Featured Does the Old Testament make any reference to the Trinity?

[Alter2Ego]

By the time we reach verse 8, it should be clear that when Jehovah said "us," he was referring to himself and the seraphs/angels that were with him. The problem is that like all Trinitarians, you are reading scripture with trinitarian lenses by ignoring surrounding verses (context), because the context debunks your philosophy.

This too is incorrect. There is no reference at all to Isaiah preaching about angels. Isaiah's message focused on God and God alone. When God said "us" He was referencing Himself, the Son and the Spirit. Angels have nothing to do with salvation, redemption or reconciling man to God. Angels were God's messengers, not His equals. In fact, angels refuse worship from men (Rev.19:10).
Here is a quote from the Bible commentator John Gill concerning this verse:

and who will go for us? not directing his discourse to the seraphim, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi; as if he consulted with them: for who of all the creatures is the Lord's counsellor? but to the Son and Spirit, who it is certain were concerned in this mission

Almighty God Jehovah was accompanied by seraphs/angels when He said "who will go for us," and you're arguing there's no mention of angels by Isaiah at Isaiah 6:2?

Isaiah 6:2​

Seraphs were standing above him; each had six wings. Each covered his face with two and covered his feet with two, and each of them would fly about with two.

Isaiah 6:8​

Then I heard the voice of Jehovah saying: “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” And I said: “Here I am! Send me!”

According to your Trinitarian argument, Jehovah didn't include the seraphs/angels at Isaiah 6:8. Instead, he was talking to part of his "trinity" Jesus, who, by the way, isn't mentioned by name anywhere in that verse of scripture. So at this point, you are making things up as you go in a vain attempt at supporting your Trinitarian philosophy.

Here is a quote from the Bible commentator John Gill concerning this verse:

and who will go for us? not directing his discourse to the seraphim, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi; as if he consulted with them: for who of all the creatures is the Lord's counsellor? but to the Son and Spirit, who it is certain were concerned in this mission

John Gill's commentary is nonsense. He has no credibility in light of the fact he is just another Trinitarian posting his personal philosophy with no scriptural support for what he's claiming.

John Gill and His Defence of the Trinity

He did more than “adorn the pastoral office.”

ca.thegospelcoalition.org

 

[Alter2Ego]

Nonsense. Genesis 18:1-2 makes no mention of Jesus, and for good reason: The writing of that book was completed by Moses in 1513 B.C.E. At that point in time, Jesus was still heaven and had not yet been sent to earth. It was not until the First Century C.E., over a thousand years later, that Jesus' spirit life was transferred by Jehovah into the womb of the virgin named Mary.

Sorry, but that is wrong. This appearance of God had to be Jesus pre-incarnate. When Moses asked to see God's face, he was told no man could see His face and live (Ex. 33:18-22). Therefore, we know God in Genesis 18 was not the Father. It had to be God the Son. As you pointed out, it was Jehovah in the flesh.

I didn't point out anything of the kind. You are ignoring the fact that I placed it in quotation signs, as follows:

Genesis 18:1 distinctly identifies Jehovah (the Father) as the person who "appeared" to Abraham in the form of a "man."

Quotation signs around a word (when the word is not part of an actual quotation) are meant to alert a reader that the person who wrote that word in quotations is distancing him or herself from the meaning of that word. It's referred to as scare-quoting. That's what I was doing when I put the word appeared in quotations.

"Authors often use quotation marks when nothing is being quoted. The marks may indicate irony, skepticism, derision—as such, they are sometimes called scare quotes. They distance an author from a term: "

https://style.mla.org/quotes-when-nothing-is-being-quoted/

I literally quoted, verbatim, the verse that clearly names Jehovah as the one who "appeared" to Abraham.

Genesis 18:1 -- American Standard Version
"And Jehovah appeared unto him [Abraham] by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;"

That scriptural quotation from American Standard Version does not make any mention of Jesus. It says Jehovah.


Later on, I will explain why I used scare-quotes with the word "appeared."

 

[Scooter]

Hahaha…well you are entitled to your opinion. I have presented solid evidence that shows the Trinity is obvious all through the Bible. You simply dismiss the evidence out of hand. It is impossible to convince someone who rejects the truth.

You made a comment I would like for you to clarify…do you believe Jesus was/is an angel?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Your problem, AgnosticBoy, is that you are inventing you own version of trinity in an attempt at dancing around Christendom's version. But your attempt fails just as Christendom's version fails. Here's why: Christendom's Trinity and your version both rely on the existence of three spirit persons. According to scripture, the Father (Jehovah) and the son (Jesus) are the only two individuals that are identified as persons. The Bible indicates God's holy spirit/holy ghost is not a person at all.

The Bible shows that the Holy Spirit can possesses things that a person does.

