Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: The Great Trinity Debate

Expand Messages
  • Rob
    Yes, but I might not be able to respond immediately, especially if there are a lot of questions, because my debate is still continuing and I have much to do
    Message 1 of 25 , Apr 30 9:52 AM
      Yes, but I might not be able to respond immediately, especially if there are a lot of questions, because my debate is still continuing and I have much to do just to keep up with that.

      In Christ's service,
      Rob Bowman


      --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "R.hero" <rdhero@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Rob,
      >
      > Are you willing to take questions here regarding your posts on Trinity?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <faithhasitsreasons@> wrote:
      > >
      > > All,
      > >
      > > I apologize for not posting this announcement sooner. My debate with Dave Burke, a Christadelphian, started this past Sunday night/Monday morning. It will be continuing for five more weeks. You can see our posts and our comments to each other at the Parchment and Pen blog (http:://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog).
      > >
      > > In Christ's service,
      > > Rob Bowman
      > >
      >
    • R.hero
      Hi Rob In your opening statement, you said: The doctrine of the Trinity is that doctrine that affirms that there is one God, the LORD (YHWH, Jehovah), a single
      Message 2 of 25 , May 2, 2010
        Hi Rob
        In your opening statement, you said:
        The doctrine of the Trinity is that doctrine that affirms that there is one God, the LORD (YHWH, Jehovah), a single divine being who exists eternally in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This doctrine of the Trinity is a conceptual framework or system for affirming the

        My questions
        1. A single divine being that exists eternally in three persons??? The use of persons is absurd. Please define person and how you could justify your definition without allegorizing it—having a hidden meaning behind the actual word.
        2. How can these three persons (whatever that is supposed to mean) if eternal precede each other as stated in the Athanasian Creed? ( I take it this the conceptual framework you are referring to, right?) That would be an infinite regress and that does not work, right?
      • Isa
        Hi, R. hero: Allow me to butt in. I say to you, it is a nice question. Traditional Trinitarians, including both Roman and Orthodox Catholic Churches, consider
        Message 3 of 25 , May 6, 2010
          Hi, R. hero:

          Allow me to butt in. I say to you, it is a nice question.

          Traditional Trinitarians, including both Roman and Orthodox Catholic Churches, consider the TRINITY as their One God. But the TRINITY is NOT a person and, therefore, CANNOT be the One Infinite God. It is simply the collective term for the One God's FINITE MANIFESTATIONS of His Infnite, Unknowable, Un-nameable, and Incomprehensible Infinite Self, without which manifestations His Existence will forever remain a subject of wild speculations, like gods demanding human blood or human sacrifices.

          The Bible reveals and reasons dictates the NEW Theology of the "One Infinite God Behind the Trinity." It may be of interest to you too. I wiill appreciate your comments.


          "The Case for the One Infinite God Behind the Trinity"

          By Dr. Isabelo S.. Alcordo, Ph.D.
          http://www.layadvocacyforchristianunity.org


          God and Creation.

          The Bible is not a book where God tries to prove His existence. It simply assumes that God exists. I believe that the reason for this is simple. If and when man realizes who he is and what his ultimate fate will be, man will surely discover for himself the real existence of God and who God is. The Bible simply begins: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen 1:1). By His Word (Jn 1:1-5), in a series of "Let there be . . . ," God created the seen and the unseen (Gen Chapts. 1-3). Thus,

          Jn 1:1-5: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

          God's creation of the visible world of living and nonliving matter and the invisible forces and laws that govern them that modern man has discovered which he presently uses not only to explain the workings of his observed universe but also to manipulate the same to create the most advanced technologies which mankind is enjoying today gives man no reason not to believe in the reality of God as his MAKER and as CREATOR of his universe. Thus was Paul justified in declaring to man:

          Ro 1:18-20: The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, being understood
          from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

          God is One and the Attributes of the One God.

          God in His Oneness Is Unknowable. Except for the fact that the One God revealed Himself to humankind in history, mankind would have never known the true God. In such ignorance, mankind would have continued to this day worshiping nature, or the false gods of mediums and spiritists demanding human sacrifices, or human kings, emperors, and rulers who,by their political power or military might, would claim to be "gods" and so hold the power of life and death over ordinary men and women, as it was of old.

          Thanks be to God, through the indwelling of certain persons with His Spirit,called prophets, He revealed Himself in the history of a chosen people, the nation Israel, who had recorded their history all the bloody and sordid details of their failure to live according to the Law and the Will of God. By these prophets, God was able to reach out to man to say that He was and is not beyond "knowing and understanding" (Jer 9:23-24) through His demands on mankind whom He
          created in "His image, in His likeness" (Ge 1:26).

          Jer 9:23-24: This is what the Lord says: "Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom or the strong man boast of his strength or the rich man boast of his riches, 24 but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight," declares the Lord.

          Ge 1:26: Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

          The true nature of God, according to the Bible, as revealed by men filled with the Holy Spirit of God, is that God is One (Deu 6:4-5; Isa 44:6; Mk 12:29).

          Deu 6:4-5: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 5 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength."

          Isa 44:6: This is what the Lord says — Israel's King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty: "I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God."

          Mk 12:29: "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: `Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.'"

          There are attributes of God that man is familiar with which man has felt and experienced himself at certain moments in his life in finite scales and are within man's ability to aspire for. These are being holy, righteous, just, loving, kind, gracious, merciful, compassionate, good, faithful, and true to one's words among so many others. One needs only to see a Bible concordance to read these attributes of God. God, of course, has these attributes in the scale
          of the infinite.

          But there are attributes that belong to God alone. Thus, God is self-existent (Ex 3:13-14). His existence is not caused by anything outside Himself. He is self-sufficient having life in Himself and in need of nothing from outside Himself (Ro 11:35-36).

          Ex 3:13-14: Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, `The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, `What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?" 14 God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: `I AM has sent me to you.'"

          Ro 11:35-36: Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him? 36 For from him and through him and to him are all things.

          He is omnipresent, being present in the highest heaven and in the deepest depth (Ps 139:7-8) and we even exist in Him (Ac17:26-28). He is omniscient, perceiving the thoughts of men from afar and knowing man's words before they are uttered (Ps 139:2-6; Isa 40:13-14) and omnipotent, whose words created the heavens and the earth (Jn 1:1-5). And He is perfect in everything (Mt 5:47-48).

          Ps 139:7-8: Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? 8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.

          Ac 17:26-28: From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28 `For in him we live and move and have our being.'

          Ps 139:1-4: O Lord, you have searched me and you know me. 2 You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. 3 You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. 4 Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O Lord.

          Isa 40:13-14: Who has understood the mind of the Lord, or instructed him as his counselor? 14 Whom did the Lord consult to enlighten him, and who taught him the right way? Who was it that taught him knowledge or showed him the path of understanding?

          Jn 1:1-35: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

          Mt 5:47-48: "And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

          The One God is eternal and immutable. The book of Hebrews declares these attributes of the One God.

          Heb 1:10-12: In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. 11 They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment. 12 You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same, and your years will never end.

          To all His finite creations, humans and spirits, the One God is
          incomprehensible (Job 11:7-8; Ro 11:33-36), beyond their mental understanding, and infinite (1 Ki 8 :37; Jer 23:24), whose face or form is beyond their ability to visualize or to perceive and we even "live, move, and have our being in Him (Ac 17:28)."

          Job 11:7-8: Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty? 8 They are higher than the heavens — what can you do? They are deeper than the depths of the grave—what can you know?

          Ro 11:33: Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!

          1 Ki 8:27: But will God really dwell on earth? The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!

          Jer 23:24: "Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?" declares the Lord. "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" declares the Lord.

          Ac 17:28: For in him we live and move and have our being. As some of your own poets have said, "We are his offspring."

          And the One God is Sovereign (Isa 46:9-11), Lord of heaven and earth whom no one has seen or can see (1 Ti 6:15-16).

          Isa 46:8-11: "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. 10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please. 11 From the east I summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose. What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do."

          1 Ti 6:15-16: God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.

          One God in Three Persons - The Trinity.

          Moses (Deu 6:4-6), Isaiah (Isa 44:6), and Jesus himself (Mk: 12:29) declared that "The Lord our God, the Lord is one." But before ascending to heaven, Jesus instructed (Mt 28:19-20) His disciples to
          baptize believers in the name of three persons: that "of the Father, that "of the Son" and that "of the Holy Spirit."

          Mt 28:18-20: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

          Thus, theologians of mainstream churches claimed to have deduced from the Bible that God is One in Three Persons declaring `the Father as true God, the Son as true God, and the Holy Spirit as true God" - the Holy TRINITY. If that is so, who really then is the One Infinite God?

