Instigator / Pro
6
1529
rating
6
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#5642
Is the Trinity mentioned in the Old Testament?
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
0
1
After 1 vote and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
CatholicApologetics
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
4
1500
rating
8
debates
62.5%
won
Description
The premise of this debate is to discuss whether the Trinity (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is mentioned in the Old Testament, whether together or separately. Are the three persons of the Godhead mentioned in the Old Testament? When I say "mentioned," I am specifically talking about indirect references, foreshadowings, and typologies, not just explicit mentions. This will help avoid semantic arguments about the term.
That being said, the purpose of this debate is not to crown a 'Winner' and a 'Loser.' The intended purpose is for anybody who may read this debate to learn and broaden the scope of their knowledge with regards to this topic.
Terms:
Trinity: three distinct persons in one Godhead
Rules:
When using the Bible as a reference, we will use the NRSV Bible for ease.
We will be discussing the Trinity as accepted by the Catholic Church, as different denominations have different beliefs regarding the Trinity.
No new arguments will be made in the last round.
Round 1
Pro
#1
INTRODUCTION.
Welcome! I would first like to thank my opponent for accepting to participate in this debate. I appreciate you taking the time and effort to engage in this discussion. I hope we will have a knowledgeable and enjoyable debate.
Today's debate will focus on the central question: Is the Trinity mentioned in the Old Testament? More specifically, are the three persons of the Godhead mentioned (directly or indirectly), through foreshadowing, or typologies in the Old Testament? I will be arguing in favor of this claim.
PREREQUISITE.
In this debate, we will not be arguing about the validity of the Trinity itself. We will solely focus on whether the Trinity (or the Persons of the Trinity) is mentioned in any form in the Old Testament. According to Catholic doctrine, the Trinity comprises three distinct Persons — God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit — sharing one divine nature [1]. In other words, the Trinity is three distinct persons in one Godhead. This is the definition we will be using for the Trinity.
MAIN BODY #1
In the Old Testament, there are several instances where God refers to Himself as "Us," implying plurality within the Godhead. In fact, within the first chapter of the Bible, we see this taking place:
Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; ... (Genesis 1:26)
The plural language "us" and "our" suggests a multiplicity within the Godhead. God is speaking as a Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. According to Scripture as a whole, the full Trinity was present at creation. Genesis 1:2 describes the Spirit of God hovering over the waters, and John 1:1-3 (though not from the Old Testament) reveals that the Word, Christ, was active in the creation of all things. St. Irenaeus interpreted this as a reference to the Trinity, indicating the involvement of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in creation [2].
These plural words are used again in Genesis 3:22 after Adam and Eve's fall:
Then the Lord God said, "See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" (Genesis 3:22)
Who is God talking to in this verse when He says that the man has become like "one of us?" Some Bible scholars see this as a reference to the Trinity: God the Father speaking to the Holy Spirit and to Christ.
Another instance occurs at the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11:7:
"Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another's speech" (Genesis 11:7)
This is the third instance in Genesis where God refers to Himself plurally, indicating a complex unity.
Jumping to the Book of Isaiah, Isaiah 48:16-17 provides a clear foreshadowing of the Trinity:
Draw near to me, hear this! From the beginning I have not spoken in secret, from the time it came to be I have been there. And now the Lord God has sent me and his spirit. Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: I am the Lord your God, who teaches you for your own good, who leads you in the way you should go. (Isaiah 48:16-17)
In this passage, we see a remarkable foreshadowing of the Trinity. Verse 16 begins with a call to listen and draws attention to someone who has been present from the beginning. This speaker, identified as "me," is distinct from "the Lord God" and "his Spirit," who have sent him. The "me" in this verse is interpreted as God the Son, Jesus Christ. He is speaking about being sent by the "Lord God," understood to be God the Father, along with "his Spirit," referring to the Holy Spirit. This clearly points to three distinct Persons: the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. Verse 17 continues with the speaker identifying Himself as the "Lord, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel," who is the one leading and teaching His people. This speaker, who has been sent by the Lord God and His Spirit, now declares Himself as the Lord. This identifies the Son as God.
