Trinity.

[TheEditor]

I'm not so sure JR. For starters, there was a slough of verses that both you and Dizerner posted. Not all of them were Messianic, but some clearly were. As you likely know, the Messianic passages, it seems, were cherry-picked by the Apostles via the enlightening power of God's Spirit. To take an entire chapter or two of the prophets and blanketly apply them to the Messiah seems to be beyond what is written. If the Apostels applied it, I will.

But getting back to Isaiah 59; the final part of the chapter that deals with ""And to Zion the Repurchaser will certainly come, and to those turning from transgression in Jacob,” is the utterance of Jehovah" (Isaiah 59:20) would certainly apply to Jesus. Other than that, I don't see Jesus in chapter 59, unless I am missing something. Isaiah 59 in it's totality is dealing with God complaining about the moral decay and lack of justice in Israel, and that God would need to clean things up. As you know, many of these prophecies had an initial fulfillment, and later the Apostles interpreted parts of them to apply to Christ. Still, it's hard for me to see trinitarianism in Isaiah 59.

Regards, Brenden.

[jriccitelli]

‘To take an entire chapter or two of the prophets and blanketly apply them to the Messiah seems to be beyond what is written (Ed)

It certainly does! Taking everything that God is, and promised, about Himself, and blanketly applying all that to someone other than God, certainly goes beyond what is written!

I am not applying it to Jesus, that’s the point: God alone is our Savior, and there is none else.

That is what God said, that would never change, and neither does God. Yet, Jesus applies all this to Himself, as so also the Apostles apply it all to Jesus, and they call Jesus the Lord. So then: Who other than God can save us and become the center of our devotion, worship, and salvation?
Answer: No one.

The Lord God demanded and Commanded, and chastised His peoples disloyalty, over and over again, page after page, year after year, and just to have them put their loyalty in another being??

It was a test, and one needed even today. If someone other than God comes along and asks you to put their loyalty in them, when all along God has told us not to, and we do, aren’t we doing just what Adam did in the Garden? Isn’t that what God will allow to happen when the beast and the false prophet arise doing miracles and signs, and then ‘All who dwell on the earth will worship him’ (the beast). Aren't we all warned of false Jesus' coming in His Name also? Just the same, why does God allow the Popes to command office all these years without stopping them? What is the purpose, why doesn’t God just come out in the open and stop all this? God could just reveal Himself for the entire world to see, in an instant, and it would be nothing for God to do just that, why doesn’t He? Why is God testing us?

‘… and later the Apostles interpreted parts of them to apply to Christ. Still, it's hard for me to see trinitarianism in Isaiah 59’ (Ed)

I don’t see Trinitarianism in this either, I see Monotheism. And I will remain monotheistic and Worship non-other than The LORD God of Israel, who appeared to Abraham, Moses, and Jacob. In this God I put my trust, and in God alone I trust for my salvation and life (seems sensible, at least).

Scripture demands and commands me to trust in no other but Him. If He is not God, then we should not trust in him. That is the theme and message of not only Isaiah, but the message from all of Gods prophets. Do you believe, serve and trust in God alone? Or do you trust in someone else also? That is the question God is asking.

“Therefore My people shall know My name; therefore in that day I am the one who is speaking, ‘Here I am… Break forth, shout joyfully together, you waste places of Jerusalem; For the LORD has comforted His people, He has redeemed Jerusalem. 10 The LORD has bared His holy arm in the sight of all the nations, that all the ends of the earth may see The salvation of our God… Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground...’ (Isaiah 52-53:2)

We know Gods arm is His own, yet it is hard not to see that His Arm is indeed called the servant mentioned here in chapter 53. Isaiah has not forgotten what he just wrote in chapter 53, when he writes in chapter 59: ‘Behold, the LORD'S hand is not so short that it cannot save; nor is His ear so dull that it cannot hear’. The arm of the lord, as well as His other parts have already been noted in scripture all along:

The LORD answered Moses, "Is the LORD's arm too short? Now you will see whether or not what I say will come true for you."
(Numbers 11:23)

God delivered them here with His own arm, not someone else. To think that God could not save us Himself, would be unbelief. God says He can, and He will save us. And God asks the rhetorical question, and God answers the question numerous times in scripture: No.