          According to most theologians of mainline churches, the One God is the
          "Trinity." But for non-Trinitarians, the "Trinity" is not a person but is simply a collective term for the "Father, Son, Holy Spirit." So, to some churches the One God is "the Father" as implied by Jesus in Jn 20:17: "I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" Again, to others He is "the Son, Jesus Christ'" and still to others He is "the Holy Spirit." So, who is really the One God?

          Is "the Father" the One God? Can "the Father" be the One True God and at the same time be one of the Three in the Trinity? If so, then the others cannot be true God. But Trinitarian theologians claimed to have deduced that "the Son" and the "Holy Spirit" are also true God. So, "the Father" cannot be the One true God.

          I believe that it is possible to deduce who the One God is by a process of elimination using the attributes of the One God. Now, one of the attributes of the One God given earlier is that of being infinite. Since God is Spirit (Jn 4:23-24), the One God must be an infinite Spirit filling heaven and earth (Jer 23:24) without a defined form.

          Jn 4:23-24: "Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

          Jer 23:24: "Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?" declares the Lord. "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" declares the Lord.

          Since it is impossible for finite beings to actually see with their own eyes that which is infinite, the One God must be beyond visual perception by His creatures, whether they are angels or men. Besides this irrefutable logical conclusion, this fact is confirmed in 1 Timothy 6:15-16 that declares that "no one has seen God nor can He be seen." Can men or angels see or have men or angels seen "the Father?" Let the Bible answer this question.

          1 Ti 6:15-16: God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever.

          Mt 5:8: "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God."

          Mt 18:10: "See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven."

          Jn 6:44-47: 44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: `They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. "

          Again, can "the Father" be the One Infinite God? Since angels, who are finite spirits, were reported by Jesus to be always seeing the face of God the Father in heaven, then the Father cannot be infinite and, therefore, cannot be the One Infinite God. Besides, the Christ Spirit, Who has a defined form and therefore finite, claimed to have seen the Father (Jn 6:46-47). Also, Jesus said that men who are pure in heart will definitely see or behold God with their own eyes.

          Thus, we are led to no other conclusion but this: God the Father cannot be the One Infinite God. More so if God the Father (Dt 32:5) is also the Almighty God of Israel Yahweh or Jehovah whom the prophet Isaiah had declared to have seen with his own eyes (Isa 6:5).

          Jn 6:46-47: "No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father."

          Dt 32: 5 They have acted corruptly toward him; to their shame they are no longer his children, but a warped and crooked generation. 6 Is this the way you repay the Lord, O foolish and unwise people?
          Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you?

          Isa 6:5: "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty."

          Can the Son (the Christ Spirit or Jesus the Man) Be the One God? Just as God the Father is not infinite in form, being seen by angels in heaven, so must God the Son or the Christ Spirit also have His pre-incarnation form distinguishable from that of the Father and the Holy Spirit. In His incarnation, God the Son assumed the form of the man JESUS (Heb 10:5-7). After His death, resurrection, and ascension the Son assumed the form of the glorified body of "one like a son of man" or that of Jesus (Rev 1:12-16), hence giving us more reasons to assert
          that the Christ Spirit or Jesus the Man cannot be the One Infinite God.

          Heb 10:5-7: Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; 6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. Then I said, `Here I am — it is written about me in the scroll — I have come to do your will, O God.'"

          Rv 1:12-16: I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and among the lampstands was someone "like a son of man," dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15 His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16 In
          his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp
          double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

          Can the Holy Spirit Be the One God? The Holy Spirit or the Spirit of God Himself has also His defined form as indicated by the report by the Father and the Son in Genesis.

          Ge 1:1-2. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

          Also, it appears that the Holy Spirit is subject to both the Father (Jn 14:16) and the Son (Jn 15:26-27), and therefore, not Sovereign which is another irreducible attribute of the One God. The Holy Spirit appears to be more of a Helper" to continue the work of Jesus, through the apostles and the Church, and to bring glory to the resurrected Christ Jesus (Jn 16:7, 12-15). Therefore, the Holy Spirit cannot be the One Infinite, Sovereign God!

          Jn 14:16-18: "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you."

          Jn 15:26-27: "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me. 27 And you also must testify, for you have been with me from the beginning."

          Jn 16:7, 12-15: "Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you." ". . . 12 I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father
          is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you."

          Can the Holy TRINITY be the One God? I agree with those who consider the Holy Trinity as man's collective term for the manifestation of the three distinct persons - "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" - of the One God. The word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible. It is also not a "person" and, therefore cannot be the One God.

          The process of elimination presented above has led us to no other conclusion, and that is: None of the Three Persons of the Trinity nor the Trinity is the One Infinite God. God the Father, however, appears to be the LIMIT of the One Infinite God's revelation of Himself to spirit beings or angels. God the Son, speaking as the "One True God" to the seven churches (Rev 1:8; 2:8) appears to be the LIMIT of both God the Father's and the One Infinite God's revelation of the nature of the One God to humankind. Jesus Himself said that he who has seen
          Him has seen the Father (Jn 1:18; 14:9). Yet at the end, we are told that "when the Son has put everything under his feet" the Son himself will be made subject to God Who put everything under him, so that "God may be all in all." This affirms the Oneness of the Infinite God.

          Rv 1:8: "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

          Rv 2:8: "To the angel of the church in Smyrna write: `These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.'"

          Jn 1:18: No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.

          Jn 14:9: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."

          1 Co 15:20-28: But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed
          all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

          The One God and the Evolution of The Trinity.

          Since neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the Trinity is the One Infinite God, who or what is our One God?

          I believe that the One God is the Infinite Mind, the Infinite Intellect, the Infinite Spirit. In His Oneness, the One God is absolutely beyond perception and comprehension by His finite creations, both angels and men, unless He reveals Himself to them in some "finite" forms. This He did in a Trinity of Persons - as
          Father, as Son, and as Holy Spirit. As such, the Three Persons have the same essence as the One God, one of WILL and PURPOSE with the One God, and speak the words of the One God according to their roles in the divine unveiling of the One God and in creation and salvation and each, therefore, the full and perfect manifestation of the One Infinite God. Such finite manifestations of the Infinite God facilitated His works of Creations and revelation of Himself in and
          to His creations. Having revealed Himself to His creations, He demands
          recognition and glorification of His Infinite Personality as CREATOR by His intelligent creations of angels in the world of spirits and of men in the material universe. The Trinity also allowed Him to keep His very own Person pristine and untainted by His creations.

          How could the Trinity have come about? I believe that the One Infinite God's DESIRE to CREATE led the One Infinite God to emanate and manifest finite essences of His Infin ite nature.

          First, the Infinite God emanated and "personified," that is, "defined or made "finite" in form so as to become manifest," His Creative Will Whom He revealed to us as the "Father in heaven" (Mt. 18:10, p. 5) and designated by us as the "First Person of the Trinity." And this "finite" Manifestation of the One Infinite God as God the Father impresses on us, who are of finite mind/intellect/spirit, an intimate "son-Father" relationship with the Infinite God and reveals to us that the One God's act of creations was a Father's act of
          love.

          Then again, but not in sequential time, the Infinite One God emanated and "personified" another Manifestation of Himself, His Creative Word or simply "the Word" (Jn 1:1-5, p. 1), Whom we have identified as the Second Person of the Trinity, Who called out into existence all that were created (Ge Chapts. 1-3). Having emanated from the Infinite God but proceeding from the "finite" God the Father, the Second Person of the Trinity is also called God the Son or Son of God (Jn 20:31). He is also called the Christ or the Christ Spirit (Heb 10:5-7, p. 6) Who incarnated in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

          Jn 20:31: But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

          With the Word, saying, "Let there be!" the Third Manifestation of the One God, His "personified" Creative Power - the Spirit of God (Mt 3:16-17; Ac 2:33-34) - Whom we call God the Holy Spirit - the Third Person of the Trinity - Who, emanating from the One God and proceeding from the Father and the Son, acted with all of the One God's Divine Power (Ge 1:1-2) to actualize in perfection everything that was called out by the Word.

          Mt 3:16-17: As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

          Ac 2:33-34: Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.

          Ge 1:1-2: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

          Thus, by the One Infinite God's act of love, personified in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - the Holy Trinity - were the world of spirits and our world and everything therein created. And it is in the name "of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" that humankind is admitted into the Kingdom of God. (Mt 28:18-20). In adoring and loving recognition of the Infinite God behind the Holy Trinity, it is demanded of us that we glorify Him in all our
          worship and prayer. Thus, we pray "Glory be to the One Infinite God, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Amen!

          Mt 28:18-20: Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

          Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW INSIGHT for the
          Church of God and for humanity to consider for our time and age. It could serve as the Doctrinal Foundation for the Unity of All Christian Church Denominations. It also demands on us to understand and to respect all non-Christian monotheistic religions and to dialogue with them to promote peaceful co-existence among the various faith communities since all worship the same One Infinite God. But most importantly, it will once and for all set MONOTHEISM as
          an unquestioned tenet of Christianity. END.

