The Trinity: Who Knows?
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.” Matthew 24:36 NASB
Nor the Son – This verse has always been problematic. How can Yeshua be God and not know? And if, as He says, He actually doesn’t know, then how can we continue to claim that He is God. God knows. According to Yeshua, no one else does. Including him.
The usual theological answer to this apparently intractable dilemma is as follows:
“ . . .what He predicates of Himself, namely ignorance as to the day and hour of His return in heavenly splendor, is true of Him as human, though it is not true of Him as divine. As the God-Man, He is simultaneously omniscient as God (in company with the other persons of the Godhead) and ignorant of some things as a man (in company with other persons of the human race).”[1]
Ah, I get it. Yeshua is simultaneously aware and ignorant of this fact. Do you suppose that means he knows the truth (since according to the Trinitarian doctrine he is omniscient) but then informs himself that he does not know this fact because he is simultaneously human? So he knows that he doesn’t know what he knows, right?
Does this strike you as complete nonsense? What if we just took the verse at its face value? What if Yeshua actually meant that he doesn’t know? Why is that so difficult to accept? Do you suppose any of the disciples who heard him say this thought, “Oh, that means he doesn’t know as a human, but of course he knows as God”? No wonder it took the Church three hundred years to come up with this answer.
It seems to me the problem is not what the text says. The problem is reading the text according to the paradigm of the Trinity. The text doesn’t present any difficulties at all. There are lots of things human beings don’t know. There are lots of things chosen messengers of YHWH don’t know. There are even some things that the Messiah doesn’t know. In fact, he tells us at least one of these things. The text is clear. What causes all the confusion is not the text. It is the subsequent ancillary textually-unsupported idea that Yeshua is also, at the same time, God. As Patrick Navas astutely points out, “In other words, somehow Jesus knows all things and does not know all things simultaneously!?”[2]
So how would you like your theology cooked? Plain, according to what the text says, or with plenty of added spices, according to what the Church decided the text must say in order to fit its dogma? And what really happens if Yeshua is the Messiah, God’s appointed messenger/Son, tasked with bringing about the Kingdom and defeating the last enemy? Will your belief system collapse if somehow that doesn’t mean he is YHWH, the one true God? Have you been so indoctrinated by Christian dogma that you simply can’t read this text for what it says? Was Yeshua simply deluded or trying to fool us? Did he lie to us when he said he didn’t know? Or are we putting words in his mouth when we try to make his denial into an affirmation of his “omniscience”?
I warned you about the pain, didn’t I?
Topical Index: Trinity, knows, Matthew 24:36
[1]Robert Reymond, Jesus Divine Messiah, p. 79.
[2]Patrick Navas, Divine Truth or Human Tradition, p. 131.
Bottom line, if Yeshua is not YHVH does that change all that he said and did? Does it change the resurrection? Does it negate the verses that promise He will reign? Not for me — He is still King of Kings and Lord of Lords. He is Meshiach and that was, is and will be enough.
Absolutely. Doesn’t change any of that. And doesn’t mean he isn’t divine either, as we may see. Keep reading.
Great post Skip (the previous ones as well). I have a several part series on Christology by RC Sproul where he attempts to explain Mt24:36 and Mk13:32. The more he talks he just keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper. The obvious meaning is that Yeshua didn’t know the day or hour; very plain. Trinitarianism has him saying that, but thinking in his mind, “But the God part of me really does know… if I just flip that switch…” It would be like someone asking me if I had 5 bucks, and me telling them no, and reaching into my right, empty pocket while the 5 bucks is in my left pocket. Glad you are looking at this with fresh eyes.
No pain here except for not understanding your purpose, and what as a result you expect us to believe/do as a consequence of what you’re teaching.
In his book God the Father/God the Son, Martyn Lloyd Jones coined the phrase “econmic Trinity” recognizing that the three are One, yet each with His own role.
I also want to point readers to some extremely value priced Kindle books by R.A. Torrey on What The Bible Teaches (which covers some of these points with many biblical references) and several works he wrote on the Holy Spirit.
To this I would add that the Holy Spirit directed Luke to write in Acts 5 that when Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit they lied to God.
