Trinity question

It depends on what you mean by "one". If you are referring to the BEING of God, then, yes, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are ONE. If you are referring to the PERSONS of God, then, no, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not one but THREE. God is THREE PERSONS existing in ONE BEING. The problem is that no one can fully understand how that works because in our experience (dimension?) each PERSON is a separate BEING. Not so with God. Different groups have erred in different ways regarding the Trinity by:
(1)Teaching the PERSONS are three separate gods (TRITHEISM) or
(2)Teaching the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are really only just three different MANIFESTATIONS of the same Person (MODALISM).
There are and have been, of course, many different variations of these two major errors.

As to specific scriptures supporting the doctrine of the Trinity, I'll get back to you later (unless someone else beats me to it)

 

In IJohn 5:7, most of the new versions do not have the phrase, "And these three are one". Those that will prove that the Trinity doctrine is false will use one of these versions. Your version has mistakes.

John 10:30 shows a comparison between Christ and the Father, in Spirit. Spiritually they are linked, with one mind, or the same thoughts. Compare this verse with John 17:21. Here Christ compares believers with the Father calling them in Christ, and in the Father, making them all one. So, how can we call Christ eqaul to the Father, and not ourselves?

Got another "proof" text?

 

Harvest,
Are you looking for the reasons used to refute the Trinity? Do you want to see how someone would try to convince you that there is no Trinity?

I was a JW and this was the point that I had a hard time swallowing. They tried for years to prove the Trinity to be false, but even though I listened to every argument, the Lord put doubt into my mind of their beliefs. I know the arguments, but they don't stand strong when truth is involved.

 

I think that their fault lies in their lack of faith, and maybe even the lack of the Holy Spirit, though some who are not saved will believe the Trinity anyway. Too many of them will base their belief on human reasoning, believing that the Lord will not give them something that is beyond their comprehension, but not that God is beyond comprehension. If a belief is based on a lie, the lie has to be proven before they will believe the truth.

Thinking goes like this: God is Himself and Jesus is a man, based on human fact. In humanity, we have a father, only one. And we, as Christ, are sons. The Spirit is our being. What could be more simple? I don't have to convince you of the Trinity, but I know what is used to disprove it, and the reasoning behind it. And not to bring versions into the argument, but because of these new versions, they can prove their stand more easily, and it can be difficult to disprove, using them.

 

I Corinthians 2:14 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

The Holy Bible : King James Version. 1995 . Logos Research Systems, Inc.: Oak Harbor, WA

rufus

 

I believe the Johannine Comma belongs in God's word. There is nothing theologically erroneous in that verse. It is perfect, proving that God is a three-one God. As far as I can think it is the single most convincing verse proving the classical doctrine of the Trinity. Three distinct persons, one substance, the Triune God.

Harald

 

You can clearly prove the trinity without that one verse, to say that one verse is all that important to the entire doctrine really speaks poorly to the rest of God's Word. The trinity is distinct and clear throught all of the Word and it is solidly taught in the NIV just as it was in the original texts. Any statement to the contrary is prejudicial.

In fact, try proving the trinity to a Oneness Pentecostal who uses only the KJV. He will find verses in the KJV that seem to support his theory more than the trinitarian one. There were several times I couldn't use certain verses because his KJV appeared to reveal a more Oneness tone. (God is one in person AND in being) I went to find the thread to show the expamples, but I have searched to no avail.

Anyway, people can use the Bible to support any belief they want, all they have to do is take a verse out of context. I am not sure what verses they use, but generally they use them out of context and worm their way around any verses that contradict it. That's how it's done, they read the Bible through their belief, not seeking to believe what it actually says. And that can be done with any version.

~Lorelei

 

Lorelei, What you say is true about a person believing what he wants. I was not referring to just one verse, as there are many verses changed or eliminated in other versions. If you tried to show that Oneness Pentacostal a different version, what would they do?

When trying to prove a doctrine you have to be sure of what you are doing, or you get egg on your face. I can take a JW's Bible and show him the doctrine of the Trinity, but it is more difficult. A KJV states the doctrine more clearly, but I wouldn't try proving something to anyone without first knowing it myself.

 

There are a lot more reasons that people do not believe the 3 in one theory. More than just some translations.

One of the reasons is the time frame it took for this doctrine to be accepted. It has been historically proven that the doctrine was not taught until the 300's. Even when at first Constantine accepted this doctrine a few years later he banned it for Arianism. It was not until the council of Constantinople that it was reinstated as the doctrine of the Godhead.

The early post apostolic fathers did not teach this doctrine. (No, I did not get this from non Trinitarian books or web sites) Many of them believed that Jesus was in existence with the Father at the time the earth was created for he created all things but they believed he was created sometime in past eternity by the Father just like a human son is created by a human father. They did not believe the Father was a person but spirit as taught by Jesus. They also believed the Holy Ghost was the poured out spirit of the Father now indwelling in men. They believed this Holy Ghost was poured through Jesus. Later the doctrine changed that the Holy Spirit was part of the Godhead but was created by JEsus. Jesus was inferior to the Father and the Holy Ghost was inferior to Jesus and the Father.

Many Post Apostolic fathers taught that when Jesus became incarnate he set aside his deity to become full man. While he walked on the EArth he was filled with the complete power of the Holy Ghost. It was through the power of the Holy Ghost that Jesus performed miracles etc. Yes he was still God in the flesh but all things were done through the power of the Holy Ghost not through his own power as God.

