Trinity

Discuss either theological doctrines, ideas about God, or Biblical criticism. I don't want any debates about creation vs evolution.

Moderator: Metacrock

Forum rules
(1) be interesting (2) be nice.

Re: Trinity

Postby The Pixie on Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:17 am

Metacrock wrote:
SayaOtonashi wrote:http://www.bibletexts.com/glossary/trinity.htm

What do you think about the fact the trinity is not fact and many are claiming and mention of trinity in John is forgery.


I am not ware of any serious scholars who claim it;s a forgery. please read those links to my Trinity pages I defend it pretty well

This is something I posted on, but clearly you missed because someone has messed up my post.

Take a look at this page, which compares translations from different Bibles, for 1 John 5:7:
http://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm

The KJV (and some others) include the erroneous addition:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

However, a lot of the more recent translations omit what is now generally regarded as a forgery:

New International Version:
For there are three that testify:

New American Standard Bible
For there are three that testify:

If even Bible publishers have acknowledged that bit should not be there, you have a big job trying to convince skeptics it is not a forgery.
The Pixie
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Trinity

Postby Metacrock on Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:52 am

The Pixie wrote:
Metacrock wrote:
SayaOtonashi wrote:http://www.bibletexts.com/glossary/trinity.htm

What do you think about the fact the trinity is not fact and many are claiming and mention of trinity in John is forgery.


I am not ware of any serious scholars who claim it;s a forgery. please read those links to my Trinity pages I defend it pretty well

This is something I posted on, but clearly you missed because someone has messed up my post.

Take a look at this page, which compares translations from different Bibles, for 1 John 5:7:
http://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm

The KJV (and some others) include the erroneous addition:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

However, a lot of the more recent translations omit what is now generally regarded as a forgery:

New International Version:
For there are three that testify:

New American Standard Bible
For there are three that testify:

If even Bible publishers have acknowledged that bit should not be there, you have a big job trying to convince skeptics it is not a forgery.



I apologiozed. I was actually trying to complament you but thought i hit quote and really hit edit.,
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
User avatar
Metacrock
 
Posts: 9924
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas

Re: Trinity

Postby The Pixie on Tue Dec 13, 2016 5:42 am

Metacrock, on this page, you cite The First Epistle of Clement as supporting the trinity, quoting:
Jesus Chrsit the high preist of our offerings, the protector and helper of our weakness. Through him we fix our gaze on the heights in heaven, in him we see mirrored God's pure and transcendent face...through him the Master has willed that we should taste importal knowlege, or 'since he reflects God's splindor he is as supiror to the Angels as his title is to theirs,'* for it is written 'he who makes the angels winds and his ministers flames of fire..."

I am focusing on this text as it is generally dated to around 95 AD, which is remarkably early for the trinity. Here is a bit more of it (from here):
This is the way, beloved, in which we find our Saviour, even Jesus Christ, the High Priest of all our offerings, the defender and helper of our infirmity. By Him we look up to the heights of heaven. By Him we behold, as in a glass, His immaculate and most excellent visage. By Him are the eyes of our hearts opened. By Him our foolish and darkened understanding blossoms up anew towards His marvellous light. By Him the Lord has willed that we should taste of immortal knowledge, "who, being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they." For it is thus written, "Who makes His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire." But concerning His Son the Lord spoke thus: "You are my Son, today have I begotten You. Ask of Me, and I will give You the heathen for Your inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Your possession."

A high priest is certainly not the equal of the god he worships. Clement believes Jesus reflects the nature of God, but that does not make Jesus and God mirror images, it makes Jesus a reflection of God. Reflections are not equal to the real thing.

Most damning of all is the last sentence in that quote; this is God adopting Jesus. Clement is presumably referencing Jesus' baptism (cf Mark); that day was the day that Jesus became God's begotten son.

We also see this in the epistle:
Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually proves to us that there shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead.

This idea of the first-fruits is used by Paul too, and relates to Jesus being the first to be resurrected, with resurrections for everyone else expected any time now. This suggests Jesus is a special man, not a part of God.
The Pixie
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Trinity

Postby Metacrock on Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:07 am

The Pixie wrote:
Metacrock wrote:
SayaOtonashi wrote:http://www.bibletexts.com/glossary/trinity.htm

What do you think about the fact the trinity is not fact and many are claiming and mention of trinity in John is forgery.


