F00028:

sigh...there you go again assuming too much. not everything is about you.

and about john 3, am not studying anything. if you haven't understood it find some else to teach it to you.

I think I am done with your acrobatics. you just dont have the answers and are not man enough to admit it.

frosbel:

Sorry , but how can a teaching be founded on a subject that is not mentioned , not even once.

In relation to the most important goal of the gospels which is our salvation, the Trinity is not mentioned, in Hebrews 6 where it talks about not laying again the foundation of the basics of our faith, it is not mentioned, ever.

frosbel: Why is the bible silent on this subject thereby requiring a multitude of teachers to search the scriptures earnestly for proof that it exists ?

frosbel: Surely if this was such an important topic which required a tremendous amount of teaching , at least somewhere this Concept would have been mentioned , no ?

If not in English at least in Greek !!

frosbel: You cannot presuppose a concept that is not specifically depicted in scripture.

frosbel: God is not in the business of confusion.

Matthew 5:37 Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No ...
But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more ... But let your word be Yea, yea; Nay, nay; but what is more than these is from evil.

frosbel: It might be valid in the scientific world where fact can be sometimes relative, however in the bible world , with God especially, there are no assumptions, it is a resounding yes or an opposite no.

frosbel: You said " they taught the Trinity even without devoting specific attention to it " , you are now treading on the ground of philosophical impossibilities.

You cannot teach on a subject without devoting much attention to it.

frosbel: One would have thought that a very important subject like the Trinity will be explicitly stated in scripture.

Ihedinobi:

Let me explain our situation a little to you. You have asked me two questions demanding yes-or-no answers neither of which options was adequate. So, I explained that while there is no crystallized, that is, standalone, focused teaching on the Trinity attributable to either Old Testament prophets or to Jesus Himself, all their teachings were founded upon it. I explained further that this is because teachings/arguments/discourses are always premised.

Assumptions must be made by the teacher. They form the premises for his delivery. The teachings of any given authority are only as valid and authoritative as their premises.

Ihedinobi:
...Then I claim that these people you asked about premised their teachings upon the Trinity. In saying so, I have answered all three questions you have now asked. I have declared that they taught the Trinity even without devoting specific attention to it. I have also declared that I got my knowledge of the Trinity from their own teachings

Mr_Anony:
Lol, just as I thought. You were never really seeking answers now were you?

....It is funny how you ask to know something yet when pointed towards the answer, you turn around and reject it without even considering it. Then you turn around and claim that I don't know what I am talking about and accuse me of "acrobatics" (all because you no wan read bible). Lol, you are a funny character.

frosbel:

Why is the bible silent on this subject thereby requiring a multitude of teachers to search the scriptures earnestly for proof that it exists ?

Surely if this was such an important topic...

F00028:

bros, i don read am tire.

..and i was looking for answers. but you have to realise this isn't class, you aren't my teacher. therefore you can't direct me to go read up a whole chapter just because you don't know the answer to my question. ( is "escapism" even a word )

rather you should say: "gee, f00028 i don't know but the answer may be in John 3. let's read it together" (or words to that effect)
or just pass the buck to Ihedinobi

F00028:

here's something Jesus was not silent about: "the Lord our GOD is ONE Lord" mr.12:29

Mr_Anony:
lol, you are such a funny chap.

First you asked me whether Jesus Christ had the same view about God's justice and mercy, I basically said "yes, see John 3". Then you immediately start whinging that I don't know what I am talking about and I am not your teacher bla bla bla,
Funny thing is if I had not given you a bible chapter to look at, you'll equally start whinging that I am just making things up and it doesn't have bible backing bla bla bla.

So my friend, It is because I am not your teacher that I didn't read the verse to you myself. Please read it and tell me if it contradicts what I have been saying or if it agrees with it and then we can discuss. Your whinging is really not necessary.

You cannot rightfully claim that I don't know something unless you know what it is I am supposed to know.

