Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

For Those Who Say Trinity is Clearly Stated in Text...

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

  • For Those Who Say Trinity is Clearly Stated in Text...

    Your own compatriots do not agree.

    Finally a compendium of veritable, I mean verifiable data which no one can diss, agree with.

    Luther:

    “It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man.”[102]

    [102] Martin Luther, Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), pp. 406-407.

    Chandler, Kegan. The God of Jesus in Light of Christian Dogma (Kindle Locations 940-942). Restoration Fellowship. Kindle Edition.

    George Joyce:

    “In Scripture there is yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together.”[103]

    [103] George Joyce, “The Blessed Trinity,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 15 (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912), p. 47.

    Indeed, we should not forget that “the word Trinity is not found in the Bible… [because] it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church until the fourth century.”[109]

    [109] R. A. Finlayson, “Trinity,” Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3 (Westmont: IVP, Tyndale House Publishers, 1980), p. 1597, emphasis added.

    The trinity of God is defined by the Church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. That
    belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical
    belief.[114]

    [114] John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Touchstone, 1995), p. 899.

    The New Catholic Encyclopedia likewise reveals that discussions of the Trinity within a first-century context are acutely anachronistic: It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and the theological elaboration of the Mystery of the Trinity… Historians of dogma and systematic theologians [recognize] that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma “One God in three Persons” became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought… it was the product of three centuries of development.[115]

    [115] Thomas Carson, The New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XIV (Farmington (Farmington Hills: Gale, 2003), p. 295.

    Bruce Metzger, know that guy?

    Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon… While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do.[116]

    [116] Bruce Metzger, Michael Coogan, The Oxford Companion to the Bible (Oxford: OUP, 1993), p. 782.


    Chandler, Kegan. The God of Jesus in Light of Christian Dogma (Kindle Location 944-12271). Restoration Fellowship. Kindle Edition.

    So then...what to do with y'ALL's scholars boys and girls?


  • #2
    Originally posted by nothead View Post
    Your own compatriots do not agree.

    Finally a compendium of veritable, I mean verifiable data which no one can diss, agree with.

    Luther:

    “It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man.”[102]

    [102] Martin Luther, Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), pp. 406-407.

    Chandler, Kegan. The God of Jesus in Light of Christian Dogma (Kindle Locations 940-942). Restoration Fellowship. Kindle Edition.

    George Joyce:

    “In Scripture there is yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together.”[103]

    [103] George Joyce, “The Blessed Trinity,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 15 (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912), p. 47.

    Indeed, we should not forget that “the word Trinity is not found in the Bible… [because] it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church until the fourth century.”[109]

    [109] R. A. Finlayson, “Trinity,” Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3 (Westmont: IVP, Tyndale House Publishers, 1980), p. 1597, emphasis added.

    The trinity of God is defined by the Church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. That
    belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical
    belief.[114]

    [114] John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Touchstone, 1995), p. 899.

    The New Catholic Encyclopedia likewise reveals that discussions of the Trinity within a first-century context are acutely anachronistic: It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and the theological elaboration of the Mystery of the Trinity… Historians of dogma and systematic theologians [recognize] that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma “One God in three Persons” became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought… it was the product of three centuries of development.[115]

    [115] Thomas Carson, The New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XIV (Farmington (Farmington Hills: Gale, 2003), p. 295.

    Bruce Metzger, know that guy?

    Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon… While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do.[116]

    [116] Bruce Metzger, Michael Coogan, The Oxford Companion to the Bible (Oxford: OUP, 1993), p. 782.


    Chandler, Kegan. The God of Jesus in Light of Christian Dogma (Kindle Location 944-12271). Restoration Fellowship. Kindle Edition.

    So then...what to do with y'ALL's scholars boys and girls?
    Terms, words, statements, develpments. blah blah, blah.
    The Trinity is REVEALED in the Bible.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by john wilcox View Post
      Terms, words, statements, develpments. blah blah, blah.
      The Trinity is REVEALED in the Bible.
      Yes, under a very strict lineage of traditional interpretations. Likely not very likely sir.

      This is WHY even your own greatest scholars have said what I've cut 'n' pasted.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nothead View Post
        Your own compatriots do not agree.

        Finally a compendium of veritable, I mean verifiable data which no one can diss, agree with.

        Luther:“It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man.”[102]

        [102] Martin Luther, Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), pp. 406-407.
        One can read Luther's entire sermon here. The sermon is not about denying the "Trinity" or the word, "Trinity."

