Trinity.

Discuss topics raised by callers on the radio program
User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3123
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Trinity.

Post by darinhouston » Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:31 pm

Homer wrote:Hi Darin,

I'm confused (that's nothing new :lol: ):
There was no Jesus before His birth, so no. But, he had the Spirit of God which preexisted and was personal.


Are you saying "He" preexisted and was personal or the Spirit preexisted and was personal?

Thanks
The Spirit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Trinity.

Post by Homer » Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:42 pm

Darrin,

You wrote:
There was no Jesus before His birth, so no. But, he had the Spirit of God which preexisted and was personal.
I asked:
Are you saying "He" preexisted and was personal or the Spirit preexisted and was personal?
You answered:
The Spirit
So you are saying the Spirit was personal, and so was God, or the Spirit was an attribute of God but the word was an impersonal "it"? I'm still not sure what you believe.

dizerner

Re: Trinity.

Post by dizerner » Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:04 am

[user account removed]
Last edited by dizerner on Sun Feb 19, 2023 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Trinity.

Post by Paidion » Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:15 pm

The Greek expression is "εγω ειμι" (egō eimi) which means "I, I am". Repetition of the "I" gives it emphasis.

Jesus used the expression "εγω ειμι" about 40 times which could not be construed to mean that He was claiming to be the great "I AM". Yet people affirm that He was doing so in that one Scripture—"Before Abraham was I am."

For example, He used the phrase (as recorded in John 18:5) to affirm that He was the one for whom the authorities were searching.

Peter used it of himself (Acts 10:21). Was he claiming to be the great "I AM"?

Paul used it of himself (Acts 22:3). Was he claiming to be the great "I AM"?

The presumption that Jesus used it to claim the He was the great "I AM", arises only by mere association.
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.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3123
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Trinity.

Post by darinhouston » Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:49 pm

Further to Paidion's post, here is further elaboration from the Appendix quoted from above.... I believe I have also seen Paidion make the point number 3 below as well.

---------

1. Trinitarians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. This is just not the case. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man” (John 9:9), is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes:
Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”24
2. The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he” or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19, 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”— Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “...I am the one I claim to be...”—John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ was speaking of himself as the Messiah of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament.

At the Last Supper, the disciples were trying to find out who would deny the Christ. They said, literally, “Not I am, Lord” (Matt. 26:22 and 25). No one would say that the disciples were trying to deny that they were God because they were using the phrase “Not I am.” The point is this: “I am” was a common way of designating oneself, and it did not mean you were claiming to be God.

3. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the mind of God as God’s plan for the redemption of man. A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Verse 56 is accurately translated in the King James Version, which says: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.” This verse says that Abraham “saw” the Day of Christ, which is normally considered by theologians to be the day when Christ conquers the earth and sets up his kingdom. That would fit with what the book of Hebrews says about Abraham: “For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb. 11:10). Abraham looked for a city that is still future, yet the Bible says Abraham “saw” it. In what sense could Abraham have seen something that was future? Abraham “saw” the Day of Christ because God told him it was coming, and Abraham “saw” it by faith. Although Abraham saw the Day of Christ by faith, that day existed in the mind of God long before Abraham. Thus, in the context of God’s plan existing from the beginning, Christ certainly was “before” Abraham. Christ was the plan of God for man’s redemption long before Abraham lived. We are not the only ones who believe that Jesus’ statement does not make him God:
To say that Jesus is “before” him is not to lift him out of the ranks of humanity but to assert his unconditional precedence. To take such statements at the level of “flesh” so as to infer, as “the Jews” do that, at less than fifty, Jesus is claiming to have lived on this earth before Abraham (8:52 and 57), is to be as crass as Nicodemus who understands rebirth as an old man entering his mother’s womb a second time (3:4).25
4. In order for the Trinitarian argument that Jesus’ “I am” statement in John 8:58 makes him God, his statement must be equivalent with God’s “I am” statement in Exodus 3:14. However, the two statements are very different. While the Greek phrase in John does mean “I am,” the Hebrew phrase in Exodus actually means “to be” or “to become.” In other words God is saying, “I will be what I will be.” Thus the “I am” in Exodus is actually a mistranslation of the Hebrew text, so the fact that Jesus said “I am” did not make him God.

