- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why isn't the Trinity mentioned in the bible?
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:01 pm to the808bass
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:01 pm to the808bass
quote:Is there still any reputable scholar who believes that John was written as late as 160 AD? I thought the scholarly consensus (to the extent that such exists) was sometime between 90 and 120 AD.
Had this little fragment been known during the middle of the past century, that school of New Testament criticism which was inspired by the brilliant Tuebingen professor, Ferdinand Christian Baur, could not have dated the composition of the Fourth Gospel in about 160
This post was edited on 11/28/22 at 2:09 pm
1
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:13 pm to Crimson1st
quote:
The concept is intact throughout the Bible and is the only viable option based off the process of elimination as well as direct references.
Well, based on history, the concept in fact isn't the only viable option.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:19 pm to the808bass
quote:I still have Bruce Metzger's "The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration" in the religious section of my personal library.
Metzger, the textual expert in “conservative” scholarship, says:
As you probably know, Metzger was Bart Ehrman's teacher at Princeton. It's interesting to me that they studied the same documents and Ehrman became an atheist while Metzger remained a believer
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:25 pm to L.A.
Bart is one of the preferred popes of the deconstructionists and progressive Christian branch. It is fascinating to read his stuff and wonder where it all went off the rails.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:29 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
No one even suggested the existence of a “Trinity“ until Tertullian, almost 2 centuries after Jesus‘ death.
That's not true though since John 1 explicitly says Jesus is God and Colossians states that Jesus was the "fullness of the Godhead bodily". Colossians was written ~60 AD and John before 100 AD.
Ignatius also says that Jesus is God in flesh and he said that in early 100.
The word "trinity" may not have been used prior to Tertullian but the idea was there before then.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:30 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Any attempt to merge two traditions is going to produce some of that.
Someone’s there’s more than just two traditions that were written and later merged. Take Exodus 9, 12, 14, and 15… YHWH kills all the Egyptian livestock twice, then kills all the firstborn cattle, then kills all the Egyptian army horses. Reading it you’d think the livestock was re-spawning like in a video game just to get killed again. It makes sense when you consider that there were multiple plague myths that the author/compiler then wrote down and compiled them all into one work.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:31 pm to El Segundo Guy
quote:
Why in the frick is this even a topic on a POLITICAL TALK forum?
Because Religion and Politics are intertwined and if you think they're not, you haven't seen the last 2000+ years on Earth.
And honestly, I quite enjoyed the dialogue in this thread. Maybe I just enjoy discussion of religion/Christianity and you do not, therefore you hated it?
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:32 pm to ruffleforeskin
Though the word "trinity" is not in the Bible, the concept is clearly seen through out. The word "God" is encountered over 2,400 times in the Old Testament. Of those 2,400 times, over 1,900 times it is translated in as "Elohim" which means, gods, plural. Well we know that we are not looking at more than one God and Genesis 1:26 says "And God said..." showing singular but as we continue,"...Let us make man in our image". So how do we have plurality in a single God? Well we must establish two things, 1) we must accept God as how he has chosen to reveal himself in the word of God by faith 2) we just simply can not explain God, he is too lofty for our complete understanding of him.
It is hard to fathom in our finite minds a triune being as a single entity yet separate. However, it is the truth and the word of God is full of examples of the Trinity such as:
In Genesis 1:1-2, we can see God created the heavens and the earth and the Spirit of God moved upon the earth, yet in John 1 we have Jesus as the Creator, so we can see the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost. This is just 1 example, there are many other examples of the Trinity in God's word.
It is hard to fathom in our finite minds a triune being as a single entity yet separate. However, it is the truth and the word of God is full of examples of the Trinity such as:
In Genesis 1:1-2, we can see God created the heavens and the earth and the Spirit of God moved upon the earth, yet in John 1 we have Jesus as the Creator, so we can see the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost. This is just 1 example, there are many other examples of the Trinity in God's word.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:32 pm to AggieHank86
Yes.