          Note: All Biblical verses were taken from the New International Version.






          --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "R.hero" <rdhero@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Hi Rob
          > In your opening statement, you said:
          > The doctrine of the Trinity is that doctrine that affirms that there is one God, the LORD (YHWH, Jehovah), a single divine being who exists eternally in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This doctrine of the Trinity is a conceptual framework or system for affirming the
          >
          > My questions
          > 1. A single divine being that exists eternally in three persons??? The use of persons is absurd. Please define person and how you could justify your definition without allegorizing it—having a hidden meaning behind the actual word.
          > 2. How can these three persons (whatever that is supposed to mean) if eternal precede each other as stated in the Athanasian Creed? ( I take it this the conceptual framework you are referring to, right?) That would be an infinite regress and that does not work, right?
          >
        • R.hero
          Hi Isa I shall respond to your post ASAP on your thread. blessings
          Message 4 of 25 , May 9, 2010
            Hi Isa

            I shall respond to your post ASAP on your thread.

            blessings





            - In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Isa" <isalcordo@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi, R. hero:
            >
            > Allow me to butt in. I say to you, it is a nice question.
            >
            > Traditional Trinitarians, including both Roman and Orthodox Catholic Churches, consider the TRINITY as their One God. But the TRINITY is NOT a person and, therefore, CANNOT be the One Infinite God. It is simply the collective term for the One God's FINITE MANIFESTATIONS of His Infnite, Unknowable, Un-nameable, and Incomprehensible Infinite Self, without which manifestations His Existence will forever remain a subject of wild speculations, like gods demanding human blood or human sacrifices.
            >
            > The Bible reveals and reasons dictates the NEW Theology of the "One Infinite God Behind the Trinity." It may be of interest to you too. I wiill appreciate your comments.
            >
            >
            > "The Case for the One Infinite God Behind the Trinity"
            >
            > By Dr. Isabelo S.. Alcordo, Ph.D.
            > http://www.layadvocacyforchristianunity.org
            >
            >
            > God and Creation.
            >
            > The Bible is not a book where God tries to prove His existence. It simply assumes that God exists. I believe that the reason for this is simple. If and when man realizes who he is and what his ultimate fate will be, man will surely discover for himself the real existence of God and who God is. The Bible simply begins: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen 1:1). By His Word (Jn 1:1-5), in a series of "Let there be . . . ," God created the seen and the unseen (Gen Chapts. 1-3). Thus,
            >
            > Jn 1:1-5: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
            >
            > God's creation of the visible world of living and nonliving matter and the invisible forces and laws that govern them that modern man has discovered which he presently uses not only to explain the workings of his observed universe but also to manipulate the same to create the most advanced technologies which mankind is enjoying today gives man no reason not to believe in the reality of God as his MAKER and as CREATOR of his universe. Thus was Paul justified in declaring to man:
            >
            > Ro 1:18-20: The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, being understood
            > from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
            >
            > God is One and the Attributes of the One God.
            >
            > God in His Oneness Is Unknowable. Except for the fact that the One God revealed Himself to humankind in history, mankind would have never known the true God. In such ignorance, mankind would have continued to this day worshiping nature, or the false gods of mediums and spiritists demanding human sacrifices, or human kings, emperors, and rulers who,by their political power or military might, would claim to be "gods" and so hold the power of life and death over ordinary men and women, as it was of old.
            >
            > Thanks be to God, through the indwelling of certain persons with His Spirit,called prophets, He revealed Himself in the history of a chosen people, the nation Israel, who had recorded their history all the bloody and sordid details of their failure to live according to the Law and the Will of God. By these prophets, God was able to reach out to man to say that He was and is not beyond "knowing and understanding" (Jer 9:23-24) through His demands on mankind whom He
            > created in "His image, in His likeness" (Ge 1:26).
            >
            > Jer 9:23-24: This is what the Lord says: "Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom or the strong man boast of his strength or the rich man boast of his riches, 24 but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight," declares the Lord.
            >
            > Ge 1:26: Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.
            >
            > The true nature of God, according to the Bible, as revealed by men filled with the Holy Spirit of God, is that God is One (Deu 6:4-5; Isa 44:6; Mk 12:29).
            >
            > Deu 6:4-5: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 5 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength."
            >
            > Isa 44:6: This is what the Lord says — Israel's King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty: "I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God."
            >
            > Mk 12:29: "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: `Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.'"
            >
            > There are attributes of God that man is familiar with which man has felt and experienced himself at certain moments in his life in finite scales and are within man's ability to aspire for. These are being holy, righteous, just, loving, kind, gracious, merciful, compassionate, good, faithful, and true to one's words among so many others. One needs only to see a Bible concordance to read these attributes of God. God, of course, has these attributes in the scale
            > of the infinite.
            >
            > But there are attributes that belong to God alone. Thus, God is self-existent (Ex 3:13-14). His existence is not caused by anything outside Himself. He is self-sufficient having life in Himself and in need of nothing from outside Himself (Ro 11:35-36).
            >
            > Ex 3:13-14: Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, `The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, `What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?" 14 God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: `I AM has sent me to you.'"
            >
            > Ro 11:35-36: Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him? 36 For from him and through him and to him are all things.
            >
            > He is omnipresent, being present in the highest heaven and in the deepest depth (Ps 139:7-8) and we even exist in Him (Ac17:26-28). He is omniscient, perceiving the thoughts of men from afar and knowing man's words before they are uttered (Ps 139:2-6; Isa 40:13-14) and omnipotent, whose words created the heavens and the earth (Jn 1:1-5). And He is perfect in everything (Mt 5:47-48).
            >
            > Ps 139:7-8: Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? 8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.
            >
            > Ac 17:26-28: From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28 `For in him we live and move and have our being.'
            >
            > Ps 139:1-4: O Lord, you have searched me and you know me. 2 You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. 3 You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. 4 Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O Lord.
            >
            > Isa 40:13-14: Who has understood the mind of the Lord, or instructed him as his counselor? 14 Whom did the Lord consult to enlighten him, and who taught him the right way? Who was it that taught him knowledge or showed him the path of understanding?
            >
            > Jn 1:1-35: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
            >
            > Mt 5:47-48: "And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
            >
            > The One God is eternal and immutable. The book of Hebrews declares these attributes of the One God.
            >
            > Heb 1:10-12: In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. 11 They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment. 12 You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same, and your years will never end.
            >
            > To all His finite creations, humans and spirits, the One God is
            > incomprehensible (Job 11:7-8; Ro 11:33-36), beyond their mental understanding, and infinite (1 Ki 8 :37; Jer 23:24), whose face or form is beyond their ability to visualize or to perceive and we even "live, move, and have our being in Him (Ac 17:28)."
            >
            > Job 11:7-8: Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty? 8 They are higher than the heavens — what can you do? They are deeper than the depths of the grave—what can you know?
            >
            > Ro 11:33: Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!
            >
            > 1 Ki 8:27: But will God really dwell on earth? The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!
            >
            > Jer 23:24: "Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?" declares the Lord. "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" declares the Lord.
            >
            > Ac 17:28: For in him we live and move and have our being. As some of your own poets have said, "We are his offspring."
            >
            > And the One God is Sovereign (Isa 46:9-11), Lord of heaven and earth whom no one has seen or can see (1 Ti 6:15-16).
            >
            > Isa 46:8-11: "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. 10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please. 11 From the east I summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose. What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do."
            >
            > 1 Ti 6:15-16: God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.
            >
            > One God in Three Persons - The Trinity.
            >
            > Moses (Deu 6:4-6), Isaiah (Isa 44:6), and Jesus himself (Mk: 12:29) declared that "The Lord our God, the Lord is one." But before ascending to heaven, Jesus instructed (Mt 28:19-20) His disciples to
            > baptize believers in the name of three persons: that "of the Father, that "of the Son" and that "of the Holy Spirit."
            >
            > Mt 28:18-20: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
            >
            > Thus, theologians of mainstream churches claimed to have deduced from the Bible that God is One in Three Persons declaring `the Father as true God, the Son as true God, and the Holy Spirit as true God" - the Holy TRINITY. If that is so, who really then is the One Infinite God?
            >
            > According to most theologians of mainline churches, the One God is the
            > "Trinity." But for non-Trinitarians, the "Trinity" is not a person but is simply a collective term for the "Father, Son, Holy Spirit." So, to some churches the One God is "the Father" as implied by Jesus in Jn 20:17: "I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" Again, to others He is "the Son, Jesus Christ'" and still to others He is "the Holy Spirit." So, who is really the One God?
            >
            > Is "the Father" the One God? Can "the Father" be the One True God and at the same time be one of the Three in the Trinity? If so, then the others cannot be true God. But Trinitarian theologians claimed to have deduced that "the Son" and the "Holy Spirit" are also true God. So, "the Father" cannot be the One true God.
            >
            > I believe that it is possible to deduce who the One God is by a process of elimination using the attributes of the One God. Now, one of the attributes of the One God given earlier is that of being infinite. Since God is Spirit (Jn 4:23-24), the One God must be an infinite Spirit filling heaven and earth (Jer 23:24) without a defined form.
            >
            > Jn 4:23-24: "Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."
            >
            > Jer 23:24: "Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?" declares the Lord. "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" declares the Lord.