Buzzard, op. cit., Doctrine of the Trinity, pp. 93–97; Dana, op. cit., Letters Addressed to Relatives and Friends, Letter 21, pp. 169–171; Morgridge, op. cit., True Believer’s Defence Against Charges Preferred by Trinitarians, pp. 120 and 121; Norton, op. cit., A Statement of Reasons for Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians, pp. 242–246; Snedeker, op. cit., Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals, pp. 416–418.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Trinity.

Post by Homer » Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:59 pm

So if Jesus' "before Abraham was, I am" means no more than this, why did they try to stone Jesus?

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Trinity.

Post by TheEditor » Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:32 pm

Hi Homer,

I'll hazzard a guess. It appears to me at least when I read the Gospels, that the Jews were about to stone Jesus at every turn, even for when he said about a prophet being without honor in his home territory.

This statement regarding Abraham came on the heels of some very censurous comments by Jesus. I suppose the reference to Abraham (their greatest forebear) was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

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

Re: Trinity.

Post by Paidion » Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:56 pm

The thing that was different about Exodus 3:14 (as recorded in the Septuagint) is that God didn't simply identify Himself as "εγω εμι" (I, I am). Rather He said to Moses, "εγω ειμι ο ων" (I, I am the Being). Here's how the verse reads in the Septugint:

...and God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.

Not "I AM has sent me to you."

However, when Jesus said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad,” I don't think He was affirming that Abraham had a premonition of the future or that God revealed the future Jesus to him. What purpose would be served in God doing that? I think Jesus was saying that He was the one with whom Abraham conversed, and whom Abraham addressed as "Yahweh". Though a different Person from his Father, I think He shared the name "Yahweh" with his Father. "Yahweh" means "The one who was, and is, and shall be." That description fits both the Father and the Son.

Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire Yahweh out of heaven. (Gen 19:24)

This verse speaks of the Yahweh on earth who was talking to Abraham. This verse indicates that the Yahweh on earth was the agent through whom Yahweh in Heaven (the source) rained sulfur and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah. But sharing the name "Yahweh" doesn't imply that the pre-existing Jesus was the same Person as the Yawheh in heaven.

In my opinion, the Jews tried to stone Him, because He claimed to have been known by Abraham. I'm sure they thought, "Who does he think he is, anyway?"
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.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Trinity.

Post by Homer » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:09 pm

Darin quoted:
The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the mind of God as God’s plan for the redemption of man.
I think the authors of this statement missed very badly. Jesus was asked a question, "have you seen Abraham?" and He responded, not only yes, but He solemnly affirmed it was so, "truly, truly".

Linski remarks:

"The aorist" (was = came into being) "marks the historical point of time when Abraham came into existence as against the time prior to that point when Abraham did not exist. As the aorist sets a point of beginning for the existence of Abraham, so the present tense 'I am' predicates absolute existence for the person of Jesus, with no point of beginning at all. That is why Jesus does not use the imperfect 'I was'; for this would say only that the existence of the person of Jesus antedates the time of Abraham and would leave open the question whether the person of Jesus also has a beginning like that of Abraham (only earlier) or not. What Jesus declares is that, although His earthly life covers less than fifty years, His existence as a person is constant and independent of any beginning in time as was that of Abraham."

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Trinity.

Post by robbyyoung » Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:55 am

Hello All,

John 17:11, emphasis underlined, "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."

We can obtain this selfsame "Oneness" with each other, as Brethren, in the same manner as Yeshua and The Father? If so, this isn't a singularity of person but rather of mindset, for lack of a better word. I can never be Steve, Homer, Brenden or anybody else. But I can be of "ONE" mind with 1 million people. Am I reading this carefully enough or am I over simplifying this?

Also, the account concerning the theif on the cross gives us great hope for not fully understanding YAHWEH and His Son. Yeshua never corrected this Brother when he referred to Yeshua as a MAN given a heavenly kingdom. Nope, Yeshua simply said, "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." So obiviously, believing He was the Messiah was good enough. Or am I missing something here as well?

God Bless.

Post Reply

Return to “Radio Program Topics”