MAIN BODY #2
Now, let's examine passages where the individual Persons of the Trinity are mentioned.
1. God, the Father
The Father is referred to in various Old Testament passages. Notably, Isaiah 63:16 and Malachi 2:10.
For you are our father, though Abraham does not know us and though Israel does not acknowledge us; you, O Lord, are our father; our Redeemer from of old is your name (Isaiah 63:16)
This passage explicitly refers to God as "our father," highlighting the recognition of God as a paternal figure and redeemer from ancient times.
Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our ancestors? (Malachi 2:10)
This verse again identifies God as the singular father of all, reinforcing the understanding of God the Father as the creator and the one who establishes covenants with His people.
2. God, the Son
The Old Testament records encounters with "the angel of the Lord," who speaks as if He is God, identifies Himself with God, and exercises the responsibilities of God. When one of God's angels make an appearance, they are titled "an angel of the Lord" (for example, Luke 2:9). Notice the subtle difference before angel. One is "the angel" while the other is "an angel." For example, in Genesis 16:10, the angel of the Lord promises Hagar numerous descendants, which is a divine prerogative.
The angel of the Lord also assumes the role of God when appearing to Abraham. In Genesis 22, God tests Abraham and commands him to sacrifice his son as a burnt offering. Abraham listens to God and sets out the next day. However, the moment he was about to kill his son, the angel of the Lord stops Abraham from sacrificing him, saying:
Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me. (Genesis 22:12)
The angel of the Lord claims that Abraham did not withhold his son from "me," implying a divine identity. This statement aligns with God's command, suggesting that this angel is not merely a messenger but possesses divine authority. The Bible says "the angel of the Lord" rather than "God" to indicate a distinction from God the Father and points to the presence of God the Son. It becomes clear that scripture intended to make a distinction between the two.
Additionally, the angel of the Lord accepts worship in Judges 13:20. The angel of the Lord appears to Manoah and his wife. As they offer a burnt offering to God, the angel of the Lord rises into heaven in the flame of their burnt offering. Manoah and his wife realize the angel of the Lord was God Himself in human form, and immediately bowed down, worshiping. This passage is important because a regular angel does not accept worship, as demonstrated in Revelation 22:8-9.
In several passages, those who see the angel of the Lord fear for their lives because they have "seen God." It's made evident that this angel was not merely an angel, but was God. Looking through the lens of the New Testament, it is easy to conclude that the angel of the Lord was Jesus Christ (God, the Son).
A passage, that mentions God the Son, specifically, is Proverbs 30:4:
Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is the person's name? And what is the name of the person's child? (Proverbs 30:4)
This verse inquires about the name of God's Son, asking: "What's his name, and what is the name of his son?" This is a powerful passage containing God, the Son.
3. God, the Holy Spirit
The spirit of the Lord shall rest on him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. His delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. (Isaiah 11:2-3)
In this passage, it could not be made more clear that Isaiah was speaking specifically about God's spirit. Isaiah mentions later on that the Holy Spirit rests upon him, convicting him to bring good news to the poor, bind the brokenhearted, and preach a message of peace (Isaiah 61:2). The Spirit of God is distinguished from the Lord in the account leading up to the flood:
Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not abide in mortals for ever, for they are flesh; their days shall be on hundred and twenty years." (Genesis 6:3)
In this passage, we observe a distinction made between the Lord and "My Spirit."
CONCLUSION.
In summary, the Old Testament contains several indirect references and foreshadowings of the Trinity. The plural language used by God in Genesis 1:26, 3:22, and 11:7 suggests a multiplicity within the Godhead. Isaiah 48:16-17 further foreshadows the Trinity by mentioning a speaker distinct from the Lord God and His Spirit, interpreted as God the Son, with the Father and Holy Spirit also present. Individual Persons of the Trinity are also mentioned: God the Father is acknowledged in Isaiah 63:16 and Malachi 2:10; God the Son is represented by the angel of the Lord, who speaks with divine authority and accepts worship, as seen in Genesis 16:10, 22:12, and Judges 13:20, and is directly referred to in Proverbs 30:4; and God the Holy Spirit is explicitly mentioned in Genesis 1:2 and Isaiah 11:2-3. These passages collectively indicate that the concept of the Trinity, while not explicitly defined, is present in the Old Testament through various indirect references and typologies.
SOURCES.
BIBLE REFERENCES.
- Genesis 1:26
- Genesis 1:2
- John 1:1-3
- Genesis 3:22
- Genesis 11:7
- Isaiah 48:16-17
- Isaiah 63:16
- Malachi 2:10
- Luke 2:9
- Genesis 22
- Genesis 22:12
- Judges 13:20
- Revelation 22:8-9
- Proverbs 30:4
- Isaiah 11:2-3
- Isaiah 61:2
- Genesis 6:3
Con
#2
Hmm, let’s start with Genesis 1:26 for my first argument.
I read through the whole chapter, and it details God creating Earth and certain celestial bodies of the universe. However, what I didn’t find in that chapter was anything that could lead to an inference that “us” could mean the Trinity. If you were to believe in the Trinity already and also believe God never changes, only then can you infer “us” to mean the Trinity. Reading that text on its own without any previous beliefs wouldn’t lead to such an inference. In other words, it’s not strong enough. “Us” could mean the Trinity. But it could also refer to God and the 24 elders in Revelations. It could also refer to God and his angels. It could mean anything really. And the rest of that chapter doesn’t mention the “us” God was talking about ever again.
Genesis 3:22 also has “us,” like you said. But this “us” is mentioned once, and only used in that verse with no further context. Again, just like the verse in Genesis 1, it’s too vague for such an inference. There are many interpretations that can be made. Is it God the trinity or God and His angels? His angels, the 24 elders, and other creatures and beings would know evil, they likely dealt with it when Satan rebelled. Without any previous belief in God being consistent, there isn’t a way someone can tell it’s referring to the Trinity. You would need a strong belief in the Trinity already to make such a conclusion. Someone who looked up the dictionary definition and then attempted to find such a reference couldn’t find it, it’s too vague. Basically what I’m trying to say is if you believe in something, any verse can be used as evidence to support that belief.
I believe Isaiah 48: 16-17 was actually Isaiah talking, not Jesus. Remember that Isaiah is a book about Isaiah’s prophecies, and would likely record Isaiah’s actual words as well, not just what God said. The whole chapter is a prophecy to northern Israel and he is speaking to a group of people. There is evidence of this in verse 14:
“Assemble, all of you, and hear!
Who among them has declared these things?
The Lord loves him;
he shall perform his purpose on Babylon,
and his arm shall be against the Chaldeans.”
The first line suggests there is a crowd, or at least people. What Isaiah does that’s weird is that he would switch from 3rd person (Isaiah talking about God) to 1st person (Isaiah saying what God SAID). The verse above was Isaiah talking ABOUT God. The next verse was what God SAID, to prove Isaiah right.
“I, even I, have spoken and called him,
I have brought him, and he will prosper in his way.” (Isaiah 48:15)
Isaiah doesn’t have the power to bless people, so verse 15 is likely Isaiah saying what GOD said. There’s a change from Isaiah speaking to God speaking.
So the next verse would make a lot more sense when you consider that Isaiah is talking to a group of people. He may be saying that to get their attention because they weren’t listening. He said “draw to me,” according to the translation stated in the rules. That could mean come to me, or stay, because people might be leaving. Whatever the case, it’s definitely Isaiah because verse 17 says “Thus says the Lord.” It would be strange if God were to refer to Himself as Lord, when He is Lord. So if that was Isaiah talking in verse 16 (because he talked in verse 15 and 17), then he is saying God sent him and God’s spirit. I don’t think this spirit is the Holy Spirit, but what Isaiah may have meant is that God sent me to you (northern Israel) and He is with me. God has been referred to as a “spirit” before, in Genesis 1 where the translation says “while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.” “Wind from God” was supposed to be “spirit of God,” but I’m not sure if I could look at the original language of the script to verify exactly what it’s supposed to be. I do think it can’t be actual wind, unless wind somehow existed before the universe. Even so, God also mentions His spirit, meaning His presence, in Genesis when announcing He will give humans 120 years before the flood.
I do agree the Bible mentions God the Father. You can still believe in God being the Father of all living things without thinking that He has an actual Son (Muslims and the religious Jewish for example).
You did cite Genesis 22:12 as evidence that the Old Testament is alluding to God the Son as Christians know it. Verses 15 and 16 suggest the angel was saying what God told him to say, like Isaiah did.
“The angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, and said, ‘By myself I have sworn, says the Lord: Because you have done this, and have not withheld your son, your only son,” (Genesis 22:15-16)
The word “I,” “me,” anything to suggest first person and to refer to oneself was only followed by “says the Lord,” from this angel. So it can be inferred then that verse 12 was God speaking, because they both refer to Abraham not withholding Isaac. And verses 15-16 appear to be a continuation of verse 12.
If the angel of the Lord in Judges 13 was Jesus, why did He say “…for the boy shall be a nazirite to God from birth?” (Judges 13:4) and not “the boy shall be a nazirite to me?” Why didn’t this angel of the Lord, if He is the same one from Genesis, use “me” instead of “God” or “Lord” like He did last time?”
There’s a possibility that Agur, the person who wrote Proverbs 30, was asking genuine questions. They aren’t rhetorical. It is possible Agur really wanted to know who made the earth and the things in it. In the first three verses of the same chapter, he says he is really tired because he’s stupider than most people. If he is admitting he is stupid and he’s tired, perhaps he’s asking the questions to remedy it. And by asking for the person’s name in the verse you provided, he wanted to know who it was. The question about the child may have been the equivalent of asking “Does this person have a family?” The fact Agur calls himself stupid for not knowing, while mentioning God in the first sentence suggests that he believes in God, but does not know the origin story of how the world came to be. So it is unlikely the questions about the person weren’t rhetorical questions hinting God has a Son or child.
It can be argued that the spirit of God mentioned in the last three verses you put up are of the same spirit. There isn’t a distinction between any of the three. Like I mentioned before, God can be called a spirit sometimes. In the Genesis verse before the flood, it didn’t say “I will not be with you,” but said “my spirit will not abide.” If God is saying “my” spirit, then it would make sense if it’s referred to as the spirit of the Lord by someone who doesn’t own that spirit. If it’s God’s spirit, meaning Himself, then the spirit of the Lord would mean God’s spirit. And God’s spirit would be God Himself. It kinda sounds weird when I type it out, but humans often attribute our body to ourselves, to basically be us. That we’re the body. For example, we don’t say, “the eyes of your body are blue.” We say “your eyes are blue.” If you believe you are a soul in a body, that’s false, souls don’t have eyes, bodies do, and you're a soul, not body. But our identity isn’t just our soul, but our body as well. Your body is you, and so it can be argued God’s spirit is Him. Isaiah wouldn’t say “my spirit” nor “God’s spirit.” The former because that’s false, and the latter because apostrophes to indicate possession weren’t a Hebrew language feature. It’s like saying, “the car of Ria.” In Spanish, it’s spoken like that, “el carro de Ria.”
So the summary of this argument: “These verses are either too vague or likely don't intend to mention any one of the Trinity except God the Father.”
Round 2
Pro
#3
INTRODUCTION.
Thank you, Strawbbycake, for taking the time to read through my points, reflect on them, and craft a response. To stay within the character limit, I will keep the introduction brief and proceed to the main arguments.
Thank you, Strawbbycake, for taking the time to read through my points, reflect on them, and craft a response. To stay within the character limit, I will keep the introduction brief and proceed to the main arguments.
PREREQUISITE.
