1+1+1=ONE

[phil36]

I do love the Personal Pronouns .

When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. 4I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. 5And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed

Blessings

Phil.

 

[b1accord]

This is a very important point...One is made of many parts, but with one head. Thank your for the references to our Holy Scriptures to back up this point. The fact that we are in this discussion leads to the point. We are all part of the One. David said Lord, to whom did he reference? Proverbs: (ie: Solomon, Lean not unto your own understanding...) The wisdom of those whom sacrifice their own credibility, unto Modern Times, that have not honestly and soundly studied the ancients, leading themselves to the edge of an abyss. How could I honestly talk about the Almighty Father, Our Creator without knowing Jesus?

 

[b1accord]

You better know how to play those bag pipes Phil36... I don't have the chapter and verse of our Scriptures but I know they are written on my heart. We know our God, and we know Him by Name. All Glory and Honor to The Almighty Father, In the Name of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost. Amen.

 

[phil36]

LOl, yeah I'm a late starter, I played the club circuit with guitar when I was younger. I nip upto to Glasgow now and again to the College of Piping for lessons on the chanter and blast away sometimes at work (during breaks) on the pipes. (the photo is at work).

John 17:5 points to the Triunness of the Godhead. The personal pronouns show the individual personalities between the Father and Son.

I agree with you, to God alone be the Glory, in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Blessings

Phil

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

This is exactly my point, actually. To say personal pronoun usage "points to" Trinity is inference; it presumes the implication and nothing else, making it perception not fact. Yet it's passed on as absolute truth with no understanding of language or anything else.

The eternal uncreated Almighty God spoke the Word into flesh. That's way more significant that casual pronoun inference and other understandings projected onto/into Scripture. The Son being distinct from the Father doesn't mean they are multiple discrete "persons". That's a humanization that is then also projected upon the Holy Spirit that has no interactive discourse with Father or Son. Oh, well... let's make the Holy Spirit a distinct "person", too... is the "logic".

Nobody bothers to understand the Rhema-Logos or many nuances of language; instead referring only to general distinctions implied by pronouns. Every God-model belief simply processes these various inferences differently.

To be Logos requires Rhema; they are inseparable but distinct parts of the spoken Word. The Logos speaks the Rhema. If not, it would simply be laleo instead of logos. The Word doesn't speak itself, it is spoken. It's actually not possible for the Word to have been a separate pre-existent God-person. And what of the Holy Spirit, which was only later made another separate "person" simply because the Father and the Word were made into "persons".

Three and distinct doesn't mean "persons" based on pronouns. Trinity is inference, as I said.

 

[phil36]

This is exactly my point, actually. To say personal pronoun usage "points to" Trinity is inference; it presumes the implication and nothing else, making it perception not fact. Yet it's passed on as absolute truth with no understanding of language or anything else.

The eternal uncreated Almighty God spoke the Word into flesh. That's way more significant that casual pronoun inference and other understandings projected onto/into Scripture. The Son being distinct from the Father doesn't mean they are multiple discrete "persons". That's a humanization that is then also projected upon the Holy Spirit that has no interactive discourse with Father or Son. Oh, well... let's make the Holy Spirit a distinct "person", too... is the "logic".

Nobody bothers to understand the Rhema-Logos or many nuances of language; instead referring only to general distinctions implied by pronouns. Every God-model belief simply processes these various inferences differently.

To be Logos requires Rhema; they are inseparable but distinct parts of the spoken Word. The Logos speaks the Rhema. If not, it would simply be laleo instead of logos. The Word doesn't speak itself, it is spoken. It's actually not possible for the Word to have been a separate pre-existent God-person. And what of the Holy Spirit, which was only later made another separate "person" simply because the Father and the Word were made into "persons".

Three and distinct doesn't mean "persons" based on pronouns. Trinity is inference, as I said.

