Is the Trinity really in the Bible?

[polonius]

The “Messiah� according to the OT is a man and never divine. This was only changed when the Christian community decided that Jesus was divine himself which was followed by the Jewish 12th Benediction (c. 85 AD) declaring Christians to be “minim� or apostates and expelling them from the Jewish synagogues (see John’s gospel, c. 95 AD).

Even the “Introduction to Matthew� in the New American Bible recognizes that the author of the Gospel of Matthew was not the apostle Matthew.

So what we are left with is, at best, the writing of an unknown writer who was not a witness to the event and whose writings about 50 years after the fact are unsupported to the writing of the other gospel writers.

[rstrats]

Not that it proves anything of course, but I think it's interesting to note that Paul never once includes the Holy Spirit in any of his letter's salutations.

[marco]

Not that it proves anything of course, but I think it's interesting to note that Paul never once includes the Holy Spirit in any of his letter's salutations.

Yes, he didn't know him. Paul made the acquaintance of Jesus when he was shoved off his horse on the way to Damascus. From that point there seems to have been a lot of telepathic communication between him and Jesus. I should imagine Paul regarded Jesus as a divinity, independent of Yahweh. Perhaps he thought he was one himself, or very close.

[Elijah John]

Not that it proves anything of course, but I think it's interesting to note that Paul never once includes the Holy Spirit in any of his letter's salutations.

It doesn't prove it, but that is strong evidence that Paul, (in spite of his very high Christology), was not a Trinitarian.

It should also be noted that in his apostolic salutations, he equates the Father with God, never Jesus.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 13 by Elijah John]

It should also be noted that in his apostolic salutations, he equates the Father with God, never Jesus.

What then do you make of this verse?

Titus 2:13

Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

_________________

[polonius]

Not that it proves anything of course, but I think it's interesting to note that Paul never once includes the Holy Spirit in any of his letter's salutations.

It doesn't prove it, but that is strong evidence that Paul, (in spite of his very high Christology), was not a Trinitarian.

It should also be noted that in his apostolic salutations, he equates the Father with God, never Jesus.

RESPONSE: Jesus was thought to possibly be the Messiah (who was always human). About 80-85 AD Jewish-Christians decided Jesus himself was God. For this apostasy they were excluded from Jewish synagogues. (See the 12 Benediction on line and the Gospel of John. It's termed "the parting of the ways."

All this was long after Paul's death in 64 AD.

[tigger2]

[Replying to post 14 by Checkpoint]

As with many of the trinitarian 'proofs,' the traditional translation of 1 Tim. 2:13 is disputed even by a number of trinitarian scholars and translators.

Even trinitarian scholar Daniel B. Wallace complains that the common translation of Titus 2:13 as found in the KJV (“the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ�) treats “‘God’ and ‘Savior’ separately�! The same separation can be seen in the ASV (Titus 2:13), the Douay Version, and the NEB (footnote).

We can find numerous translations of Titus 2:13 (probably the most-used scripture for this Sharp's Rule “proof�) which render it as referring to two persons.

Titus 2:13

Bible translations old and new:


13 lokynge for that blessed hope and appearynge of the glory of ye greate God and of oure Sauioure Iesu Christ - Coverdale

13 lokynge for þe blessed hope & appearinge of the glory of the greate God, & of oure sauioure Iesu Christ, - The Great Bible

13 Looking for that blessed hope, and appearing of that glorie of that mightie God, and of our Sauiour Iesus Christ, - Geneva

13 abidinge the blessid hope and the comyng of the glorie of the greet God, and of oure sauyour Jhesu Crist; - Wycliffe

13 lokinge for that blessed hope and glorious apperenge of ye myghty god and of oure savioure Iesu Christ - Tyndale

13 in expectation of that desirable happiness, the glorious appearance of the supreme God, and of our saviour Jesus Christ, - Mace

13 awaiting the blessed hope of the appearance of the Glory of the great God and of our Saviour Christ Jesus, - Moffatt

13 expecting the blessed hope; namely, the appearing of the glory of the great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ; - The Living Oracles

13 looking for the blessed hope, and appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ; - Noyes

13 waiting for the blessed hope, the glorious appearing of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus, - Riverside

13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, - Sawyer

(New American Bible - 1970) as we await our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus

(New American Bible - 1991) as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ

(New American Bible - 2010) as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ

(A New Translation in Plain English - Charles K. Williams) while we wait for the blessed thing we hope for, the appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ

And while we live this life we hope and wait for the glorious denouement of the Great God and of Jesus Christ our saviour. - Phillips

We are to be looking for the great hope and the coming of our great God and the One Who saves, Christ Jesus. - NLV

13 Looking for that blessed hope, and appearing of that glory of that mighty God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ. - GNV

"looking for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of the mighty God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ," - NMB

According to An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, by C. F. D. Moule, Cambridge, England, 1971, p. 109, at Titus 2:13, the sense "of the Great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ ... is possible in [New Testament] Greek even without the repetition [of the definite article before the second noun]."

