Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site reed.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!reed!purtell
From: purtell@reed.UUCP (Lady Godiva)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Trinity
Message-ID: <1785@reed.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 13:17:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: reed.1785
Posted: Fri Aug  9 13:17:20 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 07:20:33 EDT
References: <135@lmef.UUCP> <326@aero.ARPA>
Reply-To: purtell@reed.UUCP (Lady Godiva)
Distribution: net
Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon
Lines: 65


   I promised myself that I wasn't going to enter this discussion, but
here goes...

In article <326@aero.ARPA> homeier@aero.UUCP (Peter Homeier (MISD)) writes:
>But for what it's worth, here are some
>thoughts on this three-fold nature of our Lord.

>Although the nature of the Trinity is most clearly expressed in the New
>Testament, there are an abundance of references to this in the Old Testament as
>well, beginning in Genesis 1:26, at the very beginning:  "Then God said, 'Let
>Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;'".  

    I was taught that in this verse God is speaking to the earth. Let us
(God and the earth) make man. Which is just what God did. He made man
from the earth, and then breathed his spirit into him. This explanation
always seemed to make more sense to me.

>in Genesis 3:22, "Then the Lord God said, 'Behold, the man has become like one
>of Us, to know good and evil.'".  (NKJV)  In these scriptures God describes
>himself as plural.  

   Again, how do you know he was refering to only himself? Remember, the
angels, and Satan were created before man, and they all knew about good
and evil.

  In short - I see no evidence for the trinity in the Old Testament. 

   The New Testament, however, does certainly suggest that there are at
least multiple facets of God, but it never uses the word trinity, or
anything close. Who are we to say that there are only three, and to
define them so well? I think that by trying to define God down to a
level like that diminutises him.

>I would like now to turn to each member of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy
>Spirit, and try to describe my meager understanding of the nature of each.  I
>welcome whatever help others can give me in adding to or correcting this.

[paragraph about the father, then one about Christ that ends like
this:]
>Jesus is also the One who will come again
>to establish His kingdom here on earth, and to sweep away all evil forces in
>the battle of Armageddon.

  The last sentence is incredibly debatable, but the only thing that I
would like to discuss less than the trinity is prophesy. 

   [Line about the Holy Spirit]

  Basically I think that everything that you have said is good, with
only a few exceptions, which I have pointed out. My opinion is that
sure, God has many different aspects to his nature, we all do. But to
label them "father" "son" and "holy spirit" and to call them the trinity
is what I have problems with. My advice is don't get too wrapped up in
the doctrine of the trinity. Believing in it, or not believing in it, is
not going to save or damn you. Although I do know people who would
disagree violently with that.

  cheers -

  elizabeth g. purtell

  (Lady Godiva)