God needs no help, and no other to do what He can do, and certainly no other can do what God will do:
Will you really annul My judgment? Will you condemn Me that you may be justified? 9 "Or do you have an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like His?... Hide them in the dust together; Bind them in the hidden place. 14 "Then I will also confess to you, that your own right hand can save you. 15 "Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox...' (Job 40:9)

[Paidion]

Thank you for answering my question, Dizerner. Your answer indicates that you are a true Trinitarian—unlike some others who think they are Trinitarians, but are actually Modalists, that is, they believe that God to be a single divine Individual who expresses Himself in three modes (or wears three masks)—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These three, as they see it and not three distinct Individuals or Persons.

By the way, as a wide-spread teaching, Modalism pre-dated Trinitarianism by a couple of centuries.

[TheEditor]

Hi JR,

‘… and later the Apostles interpreted parts of them to apply to Christ. Still, it's hard for me to see trinitarianism in Isaiah 59’ (Ed)

I don’t see Trinitarianism in this either, I see Monotheism. And I will remain monotheistic

So then you do admit the juxtaposition of trinitarianism and monotheism?

I am not applying it to Jesus, that’s the point: God alone is our Savior, and there is none else.

The Lord God demanded and Commanded, and chastised His peoples disloyalty, over and over again, page after page, year after year, and just to have them put their loyalty in another being??

It was a test, and one needed even today. If someone other than God comes along and asks you to put their loyalty in them, when all along God has told us not to, and we do, aren’t we doing just what Adam did in the Garden?

Perhaps this is why the disciples needed an extra bump from things such as the transfiguration:

"In actual fact, about eight days after these words, he took Peter and John and James along and climbed up into the mountain to pray.  And as he was praying the appearance of his face became different and his apparel became glitteringly white.  Also, look! two men were conversing with him, who were Moses and Elijah.  These appeared with glory and began talking about his departure that he was destined to fulfill at Jerusalem.  Now Peter and those with him were weighed down with sleep; but when they got fully awake they saw his glory and the two men standing with him. And as these were being separated from him, Peter said to Jesus: “Instructor, it is fine for us to be here, so let us erect three tents, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah,” he not realizing what he was saying.  But as he was saying these things a cloud formed and began to overshadow them. As they entered into the cloud, they became fearful. And a voice came out of the cloud, saying: “This is my Son, the one that has been chosen. Listen to him.”  And as the voice occurred Jesus was found alone. But they kept quiet and did not report to anyone in those days any of the things they saw." (Luke 9:28-36)

It appears as though God the Father was giving His "seal of approval" over Jesus, to the extent that he was saying "Listen to him, not to him and the prophets and the Law, but to him alone." Maybe the disciples failed the test here? I don't know JR, but you can paste verse after verse trying to frame a catch-22 about "God alone" all you want, but they are probably about as convincing as a Calvinist's catch-22 verses. It seems we have God the Father sending his Son; He tells the disciples of his Son to "Listen to His Son". The disciples do that. The disciples did not have a "God the Son" mentality at all, and yet they did not eschew God's instruction to "Listen to my Son". Therefore, I can only conclude that your crystal-clear verses were not so crystal to the disciples.

Regards, Brenden.

[dizerner]

To take an entire chapter or two of the prophets and blanketly apply them to the Messiah seems to be beyond what is written (Ed)

Obviously those Isaiah passages are prophetically describing the redemption of Christ that God was yet to accomplish.

Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. (1Pe 1:11 NKJ)

Can you tell me exactly what prophets he meant? If you reject that truth, you both reject how the New Testament saints used the OT, and reject the inspiration of Christ in the OT.

Honestly, I see no way forward if someone takes an "anything but" approach to exegesis. No verse can ever show the doctrine you rule out by presupposition. You can pile up mountains of Scriptural evidence, but it always means "anything but."