Jesus said, “I and the Father are One.”
In Genesis 1, all three are present.
The principle of Oneness is expressed in the marriage relationship where the two “shall become” One whereas the Trinity IS One.
Thanks for the reminders. But please be aware that Torrey and others are reading the verses according to the preconceived paradigm on the Trinity which did not become a doctrine of the church for almost 400 years. That raises the question about why the early fathers did not see this, who actually did and why the authors of the New Testament didn’t spend any time making it abundantly clear, especially since it is a MAJOR departure from the Jewish view.
We are looking only at the role of the paradigm and the actual texts. If we find that the texts can be understood without the paradigm exegesis, then what compels us to adopt it? Tradition?
The “Trinity” is nowhere found in the Scriptures! It is a presumptuous doctrine, widely accepted only in Christianity, particularly in Catholicism where it started- as with making of the sign of the cross in prayer on their bodies.
Very exciting and challenging7 topic to dig into, can’t wait for the next TWs
Several years ago, when discussing the trinity/non trinity issue with a believing friend, she said to me “if God did not come to earth and die for my sins, then I’m not saved, none of us are saved and we are all lost. I simply cannot allow myself to consider your viewpoint.” I was utterly taken aback to hear this from one who professes that searching out the truth is the most important thing in the world to her. This trinity idea has embedded itself into so many people that considering any alternative is terrifying to them. Once again, I believe this is because we have not learned what is the role of the Messiah, the redeemer, the agent of God. Looking forward to more tomorrow, Skip!
But her remarks also display a complete lack of understanding of the atonement, an event that occurred BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. So he didn’t come to die on the cross for my sins AND we are all still saved.
Skip, please. Tell me you’re just taking people down this trail to make them think. To me, the deity of Christ is non-negotiable. To say otherwise is preaching some other gospel. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist..And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence, For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell.” And again “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” Just start with the simple premise that “God is love.” Love is self sacrificial. Christ’s dying is God’s voluntary self sacrifice. His expression of love. A couple of people have pointed to the marriage as a covenant where two become one. But Adam and Eve were already one to start with. Why would God divide that unity? Why take Adam’s feminine “side” from him? Because the initial unity was involuntary. To take care of “Eve”, all Adam had to do was take care of Adam. But now that they were divided, reconciliation is voluntary. Unity now requires love(self sacrifice).God seeks a mutual, covenant relationship with mankind. One of the principles of covenant is that you go through trials together. This being the case, God “self divides”. How He does this, I do not know. Why He does this, I do know. To manifest covenant love and faithfulness within the Godhead as well as to mankind. What kind of love is from God? All kinds of love come from God. He is emmanuel, “God with us”, as a father in the wilderness with the israelites. This is a one sided, unconditional love of the will(agape). As Jesus, He comes into our flesh to be one with us in the flesh(eros). As the Holy Spirit, He is with us in our hearts, as a friend who walks with us, and counsels and comforts (phileo). God is seeking a mutual relationship, and thus we see that He loves us with all His heart(phileo), all His mind(agape), and all His strength(eros).
But you’re missing the point. It is not the DEITY of Yeshua that is at issue. It is the claim that He is at one and the same time the being of God the Father (The Godhead). There is nothing you say that can’t be understood in terms of the authority, relationship, primacy and importance of the Son, but that is not what the Trinitarian doctrine claims. It claims that he is FULLY GOD and fully Man AT THE SAME TIME. Is that what you are trying to claim too? Nothing you say above requires that, I think.
I guess when Yeshua died, we had no god for three days! I wonder who substituted him…
Even more difficult. How can GOD DIE!
“Christianity” is a major departure from the Jewish traditions. Yeshua did say (we do pay attention to His words, right?), “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.’ Jesus is most certainly, “divisional.” The Messiah “divides!” This is the New Covenant (in His blood): Relationship, – not religion.
He is (one of many of the “I AM’s”) the Way. He is (the) Truth. He is (the) Life. We either accept this, or we (may) reject it. Is He, or is He NOT the Chosen One of YHWH? How are you presenting Him to us?- and to all of your readers, and to the Jewish people or Gentile people of the world? Is He, or is He NOT, the Savior of the world? Does the world include the Gentiles? Or is He the Savior of Israel only? (uhh, -to the Jew first, and also to the Greek?)
