Tinity Fom Sciptue

8/20/2019 Tinity Fom Sciptue

1/30

Home

Apologetics


2/30

Newsletter

Articles


3/30


4/30

United Nations

Mailbag

CM Blog


5/30

Google

Web Contender

Ministries


6/30

APOLOGETC!

C"ristian Apologetics

A Co#rse in Miracles

Ba"ai

B#dd"ism

Cat"olicism

E$ol#tion

%reemasonr&

Hind#ism

H#manism

slam

'e"o$a"s Witnesses

Mormonism


7/30

New Age

!cientolog&

Unitarian Uni$ersalism

Wicca

O#r Ads are a#tomaticall& placed based on t"e content o( t"e page in w"ic" t"e&

appear) We do not "a$e t"e option o( c"oosing w"ic" ads appear on t"e site) T"is

can res#lt in t"e appearance o( Ads we do not endorse and wit" w"ic" we serio#sl&

disagree) We *lter t"ese ads as we *nd t"em+ b#t t"is ta,es time) -o#r patience is

appreciated)

BBLE P.OPHEC-

A Beginning o( Global Go$ernance / 01 in a series

Prop"etic !igns t"at we are in t"e End Times


8/30

T"e Eart" C"arter2s !pirit#al Agenda / 03 in a !eries

T"e New Age n4#ence at t"e United Nations / 05 in a !eries

'es#s is t"e Messia" Prop"esied in t"e Old Testament

Li,e a T"ie( in t"e Nig"t / T"e .apt#re o( t"e C"#rc"

T"e Coming War o( Gog and Magog+ an slamic n$asion6

M#slim+ 'ewis"+ and C"ristian Prop"ec& Comparison

T"e Millennial 7ingdom


9/30

T"ere will be %alse C"rists

s t"e E)U) t"e .e$i$ed .oman Empire6

!"o#ld We !t#d& End/Time Prop"ec&6

Apostas& and t"e Laodicean 8ilemma

C"ristian Tracts

Newsletter

W"at We Belie$e

O#r Mission

Contact Us


10/30

A Compre"ensi$e Biblical 8e(ense o( t"e Trinit&

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

B& Ben .ast

Contender Ministries

8ecember 13+ 399:

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

8r) Pwarmer 4ipped t"e c"art closed+ too, o; "is reading glasses+ and let o#t a

long sig")


11/30

'o"n !,eptic" r#bbed "is temples and loo,ed #p)


12/30

Per"aps t"e single most mis#nderstood doctrine regarding t"e nat#re o( God is t"e

doctrine o( t"e Trinit&) Belie$ers and nonbelie$ers ali,e "a$e a diDc#lt time

compre"ending God=s tri#ne nat#re+ and t"ose t"at do #nderstand "a$e a diDc#lt

time e?plaining it) As critics o( t"e Trinit& are #ic, to point o#t+ t"e word is

not (o#nd in t"e Bible+ and no single $erse pro$ides a s#mmar& o( t"e Trinitariandoctrine) n an email we recei$ed+ L8! apologist 8)L) Bar,sdale said+


13/30

and p#t t"e pieces toget"er #ntil t"e& (orm a (#ll pict#re) A tri#ne God will be t"e

onl& possible $erdict based on an obJecti$e anal&sis o( t"e !cript#ral e$idence)

T"e doctrine o( t"e Trinit& can be s#mmed #p as (ollows Wit"in t"e one Being t"at

is God+ t"ere e?ist eternall& t"ree coe#al and coeternal Persons+ namel&+ t"e

%at"er+ t"e !on+ and t"e Hol& !pirit)K1 n order to pro$e t"is doctrine we m#st pro$e

t"e (ollowing

1)

T"ere is onl& one God

3)

T"e %at"er is God

5)

'es#s is God

:)

T"e Hol& !pirit is God

)

T"e %at"er+ !on+ and Hol& !pirit are t"ree distinct Persons)

