Trinity Debate
Hopefully, if you are reading this, you have already read most of, if not all, the exchanges in the debate on the Trinity that I have on Debate Center. The following is my assessment of the exchange.
First, for my first "formal" debate (though via email), I would have to say that it went fairly well. I admit that the start was a bit rough being that I started with a whole reasoned out argument and all I got from them was "I wasn't expecting a lesson" and what not. But, I was able to finally get out of the participants statments saying what they believed and to some extent, why they believed as they did. I wasn't really pleased with most of their response tactics as they just added onto my papers that I worked pretty hard on they didn't seem to take the time to put as much effort. But, I have to admit, they were probably not expecting me to write so much.
Second, I really don't know what to make of their arguments. Perhaps you already noticed, responding to most of their points was difficult in some cases because they would respond with things like, "wow, you really believe that?" or "I can't believe that you believe that." Also, they did not have the grasp of the doctrine of the Trinity that I thought they had and that they claimed to have. Their arguments seemed to be pitted against TriTheism, which I was not arguming for at all.
Third. YOu know what was the most interesting about the whole exchange? The charges of eisegesis that were flying at me. Personally, I take this charge very seriously since those who twist God's word do so "to their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:16). Its amazing because I was so meticulous to provide them with grammar and syntax and context and even simply a Scripture. But they, in their responses, scarcely exegeted a text of Scripture or even attempted to handle the text at the grammatical and syntactical level. I found that really disturbing especially since some of their arguments hinged on presuppositions that they had done the exegesis.
Fourth: Greek. Greek was so important here. In many ways, they demonstrated that they had absolutely zero knowledge of the Greek language nor of the Greek Scriptures which are the foundation for their English Bibles (at least we hope they were credible translations!). So many times they used different declensions for nouns and tried to understand all the forms of a noun based on one declension that can have so many implications. The same goes for verbs in the Greek with all the different tenses. I didn't even want to start mentioning rules of grammar and syntax like the "Granville-Sharp rule".
Fifth, and I think most important. I think these people demonstrated that they cannot refute the truth of Scripture that God is indeed a Trinity. Absolute none of the SCriptures and arguments offered were refuted by them. I don't think they even made a serious attempt to refute the arguments. NoTrinityInBible tried somewhat, but I think he was easily refuted from the text of Scripture which is God-breathed. I remember Charles Spurgeon saying something to the effect of how Scripture is a like lion that when let loose, it is able to defend itself. I hope that what was seen by these individuals and all who read the debates was that it was not Moses Flores defending the doctrine of the Trinity, but rather, the Scriptures themselves defending a most blessed and revealed doctrine of God and from God. The SCriptures did not need my help to declare the truth of God, they were sufficient in what they asserted themselves. I was only repeating and declaring what Scripture said was true.
I hope that these debates will be fruitful to all who come across them. I hope that these will serve as stepping stones for others to search the SCriptures for what they teach on the doctrine of the Trinity as well. It is a topic not easily engaged in and one that is easy to passover because of its complexity sometimes. God bless.
First, for my first "formal" debate (though via email), I would have to say that it went fairly well. I admit that the start was a bit rough being that I started with a whole reasoned out argument and all I got from them was "I wasn't expecting a lesson" and what not. But, I was able to finally get out of the participants statments saying what they believed and to some extent, why they believed as they did. I wasn't really pleased with most of their response tactics as they just added onto my papers that I worked pretty hard on they didn't seem to take the time to put as much effort. But, I have to admit, they were probably not expecting me to write so much.
Second, I really don't know what to make of their arguments. Perhaps you already noticed, responding to most of their points was difficult in some cases because they would respond with things like, "wow, you really believe that?" or "I can't believe that you believe that." Also, they did not have the grasp of the doctrine of the Trinity that I thought they had and that they claimed to have. Their arguments seemed to be pitted against TriTheism, which I was not arguming for at all.
