Is God the Father referring to the Trinity in Genesis 3:22?

[GodsGrace154]

In the literal sense, it’s most likely the majestic plural. The idea that it was “simply borrowed from pagan mythology” theory is condemned by the Church, even if one holds that it was purged of all polytheistic elements (cf. 1909 Bible Commission Decree). They make use of mythological stories, but it must be confessed that these stories teach real, historical events that actually happened.

In the allegorical sense, however, it does indeed seem to be a veiled reference to the Trinity, as many of the fathers of the Church teach.

Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas

What is the majestic plural?
Do you mean the majestic we??
Maybe it’s a typo?

GG

 

[Tim_D]

I
I tend to eliminate the majestic we because persons who use that tend to think that Jesus is not God and so do not find the Trinity in this Genesis verse.

So, in other words, you pick and choose whatever makes you feel better regardless as to true rendering of the text. Got’cha.

It is also interesting that you know for a fact that those who subscribe to the majestic plural point of view deny that Jesus is God. How do you know that it isn’t simply the majestic plural? What makes you the arbitrator of orthodoxy?

 

[Tim_D]

In the allegorical sense, however, it does indeed seem to be a veiled reference to the Trinity, as many of the fathers of the Church teach.

Certainly but the simple fact is that it can never be proved. It tends to work in that aspect, so we use it but it can’t be pushed too far or it will eventually fail.

 

[GodsGrace154]

So, in other words, you pick and choose whatever makes you feel better regardless as to true rendering of the text. Got’cha.

It is also interesting that you know for a fact that those who subscribe to the majestic plural point of view deny that Jesus is God. How do you know that it isn’t simply the majestic plural? What makes you the arbitrator of orthodoxy?

I don’t even know what the majestic “plural” is and was asking someone.

YOU also could have answered. But you prefer to attack me.

SO, People, sects, denominations, etc. that PREFER the majestic we, do so because it would be God using it and thus He wouldn’t be referring to the Trinity. See? It’s simple enough.

As far as what I choose to believe - yes - I MUST understand what I believe. Very intelligent theologians have differing views.

It’s NOT ME, who makes them up.

Between two views, YES, I use my brain to decide which one I agree with more in view of what I know about God, Jesus, the O.T. and the N.T.

How do you know what YOU believe?
You accept what the CC teaches? Good. But do you feel you have to accept it intellectualy or do you just forge blindly ahead?

Jesus said:
Mathew 22:37-40.

How do you love God with all your mind if you don’t even stop to consider if it makes sense to you or not??

GG

 

[Darryl_B]

I don’t even know what the majestic “plural” is and was asking someone.

YOU also could have answered. But you prefer to attack me.

SO, People, sects, denominations, etc. that PREFER the majestic we, do so because it would be God using it and thus He wouldn’t be referring to the Trinity. See? It’s simple enough.

As far as what I choose to believe - yes - I MUST understand what I believe. Very intelligent theologians have differing views.

It’s NOT ME, who makes them up.

Between two views, YES, I use my brain to decide which one I agree with more in view of what I know about God, Jesus, the O.T. and the N.T.

How do you know what YOU believe?
You accept what the CC teaches? Good. But do you feel you have to accept it intellectualy or do you just forge blindly ahead?

Jesus said:
Mathew 22:37-40.

How do you love God with all your mind if you don’t even stop to consider if it makes sense to you or not??

GG

My friend. This is not a work of beauty. Why do you do this?

 

[GodsGrace154]

My friend. This is not a work of beauty. Why do you do this?

Why do some do this when the conversation, till then, was absolutely normal??:

Originally Posted by Tim_D View Post
So, in other words, you pick and choose whatever makes you feel better regardless as to true rendering of the text. Got’cha.

It is also interesting that you know for a fact that those who subscribe to the majestic plural point of view deny that Jesus is God. How do you know that it isn’t simply the majestic plural? What makes you the arbitrator of orthodoxy?

Please tell me what YOU would have done if you were on a Christian site and someone there had said something like the above to you?

I’m nice. But will not accept such treatment.
And I do not feel my response was harsh, but honest.

GG

 

[Darryl_B]

Why do some do this when the conversation, till then, was absolutely normal??:

Originally Posted by Tim_D View Post
So, in other words, you pick and choose whatever makes you feel better regardless as to true rendering of the text. Got’cha.

It is also interesting that you know for a fact that those who subscribe to the majestic plural point of view deny that Jesus is God. How do you know that it isn’t simply the majestic plural? What makes you the arbitrator of orthodoxy?