The opposing party has yet to respond to the use of plurality in Genesis 11:7 during the Tower of Babel incident. Additionally, they have not addressed why the angel of the Lord speaks as if He is God, identifies Himself with God, and exercises God's responsibilities if He is not God. I would expect the contender to provide a plausible explanation for this. Furthermore, they have not explained why the angel of the Lord promises Hagar numerous descendants in Genesis 16:10 if He is not God, nor have they addressed why the angel of the Lord accepts worship, while regular angels do not. Similarly, they have not answered why those who see the angel of the Lord fear for their lives, believing they have "seen God." Moreover, the distinction between the Holy Spirit and God the Father, mentioned in Genesis 6:3 leading up to the flood, remains unaddressed. Lastly, they have also failed to address the distinction made in Isaiah 61:1. However, the opposing party has agreed that God the Father is mentioned in the Old Testament. Therefore, I will proceed to discuss God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
COUNTER-ARGUMENTS.
I read through the whole chapter ... However, what I didn’t find in that chapter was anything that could lead to an inference that “us” could mean the Trinity. ... Reading that text on its own without any previous beliefs wouldn’t lead to such an inference. In other words, it’s not strong enough. “Us” could mean the Trinity. But it could also refer to God and the 24 elders in Revelations. It could also refer to God and his angels. It could mean anything really.
You claim to have read through the entire chapter. Meaning, you would know that the verse which proceeds Genesis 1:26 confirms that God created humankind in His image, for Genesis 1:27 says:
So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27)
God says, 'Let us make humankind in our image,' and in the following verse, 'God created humankind in his image.' Notice that it doesn't say humankind was created in the image of God and the angels, or the twenty-four elders. Instead, it suggests that God was speaking with at least one other person. This person must be God because He declares that humanity will be made in 'our' image. For humans to be made in the image of God while also being made in the image of someone else (as implied by 'our image'), it necessarily points to a plurality within the Godhead.
Therefore, God could not have been speaking to angels or any other beings, because they are not created in His image. Whoever He was conversing with must also possess the image of God for humankind to be created in 'our' image, which indicates a shared divine essence among those involved in the creation process.
Genesis 3:22 also has “us,” like you said. But this “us” is mentioned once, and only used in that verse with no further context. Again, just like the verse in Genesis 1, it’s too vague for such an inference. ... You would need a strong belief in the Trinity already to make such a conclusion. ... Basically what I’m trying to say is if you believe in something, any verse can be used as evidence to support that belief.
Vagueness does not imply non-existence. The presence of "us" in Genesis 3:22 is consistent with the earlier plural language in Genesis 1:26. Both passages foreshadow the Trinity. A strong belief in the Trinity is not required to recognize this. Instead, a consistent approach regarding scripture is what is necessary.
I believe Isaiah 48: 16-17 was actually Isaiah talking, not Jesus.
With regards to the supposition that Isaiah was the speaker in Isaiah 48:16-17, it nevertheless fails to disregard the existence of at least two divine Persons: God the Father (whom you have accepted to be mentioned in the Old Testament), and the Holy Spirit. Even if Isaiah was speaking, notice what he says: "the Lord God has sent me and his spirit" (Isaiah 48:16). This clearly distinguishes the Spirit from God the Father while maintaining their unity.
Hence, Isaiah is still confirming the existence of two Persons within the Godhead in this verse.
I don’t think this spirit is the Holy Spirit, but what Isaiah may have meant is that God sent me to you (northern Israel) and He is with me. God has been referred to as a “spirit” before, in Genesis 1 where the translation says “while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.” “Wind from God” was supposed to be “spirit of God,” ... God also mentions His spirit, meaning His presence
You are testifying against yourself. Your own statements inadvertently affirm the presence of the Holy Spirit. According to 1 Corinthians 2:10-12, the "Spirit of God" mentioned in the Old Testament is the Holy Spirit. These names are interchangeable. This alignment is consistent with Catholic doctrine, which recognizes the Holy Spirit as a distinct yet unified Person within the Godhead.
By acknowledging the presence of "God's Spirit" in Old Testament passages like Genesis 1:2, you are, in essence, confirming the existence of the Holy Spirit as a Person of the Trinity. This confirmation supports the Catholic view that the Holy Spirit, as part of the triune God, was present during creation.
You agree the Bible mentions God the Father and have now confirmed the existence of the Holy Spirit so we will proceed to God the Son.
You did cite Genesis 22:12 as evidence that the Old Testament is alluding to God the Son as Christians know it. Verses 15 and 16 suggest the angel was saying what God told him to say, like Isaiah did.“The angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, and said, ‘By myself I have sworn, says the Lord: Because you have done this, and have not withheld your son, your only son,” (Genesis 22:15-16)The word “I,” “me,” anything to suggest first person and to refer to oneself was only followed by “says the Lord,” from this angel. So it can be inferred then that verse 12 was God speaking, because they both refer to Abraham not withholding Isaac. And verses 15-16 appear to be a continuation of verse 12.
The angel of the Lord says "says the Lord" the second time He speaks from heaven. The word angel means messenger [1]. A messenger is one who is sent from someone else to deliver a message. Jesus fits this description perfectly. He says in John 8:18, "I testify on my own behalf, and the Father who sent me testifies on my behalf" (John 8:18). Just as the Father sent Jesus, so also did He send the angel of the Lord. The angel is fully divine and can speak both as God and on behalf of God.
It is logical to deduce that the first time He was speaking Himself, being the Son of God, while the second time, He was relaying a message from God the Father.
If the angel of the Lord in Judges 13 was Jesus, why did He say “…for the boy shall be a nazirite to God from birth?” (Judges 13:4) and not “the boy shall be a nazirite to me?” Why didn’t this angel of the Lord, if He is the same one from Genesis, use “me” instead of “God” or “Lord” like He did last time?
It is important to read in context. By reading the entire chapter, we realize that Manoah and his wife both did not initially recognize the angel of the Lord to be God. However, only after He ascended in the flame of the altar did they suddenly have a dawning realization that He was God. Perhaps the angel wanted them to realize who He was themselves:
Then Manoah realized that it was the angel of the Lord. And Manoah said to his wife, “We shall surely die, for we have seen God.” (Judges 13:21-22)
This fits the overall character of Jesus, where He has appeared on several occasions, meeting with people whom did not initially recognize Him but eventually realize (Luke 24:13-35, John 20:11-18, John 21:1-14).
There’s a possibility that Agur, the person who wrote Proverbs 30, was asking genuine questions. They aren’t rhetorical.
Agur's message starts with extreme level of humility. The idea is so pronounced that some commentators believe it is sarcastic. This indicates that Agur was most likely responding to a critic by satirically calling himself "stupid" and his detractor "understanding." He understands his limitations in contrast to God and uses the same rhetorical methods which God used with Job (Job 38:4–5).
Prior verses used hyperboles. This verse uses rhetorical questions. The five questions asked in Proverbs 30:4 all have the same, intentionally obvious answer. Only God transcends heaven and earth. Only God can control the wind. Only God formed the clouds. Only God placed the earth in its place. Only God possesses the character of Deity. His Son, Jesus, descended from and returned to heaven. God's Son can control the wind (Matthew 14:32–33). God's Son created the heavens and the earth (John 1:3). And God's Son possesses all the nature of God the Father (Colossians 1:15–19).
The possibility you have raised is excessively minimal — if not non-existent all-together.
If God is saying “my” spirit, then it would make sense if it’s referred to as the spirit of the Lord by someone who doesn’t own that spirit. If it’s God’s spirit, meaning Himself, then the spirit of the Lord would mean God’s spirit. And God’s spirit would be God Himself. It kinda sounds weird when I type it out, but humans often attribute our body to ourselves, to basically be us. That we’re the body. For example, we don’t say, “the eyes of your body are blue.” We say “your eyes are blue.” If you believe you are a soul in a body, that’s false, souls don’t have eyes, bodies do, and you're a soul, not body. But our identity isn’t just our soul, but our body as well. Your body is you, and so it can be argued God’s spirit is Him. Isaiah wouldn’t say “my spirit” nor “God’s spirit.” The former because that’s false, and the latter because apostrophes to indicate possession weren’t a Hebrew language feature.
I do not understand what you are trying to convey in this message. But from what I do, I think this passage originates from a lack of understanding with regards to the Trinity. The argument conflates the "Spirit of God" with the Father, suggesting that the Spirit is just another way of referring to the Father, rather than a distinct Person within the Trinity. This confusion overlooks the Trinitarian understanding that while the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit share the same divine essence, they are distinct Persons with unique relational properties. The claim that "God's spirit would mean God Himself" denies the personal distinction that the Trinity teaches.