            >
            > Since it is impossible for finite beings to actually see with their own eyes that which is infinite, the One God must be beyond visual perception by His creatures, whether they are angels or men. Besides this irrefutable logical conclusion, this fact is confirmed in 1 Timothy 6:15-16 that declares that "no one has seen God nor can He be seen." Can men or angels see or have men or angels seen "the Father?" Let the Bible answer this question.
            >
            > 1 Ti 6:15-16: God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever.
            >
            > Mt 5:8: "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God."
            >
            > Mt 18:10: "See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven."
            >
            > Jn 6:44-47: 44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: `They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. "
            >
            > Again, can "the Father" be the One Infinite God? Since angels, who are finite spirits, were reported by Jesus to be always seeing the face of God the Father in heaven, then the Father cannot be infinite and, therefore, cannot be the One Infinite God. Besides, the Christ Spirit, Who has a defined form and therefore finite, claimed to have seen the Father (Jn 6:46-47). Also, Jesus said that men who are pure in heart will definitely see or behold God with their own eyes.
            >
            > Thus, we are led to no other conclusion but this: God the Father cannot be the One Infinite God. More so if God the Father (Dt 32:5) is also the Almighty God of Israel Yahweh or Jehovah whom the prophet Isaiah had declared to have seen with his own eyes (Isa 6:5).
            >
            > Jn 6:46-47: "No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father."
            >
            > Dt 32: 5 They have acted corruptly toward him; to their shame they are no longer his children, but a warped and crooked generation. 6 Is this the way you repay the Lord, O foolish and unwise people?
            > Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you?
            >
            > Isa 6:5: "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty."
            >
            > Can the Son (the Christ Spirit or Jesus the Man) Be the One God? Just as God the Father is not infinite in form, being seen by angels in heaven, so must God the Son or the Christ Spirit also have His pre-incarnation form distinguishable from that of the Father and the Holy Spirit. In His incarnation, God the Son assumed the form of the man JESUS (Heb 10:5-7). After His death, resurrection, and ascension the Son assumed the form of the glorified body of "one like a son of man" or that of Jesus (Rev 1:12-16), hence giving us more reasons to assert
            > that the Christ Spirit or Jesus the Man cannot be the One Infinite God.
            >
            > Heb 10:5-7: Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; 6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. Then I said, `Here I am — it is written about me in the scroll — I have come to do your will, O God.'"
            >
            > Rv 1:12-16: I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and among the lampstands was someone "like a son of man," dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15 His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16 In
            > his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp
            > double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
            >
            > Can the Holy Spirit Be the One God? The Holy Spirit or the Spirit of God Himself has also His defined form as indicated by the report by the Father and the Son in Genesis.
            >
            > Ge 1:1-2. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
            >
            > Also, it appears that the Holy Spirit is subject to both the Father (Jn 14:16) and the Son (Jn 15:26-27), and therefore, not Sovereign which is another irreducible attribute of the One God. The Holy Spirit appears to be more of a Helper" to continue the work of Jesus, through the apostles and the Church, and to bring glory to the resurrected Christ Jesus (Jn 16:7, 12-15). Therefore, the Holy Spirit cannot be the One Infinite, Sovereign God!
            >
            > Jn 14:16-18: "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you."
            >
            > Jn 15:26-27: "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me. 27 And you also must testify, for you have been with me from the beginning."
            >
            > Jn 16:7, 12-15: "Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you." ". . . 12 I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father
            > is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you."
            >
            > Can the Holy TRINITY be the One God? I agree with those who consider the Holy Trinity as man's collective term for the manifestation of the three distinct persons - "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" - of the One God. The word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible. It is also not a "person" and, therefore cannot be the One God.
            >
            > The process of elimination presented above has led us to no other conclusion, and that is: None of the Three Persons of the Trinity nor the Trinity is the One Infinite God. God the Father, however, appears to be the LIMIT of the One Infinite God's revelation of Himself to spirit beings or angels. God the Son, speaking as the "One True God" to the seven churches (Rev 1:8; 2:8) appears to be the LIMIT of both God the Father's and the One Infinite God's revelation of the nature of the One God to humankind. Jesus Himself said that he who has seen
            > Him has seen the Father (Jn 1:18; 14:9). Yet at the end, we are told that "when the Son has put everything under his feet" the Son himself will be made subject to God Who put everything under him, so that "God may be all in all." This affirms the Oneness of the Infinite God.
            >
            > Rv 1:8: "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."
            >
            > Rv 2:8: "To the angel of the church in Smyrna write: `These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.'"
            >
            > Jn 1:18: No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
            >
            > Jn 14:9: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."
            >
            > 1 Co 15:20-28: But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed
            > all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
            >
            > The One God and the Evolution of The Trinity.
            >
            > Since neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the Trinity is the One Infinite God, who or what is our One God?
            >
            > I believe that the One God is the Infinite Mind, the Infinite Intellect, the Infinite Spirit. In His Oneness, the One God is absolutely beyond perception and comprehension by His finite creations, both angels and men, unless He reveals Himself to them in some "finite" forms. This He did in a Trinity of Persons - as
            > Father, as Son, and as Holy Spirit. As such, the Three Persons have the same essence as the One God, one of WILL and PURPOSE with the One God, and speak the words of the One God according to their roles in the divine unveiling of the One God and in creation and salvation and each, therefore, the full and perfect manifestation of the One Infinite God. Such finite manifestations of the Infinite God facilitated His works of Creations and revelation of Himself in and
            > to His creations. Having revealed Himself to His creations, He demands
            > recognition and glorification of His Infinite Personality as CREATOR by His intelligent creations of angels in the world of spirits and of men in the material universe. The Trinity also allowed Him to keep His very own Person pristine and untainted by His creations.
            >
            > How could the Trinity have come about? I believe that the One Infinite God's DESIRE to CREATE led the One Infinite God to emanate and manifest finite essences of His Infin ite nature.
            >
            > First, the Infinite God emanated and "personified," that is, "defined or made "finite" in form so as to become manifest," His Creative Will Whom He revealed to us as the "Father in heaven" (Mt. 18:10, p. 5) and designated by us as the "First Person of the Trinity." And this "finite" Manifestation of the One Infinite God as God the Father impresses on us, who are of finite mind/intellect/spirit, an intimate "son-Father" relationship with the Infinite God and reveals to us that the One God's act of creations was a Father's act of
            > love.
            >
            > Then again, but not in sequential time, the Infinite One God emanated and "personified" another Manifestation of Himself, His Creative Word or simply "the Word" (Jn 1:1-5, p. 1), Whom we have identified as the Second Person of the Trinity, Who called out into existence all that were created (Ge Chapts. 1-3). Having emanated from the Infinite God but proceeding from the "finite" God the Father, the Second Person of the Trinity is also called God the Son or Son of God (Jn 20:31). He is also called the Christ or the Christ Spirit (Heb 10:5-7, p. 6) Who incarnated in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.
            >
            > Jn 20:31: But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
            >
            > With the Word, saying, "Let there be!" the Third Manifestation of the One God, His "personified" Creative Power - the Spirit of God (Mt 3:16-17; Ac 2:33-34) - Whom we call God the Holy Spirit - the Third Person of the Trinity - Who, emanating from the One God and proceeding from the Father and the Son, acted with all of the One God's Divine Power (Ge 1:1-2) to actualize in perfection everything that was called out by the Word.
            >
            > Mt 3:16-17: As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."
            >
            > Ac 2:33-34: Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.
            >
            > Ge 1:1-2: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
            >
            > Thus, by the One Infinite God's act of love, personified in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - the Holy Trinity - were the world of spirits and our world and everything therein created. And it is in the name "of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" that humankind is admitted into the Kingdom of God. (Mt 28:18-20). In adoring and loving recognition of the Infinite God behind the Holy Trinity, it is demanded of us that we glorify Him in all our
            > worship and prayer. Thus, we pray "Glory be to the One Infinite God, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Amen!
            >
            > Mt 28:18-20: Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
            >
            > Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW INSIGHT for the
            > Church of God and for humanity to consider for our time and age. It could serve as the Doctrinal Foundation for the Unity of All Christian Church Denominations. It also demands on us to understand and to respect all non-Christian monotheistic religions and to dialogue with them to promote peaceful co-existence among the various faith communities since all worship the same One Infinite God. But most importantly, it will once and for all set MONOTHEISM as
            > an unquestioned tenet of Christianity. END.
            >
            > Note: All Biblical verses were taken from the New International Version.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "R.hero" <rdhero@> wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > > Hi Rob
            > > In your opening statement, you said:
            > > The doctrine of the Trinity is that doctrine that affirms that there is one God, the LORD (YHWH, Jehovah), a single divine being who exists eternally in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This doctrine of the Trinity is a conceptual framework or system for affirming the
            > >
            > > My questions
            > > 1. A single divine being that exists eternally in three persons??? The use of persons is absurd. Please define person and how you could justify your definition without allegorizing it—having a hidden meaning behind the actual word.
            > > 2. How can these three persons (whatever that is supposed to mean) if eternal precede each other as stated in the Athanasian Creed? ( I take it this the conceptual framework you are referring to, right?) That would be an infinite regress and that does not work, right?
            > >
            >
          • William
            I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one
            Message 5 of 25 , May 10, 2010
              I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.