Mr_Anony:

What part of Trinity says that God is not One?

Mr_Anony:

Could you please tell us what you know Trinity to be.

F00028:


hey, whatever makes you happy. you can keep telling yourself that if you think it makes your weak verbal acrobatics seem like a superior argument.

i'll stop now before this exchange turns into a pointless put-down match. we'll meet again hopefully on a topic you can properly elucidate and back up.

F00028:

the part that says He is a committee of three

asked and answered

Mr_Anony:
lol

Mr_Anony:
lol, and what part of Trinity says that God is a committee of three?

Mr_Anony:
You really don't understand Trinity. Anyway before we continue, let me ask: Are you willing to accept the authority of the bible on the issue?

Ihedinobi:

Well, if it's the word that's the problem, have you considered that Unitarianism is not mentioned either?

Silent how, bro? As for searching the Scriptures, is that not normal to the believer?

I get the feeling that it's the absence of the term, Trinity, that is the problem. Is it?

Are you saying that unless a given doctrine is titled and presented as a specific, focused teaching in the Scriptures you will not countenance it?

Ok. What confusion do you think that the doctrine of the Trinity presents?

Where does science learn reasoning from? Science is no more than just another expression of human life. It is a body of knowledge obtained by use of our faculties and the operation of thought. Whether it is physics or Christ, it is knowledge/science. The difference in pursuing the knowledge of Christ is that we have new faith-enabled senses and faculties to perceive things about Him that we were unable to without faith.

Therefore reasoning methods remain while reasoning limits recede. The Christian must still assume, but now, he assumes true absolutes which his faith-enabled faculties and senses can discern

I have explained this a lot already. I don't know what entropy is. But I know what it does. I will never be taught by anyone that entropy is such and such and came about by such and such operations and is affected by such and such in such and such manners. Why? Because it is a scientific absolute. I am taught that such and such things happen normally, but that if this and that were done to alter the normal situation, such and such will result. When I ask why, I learn that there's a law of nature called entropy that makes it happen.

The same with the Trinity. It is simply the founding law of everything. It is the absolute of absolutes. You don't teach it as a subject. In what terms would you describe it? You describe other things in terms of it. The only way to show that the Trinity is untrue is if you can explain anything at all sufficiently without it.

F00028:

this part:
Ihedinobi:
"That's what the Trinity explains:
THREE People, one God, EACH OF THEM fully
God and ALL OF THEM together God."

yes please.

Mr_Anony:


For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 1John 5:7

What do you think of it?

Trinity, in Christian doctrine, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead.

Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew Scriptures: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4).

The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presumed presence and power of God among them—i.e., the Holy Spirit, whose coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were associated in such New Testament passages as the Great Commission: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19); and in the apostolic benediction: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14). Thus, the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity.

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. Initially, both the requirements of monotheism inherited from the Hebrew Scriptures and the implications of the need to interpret the biblical teaching to Greco-Roman religions seemed to demand that the divine in Christ as the Word, or Logos, be interpreted as subordinate to the Supreme Being. An alternative solution was to interpret Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three modes of the self-disclosure of the one God but not as distinct within the being of God itself. The first tendency recognized the distinctness among the three, but at the cost of their equality and hence of their unity (subordinationism); the second came to terms with their unity, but at the cost of their distinctness as “persons” (modalism). It was not until the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.

The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same substance [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since. It is accepted in all of the historic confessions of Christianity, even though the impact of the Enlightenment decreased its importance.


Encyclopaedia Britannica

frosbel: We still have people here trying to hold on to to this unexplainable doctrine, God help us

Poor fishermen like Peter will never talk volumes of theology to describe a simple aspect of the gospel.

Just shows how far removed the church is from the true Gospel, now resting on the reasoning and whims of MEN.

Mr_Anony:
You are missing the point frosbel, Ihedinobi and I hold that the Trinity is not of a necessity preached in explicit terms in the bible rather the Trinity is an assumed as foundational knowledge i.e. taken for granted.