I don’t take the histo-crits dating discussions all that seriously as they bring too much baggage to the discussion. If you presuppose John is written by notJohn and thus had to develop through multiple editors over time to get an advanced Christology because an advanced Christology couldn’t actually be proposed by the author of the Gospel, then you end up with dates that are decades later simply because of your suppositions about the formation of the text.
I don’t take the histo-crits dating discussions all that seriously as they bring too much baggage to the discussion. If you presuppose John is written by notJohn and thus had to develop through multiple editors over time to get an advanced Christology because an advanced Christology couldn’t actually be proposed by the author of the Gospel, then you end up with dates that are decades later simply because of your suppositions about the formation of the text.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:38 pm to AggieHank86
John 1:1,2
John 1:14
Also, reading through the Old Testament, you can verify yourself the prophesies that Jesus fulfilled.
John 1:14
Also, reading through the Old Testament, you can verify yourself the prophesies that Jesus fulfilled.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:40 pm to the808bass
quote:Interesting perspective.
I don’t take the histo-crits dating discussions all that seriously as they bring too much baggage to the discussion. If you presuppose John is written by notJohn and thus had to develop through multiple editors over time to get an advanced Christology because an advanced Christology couldn’t actually be proposed by the author of the Gospel, then you end up with dates that are decades later simply because of your suppositions about the formation of the text.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:41 pm to DoubleDown
quote:
Maybe I just enjoy discussion of religion/Christianity and you do not, therefore you hated it?
He's got a hate boner for anything theistic.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 2:45 pm to AggieHank86
Jesus said I am when questioned by Pilate.
God, when speaking to Moses, identified himself as I am.
Jesus is Lord.
God, when speaking to Moses, identified himself as I am.
Jesus is Lord.
Posted on 11/28/22 at 3:07 pm to Leotiger725
Not able to chime in a bunch, but has Psalm 2 been mentioned yet?
Posted on 11/28/22 at 3:20 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:Found a Jewish website (Jewish Virtual Library) that raises these issues in a VERY cursory way. It discusses the way that Judaism changed during the Exile. I express no opinions as to the reliability of the site.quote:Sorry I don’t have a link. I’ve read so much I don’t remember where I even read it. It’s basically circumstantial though. Take Moses for instance… he’s not in any biblical text written before about 500BCE. No historical names based on his before return from Babylonian exile. Moses myth is a composite based on a Greek demigod myth, an Egyptian demigod myth, and a story about king Sargon of Akkad. Moses’ law set the table for second temple religion, but before the return from exile, archaeologists find inscriptions of “YHWH and his Asherah”, figurines of various gods at various temples, and cooked pig bones and shellfish remains with human teeth marks within the confines of ancient Judah and Israel. The ark of the covenant was also a Persian creation.quote:Some of this is new to me, and it sounds interesting. Can you refer me to a book or an author addressing this matter?
The inhabitants of the land were dumbfounded when the Persians tried to tell them a guy named Moses led their ancestors out of slavery in Egypt. They had also never heard of a king named David.
Thx.
More info from Boston University
The Exile was the catalyst for a change from Monolatrism ("no other gods before Me") to Monotheism ("I am the only God"). This may have been influenced by exposure to Zoroastrianism (one of the first monotheistic religions) in Babylon from Persia at the end of the Exile. ( not well-sourced)
This post was edited on 11/28/22 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 11/28/22 at 4:03 pm to AggieHank86
This post has been marked unreadable!
Posted on 11/28/22 at 4:40 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
The Exile was the catalyst for a change from Monolatrism ("no other gods before Me") to Monotheism ("I am the only God").
I have a slightly different interpretation. I think the return from exile that brought the Persian/Zoroastrian- inspired second temple religion to Judah was what brought Monolatrism to those adherents. The first temple religion adherents were still in polytheism mode and remained there up until and through Christianity. Monotheism I think came about slowly but progressively for second temple adherents and reached more or less full monotheism somewhere between fall of the Macedonian empire and the conquest by Rome.
