The Trinity The Touchstone of Truth

Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."

If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it is clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.
Good post, but one question. is not God the LORD (all caps) the Father who is the First? supportive scripture, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." and the First/Father/LORD is "WITH" the Last. and is not the Last is the Lord/the Son/Jesus who .... "WAS" ... called christ, the Last Adam? 1 Corinthians 15:45 "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." 1 Corinthians 15:46 "Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual." 1 Corinthians 15:47 "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."

so, with that KNOWLEDGE, is not the Lord from heaven Spirit, and was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') while on earth in flesh, per Phil. 2:7?

knowing that, is it not JUST "ONE" Spirit? and that one Spirit is the First and the Last the same one Person, who is the Spirit. supportive scripture, 1 Peter 1:10 "Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:" 1 Peter 1:11 "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow."

and did not the prophets of old prophesied by the Holy Spirit that moved them to prophesied? supportive scripture, 2 Peter 1:21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

there is only ONE SPIRIT.

101G
 
Good post, but one question. is not God the LORD (all caps) the Father who is the First? supportive scripture, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." and the First/Father/LORD is "WITH" the Last. and is not the Last is the Lord/the Son/Jesus who .... "WAS" ... called christ, the Last Adam? 1 Corinthians 15:45 "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." 1 Corinthians 15:46 "Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual." 1 Corinthians 15:47 "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."

so, with that KNOWLEDGE, is not the Lord from heaven Spirit, and was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') while on earth in flesh, per Phil. 2:7?

knowing that, is it not JUST "ONE" Spirit? and that one Spirit is the First and the Last the same one Person, who is the Spirit. supportive scripture, 1 Peter 1:10 "Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:" 1 Peter 1:11 "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow."

and did not the prophets of old prophesied by the Holy Spirit that moved them to prophesied? supportive scripture, 2 Peter 1:21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

there is only ONE SPIRIT.

101G
You and many here are comparing "the Lord" of the Old Testament and "the Lord" of the New Testament and saying they are the same. They are not. God was the Lord in the Old Testament. Jesus is the Lord of the New Testament. This happened after Jesus was raised from the dead that God made Jesus both Lord and Christ.

Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
 
You and many here are comparing "the Lord" of the Old Testament and "the Lord" of the New Testament and saying they are the same. They are not. God was the Lord in the Old Testament. Jesus is the Lord of the New Testament. This happened after Jesus was raised from the dead that God made Jesus both Lord and Christ.

Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Nope Paul declares it’s the same Lord who is Lord over all- it’s the Son. The same Lord in Joel 2:32 is the same Lord is Roman’s 10 which Paul identified as Christ.

See Roman’s 10:9-13.
 
You and many here are comparing "the Lord" of the Old Testament and "the Lord" of the New Testament and saying they are the same. They are not. God
is not the Lord .... the LORD ... shared in flesh? scripture, Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." the "Lord" here in verse 1 is the Hebrew term,
H113 אָדוֹן 'adown (aw-done') n-m.
אָדֹן 'adon (aw-done') [shortened]
1. sovereign (i.e. controller, human or divine).
2. lord.
{also used as a prefix for names}
[from an unused root (meaning to rule)]
KJV: lord, master, owner.

this same "Lord" in verse 1 is the same "Lord" in verse 5. Psalms 110:5 "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath." here the "Lord" is the Hebrew term,
H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel” - see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]

KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113

this is the same LORD/Lord in verse 1. so, the million dollar question, "How is the (Lord) in verse 1 different but the same (Lord) in verse 5? which is the emphatic form of H113 my Lord in verse 1.

101G.

101G.
 
is not the Lord .... the LORD ... shared in flesh? scripture, Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." the "Lord" here in verse 1 is the Hebrew term,
H113 אָדוֹן 'adown (aw-done') n-m.
אָדֹן 'adon (aw-done') [shortened]
1. sovereign (i.e. controller, human or divine).
2. lord.
{also used as a prefix for names}
[from an unused root (meaning to rule)]
KJV: lord, master, owner.

this same "Lord" in verse 1 is the same "Lord" in verse 5. Psalms 110:5 "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath." here the "Lord" is the Hebrew term,
H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel” - see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]

KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113

this is the same LORD/Lord in verse 1. so, the million dollar question, "How is the (Lord) in verse 1 different but the same (Lord) in verse 5? which is the emphatic form of H113 my Lord in verse 1.