Noted British NT scholar and trinitarian clergyman Henry Alford wrote: "I would submit that [a translation which clearly differentiates God from Christ at Titus 2:13] satisfies all the grammatical requirements of the sentence: that it is both structurally and contextually more probable, and more agreeable to the Apostle’s [Paul’s] way of writing: and I have therefore preferred it." - The Greek Testament, p. 421, Vol. 3.

“Of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ (τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆ�ος ἡμῶν Χ�ιστοῦ Ἰησοῦ). …. According to A.V. [KJV] two persons are indicated, God and Christ. Revelations with others rend. of our great God and Savior Christ Jesus, thus indicating one person, and asserting the deity of Christ. I adopt the latter, although the arguments and authorities in favor of the two renderings are very evenly balanced. 155� - Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament.

"Some Trinitarians say that the grammar of Titus 2:13 forces the interpretation that Jesus is God because of the Granville Sharp rule of Greek grammar. That is not the case, however. The Granville Sharp rule has been debated and successfully challenged. When Scripture refers to “our Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,� it can indeed be referring to two separate beings: the “Great God,� and the “Savior,� Jesus Christ. The highly regarded Trinitarian Henry Alford gives a number of reasons as to why the grammar of the Greek does not force the interpretation of the passage to make Christ God (Henry Alford, The Greek Testament, Moody Press, Chicago, 1958, Vol. 3, entry on Titus 2:13 ). - Revised English Version Commentary - Titus 2:13.

And, finally (I think) concerning Titus 2:13, the steadfastly trinitarian The Expositor's Greek Testament (vol. 4, p. 195) says specifically of Titus 2:13:

"On the whole, then, we decide in favour of the R.V.m. in the rendering of this passage, appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. The grammatical argument - [Sharp's Rule] - is too slender to bear much weight, especially when we take into consideration not only the general neglect of the article in these epistles but the omission of it before σωτὴ� ['savior'] in I Tim. i. I, iv. 10 [1:1; 4:10]."

[tigger2]

[Replying to post 14 by Checkpoint]

How do you reconcile the following scriptures with the trinity 'proof' of many translations of Titus 2:13?

1 Corinthians 11:3 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)

“But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.�

2 Corinthians 11:31 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)

“The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, He who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying.�

Ephesians 1:3 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,�

Ephesians 1:17 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)

“that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him.�

1 Peter 1:3 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,�

Revelation 3:12 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)

“He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.�

Also see Ro. 15:6; 2 Cor. 1:3; Rev. 1:6; 3:2.

[bjs]

[Replying to marco]

Fair enough. The Trinity goes beyond what is directly stated in the Bible, but is a systematic way of describing the statements in the Bible. I think it is reasonable to still call that being biblical.

The Trinity is a complicated piece of theology. It is not found in the Bible and in fact its formulation conflicts with the central tenet that there is one, true God. The concept of three persons, each equally God, is far, far removed from anything biblical. Were such a notion correct somehow, in some way, Christ would have referenced it instead of leaving St. Patrick imperfectly to depict the notion by using a shamroock.

Complicated? Of course. But certainly not far removed from what is found in the Bible.

Roughly half the doctrine of the trinity comes down to saying that there is one true God, so I do not see how it could be in conflict with that same tenant which is found in the Bible.

All theology is an effort to put into systematic form the truth of God. For Christianity, that is always tied to the Bible. Now the specific language of Calvinism or Arminianism or justification or deification or the Trinity might not be found in the Bible, but that itself does not mean that they are removed in any great way from biblical teaching. They are all efforts to explain what the Bible says systematically.

Every piece of the doctrine of the Trinity is found in the Bible: There is one God, the Father is God, Jesus is God, the Spirit is God, Jesus is not the Father or the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father. What I have just described is the doctrine of the Trinity. Everything else – three persons and dual natures and hypostatic unions and analogies about clovers and such – is trying to flush out what this means when pushed for deeper understanding. As St. Hilary said, “The heretics force us to speak of the unspeakable.�

[marco]

What then do you make of this verse?

Titus 2:13

Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

The Vulgate Latin has: "exspectantes beatam spem, et adventum gloriæ magni Dei, et Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi:"


The comma and the conjunction "et" after Dei do not suggest that "Our Saviour Jesus Christ" is in apposition to God but we should read:


"the coming of the glory of (our) great God AND of our Saviour, Jesus Christ". There is no suggestion that Jesus is God.

[bjs]

[Replying to marco]

At the bare minimum Titus 2:13 strongly suggests that Jesus is God. A wooden translation of the Greek would be that we are awaiting “the appearing of the glory of the great God and Savior of us, Christ Jesus.�

The most natural reading is that “God� and “Savior� are both descriptors of Christ Jesus.

I suppose that is grammatically possible that “God� was meant to reference someone else, while only “Savior� was describing “Christ Jesus.� However, this would be an extremely awkward way of saying that.

Unless someone is deeply committed to saying that the Bible does not teach that Jesus is God, I don’t see how anyone could hold that interpretation.

To me, it seems pretty straightforward that that Paul was describing Christ Jesus as “God� and as “Savior.