is my beloved Son” - Matt 17:5 “...in whom I am well pleased” (also II Pet. 1:17). From notable scripture Isa 5:1 (Mark 12:6) Ps 2:7, Is 42:1.

How can God be pleased with God - a rather pathetic theological position you have there.

Purity

If Jesus was only glorified after his death how do you propose he was able to do what he did in the following accounts:

Matthew 17:1-13
Mark 9:2-13
Luke 9:28-34

It was foolish for me to answer as I did I should have allowed the Apostle Peter to answer it on my behalf.

1:16 For we (unlike Trinitarians) did not follow cleverly concocted (designed and formulated) fables when we made known to you the power and return of our Lord Jesus Christ; no, we were eyewitnesses of his grandeur. For he (Jesus) received honor and glory from God the Father, when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory:

Note: Iforrest Who is the one speaking and who is the ones listening? God (Majestic Glory) speaking to Jesus and his disciples.

“This is my dear Son, in whom I am delighted.” When this voice was conveyed from heaven, we ourselves heard it, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

Note: The location of the voice "from Heaven i.e. God, Father, Yahweh - the Majestic Glory above approving of an obedient Son"

Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would63 to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star64 rises in your hearts. Above all, you do well if you recognize66 this: No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination, for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit (Powerful Knowledge) spoke from God.

Purity

 

[justaname]

You havnt told the whole truth have you justaname? While you say you believe Jesus was fully human you also believe he is/was fully God.

Like I said its hard to find an honest Trinitarian.

Iforrest

Can you expand I am not sure what you are saying here.
Thanks
Purity

Okay now you have reduced yourself to accusations of dishonesty...within the very quote where I criticize you for not accepting Christ's divinity.

Really?

Lets rehash a bit here...

I proved the preexistence of the Logos, which is the Christ, which is Jesus.

The Logos has been accepted as being God, whereas the Christ is God, whereas Jesus is God.

You have nothing more to do now but falsely accuse me of dishonesty. I think our discussion is officially over.

I will continue to pray for you.

Shalom

 

[Purity]

Okay now you have reduced yourself to accusations of dishonesty...within the very quote where I criticize you for not accepting Christ's divinity.

Yes, I believe you tried to make a play on testifying your belief in Jesus' full humanity, while holding fast to your theory of incarnation. This is dishonest on your part. You should have said "I believe Jesus was fully human while also being fully divine (pertaining to mind and nature). You tried to push aside the Scriptural quotations proving not only was Jesus fully human he had the same condemnation in his body as you do.

You actually don't believe Jesus was fully human do you? 2 John 1:7

Lets rehash a bit here...

I proved the preexistence of the Logos, which is the Christ, which is Jesus.

Yes, you proved to us a post resurrected Jesus became Logos - the expression of Yahweh's living and abiding Word.

You have nothing more to do now but falsely accuse me of dishonesty.

So are you here on record saying you don't believe Jesus is fully human and fully God simultaneously?

Otherwise you misrepresented yourself and denied the teaching of those passages.

Very clear from my end...but more than willing to see you revise your position.

Purity

 

[Floyd]

Purity:

I watched with interest (and disdain) your attempt to confuse justaname with the same invalid arguments and obfuscations that you have employed from the beginning of this thread.

As I said at an early stage; why do you defend Satan? You have not answered that question.

I asked you repeatedly why you deny the Deity of Christ Jesus, you have not answered; except to refer to other parts of Scripture, which did not relate.

I asked you if you treated the Holy Spirit in the same way you treat our Lord's Deity. Eventually (after thinking time), you agreed you do.

If you meant what you said; that is tantamount to the "unforgivable sin"; if I understand that subject correctly (which I am sure you will correct me on, from your own theology!)

From my own knowledge of the Word, a person or entity who denies our Lord's Deity, is bound for a very uncomfortable judgement, prior to destruction with the great enemy of God and all Creation; Satan.

Look back on the detail I have given you to see the Scriptures.

Just a reminder for you:

Legion's occupying demon's acknowledged who Jesus was (as do all Satan's servants), they also know that they have a date with Him in the future, (who had not at that stage been Crucified; which negates your "attributed" idea out of court), which date is described in Revelation (see earlier post).

I give a last appeal to you, to drop your heretical views; the damage you are doing to many who will listen and be swayed by you, will be evidence against you at the "Great White Throne Judgement" of Rev.20!

You surely know the severe warnings of Almighty God against the "false shepherds of Israel"?

The same warnings are relevant against the "false shepherds" of Christendom!

Prophecy and prophets; (Separate study)

Prophets, Prophetesses, Shepherds and Teachers (Separate study)



Floyd.

 

[Purity]

If you meant what you said; that is tantamount to the "unforgivable sin"; if I understand that subject correctly (which I am sure you will correct me on, from your own theology!)

Floyd, what would you do if you discovered everything you had been taught was based on lies? Would you be angry? Would you be disappointed you did not possess a mind open enough to learn a deeper truth when it was presented? I like your zeal though its not guided into all truth, nonetheless I admire your zeal. Paul held such zeal unto his paradigm was shifted forever.

I wrote to you concerning the unforgiveable sin - did you read it? meaningfully?

