I do not agree. "Trinity" is as much a translation of the concept of "divine essence" as is "godhead" but for theological and contextual reasons. Call it philosophy if you will. The inclusion of "trinity" is a sound choice if it , in fact, arises from a point of truth. Equivalency is a word that figures into my discussion. I am sure you understand the implication.
jd
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The word "Trinity" is not a translation, nor is it a transliteration. It is
> a word of philosophers, a word constructed by theologians, and it is a
> philosophically loaded word. The various words of the Greek language that
> have been translated "Godhead" have at their root the word "theos," and
> therefore, "Godhead" is an appropriate translation whereas "Trinity" is not.
> The root for "three" is not found in the Greek language for this word.
>
> David Miller
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2006 4:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: [TruthTalk] Lance and "biblical language"
>
>
> Your response has nothing to do with my comments, near as I can see.
> My point is this: every English word in our bible is "added " to the
> original text. so you like godhead" and I like "trinity." They are both
> translations of the orgiinal word and/or thought.
>
> jd
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Here we go again - And who is the one who denied staking everything on
> translational and Gk
> arguments - very, very, recently?. judyt
>
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:54:47 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Here is an approximation of the [NT] biblical language"
>
> gar nomoz tou pneumatoz thz swhzev Cristy
>
> All other words [in [English] translation] are "non-biblical."
> "Incarnate" is no less a "biblical word" than "in the flesh" -- nor
> "trinity " in the place of "Godhead."
>
> Our translations are copies of the original tex t (as best as we can
> reconstruct that text) . The Latin Vulgate has the same place in biblical
> history in terms of type and quality as does the more literal of the English
> translations.
>
> To argue without end over "Godhead" verses "Trinity" is argue about
> nothing. I have just as much authority to read "trinity" as someone has
> to read "godhead" or "divine nature."
>
> jd
>
>
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On employing 'non-biblical' terminology when speaking of WHO Jesus is:
> Insofar as the language one chooses accurately reflects the subject under
> discussion it may be viewed as legitimate, helpful and, even necessary.
>
> May I ask that anyone responding to the above take the time to outline their
> own position on this.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Judy Taylor
> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Sent: January 14, 2006 08:53
> Subject: Re: Fw: [TruthTalk] love and trinity THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST IS NOT
> DIVINE
>
>
> I don't know about all that Lance. What exact part of him are you calling
> "his humanity" Is it the body or the soul?
> Also what exactly is a "trinitarian nature?" These are brand new terms
> someone has come up with. Could this
> be called "adding to the Word of Truth?"
>
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:39:32 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:
> Judy, rightly IMO, has oft spoken of the disconnect that may take place
> between theologizing and godliness. Conversely, as illustrated in this post
> by Bill, a more thoroughgoing teaching, along with the apprehension, of the
> Trinitarian Nature of God ought to issue in that which Jt speaks of. (i.e.
> godliness)
>
>
> ----- Original Messag e -----
> From: Taylor
> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Sent: January 14, 2006 07:18
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] love and trinity
>
>
> BillT wrote: The oneness of God is therefore not a number nearly so much as
> it is a unity: the unifying
> love of God in koinonia -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
>
>
> DAVEH responds: Any room for individuals in that equation?..........The
> oneness of God is therefore........Father, Son, Holy Spirit & Bill.
>
> Well, yes and no, DH. I am included in that circle of love in the way that
> Christ's humanity is included in that relationship. But as the humanity of
> Christ is not divine, neither am I divine. What I am is included in the
> humanity of the divine Christ and thus included in the eternal fellowship
> and community of the Son with the Father in the Holy Spirit. And because of
> the inseparable union of the person of Christ, his humanity with h is
> divinity, I will forever be included in the loving union of the Trinity, the
> oneness of God.
>
> Good question, though,
>
> Bill
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dave Hansen
> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] love and trinity
>
>
>
> .........Does that work in your theological paradigm?
>
> Taylor wrote:
> Moreover, John, if God is love and God is also a singularity, like many
> people think of "one" in the statement "God is one," then the greatest human
> _expression_ of that love would be narcissism: extreme self love; for that
> would be to exemplify the love of God. Instead, God is "one" -- and has been
> from eternity -- precisely because of the other-centered love which exists
> between the Father for the Son and the Son for the Father in the Holy
> Spirit. The oneness of God is th erefore not a number nearly so much as it is
> a unity: the unifying
> love of God in koinonia -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
>
> Good insight, Dude, I mean Bish; you're on a roll.
>
> Bill
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Dave Hansen
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.langlitz.com
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> If you wish to receive
> things I find interesting,
> I maintain six email lists...
> JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
> STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by Plains.Net, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how
> you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you wi ll be unsubscribed. If you have a friend
> who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> he will be subscribed.