I think you are totally wrong when trying to suggest that no -one understands the nuances of language. This is the usual type of straw man argument thats goes nowhere. Infact, you argue the case about how language is used and that no-one understands the ''Nuance'' of Languge and then you actualy argue against yourself by denying the proper usage of language (your last sentence)!


Anyhow, Have a blessed day.

Phil

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I think you are totally wrong when trying to suggest that no -one understands the nuances of language. This is the usual type of straw man argument thats goes nowhere. Infact, you argue the case about how language is used and that no-one understands the ''Nuance'' of Languge and then you actualy argue against yourself by denying the proper usage of language (your last sentence)!


Anyhow, Have a blessed day.

Phil

Again, my exact point. Holy Spirit is a neuter noun in Greek, and is also rendered "it". The Holy Spirit would more appropriately be an "it" than a "he". And I'm talking about Greek language knowledge when I say "nuances"; not English. English is a vague, derivative modern pan-European "mutt" language that can't adequately express the original NT koine Greek or the OT Hebrew.

So... according to this logic, the Holy Spirit is an "it" rather than a "he" by appropriate pronoun translation. An "it" isn't a "person", even if the Father and Son were.

The Word SAYS God's Soul/The Father was well pleased in the Son. No inference. No pronouns.

God is not a Hellenistically-derived Neo-Platonic conceptualization of three "persons". It's unscriptural, and violates any understanding of the Logos.

 

[phil36]

Mmmm English is a vague language or a mutt language.. ...Are you trying to say it has no meaning? By the way even 'oneness scholars don't argue the point you try and make. I suppose you expect us to take you seriously now??


1) ekeinos (emphatic masculine pronoun)

or really just try and explain away the personal pronouns used in the text for the Holy Spirt n John 16:13

2) Act 5:3-4 lied to the Holy Spirit not just an ''IT''

That is just 2 examples, that show the Holy Spirit is not an 'IT' but a 'He' (person).

Anyhow, may you have a blessed day.

Phil

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Mmmm English is a vague language or a mutt language.. ...Are you trying to say it has no meaning? By the way even 'oneness scholars don't argue the point you try and make. I suppose you expect us to take you seriously now??


1) ekeinos (emphatic masculine pronoun)

or really just try and explain away the personal pronouns used in the text for the Holy Spirt n John 16:13

2) Act 5:3-4 lied to the Holy Spirit not just an ''IT''

That is just 2 examples, that show the Holy Spirit is not an 'IT' but a 'He' (person).

Anyhow, may you have a blessed day.

Phil

I don't really care if Trinitarians take me seriously. They have no credibility after presenting God as multiple "persons", which is nowhere represented in Scripture. (I was a Trinitarian Pastor for 12 years, BTW.)

I nowhere indicated the Holy Spirit was always rendered an it. My point was that pronouns aren't the foundation for fundamental Godhead doctrine.

Why don't you exegete specifically that God is three "persons", while you're at it? Enough rhetoric. Just show scripture that God is three "persons". Especially show the Holy Spirit is a person. No inference. No speculation. No supposition. No perception. Just scripture.

Anyhow, have a blessed day.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

All the inference of Trinity actually makes a better case for full-on Tritheism. A stronger apologetic could be presented for Tritheism than Trinity. Unitarianism, Binitarianism, and Arianism all have as strong an exegetical foundation as Trinity.

And most proponents of those views can defend their faith, rather than being blindly indoctrinated proselytes like Trinitarians.

 

[phil36]

Hi PneumaPsucheSoma,

Language has meaning that is how we communicate and it is how God communicates to us/ So verbs.nouns , pronouns, adjectives etc, play a major role as that is how even the most basic of sentences are made.

If the Holy Spirit in Greek and English shows that HE is a person then we cannot deny it, especially in the Greek. For it is the Holy who has inspired its writing the words came from Him.

