am: Assuming the trinity is true, why must it be interpreted from scripture?
jc: The Lord can tell you about the Trinity, but also those who could watch the Holy Spirit entering the minds of Christians. Christianity has been very big about claiming an entrance by God into their minds, but very slow to understand somebody might see this.
am: Now some might disagree and say that it does not have to be interpreted from scripture, and that it is in plain site in the text, explicit for everyone to see and you would have to be stupid not to see that.... well this thread may not be for you...
jc: I suppose the closest is Jesus “mixing it up” with the Father, occasionally coming close to saying He was the Father, but never quite spitting out at last, “I am God.” He’s said to have told Thomas three words in private, and it’s nearly certain these were those.
am: So.. firstly a better word i feel than interpreted (it sounds too subjective) is inferred from scripture that Jesus being God (part of the triune God)
jc: If Jesus is the Father it changes Christianity considerably. Notably, it’s a case study of humans being eager to kill the actual Creator. And when Jesus said finally the vineyard owner would send his son and he would still be killed, it can mean that no embodied entity bearing God’s authority can approach Christians today, neither Jesus nor a prophet.
am: So the question i am asking, assumes that the trinity is true and that to learn that knowledge can only come from the study of scripture where one can make a inference based on methodology like looking it through historical, textual, cultural lens of the times these events too place.
jc: If the Trinity is true, the Bible supports the thesis only vaguely. In fact the Bible doesn’t say anything that isn’t vague. Men are examining dust, for evidence of more dust.
am: So in foundation, you will have to accept the Trinity is solely based on inference from scripture to the fact that Jesus is God in the sense of being a person of the Triune God, and that the bible does not have Jesus proclaiming explicitly or directly that he is God, more so proclaiming he is part of a triune God.
jc: Jesus was the master of vague. He said the way was difficult, but did not describe the way. He offered Himself as a path, but how can that be if humans can’t conceive of God?
am: So for the question... Why does it require such study of scripture to discover Jesus is God in the triune nature?
jc: The thrust of the question is to ask why the Bible was not more explicit, but the Bible is never explicit. You may as well ask why you have vague scripture, worthless to study.
am: The only reason i can see is that Jesus as God did not want people to know that he was God, and it was part of a test to those who claimed to "know" God, and they ought recognise him as such....
jc: Indeed, Jesus withheld the truth of His Identity, though it must have been for important reasons. The most urgent I’d guess is that since men cannot conceive of what is beyond a man, He needed to allow the possibility He was a man, so men would become Christians. It’s not really a test, because even today Christians don’t know what God is.
am: yet we see the ones (pharisees and such) in the NT who preach the loudest could not recognise God if he came up shook there hand.
jc: Hey, if Jesus is really God then His consciousness rises high above the body. He may not want to be touched, even to shake hands since this supports an ignorance believing the situation is all about bodies rather than spirit. See further, if Jesus expected others in His society to feel that way, this becomes a road too “strait and narrow” for Christians.
am: (ie:those of you who claimed you know me... i will say i do not know you.. and gnashing of teeth.paraphrase)
jc: It’s a simple deduction that Jesus would not want to touch or be touched, but this has been beyond even such geniuses as Aquinas. All claim to know God, but none appear to know any of God’s properties, or what would make Him different from the others here.
am: A epistemic veil of some sort to find his true followers and believers.
jc: What if Jesus didn’t want followers or believers, but instead friends and knowers? As I’ve been noting recently, direct service of God is not possible, because there is no route to the Invisible God except through the Lord, and the Lord is not meant to be a dictator.
am: The only problem i have with that...as it is the messiah and he preaches "God’s" word, we should be able to solely recognize the messenger from the preaching of God’s word alone, and deduct that the messenger is from God.... making it redundant that Jesus needing to be part of a triune God.
jc: I think the concept of a messiah is a false one. A messiah is a man who leads other men, but if Jesus is the Creator then He is not necessarily the leader. And if Jesus is the Creator, the steps He’d recommend to the people likely form a path too steep for them.
Christians in one of their early conferences made the prophets illegal. Any such approaching today are labeled in the most ignominious terms possible, and harmed. It is strange you’d posit a messenger can arise, when Jesus was the last that Christians accept.
am: So what i want is explanations for why one should have to study to find God in the triune nature?
jc: You want to know why Jesus didn’t come right out and say, “I am God,” but also why He did not delineate His traits, which are those He shares with the Invisible God and which are the true means of His recognition by the cognoscenti (disciples, knowers). I would say that to do this fruitfully is not easy, even today. It requires establishing a context beyond any the world has seen before, and it must take place without people hearing deciding it is a competition, or that God is offering Himself as a target to strike.
am: why is it seemingly cryptic and not clear cut?
jc: Had Jesus declared both that He was God and God’s traits, Christianity would’ve died. The humans needed to see someone they conceived is from their realm, so that they could feel in power over the situation (and the Creator). When God’s traits are declared it makes pretenders impossible, but it also loses the audience, who have no motive to listen.
am: While it is not hard now to study the trinity... it would have been earlier on.. say someone reads the bible in mongolia with not prior knowledge of the trinity would they come to the conclusion that Jesus is part of the triune God? and should they? is it key yo understanding the bible?
jc: The doctrine of the Trinity is obviously from the cognoscenti, not the direct disciples of Jesus but from those of similar stern quality. The Words of Jesus required ancillary support, for the religion to thrive. In this case Christianity is the one religion that comes closest to describing God’s true nature, though there hasn’t been a lot of profound thinking about what exactly it means for there to be “three Persons, who are yet One.”