              Bill
            • Paul Leonard
              Hi, A few thoughts, I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret
              Message 6 of 25 , May 10, 2010

                Hi,

                A few thoughts,

                 

                I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part.

                I have no idea what part "modern science" plays in this, since it does not take 'science' to figure it out. Experience alone does it. Plus while man lies, he does not always do so, and can avoid it if he wishes. Supporting one position or another does not require lying on anyone's part.

                Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded.

                Some may and some may not. How would you know if they were lying to themselves or convinced they were correct?

                Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings.

                You are assuming a couple of things. One. That science is not in harmony with scripture. Two that science cannot be wrong, where it disagrees with scripture. When the two are in conflict how do we determine which is correct?

                After all while some people believed the earth was flat , the Bible spoke of the circle of the earth. Men were wrong and based their authority on the Bible, but the Bible and science were in agreement.

                The question is valid as long as we recognize that while our understanding may be wrong, that can be our understanding of science, as well as scripture.

                If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture?

                If we reject scripture on the basis of science how do we know the science is truly correct? I can think of lots of things "science" once said was true, that isn't.

                Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.

                What if we depend on people who are truthful? After all how do you know the scientists, also liars (sinful humans) , are not lying to you? People with a moral compass, based on scripture, are a lot less likely to lie than those who have no moral compass.

              • William
                Paul, I have no doubts that science can lie to us or be wrong. I also have no doubts that theologians are likewise capable of it. I merely raise the question
                Message 7 of 25 , May 11, 2010
                  Paul,

                  I have no doubts that science can lie to us or be wrong. I also have no doubts that theologians are likewise capable of it. I merely raise the question about what assumptions we are bringing to the table.

                  I for one assume that scripture and the findings of science may be reconciled. I assume that both are dealing with the same reality. However, I also assume that when someone starts with defining something as true and unchallengable, they are far more likely to end up lying to me then when they start as defining something as true until evidence suggests it is not. Further, the more people who are attempting to prove something true or false as opposed to agreeing that some point is true by definition and unchallengable, the more I am inclined to trust the ultimate outcome. Theologians hold predefined truths to be true without question, scientists keep challenging what is accepted as true and seeking to prove it either true or false. Neither side is guaranteed to be ultimately correct, but at least science offers the appearance of seeking to confirm what is believed true.

                  One quick pair of examples, theology holds that Jesus was fully God and fully human (a contradiction)by definition. Science holds that photons are both particles and waves (also a contradiction) because testing so indicates. The definition rests on a specific worldview and a specific understanding of certain passages in scripture, as opposed to any other possible understandings or worldview. The testing relies on numerous people trying numerous times and consistently obtaining the same information, and this includes hiogh school students the world around, regardless of worldview or understanding.

                  You might like, 'it is so because so and so has decreed it to be'. However I like 'it seems to be so because everyone, myself included, who have tested it gets the same answer'.

                  Bill
                • Jeff
                  Wow, Paul! Great response. Many amens. One note -- I found it hard to follow where you were quoting William and where you were speaking. A little bit of a
                  Message 8 of 25 , May 11, 2010
                    Wow, Paul! Great response. Many amens.

                    One note -- I found it hard to follow where you were quoting William and where you were speaking. A little bit of a technical point.

                    But I wholly agree with your reply. I thought of replying myself, and I couldn't have done half the job you did.

                    Jeff

                    --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, Paul Leonard <anotherpaul2001@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Hi,
                    >
                    > A few thoughts,
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part.
                    >
                    > I have no idea what part "modern science" plays in this, since it does not take 'science' to figure it out. Experience alone does it. Plus while man lies, he does not always do so, and can avoid it if he wishes. Supporting one position or another does not require lying on anyone's part.
                    >
                    > Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded.
                    >
                    > Some may and some may not. How would you know if they were lying to themselves or convinced they were correct?
                    >
                    > Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings.
                    >
                    > You are assuming a couple of things. One. That science is not in harmony with scripture. Two that science cannot be wrong, where it disagrees with scripture. When the two are in conflict how do we determine which is correct?
                    >
                    > After all while some people believed the earth was flat , the Bible spoke of the circle of the earth. Men were wrong and based their authority on the Bible, but the Bible and science were in agreement.
                    >
                    > The question is valid as long as we recognize that while our understanding may be wrong, that can be our understanding of science, as well as scripture.
                    >
                    > If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture?
                    >
                    > If we reject scripture on the basis of science how do we know the science is truly correct? I can think of lots of things "science" once said was true, that isn't.
                    >
                    > Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                    >
                    > What if we depend on people who are truthful? After all how do you know the scientists, also liars (sinful humans) , are not lying to you? People with a moral compass, based on scripture, are a lot less likely to lie than those who have no moral compass.
                    >
                  • Jeff
                    I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does
                    Message 9 of 25 , May 11, 2010
                      I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.

                      Jefff

                      --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "William" <eliadefollower@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                      >
                      > Bill
                      >
                    • tcmadd2@aol.com
                      Folks, I once read an article in National Geographic about gorillas who were being raised in reasearch lab. They were being taught sign language and videotaped
                      Message 10 of 25 , May 11, 2010
                        Folks,
                         
                        I once read an article in National Geographic about gorillas who were being raised in reasearch lab. They were being taught sign language and videotaped 24/7.  On one night after the humans had left one young gorilla took another one's doll and tore it up. When confronted by the trainer/scientists he lied, saying he did not do it.
                         
                        Another occassion he got into a conflict with the other gorilla over something. He got quite upset about the issue and signed "toilet" followed by the sign for "face" and "you".  In other words, he was deliberately insulting his buddy.
                         
                        Tom M.
                        Fullerton


                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Jeff <preachingjeff@...>
                        To: biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Tue, May 11, 2010 10:59 am
                        Subject: [biblicalapologetics] Re: The Great Trinity Debate

                         
                        I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.

                        Jefff

                        --- In biblicalapologetics @yahoogroups. com, "William" <eliadefollower@ ...> wrote:
                        >
                        > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                        >
                        > Bill
                        >

                      • Isa
                        Hi, to all: The issue raised by Bill cannot be resolved in this forum because we do not know factually whether or not some of the Bible writers lied. As for
                        Message 11 of 25 , May 11, 2010
                          Hi, to all:

                          The issue raised by Bill cannot be resolved in this forum because we do not know factually whether or not some of the Bible writers lied.

                          As for science, it cannot be applied to spiritual revelations until we find ways to test empirically spiritual assertions.

                          What we can and must do in our study of the Bible as a whole and the Trinity specifically is to use LOGIC, REASON (which I define as the intellectual acceptance of conclusions demanded by logic from valid premises) and the RESOLUTION OF APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS throughout all the books of the Bible, without resorting to claims of errors or lies on the part of writers, realizing that the New Testament declarations over-ride OT declarations, the NT being a set of NEW REVELATIONS to give light to OT declarations.

                          Thus, without the NT, we are bound to recognize but One God who is the God of Israel alone - YHWH or Yahweh or Jehoval. With the NT, however, we are bound to accept that the "Almighty One of Israel" happens to be also the "Glorified Jesus of the book of Revelation" who happended to be both FINITE and, therefore, CANNOT BE THE ONE INFINITE GOD of humankind but simply His MANIFESTATIONS to finite being at differents stages of man's divine history.

                          May God bless us all.

