The Trinity and the Old Testament

God, Christ, & The Holy Spirit
Jose
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2014 1:42 pm

Re: The Trinity and the Old Testament

Post by Jose » Fri Aug 14, 2015 2:17 am

dizerner wrote:I guess you're missing my point. In debate, you can't make a logical argument that also works against your own position.
I didn't miss your point. That's a given, isn't it? If you could show me where you think I've done that, I will try to clarify it.
dizerner wrote:But realize too, I never claimed the words "my lord" alone prove the Trinity, that would be absurd. That should really be obvious...
Yes, that is obvious, and I do realize it because I never said you were claiming that.

This is what you said:
dizerner wrote:Needless to say it supports rather than contradicts the Trinity. For us there is one Lord, and David calls him my Lord.
This is what I think you meant by that:
"Needless to say it (psalm 110:1) supports the trinity, [because] there is only one lord, and since David calls him (Jesus) lord, Jesus must be the one lord of the trinity."

So, is that remotely close to what you meant, or did I misunderstand you?

dizerner

Re: The Trinity and the Old Testament

Post by dizerner » Fri Aug 14, 2015 4:46 am

Yea, but it's indirect not direct support, as I previously said is the case. You seem to always want to make things direct support and only disprove them in that sense. We see from the NT that this means that whoever was "my Lord" ascended to the right hand of God. Also we see this often overlooked passage in Matthew:

43 He said to them, “How then does David, by the Spirit, call him ‘Lord,’ saying,
44 ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies
under your feet”’?
55 If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how is he his son?” 46 And no one was able to answer him a word


We've got some serious implications in this verse. It says that David called this Messiah Lord by the Spirit, yet he would also be his descendant. So how could David writing hundreds of years before Christ say "The Lord said to my Lord," if, as the Jews response indicated, a future Messianic Lord wouldn't really be considered David's "Lord" under Jewish understanding? Jesus was David's "Lord" even at the time of the writing of the Psalms and David's Lord hundreds of years later. And why so often the Jews' response to Jesus' claim that he would ascend and sit at the right hand of the Power was considered blasphemy? (Blasphemy was directed against God.) And we can also show how the writer of Hebrews uses Psa. 110:4 to show Christ's eternality, having neither beginning of days nor end of life but made like the Son of God, a priest perpetually. We could also use the argument of having all things subdued to the Son as a quality that is only befitting the Divine, as Hebrews 1 clearly shows us. Certainly Psalms 110 is an important theological verse that should be a part of any theistic Biblical paradigm.

Jose
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2014 1:42 pm

The Trinity and the Old Testament

Post by Jose » Fri Aug 14, 2015 2:31 pm

dizerner wrote:Yea, but it's indirect not direct support, as I previously said is the case.
Yes, that's true. It is indirect (in your opinion) since there is no scripture that links psalm 110 with the trinity.
dizerner wrote:You seem to always want to make things direct support and only disprove them in that sense.
How can anything be disproven otherwise? Besides that, it seems to be a wise thing to do. 1 Acts 17:1, 1Thess 5:21.
dizerner wrote:We see from the NT that this means that whoever was "my Lord" ascended to the right hand of God. Also we see this often overlooked passage in Matthew:

43 He said to them, “How then does David, by the Spirit, call him ‘Lord,’ saying,
44 ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies
under your feet”’?
55 If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how is he his son?” 46 And no one was able to answer him a word


We've got some serious implications in this verse. It says that David called this Messiah Lord by the Spirit, yet he would also be his descendant. So how could David writing hundreds of years before Christ say "The Lord said to my Lord," if, as the Jews response indicated, a future Messianic Lord wouldn't really be considered David's "Lord" under Jewish understanding? Jesus was David's "Lord" even at the time of the writing of the Psalms and David's Lord hundreds of years later. And why so often the Jews' response to Jesus' claim that he would ascend and sit at the right hand of the Power was considered blasphemy? (Blasphemy was directed against God.) And we can also show how the writer of Hebrews uses Psa. 110:4 to show Christ's eternality, having neither beginning of days nor end of life but made like the Son of God, a priest perpetually. We could also use the argument of having all things subdued to the Son as a quality that is only befitting the Divine, as Hebrews 1 clearly shows us.
All I have been trying to point out is that there is a distinction between the two words that are represented by the word "lord" in this verse. Have you noticed that the first LORD is in all caps, and the second lord is not? The second "lord" - adoni- is not a divine name or title. Anyone in authority (like David) can be called "adoni" without the implication that they are divine. That is all I am saying.