101G.

101G.
See you think the Lord in the Old Testament and the Lord in the Epistles are the same being. I rest my case.
 
See you think the Lord in the Old Testament and the Lord in the Epistles are the same being. I rest my case.
THINK? Oh no, ..... KNOW, 101G will leave all the THINKING to you. as 101G always says, address the scriptures and not the person. and because you cannot address the scriptures, you rest. and that's good ... because the scriptures are not changing for you or 101G. yes, the Lord in flesh that was to come is the LORD who is the Spirit in the OT. the Diversifying of one self is the TRUTH to KNOW as 101G motto is ... "Where there is Knowledge, Stay not Ignorant". :ninja:

101G
 
THINK? Oh no, ..... KNOW, 101G will leave all the THINKING to you. as 101G always says, address the scriptures and not the person. and because you cannot address the scriptures, you rest. and that's good ... because the scriptures are not changing for you or 101G. yes, the Lord in flesh that was to come is the LORD who is the Spirit in the OT. the Diversifying of one self is the TRUTH to KNOW as 101G motto is ... "Where there is Knowledge, Stay not Ignorant". :ninja:

101G
I address Scriptures all the time on here and because you deny what I post is why you say I do not post Scripture.
 
I address Scriptures all the time on here and because you deny what I post is why you say I do not post Scripture.
101G address the scriptures. not u. so again, do post #544 declare that the LORD is the Lord diversified in flesh. if no then address the definition of "Lord" in verse 5 of Psalms 110.
Lord: H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel”
- see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]
KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113

101G.
 
What a bunch of hooey. No scripture tells us that the Word refers to God's creative self-expression. Rather, in context, the Word refers to Jesus, who became flesh.
 
You and many here are comparing "the Lord" of the Old Testament and "the Lord" of the New Testament and saying they are the same. They are not. God was the Lord in the Old Testament. Jesus is the Lord of the New Testament. This happened after Jesus was raised from the dead that God made Jesus both Lord and Christ.

Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

For someone who "teaches" how to walk in the Spirit, it's amazing how little you know of the word. Jesus was called both Lord and Christ right after he was born, by an angel of the Lord. Luke 2:11
"for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."

Acts 2:36 does not say that God made Jesus Lord and Christ after God raised Him from the dead. You assumed that, but He already was both Lord and Christ.

It must be because you don't believe that Jesus is God.
 
For someone who "teaches" how to walk in the Spirit, it's amazing how little you know of the word. Jesus was called both Lord and Christ right after he was born, by an angel of the Lord. Luke 2:11
"for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."

Acts 2:36 does not say that God made Jesus Lord and Christ after God raised Him from the dead. You assumed that, but He already was both Lord and Christ.

It must be because you don't believe that Jesus is God.
The title "Lord" (Greek, Kurious) as Kittel's observes, means "one who has full authority." In the Old Testament, God alone had "full authority" and filled both functions of Creator (Elohim) and Lord (Jehovah). Jehovah is used in connection with men with whom He has entered into some kind of covenant, starting with Adam in Genesis 2:7, and including Israel. Several redemptive characteristics and divine functions are associated with the sacred name Jehovah (Yahweh), including giving righteousness (Jeremiah 23:6), healing (Exodus 15:26), sanctification (Exodus 31:13), providing (Genesis 22:14), protection from enemies (Exodus 17:15), giving peace (Judges 6:24), and being continually present (Ezekiel 48:35). These functions can be assumed and/or delegated by persons having the authority. God has delegated many, if not all of these divine functions to Jesus Christ to share in as "Lord."
 
What a bunch of hooey. No scripture tells us that the Word refers to God's creative self-expression. Rather, in context, the Word refers to Jesus, who became flesh.
Correct, for the Lord Jesus is the WISDOM that express God "Happiness" in creating the Heavens and the earth. supportive scripture. Genesis 1:3 "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."
Light here is not the same type of Light that is produce by the sun in day 4. Light here is "WISDOM" an Expression of God in creation.
LIGHT: H216 אוֹר 'owr (ore) n-f.
1. illumination.
2. (concretely) luminary (in every sense, including lightning, happiness, etc.).
[from H215]
KJV: bright, clear, + day, light (-ning), morning, sun.
Root(s): H215

Note definition #2 happiness where have we seen this in creation at? answer, Proverbs 8:22 "The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old." Proverbs 8:23 "I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was." Proverbs 8:24 "When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water." Proverbs 8:25 "Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:" Proverbs 8:26 "While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world." Proverbs 8:27 "When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:" Proverbs 8:28 "When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:" Proverbs 8:29 "When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:" Proverbs 8:30 "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;" Proverbs 8:31 "Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men."
QUESTION, "what's another word for "rejoicing" and " delights?" answer, "happiness" bingo, there is God expression of his thoughts.