Third. YOu know what was the most interesting about the whole exchange? The charges of eisegesis that were flying at me. Personally, I take this charge very seriously since those who twist God's word do so "to their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:16). Its amazing because I was so meticulous to provide them with grammar and syntax and context and even simply a Scripture. But they, in their responses, scarcely exegeted a text of Scripture or even attempted to handle the text at the grammatical and syntactical level. I found that really disturbing especially since some of their arguments hinged on presuppositions that they had done the exegesis.
Fourth: Greek. Greek was so important here. In many ways, they demonstrated that they had absolutely zero knowledge of the Greek language nor of the Greek Scriptures which are the foundation for their English Bibles (at least we hope they were credible translations!). So many times they used different declensions for nouns and tried to understand all the forms of a noun based on one declension that can have so many implications. The same goes for verbs in the Greek with all the different tenses. I didn't even want to start mentioning rules of grammar and syntax like the "Granville-Sharp rule".
Fifth, and I think most important. I think these people demonstrated that they cannot refute the truth of Scripture that God is indeed a Trinity. Absolute none of the SCriptures and arguments offered were refuted by them. I don't think they even made a serious attempt to refute the arguments. NoTrinityInBible tried somewhat, but I think he was easily refuted from the text of Scripture which is God-breathed. I remember Charles Spurgeon saying something to the effect of how Scripture is a like lion that when let loose, it is able to defend itself. I hope that what was seen by these individuals and all who read the debates was that it was not Moses Flores defending the doctrine of the Trinity, but rather, the Scriptures themselves defending a most blessed and revealed doctrine of God and from God. The SCriptures did not need my help to declare the truth of God, they were sufficient in what they asserted themselves. I was only repeating and declaring what Scripture said was true.
I hope that these debates will be fruitful to all who come across them. I hope that these will serve as stepping stones for others to search the SCriptures for what they teach on the doctrine of the Trinity as well. It is a topic not easily engaged in and one that is easy to passover because of its complexity sometimes. God bless.
posted by prchdaword at 2:12 PM
3 Comments:
James 4:1-3 (NKJV)
Dangers of Pride, Judging, and Presumption
"Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members? You lust and do not have. You murder and covet and cannot obtain. You fight and war. Yet[a] you do not have because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures."
2 Timothy 2:22-25
"Flee also youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth,..."
hmmmm....I'm not sure the purpose of your posting those scriptures is. Perhaps you think it is prideful to defend the truths of God's word? Perhaps you think it is foolish and ignorant to discuss the true nature of God? I do not know...I do not know.
There is something about debate and apologetics that makes people think that standing for something as absolute truth makes one prideful and arrogant. I don't know where this attitude comes from, especially among God's people. Church history is filled with men of God who defended the truths of God even to death. Unfortuneately the age we live in is to much into "live and let live" even if it means allowing heresy to go unchecked in the Church of God and even to pass as legitimate Christianity.
I don't believe Christ intended that for His Church. I think the example of the New Testament letters of the apostles clearly shows that much of their concern for the Church was being watchful against that which is false and is a false Gospel and a false Christ (eg. 2 Cor. 11:4).
False doctrines exists. Believing in a false Christ WILL NOT save, no matter how sincere. Because a false Christ is a lie, it is wrong, yes, A SIN, to promote a Christ that does not exist. Thus, it is good and right to fight against the lies of Satan and to defend God's word. Those are my motives in this. The glory of God, the true God and that people may know His Son JEsus Christ.
I want people to know Christ, the true Christ that saves. Thus, I refute what I believe to be a false Christ on the basis of Scripture. Call that arrogant if you will. Call it prideful. Call it judgmental to call false doctrine what it really is. But I stand with the apostles and their example of the defense of the Gospel and Christ and with many other men of God through the ages who God used to preserve the Christianity that we have today.
Moses
Prchdaword@aol.com
Post a Comment
<< Home