The Greek demonstrates and articulates personhood and the English demonstrates and articulates personhood. we can all make our own assumptions, however the truth is in the text not our own pressumptions or axioms.

be blessed PneumaPsucheSoma

Phil
Be blessed PneumaPsucheSoma

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

If that's all there is to it, God is three separate beings as a Tritheism of three gods.

Believe as you will. You're accountable for what you've heard.

 

[phil36]

If that's all there is to it, God is three separate beings as a Tritheism of three gods.

Believe as you will. You're accountable for what you've heard.

Hi PneumaPsucheSome,

Its not God is one being, and your right I am accountable not for what I have heard, but what I believe and tell others.

God Bless PneumaPsucheSome

Phil

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Hi PneumaPsucheSome,

Its not God is one being, and your right I am accountable not for what I have heard, but what I believe and tell others.

God Bless PneumaPsucheSome

Phil

Yes, and God have mercy on Trinitarians, especially Filioquers, and their grievous error that has sent many into eternity without salvific faith in Christ.

Blessings returned to you as well.

 

[Scotth1960]

Again, my exact point. Holy Spirit is a neuter noun in Greek, and is also rendered "it". The Holy Spirit would more appropriately be an "it" than a "he". And I'm talking about Greek language knowledge when I say "nuances"; not English. English is a vague, derivative modern pan-European "mutt" language that can't adequately express the original NT koine Greek or the OT Hebrew.

So... according to this logic, the Holy Spirit is an "it" rather than a "he" by appropriate pronoun translation. An "it" isn't a "person", even if the Father and Son were.

The Word SAYS God's Soul/The Father was well pleased in the Son. No inference. No pronouns.

God is not a Hellenistically-derived Neo-Platonic conceptualization of three "persons". It's unscriptural, and violates any understanding of the Logos.

By that logic, we should call candles "she", because I believe in Greek the word for candle is feminine. Grammatic gender of words or nouns in the NT proves nothing about the gender of the Holy Spirit. God is not an "it". If He was, then Hinduism is true, for Hinduism preaches an amorphous, impersonal, pantheistic god. Go figure. Some people will go to all extremes to deny the Holy Trinity. Also, I think it's rather artificial to call Father Son, Son Body, and Spirit Spirit, as if God were one human person divided into the human tripartateness.
That's pushing the image and likeness of God in man too far. God is not a man, or a human person. But the human person (man) Jesus is God.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Hi PneumaPsucheSoma,

Language has meaning that is how we communicate and it is how God communicates to us/ So verbs.nouns , pronouns, adjectives etc, play a major role as that is how even the most basic of sentences are made.

Phil
Be blessed PneumaPsucheSoma

I didn't reiterate this as an example of clear language. The Word clearly says... in English... that God's Soul/The Father is well pleased in the Son. (Psalm 42:1, Matt. 12:18, 2Pet. 1:17)

Since it's how God communicates, I can't ignore what God has clearly said to us in the most basic of sentences.

Continue being blessed, even though you're on the wrong side of the "Pond".

 

[endofallfears]

Here are some points of demonstration of the scriptural proof of the trinity.