I am not ware of any serious scholars who claim it;s a forgery. please read those links to my Trinity pages I defend it pretty well

This is something I posted on, but clearly you missed because someone has messed up my post.

Take a look at this page, which compares translations from different Bibles, for 1 John 5:7:
http://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm

The KJV (and some others) include the erroneous addition:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

However, a lot of the more recent translations omit what is now generally regarded as a forgery:

New International Version:
For there are three that testify:

New American Standard Bible
For there are three that testify:

If even Bible publishers have acknowledged that bit should not be there, you have a big job trying to convince skeptics it is not a forgery.



yes that ne was.I was. I was thinking of Gospel of John 1:1. This one is not the basis of the Trinity doctrine, it was forged to agree with it it was not the origin of the doctrine,
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
User avatar
Metacrock
 
Posts: 9924
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas

Re: Trinity

Postby Metacrock on Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:21 am

The Pixie wrote:Metacrock, on this page, you cite The First Epistle of Clement as supporting the trinity, quoting:
Jesus Chrsit the high preist of our offerings, the protector and helper of our weakness. Through him we fix our gaze on the heights in heaven, in him we see mirrored God's pure and transcendent face...through him the Master has willed that we should taste importal knowlege, or 'since he reflects God's splindor he is as supiror to the Angels as his title is to theirs,'* for it is written 'he who makes the angels winds and his ministers flames of fire..."

I am focusing on this text as it is generally dated to around 95 AD, which is remarkably early for the trinity. Here is a bit more of it (from here)


I have read that articoe n that site, 1 Clem is my favorite patristic. I've studied it a lot.


This is the way, beloved, in which we find our Saviour, even Jesus Christ, the High Priest of all our offerings, the defender and helper of our infirmity. By Him we look up to the heights of heaven. By Him we behold, as in a glass, His immaculate and most excellent visage. By Him are the eyes of our hearts opened. By Him our foolish and darkened understanding blossoms up anew towards His marvellous light. By Him the Lord has willed that we should taste of immortal knowledge, "who, being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they." For it is thus written, "Who makes His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire." But concerning His Son the Lord spoke thus: "You are my Son, today have I begotten You. Ask of Me, and I will give You the heathen for Your inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Your possession."

A high priest is certainly not the equal of the god he worships. Clement believes Jesus reflects the nature of God, but that does not make Jesus and God mirror images, it makes Jesus a reflection of God. Reflections are not equal to the real thing.


High priest is an office, The second persoa of Trinity can hold an office that father and spirit don;t hold, Jesus the man holds the office of high priest, he is incarnate logos. But he has his own autonomy as the man Jesus. You have a point that there is no clear and distinct statement of trinitarian doctrine in 1 Clem that is not unmarred by fuzziness or error, But that's obviously because the doctrine had not been worked out, The doctrine was in formation and it wasn't fully devolved in the minds of the Church. The rudiments of it are there, You did nit read the trinity pages linked that guy to go into all of this there.

Most damning of all is the last sentence in that quote; this is God adopting Jesus. Clement is presumably referencing Jesus' baptism (cf Mark); that day was the day that Jesus became God's begotten son.



wrong. the word used is not adopted but "begotten." Begotten does not mean adopted it means procreated, The be=gatter is the sire the one who actually fathers the child. That's one of the rudiments of the doctrine I was talking about.

We also see this in the epistle:
Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually proves to us that there shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead.

This idea of the first-fruits is used by Paul too, and relates to Jesus being the first to be resurrected, with resurrections for everyone else expected any time now. This suggests Jesus is a special man, not a part of God.[/quote]

Jesus the man from Nazareth was a real man and not God. He was the incarnate logos, but in his life as a man he was autonomous man.He was not god wearing a man suit, he was the man that the second personactuyally incarnated as.


The creed says "truly God and /truly man This is what being truly man means
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
User avatar
Metacrock
 
Posts: 9924
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas

Re: Trinity

Postby The Pixie on Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:45 am

Metacrock wrote:
Most damning of all is the last sentence in that quote; this is God adopting Jesus. Clement is presumably referencing Jesus' baptism (cf Mark); that day was the day that Jesus became God's begotten son.

wrong. the word used is not adopted but "begotten." Begotten does not mean adopted it means procreated, The be=gatter is the sire the one who actually fathers the child. That's one of the rudiments of the doctrine I was talking about.

