Is God Three?

[KingdomRose]

That's just plain silly. We see the nature of God being triune from the very beginning in Genesis clear through to the end in Revelation.

Instead of calling names, why not post these verses that you say presents God as a trinity "from the very beginning in Genesis clear through to the end of Revelation?"

 

[KingdomRose]

You seem to like filling your posts against trinitarians with straw men arguments.

It's really annoying.

Please stop.

You try to lower God by saying if he's not able to be comprehended by man, then He must not be this way or that way.

You blatantly reject some scripture in favor of a single verse (John 17:3, typically) or set of verses, instead of accepting what the entire Bible says as a whole.

And then you demand that we do the same, as if we base our entire theology on just a few verses.

KR, YOU ARE A HERETIC, A LIAR, A FOOL, AND ON YOUR WAY TO HELL, BECAUSE YOU REJECT WHAT GOD TEACHES IN HIS WORD.

You need to humble yourself before Him, before you end up separated from Him for the rest of eternity.

I employ no straw man arguments. You just don't know what to do with solid Scriptural understanding and cannot refute what I'm saying so you say I'm employing straw-man arguments. YOU are becoming annoying.

 

[KingdomRose]

The trinity, as an official doctrine, began to be developed in 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea and was completed in 381 at the Council of Constantinople. Both of these official events were convened and presided over by Roman Emperors. So by 381 A.D. it was officially decreed that God was three persons who were equally the one God.

“[The Trinity Doctrine] is not ... directly and immediately the word of God.” - (p. 304) “The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples for over 100 years], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.


Now it is obvious that Scripture uses the word 'one' numerous times to describe God. And it is equally obvious that every dream or vision of God shows a single person as God (sometimes the Messiah is shone approaching or standing by the one person depicted as God (Acts 7:55 and Dan. 7:9, 13, 14 are good examples).

So, how many times in Scripture is God described using the word 'three'?

And how many times is he shown in scripture as three persons? or one person with three faces?

Excellent post. Not many people have actually taken time to ponder upon it. They're still floundering around in the ditch where the other blind people have led them.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I employ no straw man arguments. You just don't know what to do with solid Scriptural understanding and cannot refute what I'm saying so you say I'm employing straw-man arguments. YOU are becoming annoying.

We HAVE ALREADY REFUTED your arguments. And we're getting tired of posting the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and.........

And over again. You don't listen, and when we make a point you cannot refute, you ignore it until it's buried too far back to be found again, and then make your same arguments again, and rinse and repeat.

You interpret/change the Bible according to your own beliefs, we simply read what is written, and believe that.

I have already shown how your arguments are straw men, and then you accuse me of making the straw man. That's a tactic GT and children make.

It goes like this:
Trins: "You're making a straw man"
You: "I know you are, but I'm certainly not. [makes another straw man argument]"
Trins: "you just made another straw man, and now you're being a hypocrite."
You: "I know you are, but what am I?"

.....

It needs to stop.

KR. Refute this:

If Jesus was not the eternal God, then His death, burial, and resurrection could save absolutely no one.

 

[glorydaz]

Instead of calling names, why not post these verses that you say presents God as a trinity "from the very beginning in Genesis clear through to the end of Revelation?"

To say your statement was silly isn't calling names.

I think I might see your problem already. Your mind is made up from the get go.
And please don't pretend that you haven't been given proof of what I've said.

 

[glorydaz]

We HAVE ALREADY REFUTED your arguments. And we're getting tired of posting the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and.........

And over again. You don't listen, and when we make a point you cannot refute, you ignore it until it's buried too far back to be found again, and then make your same arguments again, and rinse and repeat.

You interpret/change the Bible according to your own beliefs, we simply read what is written, and believe that.

I have already shown how your arguments are straw men, and then you accuse me of making the straw man. That's a tactic GT and children make.

It goes like this:
Trins: "You're making a straw man"
You: "I know you are, but I'm certainly not. [makes another straw man argument]"
Trins: "you just made another straw man, and now you're being a hypocrite."
You: "I know you are, but what am I?"

.....

It needs to stop.

KR. Refute this:

If Jesus was not the eternal God, then His death, burial, and resurrection could save absolutely no one.

:first:

 

[KingdomRose]

Early Trinitarian Quotes
by Matt Slick

There are cult groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century until after the time of the Council of Nicea (325). This council "was called by Emperor Constantine to deal with the error of Arianism [see page 45] which was threatening the unity of the Christian Church."

The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea:

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.

"O Lord God almighty . . . I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever" (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.

"For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water" (First Apol., LXI).

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

"In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).
"We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.

"The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all . . . '" (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

"We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.

"If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority . . . There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father" (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).

