The Inescapable Trinity

God, Christ, & The Holy Spirit
User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by Paidion » Fri Oct 01, 2021 3:00 pm

Did you notice the two dots I placed over the second e in "preëminence"/
It's purpose is to show that "pre" and "em" are two separate syllables. Otherwise it might be presumed that "preem" is a single syllable
such as would rhyme with "deem".
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by dwight92070 » Wed Oct 06, 2021 8:18 am

Warning! I am about to repeat a point that I made before, but I think it bears repeating, as I just came across it in reading the Bible this morning. Romans 8:9-10 "However , you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed THE SPIRIT OF GOD dwells in you. But if anyone does not have THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he does not belong to Him. IF CHRIST IS IN YOU, though the body is dead ..."

Paul is contrasting HAVING the Spirit of God with NOT HAVING it, but in the latter phrase, he calls it THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST. Then in verse 10 he continues the same subject - "if Christ is in you", which in verse 9 he phrased "if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you." So clearly Paul interchanges the Spirit of God with Christ and also the Spirit of God with the Spirit of Christ. Then in verse 11, Paul says AGAIN, "But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you ...", obviously referring AGAIN to the Spirit of God.

So, to Paul, Christ and God AND THE SPIRIT are interchangeable, as we would expect if there a Trinity.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by darinhouston » Wed Oct 06, 2021 8:36 am

dwight92070 wrote:
Wed Oct 06, 2021 8:18 am
Warning! I am about to repeat a point that I made before, but I think it bears repeating, as I just came across it in reading the Bible this morning. Romans 8:9-10 "However , you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed THE SPIRIT OF GOD dwells in you. But if anyone does not have THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he does not belong to Him. IF CHRIST IS IN YOU, though the body is dead ..."

Paul is contrasting HAVING the Spirit of God with NOT HAVING it, but in the latter phrase, he calls it THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST. Then in verse 10 he continues the same subject - "if Christ is in you", which in verse 9 he phrased "if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you." So clearly Paul interchanges the Spirit of God with Christ and also the Spirit of God with the Spirit of Christ. Then in verse 11, Paul says AGAIN, "But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you ...", obviously referring AGAIN to the Spirit of God.

So, to Paul, Christ and God AND THE SPIRIT are interchangeable, as we would expect if there a Trinity.
sorry this is a bit of a ramble - not a lot of time right now -- I will also repeat my prior response but more - that does not (at least logically) make Christ God. That they have the same spirit is a very different thing than saying their "persons" are the same. One of the theories that resonates to me at some level but which I haven't quite grappled with enough to understand fully is what is called "Spirit Christology" which generally (there appear to be a lot of flavors) speaking says that Jesus was different than us in having his own will and body and mind and conscious existence as a human, but instead of having his own spirit his "Spirt" was the Holy Spirit. Sort of that he was "fully possessed" in such a way that speaking of his spirit as God's spirit is numerically identical or at least "as good as" the same. There is nothing more mysterious than the spirit and it's possible that we're theoretically the same but that our natural sinful state prevents being "fully" possessed by the spirit and that Jesus lacked our natural sinful state so could be fully indwell by God's spirit and in perfect communion with it in a way that we might be able to "approach" but never achieve. But, that is not even close to saying Jesus just "is" God in the way that Trinitarians believe (though most mainstream Trinitarian theologians do not adhere to "Jesus just is God" perspective). Basically, sharing the same spirit does not necessarily equate to "being" the "source" of that spirit. Logically, Trinitarians even explicitly state that while Jesus "is" God (in some sense) Jesus is unequivocally NOT the Spirit. So saying the Spirit of Christ = the Spirit of God cannot mean that they are the same person. They simply share the same spirit. We do too (in measure). (we are partakers - he is a full possessor)

(for the record, it is not merely bringing up prior thoughts that is objectionable, it is bringing them up in the context of discussing another text or point instead of interacting with the point being discussed that is objectionable, especially when they are blind proof-texts or string-cites without explaining how they not only justify your position on a subject but how they specifically relate to the topic at hand. Not the broader topic, but the verse or other point being made[/u]. It's like avoiding a philosophical discussion about how an interpretation can't be true by saying "the Bible says it, I believe it, so be it!")

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by dwight92070 » Wed Oct 06, 2021 10:44 pm

For the record, and I have mentioned this before, several scriptures that we have looked at, IMO, need no explanation, because what they appear to say,, is what they actually say. This I do find frustrating, with your inability to take easy-to-understand words or phrases, at face value. You always seem to have some reason why they can't mean what they actually say.
Take Romans 8:9-11. It is abundantly obvious that Paul has no trouble interchanging the terms but you came up with "just because they have the same spirit, this does not mean they are the same person". The only way I can see that you came up with that is by first, rejecting the obvious meaning, and second, searching for an alternative.
You do the same with John 1. The meaning is clear and obvious. The Word, was both with God, and was God. The Word, which is God, became flesh, which is Jesus.
Again, as I have previously said, the authors of scripture were not trying to give us a message that was difficult to understand. Just the opposite, I believe they wanted to make it as easy as possible to understand what they were saying.