Peter and other fishermen disciples may not have spoken "volumes of theology" but one thing they did was to worship Jesus Christ while He was alive on earth. Notice I said they worshipped Him.

If they didn't at least think that Jesus was equal with God, they would not have worshipped Him. What is equally interesting is that Jesus accepted worship while He was a man. This is something no man or angel would dare to do and still be in God's favour.

To deny the deity of Jesus pushes you straight into polytheism as you have to now hold that there are at least two beings that are worthy of worship. Mind you, the bible is very clear that God is the only one who deserves our worship.

frosbel:

Again we cannot base our teachings on assumptions.

Indeed , but this was because Yahweh gave Jesus the unlimited power of a god as his representative on earth , especially as his SON , the only Son which he beget which came out from him and was part of Him.

I have never, will never question the present deity of Christ , but I will also not say he is Yahweh, the one and only true Almighty GOD.

Let us examine this small piece of scripture below :

"And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him." - Hebrews 1:6

God gave him the power and authority.

And deservedly so, this was in his position as the representative of God , God's own Son and God's presence among Men.

No one had, he is divine but he is is not Yahweh, Yahweh is ONE.

This is the bone of contention.

Mr_Anony:
It is funny how any time i ask what you think, you quote Ihedinobi as if Ihedinobi echoes your thoughts....but then again nothing Ihedinobi said there paints God as a commitee.
A good place to start when contemplating Trinity is by looking at man as a trinity of body, soul and spirit - both the same and yet distinct entities (this is not a perfect analogy but just used to give you an idea)



Not that I normally do this but let me run a verse by you.
Consider this:

For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 1John 5:7

What do you think of it?

Mr_Anony:
You are missing the point frosbel, Ihedinobi and I hold that the Trinity is not of a necessity preached in explicit terms in the bible rather the Trinity is an assumed as foundational knowledge i.e. taken for granted.

Peter and other fishermen disciples may not have spoken "volumes of theology" but one thing they did was to worship Jesus Christ while He was alive on earth. Notice I said they worshipped Him.

If they didn't at least think that Jesus was equal with God, they would not have worshipped Him. What is equally interesting is that Jesus accepted worship while He was a man. This is something no man or angel would dare to do and still be in God's favour.

To deny the deity of Jesus pushes you straight into polytheism as you have to now hold that there are at least two separate and different beings that are worthy of worship. Mind you, the bible is very clear that God is the only one who deserves our worship.

Mr_Anony:
There is a difference between an assumption and a given.
An example of something that is a given is God's omnipresence




If that is the problem that you have, then we don't really have anything to argue about. I also hold that The Father is One, the Son is One, the Holy Spirit is One. The three are One with God and are God. Not parts of God or types of God but that God's very nature is Trinity. . . .in a sense like man's nature being a trinity of body soul and spirit.

You talked about God giving Christ unlimited power, I hope you do realize that this makes Christ omnipotent. What does that leave the Father if the Son has all the power? It is impossible for two beings to hold ultimate power equally without being one in essence.

If the Son has always existed with the Father from the beginning, does that not make the Son also timeless and eternal?
If the Son and Holy Spirit are also uncreated, but have existed eternally, does that mean that there are three gods?

I am sure if we really think about it, we could go on to list many attributes that will be exactly the same between the Father and the Son.

The problem I think you are having here is the problem of anthropomorphism. Where you are attributing some sort of Human form to God (it is not bad as it helps us understand God but it is inadequate when contemplating Him.)

You know God is an infinite being this means He cannot have a finite form or shape but when you think of Him as 1+1+1, you have unconsciously made Him a finite being therefore, you immediately miss what the Trinity is about.

