The Trinity

The Trinity

  • Total voters
    121
Rosenritter

Rosenritter

New member
Apple7 said:
We have to wonder why you repeatedly reference Trinitarian-rendered English translations for your denial of it.

What's the matter, can't you find a modalist translation?



God reveals Himself as Triune ALL the way through the Holy Bible...and I have been steadily providing examples in this thread.

Maybe, just maybe, if you stopped long enough to look, and study, then you would begin obtaining your theology as a sit-down meal....instead of at the drive-through window...
Click to expand...

I have trouble believing you read that carefully before replying. You just said that Genesis 6:3 capitalizes "Spirit" because it refers to a Member of the Trinity as a Proper Noun, a Divine Person. I didn't imagine to interpret a capital letter that way before, but you seemed to insist that was the meaning.

But if we take your interpretation, I just gave six examples of Bibles that DENY your Trinity interpretation and compared that to four that favor your Trinity interpretation. So, using your definition for "for Trinity" and "denying Trinity" this was the score:

Trinity: New King James, New International Version, New American Standard Bible, Geneva Bible

Against Trinity: King James Version, Tyndale's translation, Bishop's Bible, Revised Standard Version, American Standard Version, Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible

From your rather inane pigeon-holing, that would make the King James Version a "modalist translation." That happens to be the Bible I use and the same as what I post here for scripture references. So aside from your somewhat offense response style, it also didn't make any sense. You are destroying your own argument.

Interesting to have heard you essentially say that the King James Bible was a modalist translation... and it must be, because it didn't recognize the "Third Person of the Trinity" in Genesis 6:3!
 
Apple7

Apple7

New member
Rosenritter said:
I have trouble believing you read that carefully before replying. You just said that Genesis 6:3 capitalizes "Spirit" because it refers to a Member of the Trinity as a Proper Noun, a Divine Person. I didn't imagine to interpret a capital letter that way before, but you seemed to insist that was the meaning.
Click to expand...

You are the only one in this conversation to repeatedly mention 'capitalization'.





But if we take your interpretation, I just gave six examples of Bibles that DENY your Trinity interpretation and compared that to four that favor your Trinity interpretation. So, using your definition for "for Trinity" and "denying Trinity" this was the score:

Trinity: New King James, New International Version, New American Standard Bible, Geneva Bible

Against Trinity: King James Version, Tyndale's translation, Bishop's Bible, Revised Standard Version, American Standard Version, Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible

From your rather inane pigeon-holing, that would make the King James Version a "modalist translation." That happens to be the Bible I use and the same as what I post here for scripture references. So aside from your somewhat offense response style, it also didn't make any sense. You are destroying your own argument.

Interesting to have heard you essentially say that the King James Bible was a modalist translation... and it must be, because it didn't recognize the "Third Person of the Trinity" in Genesis 6:3!
Click to expand...

You use Trinitarian English renderings for your denial of them.

Where is your modalistic English rendering?

Answer: No where.
 
God's Truth

God's Truth

New member
Rosenritter said:
I have trouble believing you read that carefully before replying. You just said that Genesis 6:3 capitalizes "Spirit" because it refers to a Member of the Trinity as a Proper Noun, a Divine Person. I didn't imagine to interpret a capital letter that way before, but you seemed to insist that was the meaning.

But if we take your interpretation, I just gave six examples of Bibles that DENY your Trinity interpretation and compared that to four that favor your Trinity interpretation. So, using your definition for "for Trinity" and "denying Trinity" this was the score:

Trinity: New King James, New International Version, New American Standard Bible, Geneva Bible

Against Trinity: King James Version, Tyndale's translation, Bishop's Bible, Revised Standard Version, American Standard Version, Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible

From your rather inane pigeon-holing, that would make the King James Version a "modalist translation." That happens to be the Bible I use and the same as what I post here for scripture references. So aside from your somewhat offense response style, it also didn't make any sense. You are destroying your own argument.

Interesting to have heard you essentially say that the King James Bible was a modalist translation... and it must be, because it didn't recognize the "Third Person of the Trinity" in Genesis 6:3!
Click to expand...

Your claim is worthless.

Capital letters were not used in Hebrew or Aramaic. It was at the discretion of the person or person's interpreting. Some made mistakes and made a small 's' where it should have been a capital 'S'.
 
God's Truth

God's Truth

New member
A person translating the written Word of God did not necessarily have to be a true Christian.

God does not say only true Christians can translate.

Apostle Paul even made sure that he obeyed God so as not to lose his salvation as he preached how to get saved to others.

Again, Rosenritter does not make his/her case.
 
God's Truth

God's Truth

New member
Apple7 said:
Moses wrote about a Triune God.

We have already been over this, time and again...
Click to expand...

There are three, and the three are one and the same.

Seems to me that Roseritter is a modalist. Maybe those who call me a modalist need to debate me more carefully.
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
Rosenritter said:
Exodus 20:3 KJV
(3) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.


2 Corinthians 4:3-4 KJV
(3) But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
(4) In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

1 Corinthians 8:5 KJV
(5) For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)


I'm not sure where Squeaky was going with that, but Satan is called the "god of this world" with a little "g" instead of capital "G."
Click to expand...
I think squeaky thinks that deity means more than God.

Satan has one third of the Angles on his side. Why did he get such power?

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top