                          Isa
                          In Service to the Lay People of God
                          --------


                          --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, tcmadd2@... wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > Folks,
                          >
                          > I once read an article in National Geographic about gorillas who were being raised in reasearch lab. They were being taught sign language and videotaped 24/7. On one night after the humans had left one young gorilla took another one's doll and tore it up. When confronted by the trainer/scientists he lied, saying he did not do it.
                          >
                          > Another occassion he got into a conflict with the other gorilla over something. He got quite upset about the issue and signed "toilet" followed by the sign for "face" and "you". In other words, he was deliberately insulting his buddy.
                          >
                          > Tom M.
                          > Fullerton
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > -----Original Message-----
                          > From: Jeff <preachingjeff@...>
                          > To: biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: Tue, May 11, 2010 10:59 am
                          > Subject: [biblicalapologetics] Re: The Great Trinity Debate
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.
                          >
                          > Jefff
                          >
                          > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "William" <eliadefollower@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                          > >
                          > > Bill
                          > >
                          >
                        • William
                          Jeff, Science does not have an true answer on the why of people lying, but then to take scripture s attitude that humans are sinners does not really answer
                          Message 12 of 25 , May 12, 2010
                            Jeff,

                            Science does not have an true answer on the "why" of people lying, but then to take scripture's attitude that humans are sinners does not really answer the "why" either. It defines the problem as existing, and recounts the what is supposedly the first occassion. But if we take that account in a different way then is traditional we end up with the exact same situation as science describes for individuals lying to themselves.

                            Now for when humans first lie to themselves, science does have an answer. And interestingly enough, the ultimate outcome of the first lie that humans tell themselves and subsequently believe and base much of their lives on, will logically produce the exact same effects that Sin does. Interesting coincidence, don't you think? Of course though, it must be purely coincidence though, otherwise it implies problems with traditional understandings as we cannot have that, can we.

                            Bill

                            --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <preachingjeff@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.
                            >
                            > Jefff
                          • William
                            Isa, The question as to whether or not we may factually know if biblical writers lied or not rests largely on what you call a lie . Scripture claims that God
                            Message 13 of 25 , May 12, 2010
                              Isa,

                              The question as to whether or not we may factually know if biblical writers lied or not rests largely on what you call a "lie". Scripture claims that God is not human, therefore God does not lie. This implies that humans do. If then humans wrote the Bible, then they lied in doing so. If God wrote it then there are no lies. Further, if there are no lies in the Bible, then on at least one occassion, a donkey talked.

                              Now I could point out other problems where what is recorded conflicts with what may be deduced from science or other sources, but I think a talking donkey is sufficient to raise doubts.

                              Bill

                              --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Isa" <isalcordo@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Hi, to all:
                              >
                              > The issue raised by Bill cannot be resolved in this forum because we do not know factually whether or not some of the Bible writers lied.
                              >
                              > As for science, it cannot be applied to spiritual revelations until we find ways to test empirically spiritual assertions.
                              >
                              > What we can and must do in our study of the Bible as a whole and the Trinity specifically is to use LOGIC, REASON (which I define as the intellectual acceptance of conclusions demanded by logic from valid premises) and the RESOLUTION OF APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS throughout all the books of the Bible, without resorting to claims of errors or lies on the part of writers, realizing that the New Testament declarations over-ride OT declarations, the NT being a set of NEW REVELATIONS to give light to OT declarations.
                              >
                              > Thus, without the NT, we are bound to recognize but One God who is the God of Israel alone - YHWH or Yahweh or Jehoval. With the NT, however, we are bound to accept that the "Almighty One of Israel" happens to be also the "Glorified Jesus of the book of Revelation" who happended to be both FINITE and, therefore, CANNOT BE THE ONE INFINITE GOD of humankind but simply His MANIFESTATIONS to finite being at differents stages of man's divine history.
                              >
                              > May God bless us all.
                              >
                              > Isa
                              > In Service to the Lay People of God
                              > --------
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, tcmadd2@ wrote:
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Folks,
                              > >
                              > > I once read an article in National Geographic about gorillas who were being raised in reasearch lab. They were being taught sign language and videotaped 24/7. On one night after the humans had left one young gorilla took another one's doll and tore it up. When confronted by the trainer/scientists he lied, saying he did not do it.
                              > >
                              > > Another occassion he got into a conflict with the other gorilla over something. He got quite upset about the issue and signed "toilet" followed by the sign for "face" and "you". In other words, he was deliberately insulting his buddy.
                              > >
                              > > Tom M.
                              > > Fullerton
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > -----Original Message-----
                              > > From: Jeff <preachingjeff@>
                              > > To: biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com
                              > > Sent: Tue, May 11, 2010 10:59 am
                              > > Subject: [biblicalapologetics] Re: The Great Trinity Debate
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.
                              > >
                              > > Jefff
                              > >
                              > > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "William" <eliadefollower@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                              > > >
                              > > > Bill
                              > > >
                              > >
                              >
                            • Paul Leonard
                              Oh I don t know, I have known some donkey s that type. is that harder than talking? Because science doesn t know how it happened doesn t mean it can t or
                              Message 14 of 25 , May 12, 2010
                                Oh I don't know,

                                I have known some donkey's that type. is that harder than talking?

                                Because "science" doesn't know how it happened doesn't mean it can't or didn't. Not to mention all those "honest" scientists who would never lie, since apparently they aren't human.

                                 

                                Isa,

                                The question as to whether or not we may factually know if biblical writers lied or not rests largely on what you call a "lie". Scripture claims that God is not human, therefore God does not lie. This implies that humans do. If then humans wrote the Bible, then they lied in doing so. If God wrote it then there are no lies. Further, if there are no lies in the Bible, then on at least one occassion, a donkey talked.

                                Now I could point out other problems where what is recorded conflicts with what may be deduced from science or other sources, but I think a talking donkey is sufficient to raise doubts.

                                Bill

                                --- In biblicalapologetics @yahoogroups. com, "Isa" <isalcordo@. ..> wrote:
                                >
                                > Hi, to all:
                                >
                                > The issue raised by Bill cannot be resolved in this forum because we do not know factually whether or not some of the Bible writers lied.
                                >
                                > As for science, it cannot be applied to spiritual revelations until we find ways to test empirically spiritual assertions.
                                >
                                > What we can and must do in our study of the Bible as a whole and the Trinity specifically is to use LOGIC, REASON (which I define as the intellectual acceptance of conclusions demanded by logic from valid premises) and the RESOLUTION OF APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS throughout all the books of the Bible, without resorting to claims of errors or lies on the part of writers, realizing that the New Testament declarations over-ride OT declarations, the NT being a set of NEW REVELATIONS to give light to OT declarations.
                                >
                                > Thus, without the NT, we are bound to recognize but One God who is the God of Israel alone - YHWH or Yahweh or Jehoval. With the NT, however, we are bound to accept that the "Almighty One of Israel" happens to be also the "Glorified Jesus of the book of Revelation" who happended to be both FINITE and, therefore, CANNOT BE THE ONE INFINITE GOD of humankind but simply His MANIFESTATIONS to finite being at differents stages of man's divine history.
                                >
                                > May God bless us all.
                                >
                                > Isa
                                > In Service to the Lay People of God
                                > --------
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In biblicalapologetics @yahoogroups. com, tcmadd2@ wrote:
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > Folks,
                                > >
                                > > I once read an article in National Geographic about gorillas who were being raised in reasearch lab. They were being taught sign language and videotaped 24/7. On one night after the humans had left one young gorilla took another one's doll and tore it up. When confronted by the trainer/scientists he lied, saying he did not do it.
                                > >
                                > > Another occassion he got into a conflict with the other gorilla over something. He got quite upset about the issue and signed "toilet" followed by the sign for "face" and "you". In other words, he was deliberately insulting his buddy.
                                > >
                                > > Tom M.
                                > > Fullerton
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > -----Original Message-----
                                > > From: Jeff <preachingjeff@ >
                                > > To: biblicalapologetics @yahoogroups. com
                                > > Sent: Tue, May 11, 2010 10:59 am
                                > > Subject: [biblicalapologetic s] Re: The Great Trinity Debate
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.
                                > >
                                > > Jefff
                                > >
                                > > --- In biblicalapologetics @yahoogroups. com, "William" <eliadefollower@ > wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                                > > >
                                > > > Bill
                                > > >
                                > >
                                >

                              • Paul Leonard
                                Hi I have no doubts that science can lie to us or be wrong. I also have no doubts that theologians are likewise capable of it. I merely raise the question
                                Message 15 of 25 , May 12, 2010
                                  Hi

                                  I have no doubts that science can lie to us or be wrong. I also have no doubts that theologians are likewise capable of it. I merely raise the question about what assumptions we are bringing to the table.


                                  True, as well as what attitude we bring.

                                  I for one assume that scripture and the findings of science may be reconciled. I assume that both are dealing with the same reality. However, I also assume that when someone starts with defining something as true and unchallengable, they are far more likely to end up lying to me then when they start as defining something as true until evidence suggests it is not.