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by dwight92070 » Thu Oct 07, 2021 8:36 am

Matthew Henry, 1662 A.D.-1714 A.D., clearly understood John 1:14 - "He was God, (speaking of Christ), but He was made flesh." How was it so easy for him to see the clear teaching of John, 400 years ago, and yet today in 2021, you can't see it?

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by Paidion » Thu Oct 07, 2021 9:53 pm

"He was God" may be a way of saying "He was divine."
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by darinhouston » Fri Oct 08, 2021 8:33 am

dwight92070 wrote:
Thu Oct 07, 2021 8:36 am
Matthew Henry, 1662 A.D.-1714 A.D., clearly understood John 1:14 - "He was God, (speaking of Christ), but He was made flesh." How was it so easy for him to see the clear teaching of John, 400 years ago, and yet today in 2021, you can't see it?
The same way so many others throughout the same time period have failed to see it, even from the first several centuries. And the same way so many see proof-texts about Old Earth Creationism or Calvinism or Dispensationalism or Hell or Fallen Angels (or so many other issues) so clearly and others don't.

Have you not had similar discussions with OEC advocates who say "how can you not take Genesis for what it says -- it says 1 day! It means 1 Day!"? And so on and so forth....

Once you grant that this is a reasonable inquiry and honest difference of opinion, perhaps we can have rational discussion about why particular texts MUST be read one way and not other or why one reading is more likely because of such and such and so on and so forth. Instead of trying to convince one another, we can reason together.

I think that's the key difference on this issue from your approach and mine. You seem to be in an apologetic stance, trying to preserve and convince others of your position. It may not always sound like it, but I am at least coming from a different attitude. Presenting ideas and interpretations and trying to reason them. Sometimes that requires arguing a position about a particular verse or philosophical point, but not to the end of convincing anyone that the underlying premise is correct, but to explain and test assumptions and contextual understandings of each other in regards a particular verse or argument. At least that's my heart here.

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by dwight92070 » Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:27 pm

That's not how the world operates. In the real world, words mean things. If you tried to communicate with other people, the same way you parse the scripture, I doubt that you could accomplish anything. And yet, that is exactly what the scripture is - God communicating with us through his prophets and apostles. I'll bet you don't talk with your wife or your kids that way. You use words that your wife and your kids understand. And when they speak to you, you don't analyze their every word, to see how many different meanings you can come up with, before you determine what it is they actually said. You quickly determine what they're saying, and respond accordingly. And you expect your words to them to be quickly understood, and not to be analyzed at length, before they respond to you. So why can't you do the same with the Bible?

It has been said that the Bible is God's letter to us or His instruction manual for us to know how to live our lives. But you don't seem to treat the Bible that way. You seem to treat it like a difficult textbook that you are trying to decipher, to see if you can figure out exactly what the author is saying. It appears that in your world, God doesn't necessarily mean what He says, but it's up to you to analyze His every word "every which way til Sunday", before you can determine what He MIGHT really mean by His words. But even then, you can't be conclusive, because other people think He means something else.

I could not live my Christian life like that - never really knowing what God meant when He spoke, but endlessly analyzing His words and all the different possible meanings.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by Paidion » Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:32 am

So Dwight, when Jesus said the folowing words to the scribes and Pharisees, he meant just what He said:

Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! (Mathew 23:24)

It must have been pretty fascinating to have been there and watched the Pharisees swallowing camels!
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: The Inescapable Trinity

Post by darinhouston » Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:13 pm

dwight92070 wrote:
Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:27 pm
That's not how the world operates. In the real world, words mean things.
That IS how the world operates. It is usually more subtle and natural in casual conversation because you have a 2-way exchange and often share a context and culture and can ask follow up questions and "engage" with words in different ways to infer meanings. But, even then, having teenagers you do have to sometimes parse words even in that context because of differing perspectives and fewer words than might be more helpful at times. And so forth and so on. But, with ancient texts from other languages and milieus and centuries/millenia of presuppositions and denominations and the sort, it is even harder and does require that you reason and test the words against unfamiliar cultures etc. Reading with "Modern" and "Western" eyes will almost always mislead, especially if we default to the most literal English meaning possible.

Notably, even in the 4th century those Nicene bishops did this very thing to come up with these positions that people hold as unquestionable dogma based on these very sorts of parsing and debating. The question is do we have the same warrant as they to do it for ourselves? Or do we merely follow their conclusions? (and same with subsequent councils).

Post Reply

Return to “Theology Proper, Christology, Pneumatology”