"For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)

"Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification . . . " (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

Conclusion
If, as the anti-Trinitarians maintain, the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine and was never taught until the council of Nicea in 325, then why do these quotes exist? The answer is simple: the Trinity is a biblical doctrine, and it was taught before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

Part of the reason that the Trinity doctrine was not "officially" taught until the time of the Council of Nicea is that Christianity was illegal until shortly before the council. It wasn't really possible for official Christian groups to meet and discuss doctrine. For the most part, they were fearful of making public pronouncements concerning their faith.

Additionally, if a group had attacked the person of Adam, the early church would have responded with an official doctrine of who Adam was. As it was, the person of Christ was attacked. When the Church defended the deity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity was further defined.

The early church believed in the Trinity as is evidenced by the quotes above, and it wasn't necessary to really make them official. It wasn't until errors started to creep in that councils began to meet to discuss the Trinity as well as other doctrines that came under fire.

No, the early church did not believe in the Trinity. It was only as the first century came to a close that the doctrine held interest for members of the church. As Paul said, when he would be gone men would rise up from within the church and speak twisted things to draw the disciples away after themselves (Acts 20:29,30). That is when doctrines like the spurious Trinity really began to take hold.

BTW, most people probably are ignorant of the fact that Ignatius' writings are divided up into "shorter and longer" versions. Who ever wrote the shorter version took liberties with his thoughts that are in direct opposition to the longer version. His true feelings, IMHO, are sentiments such as this:

"But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the only-begotten Son." (Epistle to the Ephesians, chapter VII, long version)

"Do ye all come together in common, and individually, through grace, in one faith of God the Father, and of Jesus Christ His only-begotten Son and the 'first-born of every creature.'" (Chapter XX)

"There is one God, the Almighty, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His Word." (To the Magnesians, chapter VIII.)


The other people you mention were writing after the first century, and the Apostacy had set in quite firmly by then. I wouldn't hang my hat on any of the other ones you quote.

 

[KingdomRose]

Polycarp is not claiming there is a trinity when listing God almighty, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit in one sentence.
The three are obviously listed as being separate.


Justin Martyr is not claiming there is a trinity when listing God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit in one sentence.
The three are obviously listed as being separate.


Ignatius is not claiming there is a trinity when listing Christ Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit in one sentence.
The three are obviously listed as being separate.
The second quote is only about Jesus and not about the Father nor the Holy Spirit, so cannot be counted as supporting the idea of a trinity.


Irenaeus is not claiming there is a trinity when listing the Father Almighty, Christ Jesus, and the Holy Spirit in one sentence.
The three are obviously listed as being separate.


Tertullian can be called the father of the trinity based on this quote.


Origen had a lot of problems with trying to impose Greek philosophy onto the New Testament.


The Trinity is not a biblical doctrine.
The idea of God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son of God, and God's Holy Spirit comprising a single being that was a trinity of three beings can be traced to Tertullian and to the fear of a man wielding the power and authority that God gave to Jesus.

Excellent post!

 

[JudgeRightly]

Excellent post!

...

KR. Refute this:

If Jesus was not the eternal God, then His death, burial, and resurrection could save absolutely no one.

 

[Tigger 2]

Originally Posted by Apple7

Scripture never says that Jesus was created.

Tambora replied:

Correct.

.....................................

Jesus is described in scripture as the 'firstborn Son of God'; the 'only-begotten Son of God' and the 'Son of God.'

Begotten” and “created” are English words carefully chosen by Bible translators to convey the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words of the original manuscripts as closely as possible. So first we should determine what the words “created” and “begotten” actually mean in English. The Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1963 ed. that I have at home says:

“create ... 1: to bring into existence...3 : cause, make” - p. 195.

"beget ... begot ... begotten ... 1 : to procreate as the father : sire 2 : cause” - p. 77.

These two words can share the identical meaning of “cause to be.” That is, we may say the mother (or father) has brought into existence a child or (more often) someone has begotten some thing that he built or caused somehow.

The Hebrew word yalad means “to bear, bring forth, beget”- Gesenius, #3205, but it can be used (as the equivalent English word also can) for “cause to be.” For example, when God says he “begot”/”fathered” (yalad) the nation of Israel (Deut. 32:6, 18), he clearly means that he caused it to be or created it as a nation. There is no implication that it was somehow begotten out of the very substance of his body. In like manner God calls the nation of Israel his son, his firstborn because it was the very first nation created by him and for him (cf. Ex. 4:22). Again, anything Jehovah causes to be may be said to be “begotten” by him and is his “offspring.”

“Do you thus repay [YHWH], O foolish and senseless people? Is not he your father, who created you, who made you and established you?” - Deut. 32:6, NRSV.
“You forsook the creator who begot [yalad] you and ceased to care for God who brought you to birth.” - Deut. 32:18, NEB.

