Announcement

Collapse

General Theistics 101 Guidelines

This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.

The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Why is the Trinity an essential to there even being a God?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why is the Trinity an essential to there even being a God?

    I am of the persuasion that the Christian Trinity explanation is essential to there even being a God. The foundation to accept this is generally denied. The argument can be proposed that if the Trinity is not true that there could not even be a God.
    . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

  • #2
    Originally posted by 37818 View Post
    I am of the persuasion that the Christian Trinity explanation is essential to there even being a God. The foundation to accept this is generally denied. The argument can be proposed that if the Trinity is not true that there could not even be a God.
    Speaking purely theoretically - I can't see why not. A duality or quadrality or whatever doesn't seem to be theoretically out of the question - it is just that God happens to be triune.
    sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

    Comment


    • #3
      From the stand point of theory, no. The trinity does not need to exist for there to be a god or God. In fact pre Christian understanding seems to indicate one God's existence not a trinitarian understanding at all. The trinity seems to have come as a later fuller understanding of how God exists. (Think Peter's recognition of Jesus as God at Ceasera Phillipi)
      A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
      George Bernard Shaw

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
        Speaking purely theoretically - I can't see why not. A duality or quadrality or whatever doesn't seem to be theoretically out of the question - it is just that God happens to be triune.
        I was not speaking theoretically. But as matter of fact.

        Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
        From the stand point of theory, no. The trinity does not need to exist for there to be a god or God. In fact pre Christian understanding seems to indicate one God's existence not a trinitarian understanding at all. The trinity seems to have come as a later fuller understanding of how God exists. (Think Peter's recognition of Jesus as God at Ceasera Phillipi)
        Again I was not speaking theoretically.

        Now how God exists is a matter of fact. One might suppose ignorance of such a fact, but that would not change what is essentially true.

        Now if the trinity is just a mere interpretation then it does not warrant being called an essential of the Christian faith. And on the fact that it is an essential of the Christian faith, if the trinity explanation is not true, then the Christian faith is not true where that interpretation is regarded as a carnal essential of the faith.

        _______________________________________

        If the Trinity is an eternal truth about God, then it is essential regarding God. If it is mere matter of interpretation, and not essential to there being God. Then the concept is false. Either it is essentially true or it is not essentially true. Which is it? People have been murdered for denial of the Trinity.

        That God has always been those three Persons a fundamental truth. There would be no God otherwise.
        Last edited by 37818; 08-15-2015, 08:11 PM.
        . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

        . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

        Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 37818 View Post
          I am of the persuasion that the Christian Trinity explanation is essential to there even being a God. The foundation to accept this is generally denied. The argument can be proposed that if the Trinity is not true that there could not even be a God.
          I believe that arguments that the Trinity is not true, and whether there is a God or not are separate arguments.

          I do not believe there is a sound specific argument nor specific reference for the Trinity in the Old Testament, which creates a problem for its necessity for the nature of God's existence as Trinitarian, which on the other hand I believe is inherently unknown from the human perspective.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            I believe that arguments that the Trinity is not true, and whether there is a God or not are separate arguments.
            Why is God not a Trinity?


            I do not believe there is a sound specific argument nor specific reference for the Trinity in the Old Testament, which creates a problem for its necessity for the nature of God's existence as Trinitarian, which on the other hand I believe is inherently unknown from the human perspective.
            Do you believe God appeared to Moses in that burning bush? That the invisible God appeared to Abraham? That God had His localized Spirit/Breath move over the yet without form earth in the 6 day formation of the earth?
            . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              I believe that arguments that the Trinity is not true, and whether there is a God or not are separate arguments.
              They are separate arguments.
              With the Judeo/Christian tradition holding that man is created in the image and likeness of God: i.e. as an analogue of God, the trinity becomes easy to understand at its most basic level. Man being body, soul, and spirit is himself a trinity. The Bible makes reference to the mind of the flesh and the mind of the (person's) spirit - equivalent to the Freudian id and super-ego. There are major differences in man between body, soul, and spirit which are not commensurate with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: particularly with regard to the composition (corporeal/non corporeal). Nor can a human's body act independently of soul and spirit (insofar as I can tell), but their counterparts of God can.

              I do not believe there is a sound specific argument nor specific reference for the Trinity in the Old Testament, which creates a problem for its necessity for the nature of God's existence as Trinitarian, which on the other hand I believe is inherently unknown from the human perspective.
              Certainly with respect to the Hebrew language scriptures: explicit, no - implicit, yes, and particularly with regard to the person of the Holy Spirit. The Aramaic Scriptures (Targum Pesshita) make a distinction between the Memra of God and God - though still referring to the Memra of God as God - with those references showing the Memra of the Old Testament to be the Logos of the New.
              sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                Why is God not a Trinity?
                Odd question. I do not believe God is Trinity, because I believe, like most Jews, in pure Monotheism. Personally I do not believe God can be defined as anything other than God.