If you agree with Christ that no one is good but God, how do you get out of saying Christ is not good? And that's the real problem I have—lowering Christ. You just can't exalt Christ too highly, and as a creation alone, that's simply idolatry. That should be obvious for even a child to see. God gave us a gift—and although that gift is not the Father, it is divine in essence, and it is himself.

I apologize if anything I said offended anyone—that was not my intention. I'm glad people feel so passionately about God's Word that they "inquire to look into these things" and feel affronted if anyone questions their sincerity. But we also are commanded to speak the truth in love—that's not always easy. It's not "I'm better and smarter and more spiritual than you." It's simply God enlightening the eyes of our hearts. Let's not be offended so easily if someone is passionate for the truth. God bless.

[TheEditor]

Hi Dizerner,

No offense taken; none given I hope.

As to your query on the OT prophecies; there are plenty of them that had absolutely nothing to do with Jesus. Are you saying you believe they all did? That is a novel idea. I don't think I have ever heard anyone state that before. As a matter of fact, it has seemed to me to be quite the opposite; without the enlightening power of God's Spirit I can't see how anyone could make some of them fit Jesus. Take the '30 pieces of silver' allusion in the OT. Can you tell me how anyone would have been able to forsee that one? Even after the fact it's kinda hidden, wouldn't you say?

This "anything but" charge doesn't make sense to me. When have I ever said that? Is it only myself, and others that question the validity of the trinitarian doctrine that are guilty of "anything but" thinking? First, I have never in recent years approached the Bible with an "It can't possibly teach that" approach. There are some concepts that I believe can't be reconciled with God's love, but other than that, I'm open.

Second, most on here that are trinitarians that care (many don't seem too passionate about the doctrine) have been unwilling to entertain anything but a trinitarian position, so it seems rather humorous to me that I am the one painted with the "anything but" brush.

Lastly, your question regarding : "Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God." (Mark 10:18); Jesus said to him: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God." (Luke 18:19); He said to him: “Why do you ask me about what is good? One there is that is good.(Matthew 19:17).

The only comments I have ever run into by trinitarian commentators about this passage is to say that Jesus was not saying what he said. In other words, he wasn't saying what he appeared to say when he drew a line of demarcation between God alone being good, and the fact that he was correcting the rich ruler from addressing him that way. My impression is that the ruler was being too free with his use of "good" as a tool of flattery, and that Jesus was correcting him. At best the passage says nothing about trinitarianism or non-trinitarianism, even though it is a favorite of non-trinitarians to show that Jesus did not embrace being called "good". So, let's just say "cat's got" the verse.

Regards, Brenden.

[jriccitelli]

So then you do admit the juxtaposition of trinitarianism and monotheism? (Editor)

There is no juxtaposition with Jesus and God, They are One in the same. After all this you should understand - 'Three persons of God'
Your position, would be the juxtaposed one. Since you have two side by side who are not the same. I suppose you believe Jesus is a being separate from God, i don't know because I have not heard you tell me just what kind of being you believe Jesus is.

It appears as though God the Father was giving His "seal of approval" over Jesus, to the extent that he was saying "Listen to him, not to him and the prophets and the Law, but to him alone' (Editor)

That is not what the passage, or God said. Are you saying: God said to the disciples do not listen to Him, God that is (seems that is how your sentence reads)? You really can't be saying God is retracting all the Law and the all The Prophets here on the mountain, are you? The Law confirms Jesus, and Jesus confirms Gods Word. They are One in the same, they are ONE Jesus said so. The Words of The Law and The Prophets were now standing right in front of them (Jesus) literally (Moses and Elijah literally also) and God the Father is saying yes, this is HIM of who it was spoken, and it is HE who spoke. God is approving him, just as all the law and the prophets do. Jesus is THE LAW and THE PROPHETS which is THE WORD OF GOD made flesh, listen to HIM.

