the errors of trinitarians considered

[RumTumTugger]

So quick question, do you worship Jesus?

We Worship God in his totality as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So yes we Worship Jesus Christ

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Burn the heretic!!!

er, I mean, I think you forgot the word "not" in there, Nick.

Aye. I did. Unfortunately, I don't see OSF really replying yet to what I've said.

Maybe after he reads O'Collins it will help.

I'll be out of town this weekend so I might not answer for awhile....

[OneSizeFit]

Thanks but I am no heretic, lol (the only heretical thing I believe would be to deny Christ as the Son of God, not part of a man made Trinity).

By the way, I found a good way to describe the Trinity, like an egg. An Egg has three distinct parts but is still the essence of the egg, now you can eat the egg whole or take it apart, either way it is still a part of the egg. I am starting to get my head around it. And I do see the evidence in the NT, but again if Paul, Peter, and James did not deem it necessary to create a well defined structure, neither should we.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Thanks but I am no heretic, lol (the only heretical thing I believe would be to deny Christ as the Son of God, not part of a man made Trinity).

By the way, I found a good way to describe the Trinity, like an egg. An Egg has three distinct parts but is still the essence of the egg, now you can eat the egg whole or take it apart, either way it is still a part of the egg. I am starting to get my head around it. And I do see the evidence in the NT, but again if Paul, Peter, and James did not deem it necessary to create a well defined structure, neither should we.

There wasn't any need for them to. The early Christians knew Jesus was included in the divine identity and yet, they knew he wasn't the Father. There is that consistent chain from the NT writings to the councils through the church fathers.

As for analogies, they tend to be pretty weak in that there's mistakes in each one that don't get the idea. The egg analogy has parts for instance. The closest one I see is the family where you have two persons whose love brings out the third. For us, it happens on a temporal scale. For the Godhead, it is an eternal reality. There never was a time when the Father, Son, and Spirit were not eternally united in actuality.

[OneSizeFit]

There wasn't any need for them to. The early Christians knew Jesus was included in the divine identity and yet, they knew he wasn't the Father.

How early, I'm almost positive the reason the 1st century Jerusalem Church wanted to have Paul killed in Acts was because he was hinting at Jesus being God through his teachings (not merely ignoring the Law).

[Virgil]

How early, I'm almost positive the reason the 1st century Jerusalem Church wanted to have Paul killed in Acts was because he was hinting at Jesus being God through his teachings (not merely ignoring the Law).

Can you provide any evidence of this? Thanks in advance

[OneSizeFit]

Can you provide any evidence of this? Thanks in advance

Evidence of what?

[OneSizeFit]

Actually after re-reading Acts, I do not see evidence that Paul was in danger because he preached Jesus as God, it was because of his transgressions against the Law, bringing "Greeks into the Temple" etc. He did preach Jesus as the Messiah of the Jews through the OT.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Actually after re-reading Acts, I do not see evidence that Paul was in danger because he preached Jesus as God, it was because of his transgressions against the Law, bringing "Greeks into the Temple" etc. He did preach Jesus as the Messiah of the Jews through the OT.

That was the major part of it I'd say. The epistles really bring out more the doctrinal aspects. Interestingly however, you do find high Christological statements even in Acts. I'd recommend checking the link to my blog. I'm actually writing a series on the Trinity in Scripture.

[OneSizeFit]

Acts is freaking awesome, I read it twice today, and I usually overlook it! It's kind of like Paul's story of sacrifice for preaching a Universal Gospel if that makes sense (probably not, hehe).

[ברכיה בן ישׂראל]

Do note however the Shema.

Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one.

Now what does Paul do in 1 Cor. 8:6? He Christianizes the Shema, Israel's great statement of monotheism, and includes Jesus in it.

The reference to God is made to the Father then (Isn't it interesting how Paul has to clarify God by saying "the Father"?). The reference to Lord is made to the Son. If the Son cannot be called God because the Father is, then the Father cannot be called Lord. It seems that throughout most of the NT, God is used to refer to the Father and Kurios (Lord) to the Son to avoid confusion. There are exceptions. For instance, in Romans 9:5, Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, and other places Jesus is called God. For a more scholarly work at that, see Murray Harris's "Jesus as God." It's about the NT use of theos when it applies to Jesus.