Eac" point abo$e is $er& important+ and we will clearl& ill#strate eac") Heres&

arises w"en t"ese distinctions are bl#rred) %or instance+ modalism also ,nown as

Oneness t"eolog& wo#ld agree wit" items one t"ro#g" (o#r+ b#t item *$e is w"ere


14/30

modalism (ails) Howe$er+ as 'ames W"ite said in regards to t"e doctrine o( t"e

Trinit&+ K3

T"ere is a treas#re tro$e o( !cript#res to s#pport eac" o( t"e points we=ll be

st#d&ing) To ,eep t"is article at a reasonable lengt"+ w"ere t"ere are se$eral

rele$ant $erses+ =ll limit t"e (#ll $erse #otation to two $erses in N+ #nless stated

ot"erwise+ and gi$e t"e !cript#re re(erences (or t"e rest)

1) T"ere is onl& one God

slam+ '#daism+ and C"ristianit& are ,nown as t"e big t"ree monot"eistic religions)

-o# won=t *nd man& arg#ments among M#slims+ 'ews+ and C"ristians t"at t"ere is

more t"an one God+ e?cept per"aps among some aberrant sects) Ne$ert"eless+ let#s establis" t"is !cript#rall& be(ore we mo$e on to areas w"ere disagreements will

arise)

A) T"ere is onl& one God

8e#teronom& :5

RT"is is w"at t"e LO.8 sa&s/ srael2s 7ing and .edeemer+ t"e LO.8 Almig"t& am

t"e *rst and am t"e lastQ apart (rom me t"ere is no God)> saia" ::S


15/30

Ot"er Old Testament erses 8e#t) :5Q 535Q 3 !am) 3353Q sa) 539Q :519Q

::S/VQ :+ 1:+ 31/33Q :S)

'o"n ::

'eremia" 1919


16/30

C) All ot"er so/called are (alse gods)

in t"e world and t"at t"ere is no God b#t one)> 1 Corint"ians V:

Ot"er $erses 8e#t) 5331Q 1 !am) 1331Q sa) 51Q :135/3:+ 3Q 'er) 311Q Q

1S39Q 1 Cor) 191/39)

T"e $erses abo$e are clear e$idence t"at t"ere is onl& one God) T"is is ,nown as

monot"eism) '#daism+ slam+ and C"ristianit& are ,nown as t"e t"ree great

monot"eistic religions) Howe$er+ slam and '#daism will (all o; as we contin#e o#r

s#pport o( t"e Trinit&)

3) T"ere is a pl#ralit& to God)

T"e Hebrew word (or God is el in its sing#lar (orm) T"e most common (orm #sed (orGod is elo"im+ w"ic" is pl#ral in (orm) How can t"ere be pl#ral (orm #sed (or onl&

one God6 !ome s#ggest t"at t"e answer is (o#nd in t"e t"ree persons o( t"e Trinit&)

Ot"ers contend t"at t"e pl#ral constr#ct denotes a (#llness o( deit& as opposed to

pl#ralit&) s#bmit t"at bot" interpretations are correct) =m getting a"ead o( m&sel(

now t"o#g") .at"er t"an loo, at all t"e $erses t"at #se t"e pl#ral elo"im+ let=s loo,

at ot"er $erses t"at point to a pl#ralit& wit"in t"e one God)


17/30

Genesis 13S+ emp"asis added)

)K5

A) T"e %at"er is God)


18/30


19/30

is -a"we"+ t"e God o( t"e Old Testament) We now e?plore t"e pl#ralit& in t"e one

tr#e God)

:) 'es#s is God)

T"ere is a great deal o( !cript#ral e$idence t"at 'es#s C"rist is God) T"e e$idence is

comprised not onl& o( speci*c statements+ b#t also in prop"ec& (#l*llment and "is

attrib#tes) Let=s *rst loo, at some o( e?plicit !cript#ral e$idence) n t"is section+ we

won=t limit o#rsel$es to onl& gi$ing t"e te?t o( two $erses)

'o"n 11

'o"n 393V

want to pa#se J#st a moment to disc#ss t"e $erses abo$e) T"e Gree, word (or God

is t"eos) n 'o"n 11+ we read t"at t"e Word 'es#s was wit" t"eos and was indeedt"eos) 'es#s was and is God@ T"is is a $er& power(#l statement@ T"e word t"eos

is #sed not onl& in 'o"n 11+ b#t also in $erse 1V and in 'o"n 393V) T"eos is #sed in

t"e New Testament in re(erence to 'e"o$a"-a"we" God) T"eos is also #sed in

re(erence to 'es#s) We=re beginning to see t"e pl#ralit& (o#nd wit"in t"e one God)