Oh, how easy it is to ask the questions. But wait! There’s more! SO much more… ~ When they saw HIm, they worshiped Him.. ~ Oh really? They worshiped a man? Is this not a direct violation or transgression of the commandment of YHWH? Are we not to worship God only? And this Man receives the worship of men? (and of angels!)
The problem here is not with “church doctrine..” The problem here is our presentation of the Christ . Oh, we can “pick apart” or put down any man, any man such as Luther or Augustine or (pick one of a million or so) but who we (all) need to be focusing on (and listening to) is Christ (Himself!)
I will say this about Him. I’ve known no other man (in all of history) to (A) be sinless and (B) to be resurrected from the tomb. Of course, neither have I known no other man who spoke like this man or walked on water like this man or gave sight to blind eyes like this man or made the lame to walk like this man- shall we continue?
The question of all questions has already been asked. It is, “Who is this King of glory?” We (praise God) have a choice. – I’ve made mine and you?
Hear, (O Israel) my “loud’ confession: ~ “Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise!”
The Bible reveals one Hero. Our Bible is the Lamb’s Book of Life. ~ And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning Himself ~ (Luke 24.27) I did not write these words, – they were written already- long before I got here. As a matter of fact, (just the facts) listen again to these wonderful, life-imparting words and hear them again (for the first time?)- “it is written..”
Now why would our Savior repeat these same three words in His epic encounter with the (now defeated) Tempter? Are we listening? He defeated our Adversary as a MAN. He showed us (we who are human) the “how to!” It is done like this (y’all). Are we listening? (good) Now hear this: ~ We (all) do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power (the authority sir) of God. ~
And speaking of authority! (well, hello) Who has authority (on earth) to forgive sins? Well would you just lookie here! It is the Son of Man, our LORD Jesus (Himself) and is there more? Hello! “It is written..” What else has been written concerning the Christ? Ha! – You’re running out of time to read this? I have not yet begun to plumb the heights and the depths and the widths of the word of God! Nooope. lol! But it sure is fun to do this!
Long story short. (am I too late?) The written word of God reveals the Living Word of God, who is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Am I making this up? Why should I? (luv it) “It is written..” ~He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His Name is the Word of God ~
(Revelation 19.13)
The Messiah, this Savior, this Redeemer, this Suffering Servant, this God who is man, this man who is God, the Chosen One, the Sent One, the second Adam is one of us! But wait!- there’s more! This man was “born of a woman!” Born of a virgin! Come to think of it, I’ve known no other man ever who was born in this way! There must be something different about Him.. – Is this God incarnated into human flesh? Did He walk among us and breath our air, eat our food, speak our language, share our suffering?- Shall we continue? Is there more?
Bow the knee, return to Calvary’s cross and find Him yourself. And when you do, worship will begin.
But Carl, you have confused authority, glory and victory with the BEING of God. The issue is NOT Yeshua’s authority or glory or victory. The issue is the claim that he is EXACTLY THE SAME AS GOD IN HIS BEING.
I’m loving this! The idea of the trinity has been one that is almost impossible for me to defend to people.
Thank you, Carl and Brett, for joining the discussion. And yes, hopefully, it is just a discussion – exploring “ideas” and NOT claiming that every thing written here is “kosher”! Pray hard folks! Look to Him – the author and finisher of your Faith! In His Love, Linda K. Morales
Peter, I’m glad to see you’re participating in this discussion. And I’m glad Skip is referencing this scripture today, as it is one I’ve often turned to in order to show the perplexing side of the Trinity doctrine.
If you lie to the Holy Spirit, you lie to God. Of course. God is spirit. To see this statement as speaking of two Persons, however, seems to require a certain paradigm.
I think that same paradigm would be responsible for seeing three Persons in Genesis 1.
