The Trinity in a Nutshell

[xcav8tor]

Greetings JPH
I took your advice and checked out the uses of theos in the Greek Scriptures and apart from a few instances they are all singular personal pronouns.
I do have a small theological library which includes a book by Murray Harris call “Jesus as God” and his conclusions appear to be similar to mine...
Cheers,
Chappy

Hi Chappy,

I also have Murray Harris' book, "Jesus as God." He concludes on pg 298-299 (details in [] brackets and use of underline are mine):

While the NT customarily reserves the term THEOS for the Father, occasionally it is applied to Jesus in his preincarnate, incarnate, or postresurrection state. As used of the Father, THEOS is virtually a proper name. As used of Jesus, THEOS is a generic title, being an appellation descriptive of his genus as one who inherently belongs to the category of Deity. In this usage THEOS points not to Christ's function or office but to his nature. When this title is anarthrous [without article] (John 1:1, 18; Rom. 9:5), the generic element is emphasized. When it is articular [has article] (John 20:28; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1) the titular aspect is prominent.

In the christological use of THEOS we find both the basis and the zenith of NT Christologoy: the basis, since THEOS is a christological title that is primarily ontological in character [speaks to his nature] and because the presuppositions of the predominantly functional Christology of the NT is ontological Christology; the zenith, because THEOS is a christological title that explicitly and unequivocally asserts the deity of Christ.

He follows this up with, "Appendix II - An Outline of the New Testament Testimony to the Deity of Christ."

It is clear that Murray Harris is a traditional Trinitarian scholar who is fully persuaded of Christ's complete Deity as One Who uniquely shares (with the Holy Spirit) in the essential nature of the One True God of the Bible (as opposed to a separate, inferior, independent or secondary deity). I am therefore confused when you state that his conclusions "appear to be similar to mine," as you do not present yourself as an orthodox Trinitarian. Could you please clarify?

Regards,
xcav8tor

[Gatsby]

Interesting, so his Wisdom and Power are hypostatic...and the two main attributes of God are omniscience and omnipotence.
Hm, there's some big statement to be found in that somewhere!

Dont forget His Omnipresence also. That means present everywhere.

Regards
Gatsby

[Gatsby]

Hi Chappy,

I also have Murray Harris' book, "Jesus as God." He concludes on pg 298-299 (details in [] brackets and use of underline are mine):

While the NT customarily reserves the term THEOS for the Father, occasionally it is applied to Jesus in his preincarnate, incarnate, or postresurrection state. As used of the Father, THEOS is virtually a proper name. As used of Jesus, THEOS is a generic title, being an appellation descriptive of his genus as one who inherently belongs to the category of Deity. In this usage THEOS points not to Christ's function or office but to his nature. When this title is anarthrous [without article] (John 1:1, 18; Rom. 9:5), the generic element is emphasized. When it is articular [has article] (John 20:28; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1) the titular aspect is prominent.

In the christological use of THEOS we find both the basis and the zenith of NT Christologoy: the basis, since THEOS is a christological title that is primarily ontological in character [speaks to his nature] and because the presuppositions of the predominantly functional Christology of the NT is ontological Christology; the zenith, because THEOS is a christological title that explicitly and unequivocally asserts the deity of Christ.

He follows this up with, "Appendix II - An Outline of the New Testament Testimony to the Deity of Christ."

It is clear that Murray Harris is a traditional Trinitarian scholar who is fully persuaded of Christ's complete Deity as One Who uniquely shares (with the Holy Spirit) in the essential nature of the One True God of the Bible (as opposed to a separate, inferior, independent or secondary deity). I am therefore confused when you state that his conclusions "appear to be similar to mine," as you do not present yourself as an orthodox Trinitarian. Could you please clarify?

Regards,
xcav8tor

I may not understand it all but you have written a quite exceptional post.

Regards
Gatsby

[Zeta Metroid]

Dont forget His Omnipresence also. That means present everywhere.

Regards
Gatsby

I'd say that's a result of his omnipotence.

[jpholding]

Branham was a wacko fruitcake.

[Sparko]

Branham was a wacko fruitcake.

Yeah he was almost as strange as Joseph Smith. He held and taught the serpent seed doctrine, which claims that Eve had sex with Satan and produced Cain.

[jpholding]

Yeah he was almost as strange as Joseph Smith. He held and taught the serpent seed doctrine, which claims that Eve had sex with Satan and produced Cain.

And then that the latter ran for President? What was he, some kind of George Soros loon?

