Teaching the Trinity from the NIV

[PappaBear]

2Tim 3:7  Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

[christundivided]

So many have abandoned the faith once delivered and new agers, apostates, and cults are growing significantly.  But we no longer have the quality of Christian in the pew that former generations did, and we certainly preach a different "new and improved" Bible.  Trouble with it is that it does not have the same power and effectiveness the old King James had. 

How ethnocentric of you. Do you not know that Christianity is spreading faster than it has since the very first days of the Church?

No, I don't know that because it is not true.

Do you know that the days are getting increasingly evil, men are more deceptive and being deceived?  That it should be so is expressly stated by the Spirit of God.  You would such if you had an authoritative Bible you held to instead of your New Age apostate mumbo jumbo you frequently spout across these forums.

"The apostasy" spoken of in the Scriptures took place long before there was ever a single English translation of the Scriptures. What's funny and.... sad at the same time... is the fact you think you're immune to the effects of that falling away.

Have you ever stopped... and considered why we don't have a clear cut record of the NT testament texts till almost the 4th century? Have you? The great falling away that took place after the death of the apostles resulted in a fragmented continuation of revelation through the Scriptures. It spawned countless sects and diversions from the truth. This has resulted in the divisions we now have, with people like you anointing the KJV as the one and only text for everyone. Sad.

 

[PappaBear]

Like that famous anti-trinitarian KJVO Avery.

btw ... if you are so convinced of that (and judging from the one linked thread that admin supplied, it may be), then he may be the IDEAL person for such a debate.  Why not go over and invite him?  I suspect the admin would cringe, remembering how Avery took him to Sunday School and gave him some free lessons on the Gergasenes thread.  But it sure sounds like he would be the best man to argue that position, if indeed he is non-trinitarian.

(Note:  from what I read of that xref'd thread, it sounded more like he did not feel it important enough to argue the point with you, not that he rejected it.)

Bump for Mr. Avery.

 

[Steven Avery]

Hi,

Usually I do the Christology discussions on CARM these days, where there is an interesting mix of posters, although we had some interesting stuff on FFF. 

Since the word Trinity has a dozen conflicting meanings, and some are likely very close to my beliefs, I do not consider myself anti-Trinitarian.  Maybe non-creedal Trinitarian (e.g. Athanasian Creed) or non Orthodox Trinitarian (where it is wrong to call Jesus a human person).

My main request on any Christology discussion is a level playing field. Whatever the beliefs, they should not just be pablum word-play, but the more difficult questions should be considered, and part of the mix.  (Even if the answer is "dunno").

e.g. The first one for the professed Trinitarian that I consider very helpful --

"do you believe that God exists in three distinct, eternal consciousnesses"?

A similar question can be asked about the creedal forumlation of "three, coequal, coeternal consubstantial persons".

Now when I have some time, I will take a glance at this thread. (done)

==============

And yes, I have enjoyed the Gerash, swine marathon thread.
A bit of a keeper.

It is ironic when those opposed to the purity of the AV find themselves "defending" variants that even they understand look to be simply a textual corruption.  Yet they feel they have to defend the little blunder simply because it is in some non-AV modern versions.  In a sense, they have to defend both ends, contradiction, against the middle.

Yours in Jesus,
Steven Avery

 

[Ransom]

Since the word Trinity has a dozen conflicting meanings, and some are likely very close to my beliefs, I do not consider myself anti-Trinitarian.  Maybe non-creedal Trinitarian (e.g. Athanasian Creed) or non Orthodox Trinitarian (where it is wrong to call Jesus a human person).

Who ordered the waffles with a side order of weasel?

 

[FSSL]

Everyone has a creed. Not everyone is brave enough to expose it.

 

[Ransom]

A similar question can be asked about the creedal forumlation of "three, coequal, coeternal consubstantial persons".

From what I can tell, that particular phrase was "forumlated" by a Oneness Pentecostal author, David K. Bernard, and repeated multiple times on the Web by other Oneness folks. You try to be cagey about your true theology, Avery, but you can't help tip your hand.

The question that should be asked is: Why should we be bound to a statement made by a Oneness heretic?

Now when I have some time, I will take a glance at this thread. (done)

LOL. What are you, the narrator?

 

[PappaBear]

Hi,

Since the word Trinity has a dozen conflicting meanings, and some are likely very close to my beliefs, I do not consider myself anti-Trinitarian.  Maybe non-creedal Trinitarian (e.g. Athanasian Creed) or non Orthodox Trinitarian (where it is wrong to call Jesus a human person).

Ahhh, I thought such was probably the case.  These around here cannot be trusted, they like to twist their own definition onto people.  And I know that these Calvinists especially hate non-creedalists.  Athanasian Creed?  LOL...boy were they lying about you.