Just wanted to make something clear as to what has been so poorly translated with the word "lord" in the "Shema" of Deu. 6:4 is the Hebrew word "Elohenu" which means "El of us" or as the sentence would read. "Hear Yisrael Yah-Wah is our El Yah-Wah is one". The Hebrew word for "lord" which is "Ba'al" is not in this verse and should not have been used to translate. As it seems with so much of the translations we have, including the Berit Hadashah, those that did the translating had their understanding even if it was an understanding based in error.

[OneSizeFit]

Just wanted to make something clear as to what has been so poorly translated with the word "lord" in the "Shema" of Deu. 6:4 is the Hebrew word "Elohenu" which means "El of us" or as the sentence would read. "Hear Yisrael Yah-Wah is our El Yah-Wah is one". The Hebrew word for "lord" which is "Ba'al" is not in this verse and should not have been used to translate. As it seems with so much of the translations we have, including the Berit Hadashah, those that did the translating had their understanding even if it was an understanding based in error.

isnt the Hebrew translation of Lord, Adonai?

[ברכיה בן ישׂראל]

isnt the Hebrew translation of Lord, Adonai?

As to my understanding I see “Adon” is said to mean “master” but I see it as rather meaning more of a “sovereign” than the lower conclusion of a “master” and I will show later as to why I understand it in this way. I also see the meaning of the name “Adoniyah” meaning “Worshiper of Yah” which kinda throws us in a whole other direction. I see no reference to any “Adonai” as the name of Yah other than being something that the so called jews use in place of the expression of the name of Yah which is the so called four letter word or the tetragrammaton. In any case, I was simply pointing out that where the KJV, as well as others as I am sure, uses the term “lord” in Deu 6:4 where it pertains to The expression of the name of Yah is to my understanding incorrect. The jews do say Adonai but that is not what the expression of the name of Yah says. And also, to my understanding, the term “Baal” means “Master” in the Hebrew. As an example we have Hosea 2:16………..

Hos 2:16 And it shall beH1961 at thatH1931 day,H3117 saithH5002 the "Existence Giver",H3068 that thou shalt callH7121 me Ishi;H376 and shalt callH7121 me noH3808 moreH5750 Baali.H1180

H1180
בּעלי
ba‛ălîy
bah-al-ee'
From H1167 with pronominal suffix; my master; Baali, a symbolical name of Jehovah: - Baali.

Now as we have Deu 6:4………….

Deu 6:4 Hear,H8085 O Israel:H3478 The LORDH3068 our GodH430 is oneH259 LORD:H3068

What we do see is the Strong number for the Tetragrammaton as H3068 and not the Strong number for “Adonay” which is H136. What I also understand is that the word “Adonay” in the Hebrew is used some 432 times and in almost every occasion was used preceding the Tetragrammaton.. Now what I find so curious is that, and I disagree with this, we are told that the Tetragrammaton is the name of the Most High but yet we see the term “Adonay” used preceding the Yod Hey Wav Hey somewhat close to 432 times in the Tanach which is why I believe its meaning is more of “Sovereign”. This makes me believe that “Adonay” is not the name but rather something that was deceptively used to cover up the true name though I understand that even what some say is the name of the Most High is not but rather an expression of the name. Some even use this as a deceptive tool to further attempt to hide the true name of Yah where they use a replacement for a term that isn’t even the true name. The true name is there and out in the open and what better way to hide something but to just leave it out in plain sight. Careful, if it was a snake it would bite you. Hehehehe.

In closing, I am simply pointing out that whether the use of the term “lord” is used by way of Baal or even if it was possible that Adonay meant the same as Baal, which I doubt, it still isn’t correct to put it in the place of the Tetragrammaton or rather Yah-Wah.

[apostoli]

As to my understanding I see “Adon” is said to mean “master” but I see it as rather meaning more of a “sovereign” than the lower conclusion of a “master” and I will show later as to why I understand it in this way. I also see the meaning of the name “Adoniyah” meaning “Worshiper of Yah” which kinda throws us in a whole other direction. I see no reference to any “Adonai” as the name of Yah other than being something that the so called jews use in place of the expression of the name of Yah which is the so called four letter word or the tetragrammaton...