When Jesus said that He and His Father were one, why do we think that has to mean two Persons in one? Paul, talking about those who sow and those who water (metaphors for preaching and teaching), said they were “one.” Jesus asked that his followers be “one,” just like He and His Father were one. To be “one” is to be “one” in purpose, in goal, in thinking.
And besides, no man can see God and live. So does that mean the disciples were all summarily evaporated. Obviously, he is taking about action, purpose, intent, execution. Not BEING.
I think Brett R. and Carl Roberts bring up an interesting point. What do we mean by “divine”? In English, does this mean something worthy of worship? What is “worship”? I think many English-speakers assume that the idea of divinity includes equality with God. But on what level? Can’t Yeshua be worthy of worship as the Son of God? Does He have to “be God” in order to be lauded and honored? I’m looking at the English here, but on the Hebrew or Greek level, do we worship the Son of God because He is the Son of God? If Messiah is a perfect reflection of God’s image, is that “divine” and worthy of worship? Is our vocabulary insufficient?
Here is a “trinity” of “1’s” for a date referencing a previous TW that might fit in this discussion as interesting and significant:
Today’s Word
01/01/12
“Judaisms and Christianities”
As to today’s TW, honestly, I’ve had, in my decades of Christian learning, absolutely more difficulty in grasping and understanding
and buying the trinity dogma than in what Skip has written thus far in these three TW’s. But, until now, I hadn’t had the gumption to
allow myself the permission to even challenge it, since it, supposedly, was a given and irrefutable. Or so I was taught. However,
I am seeing that that isn’t necessarily the case. The trinity dogma, according to Navas is largely and fully inferred and intimated rather
than clearly and succinctly stated as other clear teachings of the Brit HaChadashah. Yeshua is shown in the text as “the Son of God,”
not “God, the Son.” “God the Son” is the theologically constructed and necessary axiom injected in to translation and dogma to fit a presupposed framework of understanding Yeshua’s identity as it relates to the One God, the Father. It simply comes from creating a dogma and then
massaging, manipulating and redefining biblical terms to justify the presupposed and necessary creed to sustain a new and different
gospel, contrary to clear and plain biblical text.
As I’ve been reading Patrick Navas’s book, “Divine Truth or Human Tradition” it is difficult to argue against his
evaluation challenging the traditional trinity dogma/creed/systematic theology of the 4th century that we ‘moderns’ have swallowed
lock, stock, and barrel.
Yeshua himself asked others to take on the question of “Who do you say that I am?” I am thankful for this discussion to openly
lay this huge issue on the table for dissection. Coming from my background and warped understanding of so many years, this
discussion is VERY useful. I highly disagree with an earlier comment stating it as useless.
Thanks everybody, and Skip, of course, for braving the direct challenge against “infallible” tradition.
Great questions. However, the closer Yeshua acted in accordance and in the will of the Father – the more difficult it would be in ANY language to separate the two out.
I remember being in a conversation and having difficulty explaining the idea that I can do something myself, or God can do things “through me”. The person I was talking to asked mockingly, “So am I talking to you right now, or is this ‘God talking through you’. No wonder so many Christians see every ‘good’ impulse they have — as the Holy Spirit acting.
These are big questions.
I also agree with Thomas Elsinger that I may need to reevaluate what ‘divine’ means. I have a sense
that my understanding is very mushy and without substance. At least in embracing the single
English word, ‘divine.’ I think there is more to this issue as it relates to the trinity subject.
You can also look at her resistance a little more optimistically — many Christians HAVE TO build up a little bit of callous towards unorthodox beliefs. Especially in this information age, we are constantly bombarded by religious theory.
This is why the message will be better spread by changed lives. I’ve found myself especially dependent on rationality and apologetics – when my life isn’t an adequate witness.
@Gabe
Great points about being bombarded by religious theory (especially from our supposedly
trained leaders) and about my life being an adequate witness.
Trying to speak using words which are blatantly contrary to my life and actions has
proven me weak and lifeless too many times in my life.