Another reason people have a problem with this doctrine is that Protestant churches bash the Roman Catholic Church all the time and the doctrine of the Trinity was put into force by a Roman Catholic council. Roman Catholics taunt protestants by saying you criticize our doctrines about Mary and substantiation etc but you hold to a doctrine that we created about the Godhead. You tell everyone to come out from amongst the RCC but you still hold on to our doctrine concerning the Godhead. A lot of people is confused by this reasoning.

 

They will point out that there is no OT scriptural proof.

Some text proofs against the Trinity:

Deuteronomy 6:4
Isa 44:6
Mark 12:29
1 Cor 8:4, 6
1 Tim 2:5

The Holy Spirit is spirit, not a person.

 

Dear Harvest,

I have absolute faith confidence in 1 John 5:7.

However, the Trinity is clearly taught in the OT (IMO).

Some Hebrew rules:

First
There is no present tense in Hebrew, however it can be functionalized by the use of verbal nouns and adjectives such as our English infinitive or gerund.

Hebrew Example : The praying of David in the temple. Or David to pray in the temple - would be translated David prays in the temple.

Second There are two kinds of plural in Hebrew : Dual - two entities, Plural more than two.

Third the Tetragrammaton; The 4 letter name of God YHWH (sometimes translated JEHOVAH) is the concatenation (running together) of the 3 Hebrew moments of time.

In a Hebrew grammar for children it says that the Tetragrammaton indicates that God is eternal; He was, He is, He ever will be.

OK now look at Genesis 1:26-27.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

"and God said" Here "God" is ELOHIM a word with a plural ending (not dual) indicating that ELOHIM is MULTI-personed and more than two.

Let US - again indicating multi-person.

Make ADAM - Adam is singular

In OUR image
And OUR likeness

Though ELOHIM is Plural in person His image and likeness (His projected essentia) is SINGULAR
image and likeness NOT images and liknesses.

Now look at Genesis 3:
22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

Some (JW etc) have objected to the Genesis 1:26-27 exposition of the Trinity saying ELOHIM is plural because the plural speaks of the angels with Him. However…

In Genesis 3:22 we have "And the LORD God said"

LORD God - this is the connective name of God YHWH ELOHIM. Literally : THE ETERNAL ELOHIM.

The persons in the Godhead are ETERNAL, they cannot be created angels.

Some have objected saying ELOHIM is plural because He is plural in majesty, however:

the man is become as one of us "AS ONE OF US" clearly shows that He is plural in person.

Some have used the SHEMA as an objection

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

However translated literally : Hear oh Israel YHWH (the eternal one) our ELOHIM (plural) is one YHWH (eternal being).

Typically the Shema is recited by jewish people substituting ADONAI for YHWH.

How many persons in ELOHIM?

Isaiah 6:1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
2 Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.
3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.

3 HOLY persons in the Godhead each eternal.

HankD

[ February 22, 2003, 01:18 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

And I was pointing out to those who seem to suggest that the verse in 1 John is the best verse to support their view, that just because there is nothing theologically erroneous about it, doesn't mean it needs to be added in order for us prove the trinity.

And turning the doctrine of the trinity into a debate over which version is best will get that egg all over you. You must prove the doctrine, not change the focus or make it sound like the trinity is only provable if you support the KJVOnly extremist position. That is more harmful than helpful.

That is your subjective opinion. It has been my experience that this is not the case.

~Lorelei

 

Harvest this is not necessary.

there is an old saying

You get more honey bees with nectar than vinegar.

HankD

 

It is not wise to use the scripture you used about Isaiah seeing God. He said he saw God sitting on his throne. Not their thrones.

Jesus said the FAther is a spirit so a spirit cannot sit on a throne. So who sits on the throne. Jesus. Does this substantiate the Oneness message. NO. Jesus is the express image of the Father and the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily. Yet it is expressively taught that there are more than one.

One of the main issues with the doctrine of the Trinity is the fact that the titles FAther, Son, and Holy Ghost was chosen to represent the three persons. When you look at it with human reasoning a son can only exist when that son is created through the process of birth. Yes, Jesus was born of woman but how did Jesus come into existence. If he was from eternity with the FAther then he would not be a son. Just another extension of the first person. A son has to be created. When the second person was born as a man then he was called the Son of God. Before this time in the beginning of eternity he would not have been a son but just the second person in the Godhead. The terminology God the FAther, God the Son, is erroneous in human thinking because the second person would have to have been created to be a son. This is why the Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons believe Jesus was created. Also in reality this is the doctrine taught by the post apostolic FAthers. This was why Arius would not except Athansius' teachings because he said it did not make sense that the second person was to be called God the Son. He also said calling a third person Holy Ghost did not make sense because a Ghost is not a person but a spirit.
Arius believed in three in one but that only Jesus was a person. The father was spirit and the Holy Ghost was spirit.

 

Here's some wonderful reasons why we should add to the Word of God. It's ok, if it gives ya more ammo.

It was added in later. NIV texts are older, they don't have it, The KJV does. See it goes both ways, someone could argue against both translations. Which translation isn't the issue. The issue is the doctrine of the trinity from solid biblical texts, and this argument is unproductive in proving the trinity.

I avoid the versions forum because of such animosity. I thought the question had to do with the trinity, not which version was better. I was merely pointing out that the trinity can be shown in all versions that are based off of actual texts and not transliterated such as the New World. Even then, it isn't impossible.

~Lorelei