                                  I am sure we all can identify such cases.

                                  Further, the more people who are attempting to prove something true or false as opposed to agreeing that some point is true by definition and unchallengable, the more I am inclined to trust the ultimate outcome. Theologians hold predefined truths to be true without question, scientists keep challenging what is accepted as true and seeking to prove it either true or false. Neither side is guaranteed to be ultimately correct, but at least science offers the appearance of seeking to confirm what is believed true.

                                  Well I am not sure that is totally true. As an example if enough peop0le study the Bible  and determine it is true, then they will also assume that the Basics are true also. It is in the details that disagreement comes into play.

                                  One quick pair of examples, theology holds that Jesus was fully God and fully human (a contradiction) by definition.

                                  Note to be accurate you should say some theology holds that Jesus is both god and man. Not all theology does so.

                                  Science holds that photons are both particles and waves (also a contradiction) because testing so indicates. The definition rests on a specific worldview and a specific understanding of certain passages in scripture, as opposed to any other possible understandings or worldview. The testing relies on numerous people trying numerous times and consistently obtaining the same information, and this includes hiogh school students the world around, regardless of worldview or understanding.

                                  You might like, 'it is so because so and so has decreed it to be'. However I like 'it seems to be so because everyone, myself included, who have tested it gets the same answer'. 


                                  The problem can also be related to the test and the assumptions behind the test and the 'expected' results. I deal with that in Chemistry all the time. Everyone starts with assumptions. The real test comes when we are faced with genuine and specific challenges to those assumptions. Broad assumptions are of minimal value until refined to a specific case/application.

                                  Bill

                                • Isa
                                  Bill: You wrote: If God wrote it then there are no lies. Further, if there are no lies in the Bible, then on at least one occassion, a donkey talked. My
                                  Message 16 of 25 , May 12, 2010
                                    Bill:

                                    You wrote:

                                    If God wrote it then there are no lies. Further, if there are no lies in the Bible, then on at least one occassion, a donkey talked.

                                    My response:

                                    The Bible is the most sensible revelation of God given to and written down by man. Until science can DEMONSTRATE to us the CAUSE and the SOURCE of biological LIFE and the SOURCE of the energy and the CAUSE to have that energy explode to produce the BIG BANG, I chose to believe in the Biblical account of the creation of Man and the Universe.

                                    Also, I believe that the Bible are without error and lies in the original tongue. Errors may have crept in in translations and in theological extrapolations. So, it is necessary for us lay people to study the Bible using LOGIC and REASON and word-for-word and verse-by-verse study to point out and eliminate CONTRADICTIONS and INCONSISTENCIES so as to purify the Bible of these errors due to translations and theological biases. There are also errors from introducing non-Biblical philosophies like the "immortality of souls" when the Bible declares that "GOD ALONE IS IMMORTAL."

                                    You wrote:

                                    Now I could point out other problems where what is recorded conflicts with what may be deduced from science or other sources, but I think a talking donkey is sufficient to raise doubts.

                                    My response:

                                    As for a donkey talking, I do not believe this is a lie or an error. It is so obviously unbelievable so that it MUST BE TRUE! I believe the writer reported this incident against all his humanly reasons but was forced to include it in his narrative to be TRUE to the words of God.

                                    May God bless us all.

                                    Isa
                                    In Service to the Lay People of God
                                    ---------


                                    --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "William" <eliadefollower@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Isa,
                                    >
                                    > The question as to whether or not we may factually know if biblical writers lied or not rests largely on what you call a "lie". Scripture claims that God is not human, therefore God does not lie. This implies that humans do. If then humans wrote the Bible, then they lied in doing so. If God wrote it then there are no lies. Further, if there are no lies in the Bible, then on at least one occassion, a donkey talked.
                                    >
                                    > Now I could point out other problems where what is recorded conflicts with what may be deduced from science or other sources, but I think a talking donkey is sufficient to raise doubts.
                                    >
                                    > Bill
                                    >
                                    > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Isa" <isalcordo@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Hi, to all:
                                    > >
                                    > > The issue raised by Bill cannot be resolved in this forum because we do not know factually whether or not some of the Bible writers lied.
                                    > >
                                    > > As for science, it cannot be applied to spiritual revelations until we find ways to test empirically spiritual assertions.
                                    > >
                                    > > What we can and must do in our study of the Bible as a whole and the Trinity specifically is to use LOGIC, REASON (which I define as the intellectual acceptance of conclusions demanded by logic from valid premises) and the RESOLUTION OF APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS throughout all the books of the Bible, without resorting to claims of errors or lies on the part of writers, realizing that the New Testament declarations over-ride OT declarations, the NT being a set of NEW REVELATIONS to give light to OT declarations.
                                    > >
                                    > > Thus, without the NT, we are bound to recognize but One God who is the God of Israel alone - YHWH or Yahweh or Jehoval. With the NT, however, we are bound to accept that the "Almighty One of Israel" happens to be also the "Glorified Jesus of the book of Revelation" who happended to be both FINITE and, therefore, CANNOT BE THE ONE INFINITE GOD of humankind but simply His MANIFESTATIONS to finite being at differents stages of man's divine history.
                                    > >
                                    > > May God bless us all.
                                    > >
                                    > > Isa
                                    > > In Service to the Lay People of God
                                    > > --------
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, tcmadd2@ wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Folks,
                                    > > >
                                    > > > I once read an article in National Geographic about gorillas who were being raised in reasearch lab. They were being taught sign language and videotaped 24/7. On one night after the humans had left one young gorilla took another one's doll and tore it up. When confronted by the trainer/scientists he lied, saying he did not do it.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Another occassion he got into a conflict with the other gorilla over something. He got quite upset about the issue and signed "toilet" followed by the sign for "face" and "you". In other words, he was deliberately insulting his buddy.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Tom M.
                                    > > > Fullerton
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > -----Original Message-----
                                    > > > From: Jeff <preachingjeff@>
                                    > > > To: biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > > Sent: Tue, May 11, 2010 10:59 am
                                    > > > Subject: [biblicalapologetics] Re: The Great Trinity Debate
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > I did have one thing I did want to ask. Science may agree on the lying part, but why? Why do people lie? Why do people teach themselves to lie? Does science have the answer to that question? Of course, if the Bible is true about us being sinners, we have an explanation.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Jefff
                                    > > >
                                    > > > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "William" <eliadefollower@> wrote:
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > I would like to raise teh simple, but sometimes troublesome question of what assumptions do we bring to the table when we interpret scripture to support one position or another in regards to the Trinity. Scripture clearly tells us that humans are sinners and liars, and modern science clearly agrees at least on the lying part. Do we lie to ourselves in how we interpret scripture, or is that the one area that is excluded. Do we assume that the findings of science are irrelevant in understanding scripture or do we seek to use them in understanding, even if doing so forces us to change from traditional understandings. If we reject the findings of science, are we certain that we are allowed to do so by scripture? Do we truly understand the original languages perfectly enough to dare ascert that our position is clearly correct, or are we relying on the opinions of other lying, sinful humans and refusing to argue with them.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > Bill
                                    > > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > >
                                    >
                                  • William
                                    Isa, You wish to use logic and reason to eliminate errors and restore the pure original scriptures. That is well and good, but as you noted, theological
                                    Message 17 of 25 , May 13, 2010
                                      Isa,

                                      You wish to use logic and reason to eliminate errors and restore the pure original scriptures. That is well and good, but as you noted, theological biases caused some of these errors in what was passed on. How do you eliminate your own theological biases when you seek to restore?

                                      Now, since you so nicely responded as I hoped in regards to Balaam's ride speaking, would you care to explain the worldview that allows for both this to occur and all the findings of modern science? I admit that it is possible, but it is only through a very narrow and not widely known worldview. And, NO, I am not sharing it in general forum. You can if you both know it and are willing, or share it with me privately. However, the answer of the random intervention of God to allow such things challenges all modern science (conservation of matter and energy) so it does not fit the criteria.

                                      Bill
                                    • William
                                      Paul, I think that in large part we tend to agree more than disagree. I have studied in enough different areas of knowledge that I find the easy answers
                                      Message 18 of 25 , May 13, 2010
                                        Paul,

                                        I think that in large part we tend to agree more than disagree. I have studied in enough different areas of knowledge that I find the easy answers usually don't fit all the way across the board. It is this type of study that has led me to the conclusion that the numerous people studying the scriptures have almost all the same initial assumptions, and thus have almost all the same ultimate problems in their conclusions.

                                        Also, as I noted in a response to Isa, I do beleive that donkeys are capable of what would be preceived as intelligible verbal communication with humans, just as dogs, cats and other species that have close enough ties to humans can. Other species would be capable, but for the most part do not with to try. However, this also requires certain specific assumptions, most of which are suggested by what many would consider to be borderline questionable scientific studies, including: Oschmann, Jahn and Dunne, and Sheldrake.