I personally do not see how your references from Matthew and Hebrews help settle the meaning or use of the word "adoni", which is what we are talking about. Obviously, you disagree, and think that Jesus being called lord means that he's God. So far, your arguments, which you admit are indirect implications without direct scriptural support, are not enough to convince me that your interpretation is correct so I suppose we"ll just have to leave it at that.
dizerner wrote:Certainly Psalms 110 is an important theological verse that should be a part of any theistic Biblical paradigm.
Seeing how it's the most often quoted OT verse by the NT writers, I would agree with you on that point. The question then becomes - Why did they quote it so often? Was it to imply that Jesus is God, or to prove that he is the Messiah? I think the evidence heavily leans towards the latter.

dizerner

Re: The Trinity and the Old Testament

Post by dizerner » Sat Aug 15, 2015 4:16 am

Jose wrote:How can anything be disproven otherwise? Besides that, it seems to be a wise thing to do. 1 Acts 17:1, 1Thess 5:21.
A lot of crucial doctrines only have indirect support. I don't agree it's not a "wise thing" to do, because why would you need to be a good Berean if no doctrine needed intense study. There's not a single Scripture anywhere that says all doctrines are easily and plainly stated.... many that say otherwise.
The second "lord" - adoni- is not a divine name or title. Anyone in authority (like David) can be called "adoni" without the implication that they are divine. That is all I am saying.
Trinitarians all agree that Lord is both a divine title (it surely is) and a title of respect used for people. If this particular Lord fits divine attributes, then the title Lord may very well be divine. I know it says "Yahweh said to my Lord" and I know "Lord" doesn't automatically mean God. But Lord can mean God.
Obviously, you disagree, and think that Jesus being called lord means that he's God.
I never once argued that point... I argued that Paul said for us there is one Lord as a divine title.
dizerner wrote: Was it to imply that Jesus is God, or to prove that he is the Messiah? I think the evidence heavily leans towards the latter.
It's not necessarily an either/or proposition. It can be a both/and. God is with us was a Messianic title.

User avatar
21centpilgrim
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:17 pm

Re: The Trinity and the Old Testament

Post by 21centpilgrim » Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:06 am

Dizerner, you said
Trinitarians all agree that Lord is both a divine title (it surely is) and a title of respect used for people. If this particular Lord fits divine attributes, then the title Lord may very well be divine. I know it says "Yahweh said to my Lord" and I know "Lord" doesn't automatically mean God. But Lord can mean God.
Where is adoni specifically ever used to refer to God? Of course Lord can mean God, but can you show where adoni means God?

This is the main focus of asking the question of ps. 110 imo.

Thanks
Then those who feared the LORD spoke with each other, and the LORD listened to what they said. In his presence, a scroll of remembrance was written to record the names of those who feared him and loved to think about him.

dizerner

Re: The Trinity and the Old Testament

Post by dizerner » Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:38 am

21centpilgrim wrote:Dizerner, you said
Trinitarians all agree that Lord is both a divine title (it surely is) and a title of respect used for people. If this particular Lord fits divine attributes, then the title Lord may very well be divine. I know it says "Yahweh said to my Lord" and I know "Lord" doesn't automatically mean God. But Lord can mean God.
Where is adoni specifically ever used to refer to God? Of course Lord can mean God, but can you show where adoni means God?

This is the main focus of asking the question of ps. 110 imo.

Thanks
I hadn't really been aware of the differences. So it seems the difference is only derived from the Masoretic vowel pointing, and thus would be a later addition (of where the Masoretes felt it should or should not apply). Indeed, most of the times adonai is used with God, it has a special ending vowel. Adonai with the special long a is used 315 times with YWHW. Adonai seems to be plural of intensity like elohim.

Still over 30 times the lesser adoni is applied to God, such as in the following:

“Three times a year all your males are to appear before the Lord LORD, the God of Israel” (Exod. 34:23)

When we get over to the NT, the practice is adopted to call YHWH as "Lord" in all instances. The Jews had by that time always written the vowels for Adonai under YHWH, and that is where the bastardization "YeHoWaH" came from.

Taking all this into consideration, I come up with the same conclusions I had before. Lord is the generic term for master or owner, and is often applied to God. Using Lord here does not prove anything, but fits remarkably well with a Divine Son.

Bless.

Post Reply

Return to “Theology Proper, Christology, Pneumatology”