Is Trinity the Word of God?

[BlackSheep21]

If you believe the Trinity is the Word of God, please provide scriptural proof that supports this predominant theology. This doctrine still confuses many believers today, and God is not the author of confusion. Any rebuttals must be backed up by scriptures. The Word of God itself dictates who is right and wrong.

[TRANSPONDER]

Assuming fsoA that the Bible is conveying the opinions and teachings of God (I don't even think it is true, let alone word of God), I shall leave it to the Believers to argue whether the doctrine of the Trinity is actually justified and validated by anything in the Bible.

Hint. The text has to show the Trinity is the correct Dogma - you don't start with the Dogma and find a Biblequote that sorta fits it .

[Wootah]

If you believe the Trinity is the Word of God, please provide scriptural proof that supports this predominant theology. This doctrine still confuses many believers today, and God is not the author of confusion. Any rebuttals must be backed up by scriptures. The Word of God itself dictates who is right and wrong.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/arti ... genesis-1/

I'm going to put this real simple. Imagine you knew nothing about the Bible or God and just started reading from Genesis 1. So no preconceived notions on either side.

1 In the beginning, God created the universe. 2 When the earth was as yet unformed and desolate, with the surface of the ocean depths shrouded in darkness, and while the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters, 3 God said, “Let there be light!” So there was light.

So we have two beings God and the Spirit of God. Now we think OK that spirit is just God or part of God. But that isn't my point.

My point is that if the Bible is non trinitarian how and why did it create confusion in the first sentence?

[Tcg]

Any rebuttals must be backed up by scriptures. The Word of God itself dictates who is right and wrong.

Moderator Clarification

In this sub-forum, the Bible is not considered authoritative. Note the following from our C&A Guidelines:

"2. Avoid using the Bible as the sole source to prove that Christianity is true.

4. Unsupported Bible quotations are to be considered as no more authoritative than unsupported quotations from any other book.

7. For debates purely on theology with the assumption that the Bible is an authoritative source, please consider posting in the Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma subforum.

If you choose to debate in this sub-forum you are REQUIRED to honor the Guidelines. Notice specifically that the Bible can be used ONLY to show what the bible says and what Christianity says. It cannot be used to prove that a statement or story is true."

The Word of God itself does NOT dictate who is right and wrong in this sub-forum.

Rules
C&A Guidelines


______________

Moderator clarifications do not count as a strike against any posters. They serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received and/or are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels a clarification of the rules is required.

[TRANSPONDER]

If you believe the Trinity is the Word of God, please provide scriptural proof that supports this predominant theology. This doctrine still confuses many believers today, and God is not the author of confusion. Any rebuttals must be backed up by scriptures. The Word of God itself dictates who is right and wrong.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/arti ... genesis-1/

I'm going to put this real simple. Imagine you knew nothing about the Bible or God and just started reading from Genesis 1. So no preconceived notions on either side.

1 In the beginning, God created the universe. 2 When the earth was as yet unformed and desolate, with the surface of the ocean depths shrouded in darkness, and while the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters, 3 God said, “Let there be light!” So there was light.

So we have two beings God and the Spirit of God. Now we think OK that spirit is just God or part of God. But that isn't my point.

My point is that if the Bible is non trinitarian how and why did it create confusion in the first sentence?

I don't think that works. In Christianity (and some other religions) the human has a spirit. In a way, that is a separate entity, as it supposedly lives on after death and can even leave the body. But is it real regarded as two beings? I have never heard it, so I don't see see that the spirit of God (which is apparently spirit anyway) is separate from God. If anything God and the spirit are more the same entity than your average human with a soul.

Try again.

[TRANSPONDER]

Any rebuttals must be backed up by scriptures. The Word of God itself dictates who is right and wrong.

Moderator Clarification

In this sub-forum, the Bible is not considered authoritative. Note the following from our C&A Guidelines:

"2. Avoid using the Bible as the sole source to prove that Christianity is true.

4. Unsupported Bible quotations are to be considered as no more authoritative than unsupported quotations from any other book.

7. For debates purely on theology with the assumption that the Bible is an authoritative source, please consider posting in the Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma subforum.

If you choose to debate in this sub-forum you are REQUIRED to honor the Guidelines. Notice specifically that the Bible can be used ONLY to show what the bible says and what Christianity says. It cannot be used to prove that a statement or story is true."

The Word of God itself does NOT dictate who is right and wrong in this sub-forum.

Rules
C&A Guidelines


______________

Moderator clarifications do not count as a strike against any posters. They serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received and/or are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels a clarification of the rules is required.