        Luther goes on to immediately state:

        For this reason it sounds somewhat cold and we had better speak of "God' than of the "Trinity."

        This word signifies that there are three persons in God. It is a heavenly mystery which the world cannot understand. I have often told you that this, as well as every other article of faith, must not be based upon reason or comparisons, but must be understood and established by means of passages from the Scriptures, for God has the only perfect knowledge and knows how to speak concerning himself.
        He concludes a few sections later, "Therefore we cling to the Scriptures, those passages which testify of the Trinity of God, and we say: I know very well that in God there are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; but how they can be one I do not know, neither should I know it" (Ibid., 410).

        Elsewhere Luther comments on the inadequacy of the term "Trinity": "The words trinitas, unitas are really mathematical terms. And yet we can't talk about God without using such words. But at the same time, it is also true that when we use human language to speak about God, it seems to have a ring to it, a whole new connotation" [Complete Sermons of Martin Luther Volume 6, pp. 206-207]. "True (Trinity) is not choice German, nor has it a pleasing sound, when we designate God by the word 'Dreifaltigkeit' (nor is the Latin, Trinitas, more elegant): but since we have no better term, we must employee these" [Complete Sermons of Martin Luther Volume 4.2, pp. 7-8].

        I'm sure a plentiful supply of similar sentiment from Luther could be brought forth as testimony to the fact he didn't deny the Trinity, and also used the word positively.

        JS
        Last edited by James Swan; 09-13-18, 09:45 PM. Reason: typo

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by James Swan View Post

          One can read Luther's entire sermon here. The sermon is not about denying the "Trinity" or the word, "Trinity."

          Luther goes on to immediately state:



          He concludes a few sections later, "Therefore we cling to the Scriptures, those passages which testify of the Trinity of God, and we say: I know very well that in God there are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; but how they can be one I do not know, neither should I know it" (Ibid., 410).

          Elsewhere Luther comments on the inadequacy of the term "Trinity": "The words trinitas, unitas are really mathematical terms. And yet we can't talk about God without using such words. But at the same time, it is also true that when we use human language to speak about God, it seems to have a ring to it, a whole new connotation" [Complete Sermons of Martin Luther Volume 6, pp. 206-207]. "True (Trinity) is not choice German, nor has it a pleasing sound, when we designate God by the word 'Dreifaltigkeit' (nor is the Latin, Trinitas, more elegant): but since we have no better term, we must employee these" [Complete Sermons of Martin Luther Volume 4.2, pp. 7-8].

          I'm sure a plentiful supply of similar sentiment from Luther could be brought forth as testimony to the fact he didn't deny the Trinity, and also used the word positively.

          JS
          "...it seems to have a whole new RING to it, a whole new connOTATION? Whoo HOO, A'll SAY. All say HALLELUYAH since SHEMA SAYS God is ONE not three in the PEAPOD of God sir.

          What is ONE but a SINGULAR mathematical connotation in the ECHAD? I'll echad your trinitas and raise you a deuteronomous theos sir.

          Luther thought "trinitas" was more elegant than "drafaltigkeit?" Whoo MOO. They mean the same thing, Luther must be a GENIUS discriminating between the GUTTERAL sounds of German
          compared to Latin?

          Inadequacy of human language? Did God ever say in Text, the Shema is INADEQUATE sir? WHOO butta BEAVIS says the First Command is INADEQUATE? God being ONE (and not another) is the very MEANING of Shema as described by the scribe Mk 12, "no other one but HE," sir. What you are describing is a JUXTAPOSITION between the entirely ADEQUATE Shema, and the inordinately DEFICIENT "Trinity" sir. And the thoughts that accompany each in turn sir. One set of thoughts sacred and pristine in faith. The odder one philosophical
          as a philosopher might ponder.

          What is Shema, Lutheran? Does ANY Lutheran know what Shema is sir? YHWH our elohim, YHWH one. You shall love YHWH with all of your heart soul and strength.
          Last edited by nothead; 09-14-18, 03:08 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by nothead View Post

            "...it seems to have a whole new RING to it, a whole new connOTATION? Whoo HOO, A'll SAY. All say HALLELUYAH since SHEMA SAYS God is ONE not three in the PEAPOD of God sir.

            What is ONE but a SINGULAR mathematical connotation in the ECHAD? I'll echad your trinitas and raise you a deuteronomous theos sir.

            Luther thought "trinitas" was more elegant than "drafaltigkeit?" Whoo MOO. They mean the same thing, Luther must be a GENIUS discriminating between the GUTTERAL sounds of German
            compared to Latin?

            Inadequacy of human language? Did God ever say in Text, the Shema is INADEQUATE sir? WHOO butta BEAVIS says the First Command is INADEQUATE? God being ONE (and not another) is the very MEANING of Shema as described by the scribe Mk 12, "no other one but HE," sir. What you are describing is a JUXTAPOSITION between the entirely ADEQUATE Shema, and the inordinately DEFICIENT "Trinity" sir. And the thoughts that accompany each in turn sir. One set of thoughts sacred and pristine in faith. The odder one philosophical
            as a philosopher might ponder.

            What is Shema, Lutheran? Does ANY Lutheran know what Shema is sir? YHWH our elohim, YHWH one. You shall love YHWH with all of your heart soul and strength.
            I have no idea what you're talking about, but it's blatantly clear you cited Luther out of context... That's because you cut-and-pasted something from someone else without checking your facts first. I suggest that if you "love YHWH with all your heart soul and strength," YHWH would also like you to love your neighbor as yourself by quoting him accurately. Quoting someone out of context and attributing a false position to that person is doing harm to one's neighbor, even if that neighbor has been dead for 500 years.

            JS

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by James Swan View Post

              I have no idea what you're talking about, but it's blatantly clear you cited Luther out of context... That's because you cut-and-pasted something from someone else without checking your facts first. I suggest that if you "love YHWH with all your heart soul and strength," YHWH would also like you to love your neighbor as yourself by quoting him accurately. Quoting someone out of context and attributing a false position to that person is doing harm to one's neighbor, even if that neighbor has been dead for 500 years.

              JS
              For all of your brouh ha ha, Luther did say a fact, that the WORD "trinity" in whatever language is not Text itself.

              What you have therefore is a SUPPOSED concept in Text WITHOUT a coining term, pertaining to or referencing.

              DEMEANING the possibility of that concept even BEING in Text at all, wonderkund. I can chew my kund all day listening to WONDERKUNDS like you sir.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by nothead View Post

                For all of your brouh ha ha, Luther did say a fact, that the WORD "trinity" in whatever language is not Text itself.

                What you have therefore is a SUPPOSED concept in Text WITHOUT a coining term, pertaining to or referencing.

                DEMEANING the possibility of that concept even BEING in Text at all, wonderkund. I can chew my kund all day listening to WONDERKUNDS like you sir.
                Yes Luther says the word "Trinity" is not in sacred scripture, but he did not deny the concept. Does YHWH want you to quote Luther out of context? Why would YHWH want you to spread false information about Luther?


                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by James Swan View Post

                  Yes Luther says the word "Trinity" is not in sacred scripture, but he did not deny the concept. Does YHWH want you to quote Luther out of context? Why would YHWH want you to spread false information about Luther?

                  What false information was that James?

                  I just said you are DELEGATED to affirming the CONCEPT without any word REFERENCING in Text. What did I say that was false, falsehoodminer?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by nothead View Post
                    What false information was that James? I just said you are DELEGATED to affirming the CONCEPT without any word REFERENCING in Text. What did I say that was false, falsehoodminer?
                    Let's backup. You began by saying:

                    For Those Who Say Trinity is Clearly Stated in Text...
                    09-13-18, 07:53 PM
                    Your own compatriots do not agree.

                    Finally a compendium of veritable, I mean verifiable data which no one can diss, agree with.

                    Luther: "It is indeed true that the name 'Trinity' is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man."
                    In the context of Luther's statement, he goes on to say:

                    "Therefore we cling to the Scriptures, those passages which testify of the Trinity of God, and we say: I know very well that in God there are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; but how they can be one I do not know, neither should I know it" (Ibid., 410).

                    So Luther believes the Trinity is clearly stated in the text. This was just one comment from Luther, based on the context you cited. I could provide more.

                    Does YHWH want you to quote Luther out of context?
                    Last edited by James Swan; 09-14-18, 11:55 AM. Reason: typo

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by nothead View Post
                      Your own compatriots do not agree.

                      Finally a compendium of veritable, I mean verifiable data which no one can diss, agree with.

                      Luther:

                      “It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man.”[102]

                      [102] Martin Luther, Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), pp. 406-407.

                      Chandler, Kegan. The God of Jesus in Light of Christian Dogma (Kindle Locations 940-942). Restoration Fellowship. Kindle Edition.

                      George Joyce:

                      “In Scripture there is yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together.”[103]

                      [103] George Joyce, “The Blessed Trinity,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 15 (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912), p. 47.