No, the term is also used with regards to adoption. Admittedly, this is in Hebrew, but Psalms 2:7 quotes God talking to David. At that point, God adopted David as his son. His begotten son:

7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

The same word (in Greek this time) is used in 1 John 5:18 of people in general:

18We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
Jesus the man from Nazareth was a real man and not God. He was the incarnate logos, but in his life as a man he was autonomous man.He was not god wearing a man suit, he was the man that the second personactuyally incarnated as.

The creed says "truly God and /truly man This is what being truly man means

The text in the epistle can be interpreted that way with some imagination, but it is a long way from actually stating that clearly.
The Pixie
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Trinity

Postby sgttomas on Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:32 am

The thing I don't understand Metacrock is that you're a heretic in every way that would make Jesus' divinity some necessary aspect of a theological formulation. It seems you have the vestiges of the Trinity and so you're reading the text with those lenses, but it isn't at all obvious why Jesus would be understood that way without the prior belief. Maybe I'm wrong and there is something in your belief that necessitates it? (I'm asking...not rhetorically)

Peace,
-sgttomas
Prophet Muhammad (God send peace and blessings upon him) is reported to have said, "God says 'I am as My servant thinks I am' " ~ Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol 9 #502 (Chapter 93, "Oneness of God")
User avatar
sgttomas
 
Posts: 2424
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:20 am

Re: Trinity

Postby met on Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:43 am

st, Urbie once told me (on AARM) that virtually all modern Xians are heretics & if you talk to the people in the pews about their conceptions of Christ, they almost all run afoul of some ancient decree or other....

Athanasius also observed: "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God

Is this quote from the originator of the trinity doctrine being ironically fulfilled in modern times by our technology and our contemporary ability to bring down the Apocalypse without any divine help?
The “One” is the space of the “world” of the tick, but also the “pinch” of the lobster, or that rendezvous in person to confirm online pictures (with a new lover or an old God). This is the machinery operative...as “onto-theology."
Dr Ward Blanton
User avatar
met
 
Posts: 2797
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: Trinity

Postby moksha on Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:48 pm

SayaOtonashi wrote:Is the Trinity false?

One of the most common things I heard is that how can Jesus pray to God or sacrifice himself for us if he is God.

http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/trinity.html

http://www.the-gospel-truth.info/bible- ... r-trinity/


The Trinity is just a loophole invented to get around the "no other gods before me" command. By raising Jesus to equality with god it made worshipping him ok.
User avatar
moksha
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 10:15 pm
Location: Perth Western Australia

Re: Trinity

Postby sgttomas on Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:56 pm

I'm not saying "heretic" as an accusation, it's just descriptive. And I'm not asking about every Christian on the planet, I'm wonder what Metacrock believes. The structures of meaning are removed; what's left?

Metacrock wrote:I go by a model that views the Bible as a collection of writings which are based upon human encounters with the divine. People experience God in different ways, usually beyond words; to speak about that they must call up from the deep recesses of their spirits (minds) that intangible part that produces art and literature, and they formulate into words their experiences. That means they have to load the experince into cultural constructs.


I read through his Trinity section. The exegetical principle to distinguish from cultural construct isn't obvious.

What necessitates Christ being God? What necessitates that Christ couldn't merely be chosen *by* God? God is God and Jesus is the Messiah anointed by God. You can get a long way with that heresy intact.

I want to know what necessitates that Christ is God. Otherwise I'd say that the Trinity can survive as a cultural construct, but it isn't necessary in any way for a person to know Jesus, because he was a man, so why couldn't I?

I find it really undoes any kind of rational warrant for belief in God, when God is this ultimately simple, perfect, necessary Being....until you really get to know Him.

Peace,
-sgttomas
Prophet Muhammad (God send peace and blessings upon him) is reported to have said, "God says 'I am as My servant thinks I am' " ~ Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol 9 #502 (Chapter 93, "Oneness of God")
User avatar
sgttomas
 
Posts: 2424
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to Theology/Bible

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests