The Trinity from Communications Science

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

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by darinhouston » Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:39 pm

dwight92070 wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:27 am
You are the one who brought it up with your article, not me. I'll admit that I know very little about "biblical unitarianism", but I'm learning, starting with the article that you sent, and now other articles online. It appears that there exists unitarian thought apart from the Unitarian church - maybe that's where you're coming from - I don't know. But it also appears that unitarian thought evolved relatively quickly into a denomination - the Unitarian Church. The original thinking still appears to be around 1560. So I don't know why you would be so defensive about the fact that the 2 are very closely associated.

God bless you,

Dwight
I don't know what you mean about being defensive - your assertion just doesn't make sense, and I note they aren't closely associated at all to my understanding -- again, I only brought up the article as it answered one of your questions and for the analysis that it provides to the extent that is useful as it "answers" at least from one perspective your assertion that the text was clear and plainly trinitarian. I didn't provide it as any sort of secondary authority.

But, it's also not surprising that both ideas are "around" in 1560 - most of history has had some flavor of non-trinitarian movement, and the "unitarian" movements were most notable around the 4th century and the 16th century (and again at the turn of the 20th century). Unitarian ideas haven't been orthodox since the 4th century I guess (I might argue they were the original thinking that was quickly infected by hellenized/gnostic Christianity, but that begs the question).

It seems that today's "Unitarian Universalist" church may have stemmed from some "Unitarian" denominations in the 16th century and that they had a number of "rational" bases for their positions, including a denial of the trinity. It's possible that evolved to be today's Unitarian Universalist church of today, which has no bearing on God or the godhead or anything remotely monotheistic -- they are quite the rationalists, but are not scripturally based at all and hardly can even be considered Christian (they are an "all-faith" spiritual gathering). Today, many non-trinitarians use the term "biblical unitarian" not to associate at all with that movement, but to distinguish themselves from it.

With the 16th century in mind, you might be interested to read about the life of Michael Servetus - a notable thinker/writer who was persecuted/martyred (largely at the hand of John Calvin) for these ideas (and in response to his honest yet critical inquiries about Calvin's own writings) in the 1500s. Most of his writings were lost to book burnings and the like, but some remained (notably along with his medical discovery of the circulatory system) - a brilliant man who's writings were as devout as any you might have read from anyone. You might find that history interesting. The following book is a very interesting historical read and does a great job of telling that story -- https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/out-of ... 1112274482 and it introduces some of the historic circumstances surrounding suppression of non-trinitarian ideas.

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

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by darinhouston » Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:58 pm

A little more history on early trinitarianism - most believe the so-called "Church Fathers" were unquestionably trinitarian. They certainly discussed the origins and relationships of Jesus to the Father, but though some of the quotes out of context sounds a little trintiarianish, I think they would almost all have denied the Nicene Creed (and some of them quite explicitly rejected the same notions).

Many of them believed forms of begotten pre-incarnational existence for the Son of God as the "Logos" theories emerged (as did Arius and other non-trinitarians at Nicea), but most did not hold to a co-equal and co-eternal Son in any real sense consistent with Almighty God and most (as Scripture seems to be) were various flavors of subordinationists (recognizing not the equality but the subordination of the Son to the Father) or even that Jesus was created as a lesser being, not even a subordinate part of the godhead.

Here's a brief discussion of some of those quotes in the context of basic Trinitarian beliefs -- again, not by way of any authority, but for your information...

https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/artic ... fore-nicea

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

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by dwight92070 » Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:58 pm

Paidion wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 5:54 pm
Clearly Paul was not a Trinitarian. He wrote:

For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5 ESV)
Does Paul not distinguish between the ONE GOD and the ONE MEDIATOR—the man Jesus (who is also the divine Son of the only true God.)

YES, PAUL DOES DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE FATHER AND THE SON, JUST LIKE ALL TRINITARIANS DO. YOU ARE CORRECT THAT THE FATHER IS CALLED THE ONE GOD AND JESUS IS CALLED THE ONE MEDIATOR. IF THIS WAS THE ONLY VERSE WE HAD CONCERNING THE TWO OF THEM, THEN I MIGHT HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOU. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE SO MUCH MORE INFORMATION IN THE BIBLE THAT GIVES US A CLEARER PICTURE.

FOR EXAMPLE, 1 JOHN 5:20-21 AND WE KNOW THAT THE SON OF GOD HAS COME, AND HAS GIVEN US UNDERSTANDING SO THAT WE MAY KNOW HIM WHO IS TRUE; AND WE ARE IN HIM WHO IS TRUE, IN HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. THIS IS THE TRUE GOD AND ETERNAL LIFE. LITTLE CHILDREN, GUARD YOURSELVES FROM IDOLS.
NOTICE THAT BEING IN THE FATHER AND IN THE SON IS CALLED BEING IN THE TRUE GOD AND ETERNAL LIFE. THE TRUE GOD HERE IS CALLED THE FATHER AND THE SON, NOT JUST ONE OR THE OTHER.

IN FACT, IF WE DON'T ACKNOWLEDGE BOTH AS BEING GOD, THE NEXT VERSE WARNS US OF IDOLATRY. IF JESUS IS NOT GOD, THEN TRINITARIANS ARE GUILTY OF IDOLATRY, BECAUSE WE GIVE HIM EQUAL WORSHIP AND PRAISE AS WE GIVE TO THE FATHER (JUST AS WE SEE IN REVELATIONS 5)

THOSE OF YOU WHO SAY THAT JESUS IS NOT GOD, YET STILL WORSHIP HIM --HOW IS THAT NOT IDOLATRY? YOU ARE WORSHIPPING SOMEONE OTHER THAN GOD. THE OLD TESTAMENT IS CLEAR (AND THE NEW), THAT ONLY GOD DESERVES WORSHIP.
And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

The apostle John also distinguishes Jesus from the only true God:
And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. (John 17:3)
Since Paul and John call the Father "the one God" and "the only true God" and then refers to Jesus as some on else, it follows that Jesus is NOT God.

AGAIN, FROM 1 JOHN 5;20, WE SEE THAT THE TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER AND THE SON.

Why not just accept the true claim of the New Testament writers?—that He is not God, but is the divine SON of God?

THERE IS NO WRITER OF SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS THAT JESUS IS NOT GOD. IN FACT, MOST SEEM TO SAY JUST THE OPPOSITE.

FOR EXAMPLE, PAUL SEEMS TO BE SAYING THAT "THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST AND GOD." ARE THE SAME IN EPHESIANS 5:5. IF THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD, THEN ISN'T IT CLEAR THAT CHRIST IS GOD?

IN MATTHEW 21:14-16, IN THE TRIUMPHAL ENTRY OF JESUS INTO JERUSALEM, WE SEE CHILDREN PRAISING HIM - "HOSANNA TO THE SON OF DAVID!"
THE CHIEF PRIESTS AND THE SCRIBES DIDN'T LIKE THAT AND WANTED JESUS TO STOP THEM. WHAT DID HE SAY? "YES, HAVE YOU NEVER READ 'OUT OF THE MOUTH OF INFANTS AND NURSING BABIES YOU HAVE PREPARED PRAISE FOR YOURSELF"?

SO JESUS SAID THAT GOD HAD PREPARED PRAISE FOR HIMSELF, YET WHO WERE THE CHILDREN PRAISING? THE SON OF DAVID - JESUS. JESUS IS GOD.

IN JOHN 8:58 JESUS SAID, "TRULY, TRULY, I SAY TO YOU, BEFORE ABRAHAM WAS BORN, I AM." JESUS IS CLEARLY SAYING THAT HE IS "I AM" - GOD.

IN JOHN 18:5-6 WHEN THE SOLDIERS SAID THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR JESUS THE NAZARENE, HE SAID "I AM", WHICH MADE THEM DRAW BACK AND FALL TO THE GROUND. WHY? THE ONLY EXPLANATION IS THE POWER OF JESUS IDENTIFYING WITH THE GOD OF MOSES, ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB, THE CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH.

I HAVE GIVEN YOU MANY SCRIPTURES THAT SHOW THAT JESUS IS GOD, NOT ONLY ON THIS POST BUT PREVIOUS ONES. AGAIN, IT APPEARS THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE THE OBVIOUS, NOT THAT YOU CAN'T SEE IT.

GOD BLESS YOU,

DWIGHT


[/quote]

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

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by Paidion » Tue Feb 16, 2021 4:58 pm

What do you say about John the apostle's words that distinguish between "the only true God" (the Father) and His only-begotten Son Jesus?
—and the importance of knowing both of them?
And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, AND Jesus Christ whom you have sent. (John 17:3)
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 Trinity from Communications Science

Post by dwight92070 » Tue Feb 16, 2021 5:18 pm

Paidion wrote:
Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:09 pm


Here are two statements by Paul that clearly distinguish the ONE GOD from His Son:

1Co 8:6 ... yet for us there is ONE GOD, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, AND ONE LORD, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

1Ti 2:5 For there is ONE GOD, AND there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
Dwight: Like you, I believe there is one God. Unlike you, I believe that Jesus is part of the "Godhead". If you believe that these verses show that Jesus is not God, then, by that same reasoning, you would also have to believe that the Holy Spirit is not God, because of Ephesians 4:4-6: "There is one body and one Spirit, ... one Lord, ... one God and Father of all ..." But, for some reason, you stated earlier that you believe that the Spirit IS God. You're not being consistent. Just because Paul lists the 3 persons of the Trinity separately, does not mean that they are not one and the same. Just because He refers to the Father as one God, does not mean that the mediator and the Holy Spirit are not also God, not additional "Gods", but One and the same God.

The writer of Hebrews tells us plainly that the sons of Korah were prophesying about the Son of God in Psalm 45:6-7 when they said, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever ... Therefore God, your God has anointed you with the oil of joy about your fellows." Once again, we have writers of scripture plainly calling Jesus God. What more do you need?

God bless you,

Dwight

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

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by Paidion » Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:17 pm

Nope. The writers clearly indicate that there is ONE God—the Father. Nowhere do they state that God is a compound Being consisting of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Jesus is the divine Son of God, begotten as the first act of God.
When you beget a son, your son is human like you, but he is not you.
God begat His Son Jesus. God's Son is divine like God, but is not God.

The spirit of God is just that: God's spirit or mind. Just as you have a spirit or mind, the part of you that thinks and reasons and chooses, so it is with God. God's spirit in not a separate person from Him, any more that your spirit is a separate person from you.
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 Trinity from Communications Science

Post by dwight92070 » Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:40 pm

Paidion wrote:
Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:17 pm
Nope. The writers clearly indicate that there is ONE God—the Father. Nowhere do they state that God is a compound Being consisting of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Dwight: It is equally true that nowhere do they state that Jesus is not God.

Jesus is the divine Son of God, begotten as the first act of God.

Dwight: Begotten as the first act of God? This also is not stated in scripture. It is your interpretation of scripture.

When you beget a son, your son is human like you, but he is not you.
Dwight: Obviously true of us humans.

God begat His Son Jesus. God's Son is divine like God, but is not God.
Dwight: Not obviously true when speaking of God. That again is your interpretation, but it is not stated anywhere in scripture that the Son is not God. Many Scriptures appear to say just the opposite.

The spirit of God is just that: God's spirit or mind. Just as you have a spirit or mind, the part of you that thinks and reasons and chooses, so it is with God. God's spirit in not a separate person from Him, any more that your spirit is a separate person from you.
Dwight: Again, you're assuming that what's true for man is also true for God. Even though many scriptures seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit is a separate person from the Father and the Son.

Dwight: I think it is safe to say that we can agree to disagree.

God bless you,

Dwight

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by Homer » Thu Feb 18, 2021 12:09 pm

Hi Darin,

You posted:

Homer wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 1:05 am
So why did Jesus not rebuke them?