                                        Bill

                                        --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, Paul Leonard <anotherpaul2001@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Hi
                                        >
                                        > I have no doubts that science can lie to us or be wrong. I also have no doubts that theologians are likewise capable of it. I merely raise the question about what assumptions we are bringing to the table.
                                        >
                                        > True, as well as what attitude we bring.
                                        >
                                        > I for one assume that scripture and the findings of science may be reconciled. I assume that both are dealing with the same reality. However, I also assume that when someone starts with defining something as true and unchallengable, they are far more likely to end up lying to me then when they start as defining something as true until evidence suggests it is not.
                                        >
                                        > I am sure we all can identify such cases.
                                        >
                                        > Further, the more people who are attempting to prove something true or false as opposed to agreeing that some point is true by definition and unchallengable, the more I am inclined to trust the ultimate outcome. Theologians hold predefined truths to be true without question, scientists keep challenging what is accepted as true and seeking to prove it either true or false. Neither side is guaranteed to be ultimately correct, but at least science offers the appearance of seeking to confirm what is believed true.
                                        > Well I am not sure that is totally true. As an example if enough peop0le study the Bible and determine it is true, then they will also assume that the Basics are true also. It is in the details that disagreement comes into play.
                                        >
                                        > One quick pair of examples, theology holds that Jesus was fully God and fully human (a contradiction) by definition.
                                        >
                                        > Note to be accurate you should say some theology holds that Jesus is both god and man. Not all theology does so.
                                        > Science holds that photons are both particles and waves (also a contradiction) because testing so indicates. The definition rests on a specific worldview and a specific understanding of certain passages in scripture, as opposed to any other possible understandings or worldview. The testing relies on numerous people trying numerous times and consistently obtaining the same information, and this includes hiogh school students the world around, regardless of worldview or understanding.
                                        >
                                        > You might like, 'it is so because so and so has decreed it to be'. However I like 'it seems to be so because everyone, myself included, who have tested it gets the same answer'.
                                        >
                                        > The problem can also be related to the test and the assumptions behind the test and the 'expected' results. I deal with that in Chemistry all the time. Everyone starts with assumptions. The real test comes when we are faced with genuine and specific challenges to those assumptions. Broad assumptions are of minimal value until refined to a specific case/application.
                                        >
                                        > Bill
                                        >
                                      • Paul Leonard
                                        Hi Bill, Below you make a statement I question. Now, since you so nicely responded as I hoped in regards to Balaam s ride speaking, ... However, the answer
                                        Message 19 of 25 , May 13, 2010

                                          Hi Bill,

                                          Below you make a statement I question.


                                          Now, since you so nicely responded as I hoped in regards to Balaam's ride speaking, ...  However, the answer of the random intervention of God to allow such things challenges all modern science (conservation of matter and energy) so it does not fit the criteria.

                                          A.P. IF there is an all powerful God, who created all things, then is it not reasonable that he is capable of manipulating anything he wishes or applying scientific principles we are not yet aware of. "Modern" science is not omniscient.

                                          Paul

                                        • William
                                          Paul, If there is an omnipotent God who created all things then His ability to influence whatever He would wish would be present by definition. However, the
                                          Message 20 of 25 , May 14, 2010
                                            Paul,

                                            If there is an omnipotent God who created all things then His ability to influence whatever He would wish would be present by definition. However, the existence of such a being is likewise outside the realms of modern science. It does fit with traditonal theology though.

                                            However, a god who operates purely within what appears to be the boundaries of science could likewise do all that the biblical god does. This assumption requires humans change their common understanding of reality in favor of truths that have ben recognized for at least 2500 years, if not far longer. It also requires that scientists accept some concepts for which there is ambiguous evidence rather than the currently more popular explanations for the evidence.

                                            Which way is correct is open to debate, but I would note that the Bible teaches that the wrong path seems very good to most people, and is far easier to follow. The path I propose is downright scary, and rejected as highly improbable by most. It also leads to measurable changes and great abundance of what many people preceive to be "fruits of the spirit".

                                            Bill

                                            --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, Paul Leonard <anotherpaul2001@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Hi Bill,
                                            >
                                            > Below you make a statement I question.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Now, since you so nicely responded as I hoped in regards to Balaam's ride speaking, ... However, the answer of the random intervention of God to allow such things challenges all modern science (conservation of matter and energy) so it does not fit the criteria.
                                            > A.P. IF there is an all powerful God, who created all things, then is it not reasonable that he is capable of manipulating anything he wishes or applying scientific principles we are not yet aware of. "Modern" science is not omniscient.
                                            >
                                            > Paul
                                            >
                                          • Paul Leonard
                                            Hi, If there is an omnipotent God who created all things then His ability to influence whatever He would wish would be present by definition. However, the
                                            Message 21 of 25 , May 15, 2010
                                              Hi,


                                              If there is an omnipotent God who created all things then His ability to influence whatever He would wish would be present by definition. However, the existence of such a being is likewise outside the realms of modern science. It does fit with traditonal theology though.

                                              OK

                                              However, a god who operates purely within what appears to be the boundaries of science could likewise do all that the biblical god does. This assumption requires humans change their common understanding of reality in favor of truths that have ben recognized for at least 2500 years, if not far longer. It also requires that scientists accept some concepts for which there is ambiguous evidence rather than the currently more popular explanations for the evidence.

                                              I would agree

                                              Which way is correct is open to debate, but I would note that the Bible teaches that the wrong path seems very good to most people, and is far easier to follow. The path I propose is downright scary, and rejected as highly improbable by most. It also leads to measurable changes and great abundance of what many people preceive to be "fruits of the spirit". 

                                              Being unpopular and even not easy to follow still does not make it right. Now it doesn't make it wrong either.

                                              I am interested in hearing about the "path" you are suggesting and how it ties to Scripture, which is necessary on this forum.

                                              Paul
                                              Bill

                                              --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, Paul Leonard <anotherpaul2001@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Hi Bill,
                                              >
                                              > Below you make a statement I question.
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Now, since you so nicely responded as I hoped in regards to Balaam's ride speaking, ... However, the answer of the random intervention of God to allow such things challenges all modern science (conservation of matter and energy) so it does not fit the criteria.
                                              > A.P. IF there is an all powerful God, who created all things, then is it not reasonable that he is capable of manipulating anything he wishes or applying scientific principles we are not yet aware of. "Modern" science is not omniscient.
                                              >
                                              > Paul
                                              >

                                            • William
                                              Paul, The easiest place to start to show a difference between an interpretation that is compatible with science and traditional theology would lie in a review
                                              Message 22 of 25 , May 16, 2010
                                                Paul,

                                                The easiest place to start to show a difference between an interpretation that is compatible with science and traditional theology would lie in a review of the account of the fall in Genesis 3. Clearly the Hebrew tells us that God spoke firmly regarding not eating the fruit of the tree. And taking this as a command might be quite proper. However, what is the exact nature and meaning of the command.

                                                That is to ask, is the command like that of a parent to their child of do not cross the street alone, which implies do not violate my wishes, or is it like that, also of a parent, of do not touch the burners on the stove, which implies that if the act is done there will be harm irregardless of the parent's wishes. To answer that question, let us consider some points that I am often told are irrelevant to the story, but I find highly relevant. This is, just who was Eve going to change by eating the fruit? She preceived that it would make one wiser, but which one did she see as getting wiser? If we consider a fundamental law of physics and psychiatry we know that the one person she could not have been truly aware of to improve was EVE. No one is capable of truly preceiving themselves, but merely preceiving an image that they have decreed to be themself, an image that they hold up in front of their true self and proclaim to be real and use to isolate themselves from other persons and even God. Further, individuals act in accordance with how they preceive this image to be and what they preceive its needs to be, leading to multiple problems including murder, theft, drunkenness and numerous other problems defined by Paul as fruits of the flesh, or the results of Sin.

                                                Now taking this approach, that is staying with science and God's command to Adam and Eve as being one which He gave because its violation would lead to problems that God did not desire but were also inevitable, rather then God's command as one of an arbitary wish, we are able to make Sin a scientific reality and the consequences of Sin to be logical certainties without having to charge God with arbitariness in who suffers the consequences and who does not.

                                                Admittedly I have not explained here just how the consequences are avoided through faith in Jesus (actually faith like Jesus which is actually more correct if you know the Greek) but it can logically be done.

                                                Now if you truly wish to pursue this further, I would suggest that we do it outside the forum as to many people jumping in will surely muddy the waters and make it impossible to explain in sufficient detail for you to decide if you find it plausible or not.

                                                Bill
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.