Most of the Jewish Bible to this day acknowledges an assortment of other deities that most just ignore. yHWH is a jealous god, and you shall not worship other gods before him. YHWH is to be exalted above all gods. YHWH judges and punishes the gods of Egypt. Is he punishing imaginary things? Is he being exalted higher than imaginary beings? I think not. Hell, Deuteronomy 32:8 (written during or after Babylonian exile most likely, but around 700BCE at the earliest) still preserves how YHWH became Israel’s patron diety - he inherited it from his father El Elyon “god most high”.
quote:
8When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the bordersa of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.b 9But the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage.
In this excerpt from Deuteronomy, “most high” and “God” are El Elyon, father and created deity of the Canaanite pantheon, while “LORD” is YHWH.
This post was edited on 11/28/22 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 11/28/22 at 4:46 pm to L.A.
quote:
By contrast, Jesus was a Jew, and his audience were Jews. The very notion of a tripartite deity was antithetical the the entirety of Jewish religious dogma.
If anyone wants proof of this, talk to any Orthodox Jew today and ask them what they think about the notion that Jesus is God/Man, or that Jesus is the 2nd person in the Trinitarian Godhead
The doctrine of the Trinity did not fully develop until Christianity became almost exclusively a religion of gentiles in the second through fourth centuries.
The idea of the Trinity is anathema (Greek pun intended) to an Orthodox Jew
I believe the above to be accurate.
I submit the following for more information on the topic.
Nicene Creed
In closing, it is important IMHO to recall that not all "Protestant Bible-believing Christian religions" believe in the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity.
This post was edited on 11/28/22 at 4:49 pm
Posted on 11/28/22 at 4:52 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:Interesting and plausible.
I think the return from exile that brought the Persian/Zoroastrian- inspired second temple religion to Judah was what brought Monolatrism to those adherents. The first temple religion adherents were still in polytheism mode and remained there up until and through Christianity. Monotheism I think came about slowly but progressively for second temple adherents and reached more or less full monotheism somewhere between fall of the Macedonian empire and the conquest by Rome.
But do you not consider Zoroastrianism to be a truly-monotheistic religion? If so, and if post-Exile Judaism is a direct child of Zoroastrianism, why would it "regress" from Zoroastrian monotheism to a form of monolatrism?
On the other hand, it is difficult to determine whether (for example) the Ten Commandments ("no other gods before Me") pre-dated the Exile or were added DURING the Exile.
The idea that proto-Judaism was polytheistic later than many may want to believe seems pretty clear. I think that perhaps the best proof is the Elephantine scrolls, which show that ONE group of proto-Jews (who fled TO Egypt, probably near the beginning of the Babylonian period) was still ACTIVELY practicing AT LEAST monolatrism and PROBABLY polytheism. Letters found at the site seem to indicate that post-Exile, the Elephantine proto-Jews re-established contact with Jerusalem and slowly began to adopt the "new" forms brought to Judah from Babylon. They were PROBABLY the last of the proto-Jews to do so.
This post was edited on 11/28/22 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 11/28/22 at 5:10 pm to Cajun Tiger 4
quote:
Biblical case for the Trinity
This article is not very persuasive, IMHO.
There is no definitive "Biblical case for the Trinity". If the Bible Alone were perfectly clear about the doctrine of the Trinity, then all Bible-believing Christians would agree on the topic. They do not.
In fact, as we know from the History of Christianity, the first Church to establish a written doctrine on the Trinity was the Catholic Church in the 4th and 5th centuries. The Heresy of Arianism was very strong and took very long time to rebut and reject.
The Early Church Fathers wrote on the topic and many of their ideas became Orthodox Christian doctrine on the Trinity. These Church Fathers were either Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, because they all wrote over 1,000 years before the first Protestant existed.
There remain Heresies about the Trinity even today, among those Bible-believing Protestants who reject the Catholic Catechism definition of the Trinity.
Oneness Pentecostals
This post was edited on 11/28/22 at 5:14 pm
Page 10 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News