Matthew 14
28 Peter responded and said to Him, “Lord, if it is You, command me to come to You on the water.” 29 And He said, “Come!” And Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water, and came toward Jesus. 30 But seeing the wind, he became frightened, and when he began to sink, he cried out, saying, “Lord, save me!” 31 Immediately Jesus reached out with His hand and took hold of him, and *said to him, “You of little faith, why did you doubt?” 32 When they got into the boat, the wind stopped. 33 And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, “You are truly God’s Son!”
Well, quite obviously, because there was nothing wrong and everything right with giving him praise and honor and proclaiming him as the Son of God. There are many examples of forms of "worship" (if that's the word you prefer) of all sorts of men of renown and honor. That doesn't make them Yahweh.
They "worshipped" Him. I do not believe you can cite one instance (of some 60 in the New Testament) where the Greek proskuneo (worship) is used approvingly of any other than God the Father and God the Son. That is my point.

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

Re: The Trinity from Communications Science

Post by Paidion » Thu Feb 18, 2021 12:27 pm

Paidion:
God begat His Son Jesus. God's Son is divine like God, but is not God.

Dwight:
Not obviously true when speaking of God. That again is your interpretation, but it is not stated anywhere in scripture that the Son is not God. Many Scriptures appear to say just the opposite.

Paidion:
Many Scriptures appear to say just the opposite? I have yet to see a single scripture that states that Jesus is God.
However, the following two appear to clearly distinguish Jesus from the one God, the Father:

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, AND one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, AND there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
,

So, if Jesus is "God", then He is "God" in a different sense than the way the Father is God. Perhaps it is a way of stating that being the Son of God, He is divine—with which I fully agree. If He is "God" in a different sense than that, then what is the sense? He is not the Father.
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 Trinity from Communications Science

Post by dwight92070 » Thu Feb 18, 2021 1:34 pm

Paidion wrote:
Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:17 pm


Jesus is the divine Son of God, begotten as the first act of God.

There are only a few scriptures that could relate to this statement of yours.

First of all, the word "begotten" is found in John 1:14 and 18. "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." It does not say, "glory as of the first creation of the Father", but "glory as of the only begotten from the Father". Begotten and created are 2 different things. We beget children, we do not create them. When was He begotten? The verse tells us. "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us". He was supernaturally begotten in the womb of Mary - specifically, the Holy Spirit came upon her, and the power of the Most High overshadowed her, causing the holy Child, the Son of God, to begin growing in her.

Jesus was begotten at a certain point in history - many believe it was about 4 B.C. He is the ONLY begotten Son from the Father. The Father never begot any other children, before 4 B.C. or after 4 B.C. We, as believers, are adopted (not begotten) into His family by being born again spiritually, not physically. So the Word became mortal flesh - Jesus.

However, it appears from Acts 13:33, that Jesus was begotten in another way. Paul tells us that when God raised Jesus from the dead, that Psalm 2:7 was fulfilled: "... He said to Me, 'You are My Son, today I have begotten You." Hebrews 1:3-5 also confirms this. Here we see that the Word which became mortal flesh, now becomes immortal "flesh and bones". Luke 24:39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."

So, with the resurrection of Jesus, we are introduced to another term (or two terms), which refer to His resurrection: firstborn. or firstfruits. Of all created (mortal) people, Jesus was the FIRST (or FIRSTFRUITS) to be raised from the dead (or BORN) immortal. The word "firstborn" or "firstfruits" is used in the following verses: Romans 8:29; 1 Corinthians 15:20 and 23; Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15 and 18; Hebrews 1:6 and 12:23; and Revelation 1:5. I believe that every one of these verses refers to the fact that HIs body was the first to be raised from the dead immortal.

Probably the most contested verse is Colossians 1:15: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." The Jehovah's Witnesses and many others say: "See, Jesus was the first being that God created." They read the verse as "He is the first-created of all creation." But firstborn does not mean first-created; it means the first mortal body to be raised from the dead immortal. If you doubt that, then look at all the other verses where it is used. They all refer to Christ having the first resurrected immortal body. So we know that that is what is referred to here as well.

By the way, your statement "the first act of God" makes no sense. If God is eternal, and He is, there cannot be a "first act" of His. If you say, His first act was such and such - that can't be possible, since He did something before that. No matter what act of God you refer to, there is always something that He did before that, since He always was. So there's no way that anyone could identify God's first act, much less claim that it was to create or beget Jesus. This alone, blows your theory clear out of the water.


God bless you,

Dwight

Post Reply

Return to “The Trinity”