 

[Floyd]

Floyd, what would you do if you discovered everything you had been taught was based on lies? Would you be angry? Would you be disappointed you did not possess a mind open enough to learn a deeper truth when it was presented? I like your zeal though its not guided into all truth, nonetheless I admire your zeal. Paul held such zeal unto his paradigm was shifted forever.

I wrote to you concerning the unforgiveable sin - did you read it? meaningfully?

Hello Purity:
Re. your comment above, thanks; but; I/we have been on this road for a long time, and have had many disputes with so called "learned men" (not referring to you here); and have left them all behind.
I have experienced events that cannot be explained by any natural means; (not quite a fleece); but happened even though I did not even tell my wife!
These two events, the second of which answered a very deep and cutting question for me, are undoubtedly formative in me; which as I have never shared them with any human out side my family; have left me unmoveable regarding things of basic understanding in Christ Jesus my Lord!
I say this to you, as I want you to use your considerable talents for the Truth of the Lord; not to your own inevitable destruction.

The points you have raised during this quite long exchange, I have questioned in past years; as any sincere person will; but as our life story in Christ Jesus has progressed, I have come to trust the Holy Spirit in all these matters!

No, I have not yet seen your communication; but will shortly; thanks.

I still pray, and will, that you will see the truth of Christ's position in the Godhead.

Floyd.

 

[Purity]

Hello Purity:
Re. your comment above, thanks; but; I/we have been on this road for a long time, and have had many disputes with so called "learned men" (not referring to you here); and have left them all behind.
I have experienced events that cannot be explained by any natural means; (not quite a fleece); but happened even though I did not even tell my wife!
These two events, the second of which answered a very deep and cutting question for me, are undoubtedly formative in me; which as I have never shared them with any human out side my family; have left me unmoveable regarding things of basic understanding in Christ Jesus my Lord!
I say this to you, as I want you to use your considerable talents for the Truth of the Lord; not to your own inevitable destruction.

The points you have raised during this quite long exchange, I have questioned in past years; as any sincere person will; but as our life story in Christ Jesus has progressed, I have come to trust the Holy Spirit in all these matters!

No, I have not yet seen your communication; but will shortly; thanks.

I still pray, and will, that you will see the truth of Christ's position in the Godhead.

Floyd.

Floyd,

There are degrees of truth and while both sides have learned men we both will discover the truth more completely when the Lord returns to collect his own.

The Godhead as you put it is clearly defined for you in 1 Corinthians 11

But I want you to realize Floyd that:

1. the head of every man is Christ,
2. the head of the woman is man
3 the head of Christ is God.

The context is in relation to authority and headship (tick)
Christ glorified at the right hand of the Father on high (tick)
The Godhead (Divine Authority) now dwells in Christ (tick)

However Christ is and always will be subject to his Father.

Therefore 1 Corinthians 15:27 can now make sense to you.

For he (God) "has put everything under his (Jesus) feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him (Jesus), it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.

I will not proceed with this discussion with you until you acknowledge these two verses and their implication to your Trinity.

A last hurrah you might say!

Purity

p.s thank you for the personal note.

 

[Floyd]

Floyd,

There are degrees of truth and while both sides have learned men we both will discover the truth more completely when the Lord returns to collect his own.

The Godhead as you put it is clearly defined for you in 1 Corinthians 11

But I want you to realize Floyd that:

1. the head of every man is Christ,
2. the head of the woman is man
3 the head of Christ is God.

The context is in relation to authority and headship (tick)
Christ glorified at the right hand of the Father on high (tick)
The Godhead (Divine Authority) now dwells in Christ (tick)

However Christ is and always will be subject to his Father.

Therefore 1 Corinthians 15:27 can now make sense to you.

For he (God) "has put everything under his (Jesus) feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him (Jesus), it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.

I will not proceed with this discussion with you until you acknowledge these two verses and their implication to your Trinity.

A last hurrah you might say!

Purity

p.s thank you for the personal note.

OK; your basic lesson above is not doubted; but its application is.
" I and my Father are One": John 10:30.
Floyd.

 

[shturt678]

Just my two-bits regarding the Trinity: The union of the three divine Persons (Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit) in one Godhead (state of being God) where all three are "co-equal," "co-eternal," and "co-substantial." I drew this from the Athanasius 6th century Creed.

Old Jack

 

[Purity]

OK; your basic lesson above is not doubted; but its application is.
" I and my Father are One": John 10:30.
Floyd.

At the time Jesus said John 10:30 they were One in "purpose" but not person or nature - No flesh can glory in Gods presence. 1 Cor 1:29
Purity

Just my two-bits regarding the Trinity: The union of the three divine Persons (Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit) in one Godhead (state of being God) where all three are "co-equal," "co-eternal," and "co-substantial." I drew this from the Athanasius 6th century Creed.

Old Jack

Many creeds there are and many false teachings have gone into the world - the Trinity is one of them.
Thanks old Jack

 

[shturt678]

Thank you Purity for your response, ie, maybe you're correct ergo let's take another look, eg,

IJn.5:7, 8 Trinity: the three agree to the testimony as to Jesus = God for openers.