God did not make the Light; no, he formed Light. see Isa 45:5-7 Light. the VERY FIRST THING GOD MADE WAS GOOD, Visible/seen/Known and EVIL, invisible/unseen/unknown.. now we have a better understanding of the fall in the garden. (what was seen and unseen)

as "Light was Made, so was Man. John 1:4 "In him was life; and the life was the light of men."


101G
 
Some people think that the doctrine of the Trinity means that Christians believe in three gods. This is the idea of tritheism, which the church has categorically rejected throughout its history. Others see the Trinity as the church’s retreat into contradiction.

I once Read a book by a man who had a PhD in philosophy, and he objected to Christianity on the grounds that the doctrine of the Trinity represented a manifest contradiction—the idea that one can also be three—at the heart of the Christian faith. Apparently this professor of philosophy was not familiar with the law of non-contradiction.

That law states, “A cannot be A and non-A at the same time and in the same relationship.” When we confess our faith in the Trinity, we affirm that God is one in essence and three in person. Thus, God is one in A and three in B. If we said that He is one in essence and three in essence, that would be a contradiction. If we said He is one in person and three in person, that also would be a contradiction. But as mysterious as the Trinity is, perhaps even above and beyond our capacity to understand it in its fullness, the historic formula is not a contradiction.

So before I can make a thread about the Trinity, I think my OP Should be about unity, because the word Trinity means “tri-unity.” Behind the concept of unity is the biblical affirmation of monotheism. The prefix mono means “one or single,” while the root word theism has to do with God. So, monotheism conveys the idea that there is only one God.

Many unbiblical positions can be traced back to a misunderstanding of the nature of God. God has revealed to us in His Word some aspects of His nature. If we are to have a correct understanding of God, then we must accept what God has said about Himself. This is why the Trinity is an essential Christian doctrine. Many people deny what the Bible says about God’s nature, and instead place their faith in a god they have produced from their own imagination – a god that is easier to understand. The problem is, an imaginary god cannot save you. Only the real God can. And the real God is Triune. But what does the Trinity actually mean, and does the Bible really teach this doctrine?

Here is what R. C. Sproul Teaches on the trinity:

The “Trinity” is a term we use as a short-hand way of referring to several doctrines pertaining to the nature of God. Succinctly stated, these doctrines are as follows:

1. There is one and only one God. That is, there is exactly one all-powerful, all-knowing being we call “God” or “the Lord” or by the Hebrew name “Yahweh.”

2. There are three co-equal persons who are God: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

3. The three persons of God are each fully God and are eternally distinct from each other. In other words, the Father is not the Son or the Spirit, nor is the Son the Spirit, but each is fully God and this has always been that way and will always be that way.

Any position that denies one or more of these doctrines is, by definition, a non-trinitarian position. This is crucial because when people argue against the Trinity, most of the time they do not understand the Trinity. Their arguments are actually arguments against a misrepresentation of the Trinity: a straw-man fallacy. For example, some people seem to have the impression that the Trinity is teaching that there are three gods. But this is not so. In fact, I have heard people argue against the Trinity on the basis that the Bible teaches that there is only one God (monotheism) in passages such as Deuteronomy 6:4. But of course, the Trinity affirms monotheism; it is the first doctrine of the Trinity!

The word “trinity” stems from the prefix “tri” meaning “three,” and “unity” meaning “one.” Hence, there is a one-ness aspect of God, and a three-ness aspect of God. The one-ness aspect of God is His being or His nature. There is one all-powerful being. (A moment’s reflection reveals that logically there can be only one all-powerful being.) However, this one being is comprised of three persons defined in terms of their relationship to each other. It should be clear that a person is not the same as a being. A rock has “being” because it exists. But it is not a person.