[Cow Poke]

A few of you around here may have heard of JP Holding. He was gracious enough to contribute this article to my ministry website, for which I am humbly grateful! I'm reprinting it here, as I have done with previous articles, and we both welcome your comments.

The original article appears here.

BY THREE - THE TRINITY IN A NUTSHELL
By James Patrick Holding

The Trinity may be the hardest idea in Christianity for some people, but it is easier to understand once we have some facts in hand.
A good question to start is, What is the best analogy to explain the Trinity? There isn't one that is perfect. But the best is like this:

• Father = a lamp, star, or other light source
• Son (Jesus) = the light from the lamp
• Holy Spirit = the heat from the lamp

The plus side of this analogy is that:

• It correctly captures the nature of the relationship between the members of the Trinity. All three persons -- Father, Son, Spirit -- together make one thing: a lighted lamp, which can be equated with "God". The Son and the Spirit come from the lamp.
• It explains the relationship of Jesus and the Spirit to ourselves fairly well. Jesus is the "light" of the Father (compare John 1), and the way whereby we see the Father (John 16:9). The Spirit indwelling us is the "heat" of the Father, the way whereby we experience the Father's fellowship.

The bad side of this analogy is that:

• A lighted lamp, and its light and heat, are not persons. To make the analogy complete, the lamp itself, the light it makes, and the heat it makes, would each need to have their own personality.
• A lighted lamp, and its light and heat, are not eternal. A lamp is a creation; God of course is not. And you can turn off the light and heat from a lamp, whereas that is not possible with Jesus and the Spirit. To put it another way, the Father has always existed, and He has always "shone" with the light of Jesus, and radiated the "heat" of the Spirit.

Another good question is, How do other religions misunderstand the Trinity?
There are three possible errors that can be made, by denying one of these facts about the Trinity:

• Co-eternality. All three of the members of the Trinity must be eternal, meaning, that they have always existed in the past and will always exist in the future. Some belief systems make the mistake of saying that Jesus or the Spirit were not eternal, but were created by the Father later in time. This belief was what caused the Arian controversy resulting in the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. Today the Jehovah's Witnesses are the ones who take this view. The analogy would be that the lamp was off at some point, but later turned itself on.
• Co-substantiality. In other words, the analogy made would not be of lamp-light-heat, but of three different lamps side by side. Today this is a belief of Mormons. It is also what many (like some Muslims) falsely think is Christian belief.
• Three persons. Here the analogy would be that lamp, light and heat do not each have their own personality, but that there is one personality that in turn acts as lamp, light, and heat. Today this is believed by Oneness Pentacostals.

Another important question: Is the Trinity just an invention of the church?

No. In fact, evidence shows that the Jews had "pre-Trinitarian" ideas long before the church existed. The earliest example is found in Proverbs 8, where "Wisdom" is a figure much like Jesus as described in the lamp-light analogy. There were also more such ideas in Jewish writings between the Old and New Testament.


___________________________________


Here are some related in-depth articles from Mr. Holding's website: Tekton Apologetics Ministries:
To learn about the background of ideas used to express the Trinity, particularly where Jesus is involved, see here.
To learn about the background of ideas concerning the Holy Spirit, see here.

I had thought I had heard all the "analogies" of the Trinity, but never heard the "lamp" one. Very interesting article!

[TolkienFan]

Moderator Notice

amigoxp's posts have been split into their own thread located here.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[amigoxp]

IS bible God's word?

can anyone reply me..

[Cow Poke]

This is a reply.

[amigoxp]

Father = a lamp, star, or other light source
Son (Jesus) = the light from the lamp
Holy Spirit = the heat from the lamp

as per your argument all three components are same .

likewise i would like to ask you is/are God, jesus and holy spirit are same in power, might, knowledge , authority and etc....

[Sparko]

IS bible God's word?

can anyone reply me..

You were asked not to post here any longer. They made a thread just for you to ask your questions in located here:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...Trinitarianism

If you post here again you will be moderated.

[preachthetruth]

The trinity is false and made up by man, there is no scriptural proof of the trinity and verses referring to such were added. I am not Jehovah witness. If you go back to the original copies of the scripture you will find the truth and you can start with John 1:1.

Thank You

[ApologiaPhoenix]

The trinity is false and made up by man, there is no scriptural proof of the trinity and verses referring to such were added. I am not Jehovah witness. If you go back to the original copies of the scripture you will find the truth and you can start with John 1:1.

Thank You

How about we transfer this over to my section of Deeper Waters and we can discuss this and see if you can give any textual evidence that all those verses were added.