Construing the Shema with the former pretty much conclusively attests to the validity of the "Trinity."

Old Jack that appreciates you and your view.

 

[Purity]

IJn.5:7, 8 Trinity: the three agree to the testimony as to Jesus = God for openers.

Sorry did you not read verse 5?

1Jn 5:5 Now who is the person who has conquered the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

Construing the Shema with the former pretty much conclusively attests to the validity of the "Trinity."

Old Jack that appreciates you and your view.

Middle aged purity appreciates your post also ;)

Yes this passage has been trotted out more times than I have had hot breakfasts.

The Greek textual support for this reading is virtually nonexistent. Most modern translations of 1 John 5:7 omit the reference to Father, Word, and Spirit.

I could show you many instances where the interprators false understanding influence the Scrpiture. 1 Chron 21:1 is a classic!

The language in verses 1 John 5:6–8 is so obscure at places that translators, struggling to communicate the meaning of the Greek in English, have resorted to various verse arrangements. This is apparent by comparing the RSV and NRSV:

RSV: 6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.

NRSV: 6 This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one that testifies, for the Spirit is truth. 7 There are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree.

Clearly the author is trying to communicate core theological content regarding Jesus’ status as God’s Son and the implications of that Christology. The progression of the argument appears in the following textual re-creation with a question that follows from the preceding verses. While the RSV and NRSV put verse 5 with the preceding paragraph, as its conclusion, I suggest that it introduces the exposition to follow.

You will forgive me if I suggest your Trinitarian theology is clearly not here...I mean to draw the type of complexity you require (from this section) even to support the doctrine of incarnation alone is proving impossible for justaname and wormwood simply gave up (and its his thread!).

If you would like an interpretation of this passage I am more than able.

(sometime later.....)

O well, I might as well get your cogs working....

1 John 5:5 The Question and Answer

Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? (not God the Son)

1 John 5:6 The Answer Clarified

This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ (sacrificed), not with water only but with the water and the blood. (almost all things a purged with blood)

1 John 5::6–8 The Testimonial Support

And the Spirit (God's Word) is the one that testifies, for the Spirit is the truth (God's Word is truth). There are three that testify: the Spirit (Spirit filed Word) and the water and the blood, and these three agree.

Jesus was justified (made right) by the Spirit and he became the living water through his obedience and the blood is the cleansing element to his sacrifice symbolic of once again an obedient life.

Jesus justified by the Spirit 1 Tim 3:16
Jesus benefited from his own sacrifice Heb 13:20
Jesus sanctified by the Word of God John 17:17

Purity

 

[Floyd]

Sorry did you not read verse 5?

1Jn 5:5 Now who is the person who has conquered the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?


Middle aged purity appreciates your post also ;)

Yes this passage has been trotted out more times than I have had hot breakfasts.

The Greek textual support for this reading is virtually nonexistent. Most modern translations of 1 John 5:7 omit the reference to Father, Word, and Spirit.

I could show you many instances where the interprators false understanding influence the Scrpiture. 1 Chron 21:1 is a classic!

The language in verses 1 John 5:6–8 is so obscure at places that translators, struggling to communicate the meaning of the Greek in English, have resorted to various verse arrangements. This is apparent by comparing the RSV and NRSV:

RSV: 6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.

NRSV: 6 This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one that testifies, for the Spirit is truth. 7 There are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree.

Clearly the author is trying to communicate core theological content regarding Jesus’ status as God’s Son and the implications of that Christology. The progression of the argument appears in the following textual re-creation with a question that follows from the preceding verses. While the RSV and NRSV put verse 5 with the preceding paragraph, as its conclusion, I suggest that it introduces the exposition to follow.

You will forgive me if I suggest your Trinitarian theology is clearly not here...I mean to draw the type of complexity you require (from this section) even to support the doctrine of incarnation alone is proving impossible for justaname and wormwood simply gave up (and its his thread!).

If you would like an interpretation of this passage I am more than able.

(sometime later.....)

O well, I might as well get your cogs working....

1 John 5:5 The Question and Answer

Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? (not God the Son)

1 John 5:6 The Answer Clarified

This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ (sacrificed), not with water only but with the water and the blood. (almost all things a purged with blood)

1 John 5::6–8 The Testimonial Support

And the Spirit (God's Word) is the one that testifies, for the Spirit is the truth (God's Word is truth). There are three that testify: the Spirit (Spirit filed Word) and the water and the blood, and these three agree.

Jesus was justified (made right) by the Spirit and he became the living water through his obedience and the blood is the cleansing element to his sacrifice symbolic of once again an obedient life.

Jesus justified by the Spirit 1 Tim 3:16
Jesus benefited from his own sacrifice Heb 13:20
Jesus sanctified by the Word of God John 17:17

Purity

Here I have to agree with Purity.

Words in 1Jhn.5: 7 into 8, have been added in quite late manuscripts i.e.: " in heaven: the Father ,the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8) And there are three that bear witness on earth," .

So; the corrected text shown in NKJ, Companion KJV, and others, should read:

v7) "For there are three that bear witness, the Spirit the water and the blood; and these three agree as one."

Floyd.