20/30

R-o# are wort"&+ o#r Lord and God+ to recei$e glor& and "onor and power+ (or &o#

created all t"ings+ and b& &o#r will t"e& were created and "a$e t"eir being)R

.e$elation :11 t"e words o( t"e 3: elders to 'es#s)

no#ns KGod= and !a$ior= bot" stand #nder t"e regimen o( t"e single de*niti$e

article preceding God+= indicatingFt"at t"e& are to be constr#ed corporatel&+ not

separatel&+ or t"at t"e& "a$e a single re(erent)>K n ot"er words+ attempts to

di$ide t"is cla#se into a re(erence to God and a separate re(erence to 'es#s as

!a$ior 4ies against t"e Gree, grammatical constr#ct) T"ese $erses pro$ide


21/30

additional power(#l and clear e$idence t"at 'es#s is 'e"o$a"-a"we" God) Let=s now

t#rn o#r attention to more $erses t"at re$eal 'es#s to be 'e"o$a"-a"we")

.omans 19+15) Note Pa#l re$eals 'es#s to be

t"e same re(erred to in 'oel 353+ w"ic" "e #otes) n 'oel 353+ is

'e"o$a"-a"we")

P"ilippians 319/11) Note X 'e"o$a"-a"we")

1 Peter 35) T"is $erse is

ta,en almost identicall& (rom Psalms 5:V+ w"ere is 'e"o$a"-a"we") %rom

t"e $erses t"at (ollow $erse 5+ it is clear t"is is a re(erence to 'es#s)

Anot"er wa& we ,now t"at 'es#s is 'e"o$a"-a"we" comes (rom t"e (#l*llment o( an

Old Testament prop"ec&) Yec"aria" 1319 sa&s+


22/30

1319+ 'e"o$a"-a"we" prop"esies t"at He 'e"o$a"-a"we" will be pierced+ and

people will mo#rn (or Him) 'es#s C"rist is pierced t"ro#g" "is "ands and (eet at "is

cr#ci*?ion+ and pierced t"ro#g" t"e side wit" a spear w"ile on t"e cross) .e$elation

1 con*rms t"is (#l*llment o( prop"ec&) Concl#sion6 'es#s C"rist is

'e"o$a"-a"we"@

Anot"er e$idence t"at 'es#s is 'e"o$a"-a"we" comes (rom His role as !a$ior)

saia" :511 sa&s+

-et 'es#s is re(erred to man& times in t"e New Testament as o#r !a$ior L#,e 311Q

'o"n ::3Q Acts 1535Q Ep") 35Q P"i) 539Q 1 Tim) 11Q 3 Tim) 119Q Tit 1:Q 315Q

5SQ 3 Pet) 11+11Q 339Q 53+1VQ 1 'o"n :1:)

'es#s ca#sed no small #proar among t"e 'ews o( t"e da& beca#se He accepted

praise and wors"ip blasp"emo#s i( He were not God@ As we "a$e seen+ onl& God

is t"e sa$ior o( men) Matt"ew 311/11 describes 'es#s= tri#mp"al entr& into

'er#salem) He came riding in on a don,e&+ in (#l*llment o( an Old Testament

messianic prop"ec& Yec) ) As 'es#s rode in+ we *nd t"e crowds t"at s#rro#nded

"im s"o#ting Webster=s 115 dictionar& de*ned Hosanna

as

t"e crowd $iewed 'es#s as God and !a$ior) t is important to note t"at 'es#s did not

reb#,e t"e crowd (or t"is praise) n $erse 1+ we *nd t"at t"e c"ie( priests and

P"arisees were o#traged and indignant at t"is beca#se+ as we said+ t"is wo#ld be

blasp"em& (or a mere man) C"ildren "ad (ollowed 'es#s in to t"e temple are and

were still s"o#ting+


23/30

5SRW"o is "e+ sir6R t"e man as,ed) RTell me so t"at ma& belie$e in "im)R

5'es#s said+ R-o# "a$e now seen "imQ in (act+ "e is t"e one spea,ing wit"

&o#)R 5VT"en t"e man said+ RLord+ belie$e+R and "e wors"iped "im) Kemp"asis

added

5'es#s said+ R%or J#dgment "a$e come into t"is world+ so t"at t"e blind will seeand t"ose w"o see will become blind)R