*****1. The Incarnation. The birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as described in the accounts in Matthew and Luke show that the doctrine of the Trinity was not a later invention of theologians. Luke records what an angel said to Mary: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).
*****Since other passages of Scripture reveal that the term "Most High" refers to God the Father, we have in Luke a concrete instance of the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son all being mentioned together in the supernatural event of the Incarnation.
*****2. The Baptism of Our Lord. When Jesus Christ was baptized, the heavens opened and the Holy Spirit "descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: 'You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased'" (Luke 3:21-22). In these verses we see the Son being baptized, the Spirit descending upon Him, and the Father bearing testimony.
*****3. Discourses of Christ. In John 14--16 Christ speaks of the persons of the Trinity in His Upper Room Discourse. Jesus declared to the disciples, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever -- the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you" (John 14:16-17). Our Lord here prays to the Father for the Spirit, and His emphasis on triunity is quite apparent. In John 14:26 and 15:26 Christ uses the same formula, mentioning the three persons of the Deity and indicating their unity, not only of purpose and will but of basic nature.
*****4. Paul's Letters. The apostle Paul definitely taught the triune nature of God. He wrote: "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all" (2 Cor. 13:14). It would have been difficult for Paul to give this benediction if the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were not equal persons within the Godhead.
*****5. The Great Commission. In Matthew 28:18-20 the Lord Jesus commissions the disciples to go out and preach the gospel and to make disciples of all nations. He commands them also to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Taken with the other passages bearing on the subject, this becomes an extremely powerful argument for the Christian doctrine of the trinity.
*****6. Creation. Although the Bible does not explain to us how the three persons are the one God, it tells us most emphatically that the Spirit of God created the world (Gen. 1:2), the Father created the world (Heb. 1:2), and the Son created the world (Col. 1:16). If you check the creation references in the New Testament, you will see that these particular references are bolstered by several others teaching the same things.
*****The apostle Paul declared in Acts 17:24, "the God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." This forces us to an irresistible conclusion. As creation has been attributed to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit singly and collectively, they are the one God. There cannot be three gods. The Scripture declares: "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other" (Isa. 45:22). Hence there is unity in trinity and trinity in unity.
*****7. The Resurrection of Christ. A final instance of Trinitarian emphasis is that of the resurrection of our Lord. In John 2 Christ declared to the Jews, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days" (v. 19). John hastens to tell us that Jesus was speaking of the resurrection of His earthly body (v. 21). Other Scriptures, however, state that Christ was raised by the agency of the Holy Spirit (e.g., Rom. 8:11). And Peter explicitly states that the Father raised the Son (Acts 3:26). So, again, God's Word affirms the triune nature of God. We may not fully understand the great truth of the Trinity. However, we can see the rays of light which emanate from God's Word and which teach us that, in a mysterious sense beyond the comprehension of man's finite mind, God is one in nature but three in person.

Also, in comparison with Genesis 1 and John 1:1, we see a very conspicuous difference. At creation, God spoke things into existance; there's your logos and your rhema idea. In John 1:1 God did not speak, an absence of rhema; there was only the logos. If the logos was not spoken into being, yet the logos was in existence, it must mean that the logos existed without rhema, which would make the logos eternal, not a creation.

 

[Scotth1960]

I've looked over and over and over at Matt. 28:19. I see F-S-HS. I can't seem to find "person(s)" in the text anywhere.


Trinity is a mental gymnastics nightmare.


One Scripture to justify your term "mental gymnastics". Where do you get that concept?
One Scripture that says "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" are "a nightmare". In Erie Scott


Prove the F-S-HS are separate discrete persons.

If they are'n't distinct, they're all the same person. How can that not be what you believe? Either they are 3 distinct persons, who are not separate from each other, but united as one in one Godhead, or they are all each other, and they are all one person, not distinct from each other, but fused together indistinguishably. Those are the only two possibilities of belief, aren't they?
In Erie PA Scott

You're even more dishonest than most Trinitarians. ONE scripture that unequivocally shows 3 persons. ONE.

Good grief.

One Scripture that shows they are not person. One Scripture that allows you to state that only Jesus Christ is a person. And that the Father is impersonal. And the Spirit is impersonal. One Scripture that proves Sola Scriptura, so you can reject persons because it is in Church tradition, but not in Scripture. One Scripture that shows the Church that says "persons" is in error. Take care.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Here are some points of demonstration of the scriptural proof of the trinity.