Why would God say don't listen to The Prophets and The Law? I would at that point question God Himself, since His Word says His Word endures forever and forever, to all our children, and till heaven and earth pass away.

When it says THE WORD was made flesh, it means just what it says, everything they had known was unfolding in front of them, IN CHRIST.

"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. (Matt 5:17)
'Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished' (Luke 18:31)
'It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." (Luke 22:37)
'Now He said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures' (Luke 24:44)
'But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe' (Romans 3)
Amen

[TheEditor]

Hi JR,

There is no juxtaposition with Jesus and God, They are One in the same. After all this you should understand - 'Three persons of God'
Your position, would be the juxtaposed one. Since you have two side by side who are not the same. I suppose you believe Jesus is a being separate from God, i don't know because I have not heard you tell me just what kind of being you believe Jesus is.

No, I beg to differ. You contrasted Monotheism with trinitarianism in your post. Reread it.

Still, it's hard for me to see trinitarianism in Isaiah 59’ (Ed)

I don’t see Trinitarianism in this either, I see Monotheism.

You are the one that espouses trinitarianism. You believe in the doctrine, and I don't recall ever having read you to say you have any caveats regarding it. The doctrine states that all three persons are fully God, both individually as well as collectively; "co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial, and each is God, whole and entire", according to the Orthodox definitions as I have been able to find. You and other trinitarians may profess Monotheism--I have no reason to doubt that in your heart you believe you are, and may be; however, when such professions rely upon doing violence to the manifest meaning of words, I have to take issue.

It appears as though God the Father was giving His "seal of approval" over Jesus, to the extent that he was saying "Listen to him, not to him and the prophets and the Law, but to him alone' (Editor)

That is not what the passage, or God said. Are you saying: God said to the disciples do not listen to Him, God that is (seems that is how your sentence reads)? You really can't be saying God is retracting all the Law and the all The Prophets here on the mountain, are you? The Law confirms Jesus, and Jesus confirms Gods Word.

No JR. How could yo possibly read that? In fact, I underlined what I wanted to highlight, and you highlighted (in blue) what I was not saying. I will assume you were just tired.

But Yes, I do believe that God was saying that the Law and the Prophets had to give way to Jesus. Peter wanted to build a tent for the other two. He apparently had a hybrid in mind--The Law, the Prophets and Jesus. But God said "Listen to Him". Jesus himself said "You have heard it said...but I say to you...." Yes, he was "the fulfillment" of the Law. Once something is "fulfilled" it's over.

Regards, Brenden.

[Homer]

Hi Brenden,

You wrote:

Lastly, your question regarding : "Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God." (Mark 10:18); Jesus said to him: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God." (Luke 18:19); He said to him: “Why do you ask me about what is good? One there is that is good.(Matthew 19:17).

The only comments I have ever run into by trinitarian commentators about this passage is to say that Jesus was not saying what he said. In other words, he wasn't saying what he appeared to say when he drew a line of demarcation between God alone being good, and the fact that he was correcting the rich ruler from addressing him that way. My impression is that the ruler was being too free with his use of "good" as a tool of flattery, and that Jesus was correcting him. At best the passage says nothing about trinitarianism or non-trinitarianism, even though it is a favorite of non-trinitarians to show that Jesus did not embrace being called "good". So, let's just say "cat's got" the verse.

I have a different impression. I suspect that Jesus was giving the young fellow an opportunity to confess that Jesus was God. Jesus was good (sinless), no one is good but God, therefore...............

[dizerner]

I have a different impression. I suspect that Jesus was giving the young fellow an opportunity to confess that Jesus was God. Jesus was good (sinless), no one is good but God, therefore...............

Exactly, Homer. Jesus was saying he was good, not that he wasn't. Christ was perfection, and Scripture constantly attests to the fact over and over. He is not called "a lamb unblemished and spotless" for no reason. Any Trinitarian that is using this to say Christ was not admitting to being good is very mistaken! Christ is the door of salvation, the pure lamb of God, and the perfect sacrifice. He was giving the rich young ruler a chance to trust in Him for salvation.