The Trinity in the Old Testament (page 9)

hooberus

Now what do you think of the Societies "quote in a box" in their brochure? http://www.watchtower.org/library/ti/index.htm

"There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."?The Triune God

The quote in the box is not original with the WT Society. They're simply showing that this is what someone else wrote about the Bible writers. While I'm not a defender of the Society, I think the quote expresses pure truth that no trinitarian has yet been able to contradict.

How did we get from the Old Testament, especially Genesis, to the third century and the WT Society? Are we talking Bible or are we talking about what men think about the Bible?

herk

hooberus

I agree that we should stick the subject of the Old testament. However the Trinity brochure has been referred to here as a reliable source for the subject.

for example:

Herk: I have retired as champion from Trinity discussions. I have concluded that people want to believe in the Trinity, I am not going to waste my time anymore in that discussion. I refer them to the Trinity brochure which completely presents the case. Let them decide. If they still like the TRinity heathen nonsense, then let thenm believe what they like.

hooberus

The quote in the box is not original with the WT Society. They're simply showing that this is what someone else wrote about the Bible writers. While I'm not a defender of the Society, I think the quote expresses pure truth that no trinitarian has yet been able to contradict.

So you agree with the following quote?

"There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."?The Triune God

herk

Herk wrote:

I think the quote expresses pure truth ...

Hoob wrote:

So you agree with the ... quote?

Is there another way that I'm supposed to answer your question, Hoob? What is your point?

Herk

hooberus

"There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."?The Triune God

Clement of Alexandria was a sacred writer and he certainly "suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."

"...the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God....I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father." The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, pp. 202, 468

stillajwexelder

Clement of Alexandria was a sacred writer and he certainly "suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."

"...the Divine----- Word was in God....I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father." The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, pp. 202, 468

See a painting in an art gallery -- all of us can UNDERSTAND something diiferent from it -- put a different INTERPRETATION on it -- someones UNDERSTANDING or INTERPRETATION -- NEVER makes it fact

hooberus

See a painting in an art gallery -- all of us can UNDERSTAND something diiferent from it -- put a different INTERPRETATION on it -- someones UNDERSTANDING or INTERPRETATION -- NEVER makes it fact

stillajwexelder, I was not trying to imply that the Trinity is a fact because Clement used the term. I quoted Clement in order to show the falseness of the quote used by the Watchower:

"There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."?The Triune God

Narkissos

Just a really candid question: is not "sacred writer" equivalent to "Bible writer" in English Protestant (including WT) use?

herk

hoob,

It seems you and I are on different planets. I tho't the question was about the Bible writers, not about somebody (Clement) who wrote something more than a hundred years after the Bible was completed.

Even as the JW brochure shows, and accurately at that, the histories and commentaries written by both Catholics and Protestants, as well as others, are replete with testimony that the doctrine did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century.

Is it wise to take as gospel truth the word of men who lived hundreds of years after the Bible was completed? The American Constitution has been around about 200 years and scholars debate its meaning on several issues. We can know who is speaking truth and who is distorting the document only by examining the Constitution itself. The same applies to the Bible.

herk

The Trinity in the Old Testament

Share this