Please tell me what YOU would have done if you were on a Christian site and someone there had said something like the above to you?

I’m nice. But will not accept such treatment.
And I do not feel my response was harsh, but honest.

GG

In yet … all I see is something else. Please I am sure you can be nice. But please present Christianity in its beauty excluding the word “you” and by default “I”.

 

[Darryl_B]

Please tell me what YOU would have done if you were on a Christian site and someone there had said something like the above to you?

And this highly offends me, because I am on a Christian site. But where will I go?

 

[GodsGrace154]

And this highly offends me, because I am on a Christian site. But where will I go?

Don’t be offended.

You know very well I mean a CHRISTIAN site as opposed to CATHOLIC site.

I didn’t mean to imply that Catholic is not Christian.

So now could you answer my question as to how YOU would have felt instead of sidetracking it??

GG

 

[GodsGrace154]

In yet … all I see is something else. Please I am sure you can be nice. But please present Christianity in its beauty excluding the word “you” and by default “I”.

Darryl !!

I’m speaking about YOU, personally.

Please advise, using the English language, HOW I am to refer to YOU, Darryl B??

I NEVER use YOU to refer to a group of persons. Please read ALL my posts and then come back and report.

And I mean on ALL threads.

GG

 

[Darryl_B]

Don’t be offended.

You know very well I mean a CHRISTIAN site as opposed to CATHOLIC site.

I didn’t mean to imply that Catholic is not Christian.

So now could you answer my question as to how YOU would have felt instead of sidetracking it??

GG

No. I am offended that you think a “christian” site must necessarily be protestant. I was protestant. All I see in you is me years ago.

 

[GodsGrace154]

No. I am offended that you think a “christian” site must necessarily be protestant. I was protestant. All I see in you is me years ago.

Stop looking at me Darrly. I’m not you.
You know nothing about me but what I post here.
I’ve already asked that you don’t be offended. I’m the one who’s getting offended on this site and am considering leaving. It’s sad that we who believe in Christ cannot be more united but must bicker.
Just take everything I say at face value.
Just this morning I spoke to a priest friend of mine and a Deacon friend of mine.
Does that shock you?

You still haven’t answered my question. Should I have felt attacked or not?? I’m a a guest here and would like to be treated as such.

Are we in the same time zone??

GG

 

[GodsGrace154]

No. I am offended that you think a “christian” site must necessarily be protestant. I was protestant. All I see in you is me years ago.

BTW, as I was looking around for a forum,
CHRISTIAN did mean Protestant

And this site is called CATHOLIC.

Do you understand this now?
I didn’t decide this, the people who put together forums did.

You could try checking this out someday.

GG

 

[Tim_D]

I don’t even know what the majestic “plural” is and was asking someone.

The word “we” is plural, meaning more than one. It is synonymous with saying the majestic “we.”

YOU also could have answered. But you prefer to attack me.

SO, People, sects, denominations, etc. that PREFER the majestic we, do so because it would be God using it and thus He wouldn’t be referring to the Trinity. See? It’s simple enough.

That statement makes absolutely no sense. Please try again.

As far as what I choose to believe - yes - I MUST understand what I believe. Very intelligent theologians have differing views.

It’s NOT ME, who makes them up.

I would hope that no theologian would simply make things up but would base their work on the knowledge and study of the subject in accordance with the structure of their discipline. You cannot prove that the “we” in Genesis is a reference to the Trinity, (keep in mind that the Trinity is not even mentioned explicitly in the New Testament) so you simply accept it because it makes you happy. In a way, you are simply making it up because it pleases you!

Between two views, YES, I use my brain to decide which one I agree with more in view of what I know about God, Jesus, the O.T. and the N.T.

Did you ever once think that what you know about God, Jesus, the O.T. and the N.T. may be deficient and that there may be some things that have either escaped your knowledge or that you are simply ignorant about? I doubt that there are many religious scholars or theologians who claim to know everything possible about the subject.

How do you know what YOU believe?
You accept what the CC teaches? Good. But do you feel you have to accept it intellectualy or do you just forge blindly ahead?

We cannot believe anything unless we accept it with our intellect. If anyone is forging blindly ahead it is you and your insistence that Genesis refers to the Trinity when there are equally valid arguments against it.

How do you love God with all your mind if you don’t even stop to consider if it makes sense to you or not??

Love of God does not stem from believing that Genesis refers to the Trinity. The Bible helps us in our quest but love of God comes from our heart and our intellect. Whether the “we” in Genesis is the majestic plural or not has nothing to do with it.

 

[GodsGrace154]

The word “we” is plural, meaning more than one. It is synonymous with saying the majestic “we.”