'es#s accepted wors"ip) T"is is not adoration o( a mere prop"et+ b#t praise and

wors"ip d#e onl& to God) 'es#s was eit"er God or He was cra&+ and t"ere is ample

e$idence against t"e latter and in s#pport o( t"e (ormer) %#rt"er e$idence comes

(rom t"e (act t"at 'es#s "as man& o( t"e attrib#tes o( God

Creator 'o"n 15+ 1 Cor) VSQ Col 11S/1Q Heb) 13Q .e$) 51:

Unc"anging Heb) 119/13Q 15V

Eternal 'o"n 11Q VVQ 1Q Col) 11Q Heb) 13

Omniscient 'o"n 1S59

Omnipresent Matt) 1V39Q 3V39Q 'o"n 515Q Ep") 135Q :19Q Col) 511


24/30

t is clear (rom t"e !cript#ral e$idence abo$e t"at 'es#s is God) He is t"e LO.8

'e"o$a"-a"we" o( t"e Old Testament+ and t"ere(ore is t"e one tr#e elo"im or

t"eos) He s"ares t"is role as God wit" t"e %at"er) As we are abo#t to see+ He also

s"ares t"is role wit" t"e Hol& !pirit)

) T"e Hol& !pirit is God

Less !cript#re is dedicated to t"e Hol& !pirit+ b#t t"ere is eno#g" to concl#de t"at

He too is God) n Acts 5/:+ we see t"e Hol& !pirit being e#ated wit" God

3 Corint"ians 51/1V


25/30

Additional e$idence o( t"e deit& o( t"e Hol& !pirit comes (rom t"e s"ared attrib#tes

o( t"e deit&) T"e Hol& !pirit is

Eternal Heb) 1:

Omniscient 1 Cor) 319/11

Omnipresent Psa) 15

!a$ior .om) V1/3

n addition to t"e attrib#tes abo$e+ we *nd t"e Hol& !pirit was in$ol$ed in creation

Gen) 13Q Psa) 19:59+ t"e incarnation Matt) 11V+39Q L#,e 15+ and t"e

res#rrection .om) 1:Q V11) T"is is ample e$idence to s"ow t"at t"e Hol& !pirit is

God) We "a$e now pro$en !cript#rall& t"at t"ere is onl& one God) We "a$e alsopro$en t"at t"e %at"er+ !on+ and Hol& !pirit can eac" la& claim to being God)

Howe$er+ one can belie$e in all t"is+ and still s#bscribe to t"e erroneo#s belie( o(

modalism)


26/30

Modalists belie$e t"at t"ere is onl& one God+ b#t belie$e God to be comprised o( one

Person w"o simpl& mani(ests Himsel( at di;erent times t"ro#g" %at"er+ !on+ or Hol&

!pirit) n ot"er words+ modalists belie$e t"at God is one in s#bstance as well as

essence t"e %at"er+ !on+ and Hol& !pirit are not distinct persons) As we s"all see+

modalism (ails beca#se t"e %at"er+ !on+ and Hol& !pirit are indeed t"ree distinctpersons)

S) T"e %at"er+ !on+ and Hol& !pirit are t"ree distinct persons)

A) 'es#s is not t"e %at"er %irst+ let=s t#rn o#r attention to Matt"ew 3V1+


27/30

t"e %at"er+ : and will testi(& abo#t 'es#s) Anot"er $erse t"at identi*es 'es#s and

t"e Hol& !pirit separatel& is 'o"n 1S+ emp"asis added) Once again+ t"e elements are "ere to s"ow

t"at 'es#s+ t"e %at"er+ and t"e Hol& !pirit are separate) 'es#s said He wo#ld as, t"e

%at"er) ( 'es#s were simpl& a mani(estation o( t"e %at"er+ t"en He wo#ld be as,ing

Himsel(+ w"ic" so#nds ne#rotic rat"er t"an ort"odo?) T"e $erse also re(ers to t"e

Hol& !pirit as Eac" person is described separatel& "ere) %irst+ note t"at

'es#s was pra&ing) ( Oneness t"eolog& were correct+ 'es#s wo#ld be pra&ing to

Himsel() Once again+ t"at smac,s o( ne#rosis) nstead+ 'es#s was pra&ing to t"e

%at"er) As He did+ t"e Hol& !pirit descended on 'es#s in a p"&sical mani(estation

li,e a do$e) T"e $oice o( t"e %at"er was t"en "eard (rom Hea$en+ spea,ing to t"e!on) T"is "ig"lig"ts t"at eac" person o( t"e Trinit& is #ni#e and separate)

