Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
see my last message!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Doctrine of the Trinity - Stated or Implied?
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
see my last message!
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
I know you are.
We cannot get hung up on what doctrines are called. We HAVE to look at the doctrines themselves. Too much is taken too lightly.
What you are telling me is that as long as one mentions the word "Trinity" the doctrine is taught. If one teaches the doctrine but does not use the word "Trinity" it is not taught. This is superstition. We have to look at the teaching.
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
You do realize that the teaching that God is a Triune God pre-dates the use of the word "Trinity", don't you? You do understand that this is doctrine taught in Scripture, even thought it doesn't use the title "Trinity", right?
IT IS VERY LONG. (Compare it with the average posts of others; even mine!)
Given your other lengthy posts (without attribution--which means plagarism) I really think this last post of yours was a hodgepodge of unattributed quotes, condensed and edited by you! SHAME ON YOU!
I know. I didn't see an old, wise emoji. You know what Paul said in 2 Corinthians....better wright than cool.that you are not!
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
IT IS VERY LONG. (Compare it with the average posts of others; even mine!)
Given your other lengthy posts (without attribution--which means plagarism) I really think this last post of yours was a hodgepodge of unattributed quotes, condensed and edited by you! SHAME ON YOU!
My Name is Andrew Ansell, from England, UK, and STUDIES ON THE HOLY TRINITY is MY website! Please get your facts right before making a fool of yourself!
You plagiarized yourself??? I remember @TCassidy saying he did that once as well....so you're in good company.My Name is Andrew Ansell, from England, UK, and STUDIES ON THE HOLY TRINITY is MY website! Please get your facts right before making a fool of yourself!
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
You plagiarized yourself??? I remember @TCassidy saying he did that once as well....so you're in good company.
People get involved with things they know nothing about, instead of first asking! I thought we Christians were meant to be better...
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
You do realize that the teaching that God is a Triune God pre-dates the use of the word "Trinity", don't you? You do understand that this is doctrine taught in Scripture, even thought it doesn't use the title "Trinity", right?
Well, the Old Testament Saints were not aware of the Three Persons in the θειότης. IT was only expounded in New Testament times by the Holy Spirit. My point being, that "θειότης" (used once in Romans 1:20), which speaking of the "divine nature", does not tell us about the "Persons" within this "nature". The term "Trinity" seels to do this, and if rightly explained, can be understood by almost anyone. I must stress that we need the Holy Spirit to open the "eyes of our understanding"!
No, you are right because the doctrine of the Trinity is a product of systematic theology. That said, do you not understand the Trinity within the context of "God" as well?
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
Are you referring to the word "God"? In the Old Testament, "Elohim" is in the masculine, plural, which I believe is because the "God" of the Bible is not a single Person, which can be seen from texts like, "let US make man in OUR image" (Genesis 1:26), and Eccles, 12:1, "remember your Creators", etc. However, in the New Testament, the word "theos" is singluar in number! The very nature of the Godhead needs to be carefully explained, as it is not obvious from the mere uses of the word "God", or even "Godhead".
good night from England!
Yes. Although Elohim down not necessarily mean plural in number. We cannot have a doctrine of God that excludes Father, Son, and Spirit.
Have you not read?
Not just Ex 3:6, but in every verse where God said "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."
He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Yes, God is the God of the living.....But that wasn't the question. What they did not know was the Scriptures or the power of God.
They knew the law, but they didn't understand it. Jesus found that little verse eminently relevant to their question, and with it undid the central presumption of their sect, that there is no resurrection.
There is no explicit mention of the Resurrection in the Law, but it is implied, and the implication is no less authoritative.
They also rejected as Scripture the Old Testament (believing only Torah binding) and didn't believe in angels or spirits (both present in Scripture). The resurrection of the dead is stated in the Old Testament (in Psalms, repeatedly, as the soul will not be abandoned to Sheol).
As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth. Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God (Job 19:25-29)
I have not read this thread, for I fear it became about the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity. But the actual topic, how much should we read between the lines, if a very important topic. As a minimalist, I ask the question, what is the least God could be saying. That question protects us from adding to scripture by speculation.
For example does "all" mean everything imaginable, or just the things intended by the author. Speculation is the mother of false doctrine. OTOH, there is such a thing as logical necessity. The fly in the buttermilk is that it is hard to discard the shoddy and speculative interpretations of past theologians, and it is equally hard to admit we were wrong to embrace a baseless but age-old doctrine.
For example does "all" mean everything imaginable, or just the things intended by the author. Speculation is the mother of false doctrine. OTOH, there is such a thing as logical necessity. The fly in the buttermilk is that it is hard to discard the shoddy and speculative interpretations of past theologians, and it is equally hard to admit we were wrong to embrace a baseless but age-old doctrine.
You are absolutely right.My Name is Andrew Ansell, from England, UK, and STUDIES ON THE HOLY TRINITY is MY website! Please get your facts right before making a fool of yourself!
My heartfelt apologies.
I treated you miserably. Please forgive me.
You are clearly a very studied Christian.
Have a wonderful Christmas,
Brother Davis