 

[christundivided]

Hi,

Since the word Trinity has a dozen conflicting meanings, and some are likely very close to my beliefs, I do not consider myself anti-Trinitarian.  Maybe non-creedal Trinitarian (e.g. Athanasian Creed) or non Orthodox Trinitarian (where it is wrong to call Jesus a human person).

Ahhh, I thought such was probably the case.  These around here cannot be trusted, they like to twist their own definition onto people.  And I know that these Calvinists especially hate non-creedalists.  Athanasian Creed?  LOL...boy were they lying about you.

Lying about him? He's oneness pentecostal. Just ask him. See if he answers you.

You're blind if you can't see it. He's playing on the mysteries of the incarnation.

Herb Evans attacked him all the time for it. All the time. Are you really that silly?

 

[bgwilkinson]

KJVOs are truly blind. They will believe anything, claim anything to support their beloved KJVO dogma.

The blind leading and influencing the blind. Willfully blind.

A great example of strong delusion. From the 1550s Latin nominative delusio.

 

[FSSL]

Ahhh, I thought such was probably the case.  These around here cannot be trusted, they like to twist their own definition onto people.  And I know that these Calvinists especially hate non-creedalists.  Athanasian Creed?  LOL...boy were they lying about you.

I called him a "nonTrinitarian." Where is the lie?
Second, do you have something against the Athanasian Creed?

I have good reason to highly suspect that your definition of "KJVO nonTrinitarians" is not one they would own.  Honesty does not appear to be either a Calvinists strong suit, nor your own.  Want to provide some links to these "debates" so it can be seen whether these are truly non-Trinitarians?

... and now you have seen it AGAIN and it doesn't matter. You still call me a liar.

How are we to believe YOU defend the Trinity?

 

[PappaBear]

I called him a "nonTrinitarian." Where is the lie?
Second, do you have something against the Athanasian Creed?

Against the Athanasian Creed?  Oh, no.  Look back on my posts on the subject.  But apparently *YOU* do.  You have called a person who describes himself using that as "nonTrinitarian."  So, what to you is so insufficient in the Athanasian Creed that you think it to be nonTrinitarian?

You still call me a liar.

True.  I have also called you a Calvinist.  But ahhhh, I repeat myself in that. 

 

[PappaBear]

Lying about him? He's oneness pentecostal. Just ask him. See if he answers you.

You're blind if you can't see it. He's playing on the mysteries of the incarnation.

Herb Evans attacked him all the time for it. All the time. Are you really that silly?

That a reprobate like you hates him so very much is only a recommendation to me.  Yes, it appears you have lied about him.  Nothing new.  Augustine lied about the Novatians, Calvin lied about Servetus, Hitler lied about the Jews.  You birds of feather, and so on...

 

[Steven Avery]

Hi,

A similar question can be asked about the creedal forumlation of "three, coequal, coeternal consubstantial persons".

From what I can tell, that particular phrase was "forumlated" by a Oneness Pentecostal author, David K. Bernard, and repeated multiple times on the Web by other Oneness folks.

Catholic Dictionary: An Abridged and Updated Edition of Modern Catholic Dictionary
John Hardon
http://books.google.com/books?id=cQPgxUewa_IC&pg=PA510

Trinity, The Holy
... The three divine persons are co-equal, co-eternal, and consubstantial and deserve co-equal glory and adoration.

Dozens of such references are available, from Catholic and Baptist and other sources, from those in favor of the idea, and those opposed.  Books of the 1700s and 1800s frequently reference these terms as part of the orthodox doctrine, modern writers frequently include the terms in their statement of faith.

===============

Interestingly, John Calvin was brought up on charges when the 1536 Geneva Confession, prepared with William Farel, did not include the key words like persons and Trinity.  A major issue was Calvin's refusal to affirm the Athanasian Creed.

Yours in Jesus,
Steven Avery

 

[bgwilkinson]

Lying about him? He's oneness pentecostal. Just ask him. See if he answers you.

You're blind if you can't see it. He's playing on the mysteries of the incarnation.

Herb Evans attacked him all the time for it. All the time. Are you really that silly?

That a reprobate like you hates him so very much is only a recommendation to me.  Yes, it appears you have lied about him.  Nothing new.  Augustine lied about the Novatians, Calvin lied about Servetus, Hitler lied about the Jews.  You birds of feather, and so on...

Ad Hominem and name calling is indicative of vacuous arguments from a position of uninformed weakness while lacking relevant supporting facts.

 

[christundivided]

Lying about him? He's oneness pentecostal. Just ask him. See if he answers you.

You're blind if you can't see it. He's playing on the mysteries of the incarnation.

Herb Evans attacked him all the time for it. All the time. Are you really that silly?

