Interpretation the Trinity is polytheistic

[Trucker]

Originally posted by Trucker View Post
Note:

Essentially that is what you are saying I.



You misrepresent me, sir. I have never claimed a perfect interpretation or understanding of the Bible..

No one ever said you claimed a perfect understanding of the Bible, and no one has misrepresented you on this point.

So who were you addressing when you made this statement?:

The problem is with your claim of the only translation, interpretation and understanding of the Bible.

.

[mikewhitney]

[QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1195982][QUOTE=Christian3;n1195960]

Disagree, God did not become a man in Genesis 18. God is not a man is the same as 'God becoming a man, both are not supported by the text of the Tanakh.

I'm not sure where you think scripture says that God cannot come incarnate in the flesh. What are the limitations of what God can do or how He can appear, as found in scriptures?

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=mikewhitney;n1196111][QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1195982]

I'm not sure where you think scripture says that God cannot come incarnate in the flesh. What are the limitations of what God can do or how He can appear, as found in scriptures?

Yes, God can do as God chooses. The problem is that humans cannot simply divide God in three persons, and describe Jesus Christ as the incarnate Son of God, because they want it so, Incarnate Gods are Greek and Roman belief, and not according to the Tanakh.

[mikewhitney]

Yes, God can do as God chooses. The problem is that humans cannot simply divide God in three persons, and describe Jesus Christ as the incarnate Son of God, because they want it so, Incarnate Gods are Greek and Roman belief, and not according to the Tanakh.

You just said God can do as He chooses but now you say He can't be the Trinity. You have to make up your mind. You just saw the example of God appearing as a man to Abraham. So the evidence is mounting against your view.

What you need is an OT scripture that counters the places where one person of the Godhead refers to another person in the Godhead. You wish to deny that God can be what God is, even if it is not the way you expected it to be.

[Tassman]

[QUOTE=Christian3;n1195895][QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1195892]

God isn't a man; God is spirit.

According to the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union Jesus is simultaneously fully God and fully man - so yes God is also a man.

[shunyadragon]

You just said God can do as He chooses but now you say He can't be the Trinity. You have to make up your mind. You just saw the example of God appearing as a man to Abraham. So the evidence is mounting against your view.

What you need is an OT scripture that counters the places where one person of the Godhead refers to another person in the Godhead. You wish to deny that God can be what God is, even if it is not the way you expected it to be.

No need to make up my mind at all. Of course, God may do whatever God chooses. Could you accept that God may not be a Trinitarian God if God chooses not to be so?

My basis for rejection of the Trinity begins in the Tanakh, which rejects the concept of incarnate Gods, and believes there is only One indivisible and inseparable God the Creator of all that exists. I believe the belief in incarnate Gods is a Grek and Roman concept.

[mikewhitney]

No need to make up my mind at all. Of course, God may do whatever God chooses. Could you accept that God may not be a Trinitarian God if God chooses not to be so?

My basis for rejection of the Trinity begins in the Tanakh, which rejects the concept of incarnate Gods, and believes there is only One indivisible and inseparable God the Creator of all that exists. I believe the belief in incarnate Gods is a Grek and Roman concept.

you have not shown how the OT rejects God appearing to Abraham and how God spoke to God (where the psalm said "the Lord said to my Lord"). Thus, you are rejecting the OT/Tanakh and the Son whom God sent. You are going by your beliefs rather than scripture.

And you are then accusing Jews of twisting the OT in order to document what the Messiah said and who He is.

And if a better understanding of the Godhead was sufficiently argued (using the full Protestant Canon) , that would be worth consideration. But no one has done this afaik.

[shunyadragon]

you have not shown how the OT rejects God appearing to Abraham and how God spoke to God (where the psalm said "the Lord said to my Lord"). Thus, you are rejecting the OT/Tanakh and the Son whom God sent. You are going by your beliefs rather than scripture.

And you are then accusing Jews of twisting the OT in order to document what the Messiah said and who He is.

And if a better understanding of the Godhead was sufficiently argued (using the full Protestant Canon) , that would be worth consideration. But no one has done this afaik.

I need not show anything. Quoting the OT is sketchy when trying to relate to Christian perspective, which you have failed to provide the specific citation, and relate it to the Hebrew in context.

[mikewhitney]

I need not show anything. Quoting the OT is sketchy when trying to relate to Christian perspective, which you have failed to provide the specific citation, and relate it to the Hebrew in context.

Indeed you do not need to show anything. You don't need to say anything. You have many idle options available.

[shunyadragon]

Indeed you do not need to show anything. You don't need to say anything. You have many idle options available.

Quoting the OT is sketchy when trying to relate to Christian perspective, which you have failed to provide the specific citation, and relate it to the Hebrew in context.

Still waiting for your citation . . .

[mikewhitney]

Quoting the OT is sketchy when trying to relate to Christian perspective, which you have failed to provide the specific citation, and relate it to the Hebrew in context.

Still waiting for your citation . . .

what do you even mean by this? Or are you just continuing your idleness?

[Tassman]

you have not shown how the OT rejects God appearing to Abraham and how God spoke to God (where the psalm said "the Lord said to my Lord"). Thus, you are rejecting the OT/Tanakh and the Son whom God sent. You are going by your beliefs rather than scripture.

And you are then accusing Jews of twisting the OT in order to document what the Messiah said and who He is.

And if a better understanding of the Godhead was sufficiently argued (using the full Protestant Canon) , that would be worth consideration. But no one has done this afaik.

Christians often quote Jewish scripture to support the claim that Jesus was the promised Jewish Messiah. But, the Jews themselves have NEVER accepted any of these as having been fulfilled by Jesus, and in many cases do not regard them as messianic prophecies at all.

[mikewhitney]

Christians often quote Jewish scripture to support the claim that Jesus was the promised Jewish Messiah. But, the Jews themselves have NEVER accepted any of these as having been fulfilled by Jesus, and in many cases do not regard them as messianic prophecies at all.

You are off by a thousand miles. Jews wrote the New Testament. Jews followed Christ. The original Gentile followers were joining a Messianic sect of Judaism. The interpretation of the Old Testament and the words of Jesus were done by a Pharisee who was named Saul but became known as Paul.
So, really, you have to say that Jews interpreted the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah and about the judgment of the Hebrew people. If it is in question whether these prophecies were accurate, the Temple indeed was destroyed by AD70. So, I'm not sure where the Jewish interpretation of the prophecies and events falls short in your estimation.

[Christian3]

[QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1196120][QUOTE=mikewhitney;n1196111]

Yes, God can do as God chooses. The problem is that humans cannot simply divide God in three persons, and describe Jesus Christ as the incarnate Son of God, because they want it so, Incarnate Gods are Greek and Roman belief, and not according to the Tanakh.

Humans did not divide God in three persons.

There is only one God and we believe in that one God.

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=Christian3;n1196200][QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1196120]

Humans did not divide God in three persons.

There is only one God and we believe in that one God.

Then you do not believe in the Trinity?