“Men of Athens [nonChristians], .... The God who made the world and everything in it ... does not live in shrines made by man. .... Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the Deity is like gold or silver, or stone...” - Acts 17:22, 24, 29, RSV.

In Ps. 90:2 we also see yalad used in the sense of created: “Before the mountains were born [yalad] or you brought forth the earth” - NIV, AT, JB, NJB, NAB (1991), NASB ; “begotten” - NAB (1970); “were given birth” - MLB. Or, “Before the mountains were created, before the earth was formed.” - Living Bible, cf. TEV. So, the Hebrew word most often translated “begotten, brought forth” may also be understood (as in English) to mean created or produced.

1 Cor. 8:6 (compare Eph. 4:6) tells us, again, that God is the Father of ALL things. He is the Creator of all things. The very common usage of “Father,” “son,” “begotten,” “born,” etc. is again used here for creation. Not only is God the Father of all created things here, but these things have literally “come out” (ex/ek) from him. (“But to us there is but one God, the Father, [out of - ek/ex] whom are all things”.) Yes, the original New Testament word used here is “ex/ek” which literally means “out of” (W. E. Vine, p.1270) and is commonly used in the sense of generating, begetting. For example, Matt. 1:3 literally reads in the original manuscripts: “Judah generated Perez and Zerah out of [ek] Tamar.” Judah was the father, but the children were literally out of the body (essence, flesh) of their mother Tamar.

The terms “generated” and “begotten” had different meanings for Christians before the 4th century advocates for a trinity idea transformed them into the trinitarian terms that are generally used today. Church historian (and trinitarian) Dr. Williston Walker writes in his classic work, A History of the Christian Church, 4th ed.:

“[The beginning of the 4th century debates over the deity of Christ] hinged in turn on interpretation of the Greek term gennetos [‘generated’] as that was applied to the Son. [Although] traditionally translated ‘begotten,’ in Greek philosophical terminology [as well as in Scriptural terminology: Luke 7:28; Jn 3:5; 1 Jn 5:1; Ps. 90:2; Prov. 8:25] it had a broader and hence vaguer sense. It denoted anything which in any way ‘came to be’ and hence anything ‘derivative’ or ‘generated.’ Christian thought had early learned to express its monotheistic stance by insisting that God is the sole agennetos (‘underived,’ ‘ungenerated’ [‘unbegotten’]): that is, the unique and absolute first principle. By contrast with God, all else that exists - including the Logos, God’s Son - was described as generated [‘begotten’].” - p. 132, Charles Scribner’s Sons, Macmillan Publishing Co., 1985. [Emphasis and bracketed material added. - RDB]

Early Christian Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 A.D.) wrote:

"God alone is unbegotten and incorruptible, and therefore He is God, but all other things after him are created [genneta] and corruptible [Justin has just concurred that the world itself was begotten by God] .... take your stand on one Unbegotten [agennetou], and say this is the Cause of all." - ANF 1:197 (‘Dialogue’).

But,

"Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being His Word and first-begotten" - ANF 1:170 (‘Apology’).

"And thus do we also, since our persuasion by the Word, stand aloof from them (i.e., the demons), and follow the only unbegotten God through His Son" - ANF 1:167 ('Apology').

Furthermore,
Remember, angels and men are called sons of God in scripture. This obviously does not mean the Almighty spirit person who created everything literally gave birth (in the sense of earthly creatures) to them!
..........................

As for salvation, anyone whom the Father (God alone) decrees to be savior of mankind, WILL BE the savior of mankind.

If He wanted a perfect man to prove that it is possible for a man not to sin as the first man had, He could do it.

If he wanted the very first spirit person (His only Son) to become flesh and die for all mankind, He could allow that!

Why would anyone believe that it is necessary for the Almighty God Himself to die (which is impossible, anyway) for an incredibly tiny part of the very creation He produced?

 

[Truster]

1 John 5:7,8 KJV

Edited out of many translations including the ASV

 

[Lon]

The trinity, as an official doctrine, began to be developed in 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea and was completed in 381 at the Council of Constantinople.

No. It was 'addressed' in this year. The triune concept is biblical and supported by the ECF's.

Both of these official events were convened and presided over by Roman Emperors. So by 381 A.D. it was officially decreed that God was three persons who were equally the one God.

It wasn't presided over by emperors.

“[The Trinity Doctrine] is not ... directly and immediately the word of God.” - (p. 304) “The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples for over 100 years], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.

It doesn't matter 'when' but 'if'.' The answer is 'yes' so when makes no difference. All one is concerned about is if it is biblical. Simply doing a history looking for favoring position is a heresy tactic. The only point worth discussing is if it is biblical and it is.