Mr_Anony:
There is a difference between an assumption and a given.
An example of something that is a given is God's omnipresence




If that is the problem that you have, then we don't really have anything to argue about. I also hold that The Father is One, the Son is One, the Holy Spirit is One. The three are One with God and are God. Not parts of God or types of God but that God's very nature is Trinity. . . .in a sense like man's nature being a trinity of body soul and spirit.

You talked about God giving Christ unlimited power, I hope you do realize that this makes Christ omnipotent. What does that leave the Father if the Son has all the power? It is impossible for two beings to hold ultimate power equally without being one in essence.

If the Son has always existed with the Father from the beginning, does that not make the Son also timeless and eternal?
If the Son and Holy Spirit are also uncreated, but have existed eternally, does that mean that there are three gods?

I am sure if we really think about it, we could go on to list many attributes that will be exactly the same between the Father and the Son.

The problem I think you are having here is the problem of anthropomorphism. Where you are attributing some sort of Human form to God (it is not bad as it helps us understand God but it is inadequate when contemplating Him.)

You know God is an infinite being this means He cannot have a finite form or shape but when you think of Him as 1+1+1, you have unconsciously made Him a finite being therefore, you immediately miss what the Trinity is about.

frosbel:

Unitarianism was a word coined to object to Trinitarianism.

I would not normally use these terminologies, the bible says there is ONE GOD and Jesus re-echoed this time and time again during his ministry. This is sufficient for me.

Why not , it is highly recommended.

That and the fact that the evidence does not add up.

Indeed I am and why not ?

All the important doctrines are mentioned such as salvation, justification, grace, love, redemption, sanctification, resurrection and judgement, why is the Trinity absent ?

The doctrine of the Trinity represents 3 individuals , each which his own mind, will and intellect , capable of acting independently of each other and yet co-equal in substance and purpose, hence the mysterious figure of ONE.

Does not make sense from whichever angle you look at it.

I have visited a tremendous amount of Jewish sites , both Judaic and Messianic , and they find this concept of 3 gods in on GOD blasphemous to say the least.

Science is based on theories , hypothesis and proof, our belief in God on the other hand is based on Faith in God stated facts.

Besides , the purpose of reading the bible is to know more about God's will for our lives and becoming more like him in will and purpose on a day to day basis.

My boss once told me that assumptions were the 'mother of all mistakes', I agree with him.

In the kingdom of God, there are certain facts which are fundamental to our belief system and one of such is the nature of God.

Millions of Jews and Muslims have been kept out of the body of Christ because Men hold on to this mysterious mystery rather than simply telling them to repent , be baptised and be saved.

Mr_Anony:
....but then again nothing Ihedinobi said there paints God as a commitee.

Mr_Anony:
A good place to start when contemplating Trinity is by looking at man as a trinity of body, soul and spirit - both the same and yet distinct entities (this is not a perfect analogy but just used to give you an idea)

Mr_Anony:

Not that I normally do this but let me run a verse by you.
Consider this:

For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 1John 5:7

What do you think of it?

Sorry to say, but this is just human reasoning again.

We know God by faith , faith alone based on reasonable facts.

If it is an absolute, how come Paul , Peter, James , Jude, Phillip etc never once preached it , if they did , please show me where.

F00028:

what part of THREE did you not understand?
among other things they are distinct entities.

you are right, bad example. those entities individually cannot be called 'man'.

I have come across it before. first, remember you stated that when it comes to christian belief, Jesus is law. these are not the words of Jesus.

ordinarily that shouldn't be a problem except they contradict his clear teachings on the subject. clear unambiguous statements like there is only One True God, who has no equals for He is Greater than all, etc

and no how I'm gon' take the words of any man OVER those of Jesus the Christ...you shouldn't either.

Ihedinobi:

So?

F00028:
so if they are three distinct entities they cant be one at the same time. such a fantastic qualification the One that is God has no clear basis in any of the pronouncments of Jesus who you say is the final word.

but the one way your precious trinity would work is you abolish the biblical God as an entity and reestablish Him as a function. I bet you the trinity would work then.