Holy Spirit can communicate Acts 13:2-
2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”

The Holy Spirit has emotions... Ephesians 4:30
30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

Were you thinking that the Spirit was a force? Either way, I think my passages show otherwise.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

@Alter2Ego

These are some of the strong points in Scooter's view, and I don't see that you addressed them:

Gen.1: 26 At creation, God spoke in the plural sense.
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…

You said God was speaking to angels or were accompanied by them but that doesn't hold weight given this point below...

Also, mankind is made in the image and likeness of God. Not in the image and likeness of angels: Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

I think one of Alter2Ego's strong points is his reference in Numbers:

"God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?" (Numbers 23:19 -- New International Version)

But perhaps this could just mean that God did not take on any human nature, yet. This was a time before Jesus's birth.

 

[Scooter]

I think one of Alter2Ego's strong points is his reference in Numbers:

"God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?" (Numbers 23:19 -- New International Version)

But perhaps this could just mean that God did not take on any human nature, yet. This was a time before Jesus's birth.

Here’s an AI explanation of Num.23:19

Numbers 23:19 declares God's absolute faithfulness and immutability, emphasizing that unlike human beings who can lie or change their minds, God is incapable of doing so. The verse uses rhetorical questions to highlight that God's promises are always fulfilled and His word is dependable. The core meaning is that God's character is trustworthy and steadfast, making His promises reliable and His purposes sure

I don’t believe the verse is declaring God is not a man, but God is not like men who lie or change their minds.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Here’s an AI explanation of Num.23:19

Numbers 23:19 declares God's absolute faithfulness and immutability, emphasizing that unlike human beings who can lie or change their minds, God is incapable of doing so. The verse uses rhetorical questions to highlight that God's promises are always fulfilled and His word is dependable. The core meaning is that God's character is trustworthy and steadfast, making His promises reliable and His purposes sure

I don’t believe the verse is declaring God is not a man, but God is not like men who lie or change their minds.

I like that! It's not unnecessarily restrictive unlike Alter2Ego's interpretation, but most importantly, it's still a reasonable interpretation.

It leaves the door open for God being like humans in some ways, and in other ways, not like them. I think there's still room for my explanation regarding the time the statement was made and God changing or adding a human nature at a future time.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Hahaha…well you are entitled to your opinion. I have presented solid evidence that shows the Trinity is obvious all through the Bible. You simply dismiss the evidence out of hand. It is impossible to convince someone who rejects the truth.

You made a comment I would like for you to clarify…do you believe Jesus was/is an angel?

My opinion, when the scripture I quoted clearly says "Jehovah" (the Father) was the one who appeared to Abraham and made no mention of Jesus (the son)? The laugh is on you, Scooter.


Genesis 18:1 -- American Standard Version
"And Jehovah appeared unto him [Abraham] by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;"

 

[Alter2Ego]

Hahaha…well you are entitled to your opinion. I have presented solid evidence that shows the Trinity is obvious all through the Bible. You simply dismiss the evidence out of hand. It is impossible to convince someone who rejects the truth.

You made a comment I would like for you to clarify…do you believe Jesus was/is an angel?

Scooter:

The only solid evidence you've presented thus far is of your ability to cherry-pick verses and your ability to even isolate a single word within an entire verse--and ignore context. The quotation at Genesis 18:1 debunks your claim that Jesus appeared to Abraham since the verse clearly names Jehovah the father.

Likewise, the quotation at Isaiah 6:2 debunks your claim that Jehovah was talking to part of his trinity self/Jesus (his created son) when Jehovah used the expression "us" at Isaiah 6:8. Isaiah 6:2 says in plain language that Jehovah was accompanied by seraphs/angels when he said: "who will go for US" at verse 8. You ignored the angels/seraphs so that you could isolate the word US from two complete verses of scripture and claim that the mere use of the term US is proof of a trinity.

Isaiah 6:2​

Seraphs were standing above him [Jehovah]; each had six wings. Each covered his face with two and covered his feet with two, and each of them would fly about with two.

Isaiah 6:8​

Then I heard the voice of Jehovah saying: “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” And I said: “Here I am! Send me!”


FYI: I can show you context that will debunk every single so-called trinity verse that you can come up with. It is the context (surrounding words, verses, and chapters) that enables people to understand what they are reading I've been debating this topic for over a decade online. And guess what? Not one single Trinitarian has been willing to be corrected by scriptural context. They do not care what the Bible says. It's about them and their personal philosophy. It is never about their willingness to find spiritual truths.

 

[Scooter]

FYI: I can show you context that will debunk every single so-called trinity verse that you can come up with.

I would rather you first answer my direct question regarding Jesus…do you believe Jesus is/was an angel, or some other created being?

Second, Agnostic Boy pointed out that God said Let us create man in our image and our likeness and then how God created man in His own image; not in the image of angels. You ignored that piece of evidence of the Trinity.