Skip,
Thanks for the thought provoking comments. I never bought the explanation that Jesus knew but didn’t know. However, I don’t think that it has to follow that He wasn’t divine. Perhaps there is only so much information that can fit into a human brain and God, the Father, did not impart this information to Jesus’ brain because Jesus didn’t need to know. You might assert that God could have given Jesus this information through the Spirit, but I think the beauty of Jesus’ humanity is that He feels pain in the way we do, and He has to deal with the uncertainties of life, just as we do. This doesn’t make him un-divine; rather, it shows the tenderness of HaShem. Yes, Jesus, in his human state, was less than God the Father (Philippians 2), but that doesn’t mean He wasn’t part of God the Father. [Aside: Another possibility is that somehow, Satan would be able to listen into Jesus’ telling others about the day and the hour and, God didn’t want Satan to know so God didn’t tell Jesus]
I don’t think you can avoid the “I am” statements that Jesus makes. These clearly are a reference to Exodus 3 and a claim of divinity by Jesus. Moreover, there is John 1:1 where the claims are explicit (the problems with “pros” aside). What is comforting about the Trinity is that God, in His very nature, is a community. He was never alone, unlike Allah. So, creating us and enveloping us into His community is a natural extension of His nature.
Moreover, forgiveness has a cost – someone has to absorb the wrongdoing. If Jesus wasn’t God, then it seems the cost of forgiveness, from God’s perspective is lessened. Maybe this is the issue that theologians struggle the most with – if Jesus wasn’t divine then how can his sacrifice be enough for all humanity? (even if that sacrifice happened in another realm before the creation of the earth).
It seems pretty clear to me from all the comments so far that people generally do not know what the doctrine of the Trinity actually claims. It does NOT claim that Yeshua is “part” of the Godhead. It claims that God is indivisibly one BEING and that all three persons in the ONE BEING are equally God, not parts of God. Secondly, the Trinitarian view does NOT claim that “Jesus” gave up his divinity in order to become a man. It claims that while he did empty himself, he nonetheless remained fully God — and fully Man. He was not a disguised God in human form nor a human being who was never God. He is both at once. How that works itself out is a “mystery.” The Trinitarian doctrine does NOT claim that Yeshua and the Spirit are “manifestations” of the ONE God. It claims that Yeshua and the Holy Spirit are separate but equal “persons” in the ONE GODHEAD. That, by the way, is the whole problem in a nutshell.
None of this discussion changes the role of the Messiah, his authority (granted to him), his atonement, his Lordship, his relationship to Israel, his function in the creation or the fact that he existed before the creation of the world. Nor does it change the attribute “divine” when properly understood as the term elohim. Even Yeshua uses that term to attribute a role to men!
So, let’s pay attention to the real question. Are Yeshua and the Holy Spirit “persons” in the GODHEAD, individually identifiable but equally fully God? Does that make sense? What biblical support does it have?
@ Suzanne:
Amen! And us seeking the truth on these matters doesn’t change who Yeshua is. We are just trying to be in alignment with what He said. Period.
@ Dot Olsen:
Unfortunately, in many camps, Christianity is about having the right BELIEFS on doctrinal issues (and not necessarily stressing right beliefs to produce action). Therefore, it terrifies and offends many Believers to even test a doctrine such as the Trinity because we have to have the CORRECT thoughts about it (salvation is on the line in many cases). It’s not necessarily about having security and faith in the Holy One who saves, but the right THOUGHTS about the Holy One who saves. Thus, it forces a Christian to be locked in a box, fearful to ever question what the Church fathers or the pastor handed down to us and really grow in the Scriptures. 🙁
It really hurts when brothers and sisters get so offended when you deviate from their denominational teaching that conversations about God’s Word becomes limited. What happened to really being a Berean?
Is YHVH a god of confusion? I’ve known many who’ve rejected the trinitarian doctrine as nonsense, yet enjoy a direct, personal relationship with the God of Israel. Seems God continues blessing non-trinitarians with growing peace and clarity, so maybe I’m not understanding why anyone, myself included, would turn backwards to such a confusing doctrine. Would Yeshua step in between to break up a growing relationship with our Creator or would he applaud and encourage all humans, Trinitarians and non-Trinitarians, to seek YHVH alone? In my personal experience, things are better between myself and my Heavenly Father since ditching this trinity god head thing.
