How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by steve7150 » Sun Mar 14, 2021 8:53 pm

I don't see that there being a beginning to God's acts implies that God had a beginning.









Why does it matter if it was God's first act or seventh act? If Christ came out of God or came forth from God is it significant if God first ate lunch? Unless you mean God's first act of creation, but then do you believe Christ is created?

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by steve7150 » Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:00 pm

An interesting point that i rarely hear mentioned is that if the Holy Spirit is a person, shouldn't Jesus be the son of The Holy Spirit?

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by darinhouston » Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:34 pm

steve7150 wrote:
Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:00 pm
An interesting point that i rarely hear mentioned is that if the Holy Spirit is a person, shouldn't Jesus be the son of The Holy Spirit?
A related note: one of the main things that nagged at me when I first started questioning this doctrine was my attempts to "diagram" John 1 and keep track of the referents. I asked myself "why isn't the LOGOS" a fourth person of a Holy Quaternary? or the third person instead of the Son? If it is a Person and it pre-existed Jesus and was what "became enfleshed as" Jesus, then the LOGOS is part of the Trinity. If not a person, then how did something non-personal become Jesus? Did the LOGOS quit being the LOGOS at the nativity? It made me realize pretty quickly how symbolic and poetic/stylistic this passage was meant to be (particularly in contrast to how we take Proverbs Wisdom passages) and that we Westerners take just as silly an approach to it as Dispensationalists do Revelation. We may still have a lack of full knowledge of what it does mean, but the traditional way seems to really miss the boat and it's unfortunate we've quieted all orthodox scholarship on alternatives for millennia through bad politics.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by Paidion » Mon Mar 15, 2021 11:32 am

But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you. (Rom 8:11 NKJV)

If, now, the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his spirit that resides in you.
(Rom 8:11 New World Translation)


This verse (in any translation) speaks of the spirit of "Him who raised Jesus from the dead". That "Him" who raised Jesus is the Father.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

commonsense
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2021 11:25 pm

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by commonsense » Tue Mar 16, 2021 12:20 am

darinhouston wrote:
Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:34 pm
A related note: one of the main things that nagged at me when I first started questioning this doctrine was my attempts to "diagram" John 1 and keep track of the referents. I asked myself "why isn't the LOGOS" a fourth person of a Holy Quaternary? or the third person instead of the Son? If it is a Person and it pre-existed Jesus and was what "became enfleshed as" Jesus, then the LOGOS is part of the Trinity. If not a person, then how did something non-personal become Jesus? Did the LOGOS quit being the LOGOS at the nativity? It made me realize pretty quickly how symbolic and poetic/stylistic this passage was meant to be (particularly in contrast to how we take Proverbs Wisdom passages) and that we Westerners take just as silly an approach to it as Dispensationalists do Revelation. We may still have a lack of full knowledge of what it does mean, but the traditional way seems to really miss the boat and it's unfortunate we've quieted all orthodox scholarship on alternatives for millennia through bad politics.
Darin, the Logos as presented by Heraclitus who lived sometime around 500 BC, was the rational intelligence/mind of the universe;logic, hence the word Logos. I haven't studied into him too much, but you can see the influence of this philosopher, as well as others, in the writings of the New Testament. but, they use "the Word" because this is how it's described in the Old Testament. Just as Moses said, "the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart that you should obey it." I think the Trinity is a stumbling block that prevents people from understanding what is actually being said. God is not a man, and while Jesus may be a good way of explaining God to younger people; as Paul says, when we mature, it's time to put away these things and delve deeper because it just doesn't add up.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by darinhouston » Tue Mar 16, 2021 8:20 am

commonsense wrote:
Tue Mar 16, 2021 12:20 am
darinhouston wrote:
Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:34 pm
A related note: one of the main things that nagged at me when I first started questioning this doctrine was my attempts to "diagram" John 1 and keep track of the referents. I asked myself "why isn't the LOGOS" a fourth person of a Holy Quaternary? or the third person instead of the Son? If it is a Person and it pre-existed Jesus and was what "became enfleshed as" Jesus, then the LOGOS is part of the Trinity. If not a person, then how did something non-personal become Jesus? Did the LOGOS quit being the LOGOS at the nativity? It made me realize pretty quickly how symbolic and poetic/stylistic this passage was meant to be (particularly in contrast to how we take Proverbs Wisdom passages) and that we Westerners take just as silly an approach to it as Dispensationalists do Revelation. We may still have a lack of full knowledge of what it does mean, but the traditional way seems to really miss the boat and it's unfortunate we've quieted all orthodox scholarship on alternatives for millennia through bad politics.
Darin, the Logos as presented by Heraclitus who lived sometime around 500 BC, was the rational intelligence/mind of the universe;logic, hence the word Logos. I haven't studied into him too much, but you can see the influence of this philosopher, as well as others, in the writings of the New Testament. but, they use "the Word" because this is how it's described in the Old Testament. Just as Moses said, "the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart that you should obey it." I think the Trinity is a stumbling block that prevents people from understanding what is actually being said. God is not a man, and while Jesus may be a good way of explaining God to younger people; as Paul says, when we mature, it's time to put away these things and delve deeper because it just doesn't add up.
That's at least part of the history of LOGOS - I understand there is a broader pagan relevance as well apart from Heraclitus. One of the paths I'm exploring is that John was speaking to a particularly gnostic audience in his gospel, using terminology and themes they related to in order to bring them the gospel in terms they understood.

commonsense
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2021 11:25 pm

Re: How Translators Injected "the Third Person" into the New Testament

Post by commonsense » Wed Mar 17, 2021 8:03 pm

darinhouston wrote:
Tue Mar 16, 2021 8:20 am
That's at least part of the history of LOGOS - I understand there is a broader pagan relevance as well apart from Heraclitus. One of the paths I'm exploring is that John was speaking to a particularly gnostic audience in his gospel, using terminology and themes they related to in order to bring them the gospel in terms they understood.
Darin, If John was spreading the word of God, then he was speaking to all mankind. We are also the audience if we are reading it.
commonsense wrote:
Tue Mar 16, 2021 12:20 am

It made me realize pretty quickly how symbolic and poetic/stylistic this passage was meant to be (particularly in contrast to how we take Proverbs Wisdom passages)
I totally agree with your viewpoint. Poetry is a universal language.

Post Reply

Return to “The Trinity”