The medieval Jewish scholar Maimonides has a lengthy explanation in his Guide for the Perplexed, Chapter LXI - well worth reading in full...I'll just cite the intro...

IT is well known that all the names of God occurring in Scripture are derived from His actions, except one, namely, the Tetragrammaton, which consists of the letters yod, hé, vau and hé. This name is applied exclusively to God, and is on that account called Shem ha-meforash, "The nomen proprium." It is the distinct and exclusive designation of the Divine Being; whilst His other names are common nouns, and are derived from actions, to which some of our own are similar, as we have already explained. Even the name Adonay, "Lord," which has been substituted for the Tetragrammaton, is derived from the appellative "lord"; comp. "The man who is the lord (adone) of the land spake roughly to us" (Gen. xliii. 30). The difference between Adoni, "my lord," (with ḥirek under the nun), or Adonay (with kameẓ), is similar to the difference between Sari, "my prince," and Saraï, Abraham's wife (ib. xvi. 1), the latter form denoting majesty and distinction. An angel is also addressed as "Adonay"; e.g., "Adonay (My lord), pass not away, I pray thee" (ib. xviii. 3). I have restricted my explanation to the term Adonay, the substitute for the Tetragrammaton, because it is more commonly applied to God than any of the other names which are in frequent use, like dayyan, "judge," shadday, "almighty," ẓaddik, "righteous," ḥannun, "gracious," raḥum, "merciful," and elohim "chief" all these terms are unquestionably appellations and derivatives. The derivation of the name, consisting of yod, hé, vau, and hé, is not positively known, the word having no additional signification. This sacred name, which, as you know, was not pronounced except in the sanctuary by the appointed priests, when they gave the sacerdotal blessing, and by the high priest on the Day of Atonement, undoubtedly denotes something which is peculiar to God, and is not found in any other being. It is possible that in the Hebrew language, of which we have now but a slight knowledge, the Tetragrammaton, in the way it was pronounced, conveyed the meaning of "absolute existence..."

Peace

[ברכיה בן ישׂראל]

The medieval Jewish scholar Maimonides has a lengthy explanation in his Guide for the Perplexed, Chapter LXI - well worth reading in full...I'll just cite the intro...

IT is well known that all the names of God occurring in Scripture are derived from His actions, except one, namely, the Tetragrammaton, which consists of the letters yod, hé, vau and hé. This name is applied exclusively to God, and is on that account called Shem ha-meforash, "The nomen proprium." It is the distinct and exclusive designation of the Divine Being; whilst His other names are common nouns, and are derived from actions, to which some of our own are similar, as we have already explained. Even the name Adonay, "Lord," which has been substituted for the Tetragrammaton, is derived from the appellative "lord"; comp. "The man who is the lord (adone) of the land spake roughly to us" (Gen. xliii. 30). The difference between Adoni, "my lord," (with ḥirek under the nun), or Adonay (with kameẓ), is similar to the difference between Sari, "my prince," and Saraï, Abraham's wife (ib. xvi. 1), the latter form denoting majesty and distinction. An angel is also addressed as "Adonay"; e.g., "Adonay (My lord), pass not away, I pray thee" (ib. xviii. 3). I have restricted my explanation to the term Adonay, the substitute for the Tetragrammaton, because it is more commonly applied to God than any of the other names which are in frequent use, like dayyan, "judge," shadday, "almighty," ẓaddik, "righteous," ḥannun, "gracious," raḥum, "merciful," and elohim "chief" all these terms are unquestionably appellations and derivatives. The derivation of the name, consisting of yod, hé, vau, and hé, is not positively known, the word having no additional signification. This sacred name, which, as you know, was not pronounced except in the sanctuary by the appointed priests, when they gave the sacerdotal blessing, and by the high priest on the Day of Atonement, undoubtedly denotes something which is peculiar to God, and is not found in any other being. It is possible that in the Hebrew language, of which we have now but a slight knowledge, the Tetragrammaton, in the way it was pronounced, conveyed the meaning of "absolute existence..."

Peace

Yep, I've read it. Another mans own interpretation.

Thanks for sharing.