Last thing I want is to 'comment' on moderators or take issue with the Rules, but it seems to be inevitable that discussion of Christianity, what the Bible says is the basic and only evidence. Correct and needful that the Bible is not evidence for the Bible but it is evidence. It is a claim, and the claim is not evidence for the claim, but the internal logic of the claim (what it means and how that works) is a valid subject for discussion. Is the spirit of God a different entity of God? When the spirit descended on Jesus, was God going somewhere it wasn't? Not in current thought (though in Iron age Judea I suspect God was as solid as his throne) God is everywhere and the blob of light descending on Jesus was to let him know that the spirit was now there to tell him what God thought he needed to know. Or so Jesus claimed

[Data]

Last thing I want is to 'comment' on moderators or take issue with the Rules, but it seems to be inevitable that discussion of Christianity, what the Bible says is the basic and only evidence. Correct and needful that the Bible is not evidence for the Bible :D but it is evidence. It is a claim, and the claim is not evidence for the claim, but the internal logic of the claim (what it means and how that works) is a valid subject for discussion. Is the spirit of God a different entity of God? When the spirit descended on Jesus, was God going somewhere it wasn't? Not in current thought (though in Iron age Judea I suspect God was as solid as his throne) God is everywhere and the blob of light descending on Jesus was to let him know that the spirit was now there to tell him what God thought he needed to know. Or so Jesus claimed 8-)

I recently had a thread moved to "rambling" because I foolishly posted a good OP that didn't comport with the essence of this forum. This is like that. It's sort of a different forum and that's easy to forget. A very delicate variation. Put simply, if you want to debate theology, go to that forum. This one is for atheists and theists to explore their differences which aren't theological as such.

Your question, which you didn't formally express according to the rules as I remember, can be answered without scriptural support by simply examining the history of the apostate church, which adopted the Platonic trinity from Greek philosophy, of course, Plato, who got it from Babylon. So, there is this history of trinitarian concepts predating certainly Christ, and likely even Moses.

That's my two cents.

[TRANSPONDER]

Last thing I want is to 'comment' on moderators or take issue with the Rules, but it seems to be inevitable that discussion of Christianity, what the Bible says is the basic and only evidence. Correct and needful that the Bible is not evidence for the Bible but it is evidence. It is a claim, and the claim is not evidence for the claim, but the internal logic of the claim (what it means and how that works) is a valid subject for discussion. Is the spirit of God a different entity of God? When the spirit descended on Jesus, was God going somewhere it wasn't? Not in current thought (though in Iron age Judea I suspect God was as solid as his throne) God is everywhere and the blob of light descending on Jesus was to let him know that the spirit was now there to tell him what God thought he needed to know. Or so Jesus claimed

I recently had a thread moved to "rambling" because I foolishly posted a good OP that didn't comport with the essence of this forum. This is like that. It's sort of a different forum and that's easy to forget. A very delicate variation. Put simply, if you want to debate theology, go to that forum. This one is for atheists and theists to explore their differences which aren't theological as such.

Your question, which you didn't formally express according to the rules as I remember, can be answered without scriptural support by simply examining the history of the apostate church, which adopted the Platonic trinity from Greek philosophy, of course, Plato, who got it from Babylon. So, there is this history of trinitarian concepts predating certainly Christ, and likely even Moses.

That's my two cents.

I truly don't care, neither about your attempt to play moderator (which you aren't) to instruct me how to post, damn' your insolence or about the foggy pseudo - philosophical ramblings of a bunch of ancient fanatics fiddling the material to suit their beliefs, half of which were dismissed as heretical anyway.

No. What the Bible says, not what a bunch of beard - mumbling church loudmouths thought it said, is what matters in deciding whether Biblegod is a triple entity, and all that matters.

Have a lovely weekend

[Data]

I truly don't care, neither about your attempt to play moderator (which you aren't) to instruct me how to post, damn' your insolence :D or about the foggy pseudo - philosophical ramblings of a bunch of fanatics fiddling the material to suit there beliefs, half of which were dismissed as heretical anyway.

No. What the Bible says, not what a bunch of beard - mumbling church loudmouths thought it said, is what matters in deciding whether Biblegod is a triple entity, and all that matters.

Have a lovely weekend O:)

I understand that from an ideological perspective you have to object to pretty much everything I say here, but couldn't you at least put some thought into it to challenge rather than amuse me?

Just a thought.

[TRANSPONDER]

I truly don't care, neither about your attempt to play moderator (which you aren't) to instruct me how to post, damn' your insolence or about the foggy pseudo - philosophical ramblings of a bunch of fanatics fiddling the material to suit there beliefs, half of which were dismissed as heretical anyway.

No. What the Bible says, not what a bunch of beard - mumbling church loudmouths thought it said, is what matters in deciding whether Biblegod is a triple entity, and all that matters.

Have a lovely weekend

I understand that from an ideological perspective you have to object to pretty much everything I say here, but couldn't you at least put some thought into it to challenge rather than amuse me?

Just a thought.

One reason I can do it without going smack out of my mind is to pick what really matters, and not get dragged off into irrelevant byways. Just consider if I put your remarks in the context of post Daaniken God was an astronaut arguments. I doubt that any more than me, would you want to get dragged into lime and braincell - wasting discussions about whether flying saucers were powered by spore -drive or by the same Powert that helped carve the pyramids. We have to choose our battles, and the only ones that matter is what the Bible actually says, which, with the translation shoppers and the Interpreters is tough enough without the opinions of the dumbells of later Roman theology being quoted.

Look, pal, if the Bible is not true, then every faithbased speculation of Orgen, Tertullian and Anselm are worthless. Worthless, do you get it?

Skipping over the crudely kneejerk bias accusation, as always, if you think they have something relevant to say, post it for discussion. But as always, you do not get to play misdirections like demanding we go and read this book or watch that video before we are qualified to post.