That statement makes absolutely no sense. Please try again.

I would hope that no theologian would simply make things up but would base their work on the knowledge and study of the subject in accordance with the structure of their discipline. You cannot prove that the “we” in Genesis is a reference to the Trinity, (keep in mind that the Trinity is not even mentioned explicitly in the New Testament) so you simply accept it because it makes you happy. In a way, you are simply making it up because it pleases you!

Did you ever once think that what you know about God, Jesus, the O.T. and the N.T. may be deficient and that there may be some things that have either escaped your knowledge or that you are simply ignorant about? I doubt that there are many religious scholars or theologians who claim to know everything possible about the subject.

We cannot believe anything unless we accept it with our intellect. If anyone is forging blindly ahead it is you and your insistence that Genesis refers to the Trinity when there are equally valid arguments against it.

Love of God does not stem from believing that Genesis refers to the Trinity. The Bible helps us in our quest but love of God comes from our heart and our intellect. Whether the “we” in Genesis is the majestic plural or not has nothing to do with it.

Wow. A catholic who doesn’t believe in the Trinity. And even turns down proof of it.
Incredible.

GG

 

[Tim_D]

So, what you’re saying is: Catholicism came FIRST
and then you fit the verse in.

Didn’t the verses come first??? Followed by Catholicism?
You mean Catholicism was already around in Genesis?

:whacky:

The Catholic Church is the institution founded by Christ as the ordinary means of grace through the sacraments. God the Father, through His goodness, desired the we, His creatures, should experience existence with Him. Jesus Christ became man incarnate for the sole purpose of offering Himself as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind so that we may obtain life everlasting with God. This was the plan for all eternity. It isn’t a case of what came first, Catholicism or Genesis? Catholicism and life in Christ exists without the Bible. The Bible is an excellent resource for us but it isn’t the basis of our faith.

 

[Tim_D]

Wow. A catholic who doesn’t believe in the Trinity. And even turns down proof of it.
Incredible.

GG

WHEN DID I EVER SAY THAT I DIDN’T BELIEVE IN THE TRINITY???

Honestly, are you so arrogant that you think that your declaration of the Trinity in Genesis is proof???

 

[GodsGrace154]

:whacky:

The Catholic Church is the institution founded by Christ as the ordinary means of grace through the sacraments. God the Father, through His goodness, desired the we, His creatures, should experience existence with Him. Jesus Christ became man incarnate for the sole purpose of offering Himself as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind so that we may obtain life everlasting with God. This was the plan for all eternity. It isn’t a case of what came first, Catholicism or Genesis? Catholicism and life in Christ exists without the Bible. The Bible is an excellent resource for us but it isn’t the basis of our faith.

What IS the basis of your faith Tim_D?
Treating other Christians as outsiders
and with disdain?

Here are a few things you’ve told me:

Are You So Arrogant
so you simply accept it because it makes you happy
you are simply making it up because it pleases you
Did you ever once think that what you know about God, Jesus, the O.T. and the N.T. may be deficient
You are simply trying to twist and turn things to fit a narrative that pleases you. If that makes you happy, then fine but don’t also assume that it makes you correct.
That statement makes absolutely no sense. Please try again.

The Bible helps us in our quest but love of God comes from our heart and our intellect.

Did you ever stop to think that all that stuff up there could refer to YOU too?
I very much agree with the last and separated sentence. But I’ve not found much of God’s love on this site. DarrlyB has been rather not nice too. So instead of DISCUSSING the plural we, it has turned into an attack on me and for what reason I don’t know. It’s like if one of you says something it’s okay - if I say something it turns into an argument. Maybe it’s me. Maybe I don’t belong here.

GG

 

[Lucretius]

Nice? No. Coincidence. Yeah.

The beginnings of Genesis were written at least 1,200 years before the Gospel of John. Both are singular works designed to convey spiritual truths, and in the case of Genesis, through a literary style that would have been recognizable to the people of the time. The triune nature of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit was unknown to the early Hebrews. It does not work to try and take a verse of scripture from one book and try to shoehorn it into the verse of another.

But isn’t God the Author of the Scriptures? Even when we account the plurality of the secondary authors of Scripture, the Primary Author must be considered first and foremost.

Therefore, I don’t see why we can think that “Moses” intended a royal we, and God intended both that and a implicit understanding of the Three Person

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[Tim_D]

Therefore, I don’t see why we can think that “Moses” intended a royal we, and God intended both that and a implicit understanding of the Three Person

Haha Yes, sir; you make a good point!