So the sense in which God is one is different from the sense in which God is three. Perhaps a simplistic way to put it is this: God is one “what” and three “who’s.” This is a crucial distinction because people who don’t understand the Trinity often assert that the concept is contradictory. They say “God can’t be both one and three because that is a contradiction.” But a contradiction is to assert both A and not-A at the same time and in the same sense. If I said “God is (only) one being and God is three beings,” then that would be a contradiction. And if I said, “God is (only) one person and also three persons in the same sense,” then that too would be a contradiction. But neither of these assertions is the Trinity. There is no contradiction in asserting that God is one in one sense (being/nature), and three in a different sense (persons). It may be counter-intuitive or contrary to our preferences or expectations. But it violates no principle of logic.

Indeed, many things in nature are one in one sense, and more than one in a different sense. The physical universe is one universe, but it is three in terms of components: space, time, and matter. Furthermore, there is only one space, but space is three in terms of dimensions (height, width, and depth). Time is one dimension but with three aspects: past, present, and future. There is nothing contradictory or absurd in recognizing that something can be one in one sense, and three in a different sense. Note that I am not saying that the above examples are exactly like the Trinity.[1] But they do demonstrate the irrationality of asserting that something cannot possibly be one in one sense and more than one in an entirely different sense. The Lord has provided us with a universe of counterexamples.

The church itself is an example of one “what,” but more than one “who.” The universal church consists of all those who have been saved by Jesus. The one church is comprised of many persons. This example isn’t exactly like the divine Trinity because each person in the church is not “the church,” whereas each person of the Trinity is fully God. But it does illustrate a familiar example of one “what” with more than one “who.”

Some might ask, “But can you show me an analogy that is just like the divine Trinity?” No. There are many three-in-ones, but none are exactly like God. And there is a good reason for this. God is unique (Isaiah 46:9). He alone is one divine being consisting of three eternally distinct persons who are fully God. There is nothing besides God that is just like God. Deal with it. You can either humbly accept what God has said about Himself, or you can make up your own idol that is easier to understand. (But your idol cannot save you from your sins.)

So what then do we mean by the “persons” of the Trinity? We might initially think of a “person” in terms of a physical body, but God is a an omni-present spirit. He doesn’t have a physical body.[2] So this isn’t what we mean. Rather, we use the term “person” to speak of the personal relationships within the one being who is God. There is love and communication between the three persons who are God (John 5:20, Genesis 1:26). Each person has a particular role in the redemption of God’s people (John 6:44, 3:5). Each is a distinct witness to the events of history (John 5:31-37).

You might say, “But I don’t fully understand the nature of God.” But would you expect a finite being to be able to fully understand the infinite mind and uncreated nature of the eternal God? God doesn’t expect or require us to fully comprehend his nature (Deuteronomy 29:29). But He does require us to have faith that He is who and what He claims to be. And He Himself gives us such faith as He wills (Hebrews 12:2).

Some critics assert, “But the term ‘Trinity’ is not found in the Bible.” That’s true. But it is utterly irrelevant to the truth of the doctrine. After all, there are many modern terms not found in the Bible that nonetheless describe biblical principles. For example, God is omniscient, meaning he knows everything. The word “omniscient” isn’t found in most English Bibles. But the principle that God knows everything is definitely taught (Psalm 147:5). Even the term “Christianity” is not found in the Bible, but does that make “Christianity” unbiblical? Of course not! The term “monotheism” is not found in the Bible. But the Bible does endorse the principle that there is only one God – that’s monotheism.

R. C. Sproul, What Is the Trinity?​

Jesus understood he wasn't God--John 20:17, Rev 3:12 as did the bible writers- 1Cor 8:6, 2 Cor 1:3, Eph 1:3- 1Pet 1:3---Your translations are altered and filled with errors.
 
I never cared for the Catholic doctrine or the philosophy of its protestant sisters.

There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament. One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not.

There's no teaching on the trinity anywhere in the Bible. No whole paragraph or chapter teaching that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

If the Jews had no trinity, and the Christians had no trinity until it was officially declared by the Catholic Church in the 4th century. Then don’t you have to wonder where it came from? If it was formulated by the same Church that brought you Mary Mother of God, immortality of the soul, purgatory and hellfire... then don't you wonder just a little bit?

All you folks ever put in front of me are bits and pieces of words and half verses that are scattered all over the Bible. Also there's no teaching on why God would come to the earth as a man. Such a concept accomplishes nothing. Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...

Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.

The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.
 
Back
Top Bottom