Now it is obvious that Scripture uses the word 'one' numerous times to describe God. And it is equally obvious that every dream or vision of God shows a single person as God (sometimes the Messiah is shone approaching or standing by the one person depicted as God (Acts 7:55 and Dan. 7:9, 13, 14 are good examples).

There you go, sometimes one, sometimes two or more. You just destroyed your own argument. Welcome to being a Trinitarian. :up:

So, how many times in Scripture is God described using the word 'three'?

Er "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" Count.

And how many times is he shown in scripture as three persons? or one person with three faces?

However such is posted, best not to get it wrong for the misplaced support of a heresy. Nobody claims to know exactly how revelation of God's identity fits together. That guy or gal is playing a game if they try. Rather, we simply listen to and embrace scriptures revelation about God.

John 1:1. Clear enough: Was with God (two beings) and Was God (one being). To me, it is the end of the discussion. You can't touch John 1:1 with a ten foot pole as an arian or Unitarian. It just isn't gonna happen. You cannot touch John 20:28 as an Arian or Unitarian. It just isn't going to happen.

 

[Bee1]

The trinity, as an official doctrine, began to be developed in 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea and was completed in 381 at the Council of Constantinople. Both of these official events were convened and presided over by Roman Emperors. So by 381 A.D. it was officially decreed that God was three persons who were equally the one God.

“[The Trinity Doctrine] is not ... directly and immediately the word of God.” - (p. 304) “The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples for over 100 years], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.


Now it is obvious that Scripture uses the word 'one' numerous times to describe God. And it is equally obvious that every dream or vision of God shows a single person as God (sometimes the Messiah is shone approaching or standing by the one person depicted as God (Acts 7:55 and Dan. 7:9, 13, 14 are good examples).

So, how many times in Scripture is God described using the word 'three'?

And how many times is he shown in scripture as three persons? or one person with three faces?

http://www.trinitytruth.org

The word trinity was introduced by Tertullian (160-225 AD) who was a PAGAN turned Catholic theologian and one of the early Church fathers who wrote in the early third century to define the teaching concerning the Godhead. His conclusion was that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were one substance, but not one in person. He also did not see the Son as being co-eternal with the Father.

There are many unanswered questions about the trinity doctrine and the most obvious is where in the Bible is it explained? Scholars throughout history have acknowledged that it is not found in the Bible. Many will respond that the trinity doctrine is found in 1 John 5:7. But the italicized part of this verse that says, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one,” does not EXIST in the earliest manuscripts!

Whore of Babylon !


Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

 

[john w]

http://www.trinitytruth.org
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one,” does not EXIST in the earliest manuscripts!

What "the earliest manuscripts" would that be? You've examined them?

You just read that somewhere, didn't you, such as the above link, never having seen/examined these "the earliest manuscripts?"

Tell us about these "the earliest manuscripts." Do be a dear.


Come clean....Let's see how honest you are, on this issue. Let's go.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Excellent post!

Still waiting for a response to this, KR. I'm not going to let this get buried.

We HAVE ALREADY REFUTED your arguments. And we're getting tired of posting the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and.........

And over again. You don't listen, and when we make a point you cannot refute, you ignore it until it's buried too far back to be found again, and then make your same arguments again, and rinse and repeat.

You interpret/change the Bible according to your own beliefs, we simply read what is written, and believe that.

I have already shown how your arguments are straw men, and then you accuse me of making the straw man. That's a tactic GT and children make.

It goes like this:
Trins: "You're making a straw man"
You: "I know you are, but I'm certainly not. [makes another straw man argument]"
Trins: "you just made another straw man, and now you're being a hypocrite."
You: "I know you are, but what am I?"

.....

It needs to stop.

KR. Refute this:

If Jesus was not the eternal God, then His death, burial, and resurrection could save absolutely no one.

 

[Bee1]

The unedited one. Stop being so naive, you know the "Bible" has been chopped,slice and dice.Or do you beleive what you read in your "Bible" reflects the message that the originals writers wanted to convey?

 

[Hawkins]

The unedited one. Stop being so naive, you know the "Bible" has been chopped,slice and dice.Or do you beleive what you read in your "Bible" reflects the message that the originals writers wanted to convey?

Do you believe that God has full control of His own Word? If so, forget about the ancient scrolls and concentrate on what is said now!

We pray in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

When Thomas, His direct disciple, called Him God it's no point to say He's not.

 

[Bee1]

where in Genesis where in Revelation?

 

[Bee1]

what evidence do you have that shows trinity being taaught in the first century/ Who taught it?

 

[keypurr]

1 John 5:7,8 KJV

Edited out of many translations including the ASV

This verse is not in the early manuscripts, it was added about 1600.