I know you’re working through this still and frankly, so am I. There is a lot of “undoing” going on around here. =)
Without claiming Yeshua and the Father are the same being (with the Spirit), how are we to understand Yeshua’s clear claims of deity, of Godhood? For instance, his “I AM” statements, saying He is the Shepherd of the flock (Jn 10) thus equating himself with YHVH Tsva’ot (Ez 34, Is 40); “I and the Father are one”, etc etc etc.
wait a day or two it’s coming
I hope you’re getting to Colossians 2:9-10. I hope I haven’t missed where you looked at that Scripture. Skip, I really appreciate you digging into this. I’ve had trouble with this doctrine for a long time.
Skip – Roman’s 9 v 5 Abraham, Isaac & Jacob are their ancestors, and Christ himself was an Israelite as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is “”””GOD”””, the one who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen..
Interesting, if we read this in the plain it clearly states Christ is God, or is this a corrupted verse??
Shalom Simon
Just wait a day or two for the rest
Anchor point? :O)
Why is it that when the Greek expression “ego eimi” is used it automatically means a claim of divinity for Jesus but for others it doesn’t? In John 9:9 the blind man says “I am”. Yet in most of our translations “he” is added, although it is not in the Greek. Also Peter meeting the men from Cornelius says in Acts 10:21 “ego eimi”. Again “he” is added. Even in Jesus case in John 8:24 and 8:28 when He says “ego eimi” the translators add “he” yet they don’t do that in John 8:58 when Jesus says “Before Abraham was, I am” The footnotes indicate that Jesus is claiming divinity there. However why do they not say the same thing for John 8:24 and 28? Simply because there is no reaction from the folks arguing with him. Well what about the 8:58 interchange? It is entirely possible that they picked up stones after 8:58 because they were finally fed up with what THEY considered to be a pretentious attitude. John does NOT say that they claimed Jesus was blaspheming.
Many times the prophets who spoke “on behalf of YHVH” spoke as if the Father was speaking Himself. That’s what an ambassador (sent one) did/does! Over and over in the Gospel of John Jesus talks about being “sent” from above, from heaven, from the Father. See John 6:38, 7:28, 29; 8:26; 8:42; 17:8. Also, many things that Jesus said in the gospels, you will find the Father saying in the Prophets. Again, speaking on behalf of? Hm m m m m . . . . . . . . . . Much to ponder! 🙂
Skip: years ago I really tried to get my head around the Trinity and the notion “fully God, fully man” It struck me then (and still does today) that these two entities, God and man, can in fact never coexist. Four verses in Tanach say directly “God is not a man…” Paul argues in 2 Tim 3:15,16 that Tanach is the foundation for all instruction, correction etc. And that was the LAST letter Paul wrote. It occurred to me that there was only one other example of two totally different contradictory things being “fully there” at the same…the eucharist doctrine. The wafer is a simple physical entity made out of ground flour. However it is claimed that when the priest prays over it, the wafer “becomes” the very divine body of Jesus. What incredible power to be able to produce this natural/divine transubstantiation. Yet the wafer remains exactly the same as it looked beforehand. It will crumble, decay etc just like a normal wafer. But any sanctified wafers are stored in a tabernacle near the altar with a light turned on to indicate that Christ is “present”. Then it occurred to me that the Trinity emerged at the same time in Church history using similar reasoning.
Yup will do ( wait).
Great news you may be joining us again next June on way back from Israel.
Simon,
Wow ! Can’t wait to hear more. YHVH bless you Skip.
I thought one more comment on my part might help explain what I mean by “oneness.” I actually don’t write these comments. My wife does. She started “me” participating in this community because she knew I have a need to be socially involved. Because of multiple chemical sensitivity, I’m not able to be with people like I would prefer. And both of us are devoted to learning more about the word of God and the followers of Yeshua. She composes the comments. If she’s not sure the words reflect my opinion, she’ll have me read them before she posts them. We are two individuals who are actually quite the opposite of each other in many ways, but we are one in purpose and action. My being able to be a part of “At God’s Table” has meant the world to me.
Wonderful. Continue. And bless your ezer kenegdo