*****1. The Incarnation. The birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as described in the accounts in Matthew and Luke show that the doctrine of the Trinity was not a later invention of theologians. Luke records what an angel said to Mary: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).
*****Since other passages of Scripture reveal that the term "Most High" refers to God the Father, we have in Luke a concrete instance of the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son all being mentioned together in the supernatural event of the Incarnation.
*****2. The Baptism of Our Lord. When Jesus Christ was baptized, the heavens opened and the Holy Spirit "descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: 'You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased'" (Luke 3:21-22). In these verses we see the Son being baptized, the Spirit descending upon Him, and the Father bearing testimony.
*****3. Discourses of Christ. In John 14--16 Christ speaks of the persons of the Trinity in His Upper Room Discourse. Jesus declared to the disciples, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever -- the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you" (John 14:16-17). Our Lord here prays to the Father for the Spirit, and His emphasis on triunity is quite apparent. In John 14:26 and 15:26 Christ uses the same formula, mentioning the three persons of the Deity and indicating their unity, not only of purpose and will but of basic nature.
*****4. Paul's Letters. The apostle Paul definitely taught the triune nature of God. He wrote: "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all" (2 Cor. 13:14). It would have been difficult for Paul to give this benediction if the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were not equal persons within the Godhead.
*****5. The Great Commission. In Matthew 28:18-20 the Lord Jesus commissions the disciples to go out and preach the gospel and to make disciples of all nations. He commands them also to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Taken with the other passages bearing on the subject, this becomes an extremely powerful argument for the Christian doctrine of the trinity.
*****6. Creation. Although the Bible does not explain to us how the three persons are the one God, it tells us most emphatically that the Spirit of God created the world (Gen. 1:2), the Father created the world (Heb. 1:2), and the Son created the world (Col. 1:16). If you check the creation references in the New Testament, you will see that these particular references are bolstered by several others teaching the same things.
*****The apostle Paul declared in Acts 17:24, "the God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." This forces us to an irresistible conclusion. As creation has been attributed to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit singly and collectively, they are the one God. There cannot be three gods. The Scripture declares: "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other" (Isa. 45:22). Hence there is unity in trinity and trinity in unity.
*****7. The Resurrection of Christ. A final instance of Trinitarian emphasis is that of the resurrection of our Lord. In John 2 Christ declared to the Jews, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days" (v. 19). John hastens to tell us that Jesus was speaking of the resurrection of His earthly body (v. 21). Other Scriptures, however, state that Christ was raised by the agency of the Holy Spirit (e.g., Rom. 8:11). And Peter explicitly states that the Father raised the Son (Acts 3:26). So, again, God's Word affirms the triune nature of God. We may not fully understand the great truth of the Trinity. However, we can see the rays of light which emanate from God's Word and which teach us that, in a mysterious sense beyond the comprehension of man's finite mind, God is one in nature but three in person.

Without nitpicking each of these, I'll just say that every Godhead belief can account for all the above. And most of it is more conducive to a Tripartite view of Spirit-Soul-Body of One Divinity. You've only managed to conceptualize and infer based on pre-determined perception. None of it explains away the absence of three "persons" and the presence of God's Soul/The Father being well pleased in the Son. It's pure eisegesis.

The last one (#7) especially attributes all three as the same singular source; not each of three "persons". This is only conclusive as Trinity to indoctrinated Trinitarians; who never look for what scripture says, just what they've pre-determined it to say whole ignoring the rest.

Also, in comparison with Genesis 1 and John 1:1, we see a very conspicuous difference. At creation, God spoke things into existance; there's your logos and your rhema idea. In John 1:1 God did not speak, an absence of rhema; there was only the logos. If the logos was not spoken into being, yet the logos was in existence, it must mean that the logos existed without rhema, which would make the logos eternal, not a creation.

It isn't "my rhema idea." It was an exegesis of the definitions. There can be no logos without rhema; that would be laleo. The last paragraph is the most absurd and ignorant thing I've heard in quite some time. Even the Ante-Nicene Fathers had a better understanding while leading up to Trinity formulation.

And I've never represented the logos as anything other than uncreated and eternally pre-existent.

I do appreciate that you gave time and energy to post this. I just would like to see a Trini do a thorough valid exegesis or admit it can't be done.