                      Indeed, we should not forget that “the word Trinity is not found in the Bible… [because] it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church until the fourth century.”[109]

                      [109] R. A. Finlayson, “Trinity,” Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3 (Westmont: IVP, Tyndale House Publishers, 1980), p. 1597, emphasis added.

                      The trinity of God is defined by the Church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. That
                      belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical
                      belief.[114]

                      [114] John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Touchstone, 1995), p. 899.

                      The New Catholic Encyclopedia likewise reveals that discussions of the Trinity within a first-century context are acutely anachronistic: It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and the theological elaboration of the Mystery of the Trinity… Historians of dogma and systematic theologians [recognize] that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma “One God in three Persons” became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought… it was the product of three centuries of development.[115]

                      [115] Thomas Carson, The New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XIV (Farmington (Farmington Hills: Gale, 2003), p. 295.

                      Bruce Metzger, know that guy?

                      Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon… While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do.[116]

                      [116] Bruce Metzger, Michael Coogan, The Oxford Companion to the Bible (Oxford: OUP, 1993), p. 782.


                      Chandler, Kegan. The God of Jesus in Light of Christian Dogma (Kindle Location 944-12271). Restoration Fellowship. Kindle Edition.

                      So then...what to do with y'ALL's scholars boys and girls?
                      I would hardly think it a big deal Luther would say what anyone of rational intellect can say. That this name Trinity is not verbatim in scriptures. Doesn't matter on account of this name Trinity expressed what is in scriptures. Besides we modern English only Christians are under the impression the ancients to not say ,in refuting the heretics new words and terms word needed to express the ancient. The historical fact is , most of what anti Trinitarian Oneness and Unitarians erroneously teach today, is the precise contribution and imposition by decree to Trinitarian terminology. Therefore I have no idea what point you intended to make by this thread.

                      btw Luther as Wesley and John understood the Trinity as was understood by the medieval theologians .


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by James Swan View Post

                        Let's backup. You began by saying:



                        In the context of Luther's statement, he goes on to say:

                        "Therefore we cling to the Scriptures, those passages which testify of the Trinity of God, and we say: I know very well that in God there are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; but how they can be one I do not know, neither should I know it" (Ibid., 410).

                        So Luther believes the Trinity is clearly stated in the text. This was just one comment from Luther, based on the context you cited. I could provide more.

                        Does YHWH want you to quote Luther out of context?
                        Yes by concept but not by any singular term as in...Trinity, trinitas, tripartite, tri-prosopons, tri-anythingyouwantaboogywith.

                        What you have is a concept without anything to term, as we have today. This both makes the concept itself, more UNLIKELY, and the addition of the TERM Trinity, trinitas, Plokenspurer or whatevers...an ADDITION to Text sir. An ADDITION added to authorial INTENT sir.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Aeg4371 View Post

                          I would hardly think it a big deal Luther would say what anyone of rational intellect can say. That this name Trinity is not verbatim in scriptures. Doesn't matter on account of this name Trinity expressed what is in scriptures. Besides we modern English only Christians are under the impression the ancients to not say ,in refuting the heretics new words and terms word needed to express the ancient. The historical fact is , most of what anti Trinitarian Oneness and Unitarians erroneously teach today, is the precise contribution and imposition by decree to Trinitarian terminology. Therefore I have no idea what point you intended to make by this thread.

                          btw Luther as Wesley and John understood the Trinity as was understood by the medieval theologians .

                          Luther was a medieval theologian genius.

                          It would be very odd to have the CONCEPT of Trinity without a word to define, as in TRINITY sir. You THINKY think it is no big deal because you don't thinky THINK much sir.

                          It are peoples like YOU sir who thunky thought the NT AUTHORS are less adept as your Greek thunken DOCTORS were, Doctor Zhivago.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by nothead View Post

                            Yes by concept but not by any singular term as in...Trinity, trinitas, tripartite, tri-prosopons, tri-anythingyouwantaboogywith.

                            What you have is a concept without anything to term, as we have today. This both makes the concept itself, more UNLIKELY, and the addition of the TERM Trinity, trinitas, Plokenspurer or whatevers...an ADDITION to Text sir. An ADDITION added to authorial INTENT sir.

                            So, YHWH wants you to misquote Luther? What a strange god you worship.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by James Swan View Post


                              So, YHWH wants you to misquote Luther? What a strange god you worship.
                              Every word I quoted, he quoted. The common perception is that this was out of context, but NO...I am only saying what I think Luther MEANT by the words I quoted.

                              We can haggle onnis all day already. You wantoo go'on with you onnis here thingybobber, Swan Song?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X