                Do you believe God appeared to Moses in that burning bush? That the invisible God appeared to Abraham? That God had His localized Spirit/Breath move over the yet without form earth in the 6 day formation of the earth?
                Yes, and so do the Jews. If you believe it, it is a witness of God, but not the Trinity. That is a stretch, and a latter day interpretation.
                Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-26-2015, 01:40 PM.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  They are separate arguments.
                  With the Judeo/Christian tradition holding that man is created in the image and likeness of God: i.e. as an analogue of God, the trinity becomes easy to understand at its most basic level. Man being body, soul, and spirit is himself a trinity. The Bible makes reference to the mind of the flesh and the mind of the (person's) spirit - equivalent to the Freudian id and super-ego. There are major differences in man between body, soul, and spirit which are not commensurate with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: particularly with regard to the composition (corporeal/non corporeal). Nor can a human's body act independently of soul and spirit (insofar as I can tell), but their counterparts of God can.
                  I do not consider these parallels to be adequate to justify the Trinity.

                  Certainly with respect to the Hebrew language scriptures: explicit, no - implicit, yes, and particularly with regard to the person of the Holy Spirit. The Aramaic Scriptures (Targum Pesshita) make a distinction between the Memra of God and God - though still referring to the Memra of God as God - with those references showing the Memra of the Old Testament to be the Logos of the New.
                  Neither the Jews, Muslims, Baha'is nor I consider this an adequate explanation to justify the Trinity. A description of the manifestation of God in this world described in OT scripture is not adequate justification for a separate another 'person' of God, nor a Trinitarian belief.

                  If the concept of the Trinity is true and essential it would have been more specifically defined in the OT.
                  Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-26-2015, 02:01 PM.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    Odd question. I do not believe God is Trinity, because I believe, like most Jews, in pure Monotheism. Personally I do not believe God can be defined as anything other than God.
                    And God's identity?

                    Yes, and so do the Jews. If you believe it, it is a witness of God, but not the Trinity. That is a stretch, and a latter day interpretation.
                    So God as a finite being does all those things. And talks to himself.
                    . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

                    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

                    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      I do not consider these parallels to be adequate to justify the Trinity.



                      Neither the Jews, Muslims, Baha'is nor I consider this an adequate explanation to justify the Trinity. A description of the manifestation of God in this world described in OT scripture is not adequate justification for a separate another 'person' of God, nor a Trinitarian belief.

                      If the concept of the Trinity is true and essential it would have been more specifically defined in the OT.
                      Says he who claims to believe in progressive revelation.
                      sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                        Says he who claims to believe in progressive revelation.
                        Yes I believe in progressive Revelation, but the fundamental oneness of God does not change. The evolution of Spiritual laws as humanity matures is the primary purpose of Progressive Revelation. The concept of Progressive Revelation includes restoring original foundation beliefs in God that have been corrupted by human culture. In this case a Roman Hellenist view of Gods. The history of OT Progressive Revelation reflects constant efforts to restore Monotheism as opposed to other polytheistic and corrupted views of God.
                        Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-27-2015, 07:50 AM.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                          And God's identity?
                          God is God. The One and only One God and indivisible as confirmed throughout the Old Testament.


                          So God as a finite being does all those things. And talks to himself.
                          Yes, God is an infinite being that does all these things. I do not see anywhere where God talks to himself.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            Yes I believe in progressive Revelation, but the fundamental oneness of God does not change. The evolution of Spiritual laws as humanity matures is the primary purpose of Progressive Revelation. The concept of Progressive Revelation includes restoring original foundation beliefs in God that have been corrupted by human culture. In this case a Roman Hellenist view of Gods. The history of OT Progressive Revelation reflects constant efforts to restore Monotheism as opposed to other polytheistic and corrupted views of God.
                            Indeed - the fundamental oneness of God does not change. Nor does the fundamental oneness of the generic human.
                            Is it your claim that the New Testament is in conflict with the Old Testament about the identity of Christ as God? Are you familiar with the archaeological findings that show the Masoretic Text - upon which modern Hebrew scripture is based - is not the same as the Hebrew text prior to 150AD?
                            sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                              God is God. The One and only One God and indivisible as confirmed throughout the Old Testament.
                              That is meaningless. That provides no meaningful identity as to God.

                              Yes, God is an infinite being that does all these things. I do not see anywhere where God talks to himself.
                              Walks in a garden. And speaks to himself as "us." Not as "we," mind you, but as "us."
                              . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

                              . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

                              Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X