The Trinity And The Old Testament

[centauri]

rayskidude says "But I firmly believe that there will come a time when all the Jews present will place their faith in Jesus of Nazareth as God's anointed Messiah.

 

Why should they put their faith in a messianic failure? Jesus already failed to perform the job requirements of a king messiah and didn't have the proper pedigree for the position.

 

Are you unaware of the return of Jesus? And that He will defeat His enemies - the unbelieving world - and establish His Millennial Kingdom for 1,000 yeras. And then after a final Satanic rebellion, God destroys the current universe and creates a New Heaven and Earth? How did you miss these obvious truths?

What obvious truths would that be?

Jesus promised to return before all of his associates were dead.

He didn’t even keep his own promise.

He didn’t sit on the throne of David, didn’t lead people into great compliance with the law, and didn’t usher in an era of peace and prosperity.

Those are some of the job requirements for an expected king messiah.

None of them were fulfilled by Jesus.

 

Mat 26:63 But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, "I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God."

Mat 26:64 Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven."

Neither the high priest nor the assembly saw any of this because Jesus never came back.

[★ Citsonga ★]

This is just nonsense - Trinitarian scholars point to the Scriptures I listed as evidence 'consistent with' God existing as a Trinity. We all know that the OT does not present a decidedly Trinitarian God. The name 'Elohim' is plural meaning "the gods" >> and when we use the term "the Seven Seas" to describe that fact that there is one great body of salt water on the Earth - yet we recognize there are different parts that comprise this one great ocean.

 

Yes, Christians state emphatically that there is only One God!!! But the name Elohim certainly implies a plurality within the one singular Godhead.

 

If "Elohim" is evidence of the Trinity, then I'm curious how you deal with certain other usages of "Elohim" in the OT:

 

Exodus 7

[1] And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god [Elohim] to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

 

If Moses was like Elohim to Pharaoh, does that mean that Moses was a Trinity?

 

1 Kings 11

[5] For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess [Elohim] of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites....

[33] Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess [Elohim] of the Zidonians....

 

Was Ashtoreth the goddess a Trinity?

 

Genesis 23

[5] And the children of Heth answered Abraham, saying unto him,

[6] Hear us, my lord: thou art a mighty [Elohim] prince among us....

 

Were they insinuating that Abraham was a Trinity of a prince?

 

Jonah 3

[3] So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding [Elohim] great city of three days' journey.

 

Was Nineveh a Trinity of a city?

 

Just curious what your take is on this....

[oddbird1963]

I have never stated that the Trinity is explicitly taught in the OT, as it is in the NT. What I have said is that there is data in the OT that is consistent with God as Trinity. And the plural word Elohim used with singular verbs is a case in point. An aspect of singlarity and plurality together - Trinity = One God existing as three Persons, singularity & plurality both true simultaneously. Another Heb word is 'echad' used of God rather than 'yachid' = consistent with God as Trinity.

I understand that you don't state the doctrine of the Trinity is explicitly taught in the OT. It is the claim that there is some consistency between the word Elohim and the doctrine of the Trinity that is incorrect.

 

You are off base by considering the OT texts as "data" that can be twisted and manipulated at will to fit into some doctrine. You're not plotting points on a graph and engaging in regression analysis. You're dealing with texts that have meaning derived from their context. The plural nature of Elohim and the singular nature of the verbs used in the sentence as in Gen. 1:1 aren't opportunities to demonstrate a consistency with a doctrine of the Trinity. The use of plural suffixes in many Hebrew nouns doesn't indicate plurality. That's just a grammatical reality that is demonstrated throughout the OT with words other than Elohim.

 

No, you are incorrect. I am not taking issue with the fact the guy is Jewish - I take issue with what he says - "hey, Moses was referred to as 'Elohim' so he must be a Trinity, too" This kind of nonsense argument shows a lack of understanding of context. Jesus even said to the Jews;

Joh 10:34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'?

Joh 10:35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came--and Scripture cannot be broken--

Joh 10:36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

 

Does Jesus here say that the Jewish leaders whom God called "elohim" are actually God, or a Trinity? Of course not. God was telling them, that before His people, the rulers are to rule righteously, to lead the people properly, to be "the strong ones" - literal translation of Elohim - in protecting God's people. SO any statement about Moses being a Trinity is sheer nonsense - no right minded person would make that interpretation.

But you miss the point that you aren't justified in seeing some consistency with the word Elohim and the doctrine of the Trinity.

Christains believe Elohim is One God. So how are we different? Only by saying that the name Elohim, which God uses for Himself allows for the Trinity, and is consistent with God as Trinity - and may even point to the fact that God is Trinity. This statement is not outlandish.

It's outlandish to bring the Trinity into the Old Testament at all. You do so only by committing the indiscretion of "eisegesis" which biblical fundamentalists love to decry in others. Only from a mindset already convinced of the truth of a trinity doctrine can you go back into the old testament and say "Ah! Here is an indication of the Triune nature of god!" There is no such valid way of interpreting this from the Old Testament texts.

[Guest Leo Holley]

In Genesis we read at the time of creation of man" let US ( TWO ) make man in our image. New International Version (©1984)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. What does this tell us. It Tells us that in the beginning there was two God Heads. Two who were like minded. One would become what we know as "the Son".

 

The one who became the Son, Jesus Christ, is the one that was the God of the Old Testament. The One who gave Moses the ten Commandments and later became flesh and died for our Sins. The Holy Spirit IS NOT A DIFFERENT entity, but it is Jesus Christ in the Spirit.

 

When Jesus was Baptized He was giving us a example of what we as sinners are to do.God sent Him the Holy Spirit for He was Human and was given to Him as an example TO US. The Holy Spirit was not a third entity. There is no Trinity, only TWO.

 

freeman4:

[Guest Leo Holley]

In Genesis we read at the time of creation of man" let US ( TWO ) make man in our image. New International Version (©1984)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. What does this tell us. It Tells us that in the beginning there was two God Heads. Two who were like minded. One would become what we know as "the Son".

 

Another possibility is US = MORE THAN TWO, a vestige of pre-Torah (that is, an earlier tradition out of which that section of Genesis arose and was solidified in writing) polytheism in which YHWH coexisted with a multitude of deities.

 

Phanta