) Concl#sion


28/30

t is clear (rom a reading o( t"e Bible t"at t"ere is onl& one God+ ,nown in t"e Old

Testament as -a"we"'e"o$a") t is clear t"at t"e %at"er+ t"e !on+ and t"e Hol&!pirit are eac" God -a"we") t is also clear+ in contrast to Oneness t"eolog&

Unitarian modalism+ t"at eac" person is separate and distinct (rom t"e ot"er) One

God in t"ree persons t"e Biblical Trinit&)

Ontolog& is important in #nderstanding t"e Trinit&) Ontolog& is t"e st#d& o(

As 'ames W"ite said+ KS

Are &o# still "a$ing a diDc#lt time compre"ending t"e tri#ne nat#re o( God6 T"at=s

#nderstandable) T"e laws to w"ic" we are bo#nd de*ne o#r compre"ension) God=snat#re transcends t"ese laws) ( we co#ld (#ll& compre"end God=s nat#re+ "e wo#ld

cease to be Almig"t& God) He wo#ld be lesser t"an He tr#l& is) am a de$otee o(

analogies) One analog& li,e to #se wit" regards to t"e Trinit& is m& comp#ter) M&

comp#ter consists o( inp#t de$ices mo#se and ,e&board+ o#tp#t de$ices monitor+

printer+ spea,ers+ and t"e central processing #nit) T"ese di;erent components

(orm m& one comp#ter) T"is analog& (ails to capt#re t"e (#ll comple?it& o( t"e

s#bstance o( God+ b#t it can "elp someone to grasp t"e basic relations"ip)

t is tr#e+ as so man& Mormons+ M#slims+ and 'e"o$a"=s Witness are inclined to point

o#t+ t"at t"ere is no concise+ clear teac"ing o( t"e Trinit& in t"e New Testament or

Old Testament) Howe$er+ b& s#c" reasoning+ t"ere is also no clear teac"ing

regarding smo,ing or illicit dr#g #se) -et b& e?amining !cript#re in its greater

conte?t+ it is clear t"at o#r bod& is t"e temple o( God 1 Cor) S1 and Pa#l #rges #s

to p#ri(& o#rsel$es (rom t"ings w"ic" contaminate t"e bod& 3 Cor) 1) !imilarl&+


29/30

b& e?amining t"e s#m o( !cript#re in immediate and greater conte?t+ it is clear t"at

God is tri#ne) He is one God+ eternall& e?istent in t"ree di$ine persons t"e %at"er+

t"e !on+ and t"e Hol& !pirit) We m#st be able to de(end t"is biblical doctrine i( we

are to e;ecti$el& contend (or t"e tr#t" o( t"e gospel)

KA#t"or=s note n t"e coming wee,s+ we will post a (ollow/#p article to e?amine and

re(#te t"e most common obJections raised against t"e Trinit& b& $ario#s c#lts+ s#c"

as t"e 'e"o$a"=s Witnesses and t"e Mormon C"#rc")

EN8NOTE!

1) 'ames .) W"ite+ Lo$ing t"e Trinit&+ C"ristian .esearc" 'o#rnal+ ol#me 31 ss#e

:)

3) bid)

5) T"e Hebrew name (or God is -HWH (o#r consonants onl&) Beca#se o( a nearl&

s#perstitio#s (ear o( ta,ing t"e Lord=s name in $ain+ t"e 'ews a$oided #sing t"is

name+ and o(ten #sed t"e name Adonai) E$ent#all&+ t"e $owels (rom Adonai were

incl#ded in -HWH to (orm -a"owa") Toda&+ t"is name is o(ten spelled in Englis"+

-a"we") As a "#man contri$ance+ -a"owa" m#tated to 'e"o$a" in some

man#scripts) -a"we" and 'e"o$a" are considered s&non&mo#s+ and mean


30/30

) .obert L) .e&mond+ 'es#s+ 8i$ine Messia" T"e New Testament Witness

P"illipsb#rg+ N' Presb&terian and .e(ormed+ 19+ p) 3S)

S) W"ite+ Lo$ing t"e Trinit&

Documents

Tinity Fom Sciptue