That a reprobate like you hates him so very much is only a recommendation to me.  Yes, it appears you have lied about him.  Nothing new.  Augustine lied about the Novatians, Calvin lied about Servetus, Hitler lied about the Jews.  You birds of feather, and so on...

Ad Hominem and name calling is indicative of vacuous arguments from a position of uninformed weakness while lacking relevant supporting facts.

Its sad he would call me a reprobate because I reject KJVOism.

 

[christundivided]

Hi,

A similar question can be asked about the creedal forumlation of "three, coequal, coeternal consubstantial persons".

From what I can tell, that particular phrase was "forumlated" by a Oneness Pentecostal author, David K. Bernard, and repeated multiple times on the Web by other Oneness folks.

Catholic Dictionary: An Abridged and Updated Edition of Modern Catholic Dictionary
John Hardon
http://books.google.com/books?id=cQPgxUewa_IC&pg=PA510

Trinity, The Holy
... The three divine persons are co-equal, co-eternal, and consubstantial and deserve co-equal glory and adoration.

Dozens of such references are available, from Catholic and Baptist and other sources, from those in favor of the idea, and those opposed.  Books of the 1700s and 1800s frequently reference these terms as part of the orthodox doctrine, modern writers frequently include the terms in their statement of faith.

===============

Interestingly, John Calvin was brought up on charges when the 1536 Geneva Confession, prepared with William Farel, did not include the key words like persons and Trinity.  A major issue was Calvin's refusal to affirm the Athanasian Creed.

Yours in Jesus,
Steven Avery

Don't pretend you're cut from the same mold as Calvin. You both have different motives. The very fact you attempt to interject questions in the Orthodox understanding of the Trinity.... proves you do not accept it. Those that accept the doctrine of the Trinity.... do so without question.

Its also laughable the you would so question the doctrine of the Trinity while deriding anyone that dare question KJVO doctrine.

Its clear which "god" you've chosen.

You've been asked many times about your belief in Oneness and you refuse to reject it. You're just playing games in typical "Avery fashion". 

 

[Steven Avery]

Hi,

.... the same mold as Calvin. You both have different motives. The very fact you attempt to interject questions in the Orthodox understanding of the Trinity.... proves you do not accept it. Those that accept the doctrine of the Trinity.... do so without question.

Pierre Caroli made a similar argument against Calvin, especially emphasizing his refusal to subscribe to the Athanasian Creed.  Even in his later years, even in l'affaire Michael Servetus, afaik Calvin never subscribed to that creed nor did he use that creed as a sine qua non of orthodoxy, with or without Chalcedonian components.  Calvin even wrote that the prayer to the Holy Trinity "savors of barbarism".

Anyway, I am very happy to agree that I do not accept the "Orthodox understanding of the Trinity", especially noting that the orthodox understanding insists that Jesus is not a human person.

And I've found most accusatory writers today on the Trinity issue do not themselves know and ascribe to the "Orthodox understanding of the Trinity".  I simply suggest that they get their own doctrinal house in order before rushing to accuse.

John Wesley, in his sermon on the heavenly witnesses, made some interesting points in this regard.

Yours in Jesus,
Steven Avery

 

[Ransom]

Anyway, I am very happy to agree that I do not accept the "Orthodox understanding of the Trinity", especially noting that the orthodox understanding insists that Jesus is not a human person.

What are you smoking, Avery?

 

[christundivided]

Hi,

.... the same mold as Calvin. You both have different motives. The very fact you attempt to interject questions in the Orthodox understanding of the Trinity.... proves you do not accept it. Those that accept the doctrine of the Trinity.... do so without question.

Pierre Caroli made a similar argument against Calvin, especially emphasizing his refusal to subscribe to the Athanasian Creed.  Even in his later years, even in l'affaire Michael Servetus, afaik Calvin never subscribed to that creed nor did he use that creed as a sine qua non of orthodoxy, with or without Chalcedonian components.

However, I am very happy to agree that I do not accept the "Orthodox understanding of the Trinity", especially noting that the orthodox understanding insists that Jesus is not a human person.

And I've found most accusatory writers today on the Trinity issue do not themselves know and ascribe to the "Orthodox understanding of the Trinity".  I simply suggest that they get their own doctrinal house in order before rushing to accuse.

John Wesley, in his sermon on the heavenly witnesses, made some interesting points in this regard.

Yours in Jesus,
Steven Avery

Why are you ignoring the fact you ascribe to Pentecostal Oneness beliefs? State plainly if you reject them or accept them.

You're purposely talking around the issue.

Here is the Athanasian Creed dealing with the Trinity. Show me where you depart from said creed? Also show me where you claim it says "Jesus is not a human person." Do you even know what "incarnation" means? How in the world you can make such a claim is beyond any rational mind.

That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood by God. One altogether; not by confusion of Essence; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of the God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.