In this debate, we are not arguing about whether God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are different Persons of the Trinity, we are solely focusing on whether they are mentioned in the Old Testament in any way. Please read the prerequisite of my previous post which read:
In this debate, we will not be arguing about the validity of the Trinity itself. We will solely focus on whether the Trinity (or the Persons of the Trinity) is mentioned in any form in the Old Testament. According to Catholic doctrine, the Trinity comprises three distinct Persons — God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit — sharing one divine nature [1]. In other words, the Trinity is three distinct persons in one Godhead. This is the definition we will be using for the Trinity.
CONCLUSION.
Keeping the conclusion brief to respect the character limit, the Old Testament contains references that allude to the distinct Persons of the Trinity—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Passages like Genesis 1:26-27 and Isaiah 48:16 suggest a plurality within the Godhead, aligning with the Catholic teaching of the Trinity, while other passages directly mention the specific Persons.
Con
#4
Eh, my brain already hurt trying to argue against the consistency of the bible and you basically demolished it. The reason why I couldn't argue against some of the verses is because if I were to try to comprehend it, it's clear what it means. I am starting to realize that atheists and others who try to to disprove the idea of the bible being consistent, rather than the bible is wrong (God doesn't exist, the bible says the earth is flat, etc.) would have to cherry pick verses and not comprehend them in order to make an argument. Maybe I'm just not a good debater, but that's what I'm seeing so far. I didnt even realize I forgot Genesis 1:27, and I wasnt lying when I said I read the whole thing (lol).
As a christian, it's cool to see another Cliffe defending the Word of God. I dont think he's catholic but he does what you do, but irl.
I know this isnt really an argument but I think I've put more effort into arguing against my own beliefs than I should've, so Im stopping here 😂
P.S: This whole entire debate has strengthened my belief in a consistent bible, more than 50 books across hundreds of years somehow tell the same story and have the same ideas. Its a 50 part book series rather than a collection of stories, pretty cool ngl
Round 3
Pro
#5
INTRODUCTION.
Thank you, Strawbbycake, for engaging in this debate. Your honesty is commendable—a quality that not everyone possesses. You’re certainly not a bad debater; some of your points really challenged me and made me think more deeply. If you aspire to be more like Cliffe Knechtle, I recommend reading the Bible, learning about Church history, studying the Early Church Fathers, and consistently participating in debates. These debates will often require further study, which will, in turn, deepen your understanding of the faith.
I’m glad to hear that this debate has strengthened your belief in the Bible. If you’re not already reading it, I’d suggest starting with the Gospels.
CONCLUSION.
The opposing party has conceded. They have admitted being unable to defend their position, reinforcing the claim that the Trinity has been mentioned in the Old Testament. The plural language used by God in Genesis 1:26, 3:22, and 11:7 suggests a multiplicity within the Godhead. Isaiah 48:16-17, regardless if Isaiah is the speaker, nevertheless confirms the existence of two divine Persons: the Father and the Holy Spirit. God the Son is directly referred to in Proverbs 30:4 and is interpreted to be the angel of the Lord in passages like Judges 13:20-22, where it is revealed that people who see the angel of the Lord claim to have seen God. The Holy Spirit has been mentioned in Genesis 1:2 and Isaiah 11:2-3. Collectively, these passages indicate that the concept of the Trinity has been mentioned in the Old Testament.
Thank you to Strawbbycake once again for this debate.
Con
#6
Honestly, I should thank YOU.
I have just realized some of your points help prove the validity of the Trinity in the Bible in general. So many people, esp Muslims, dont believe in Jesus being God and then say no such verses exist. Previous arguments for it, while true, were usually pulled from the New Testament. basically, the argument was that Jesus says so Himself.
Your points prove that it was both mentioned and affirmed in the Old Testament (which includes the Torah, a Jewish religious book) as well, and that helps prove a whole lot of other things, such as bible consistency, God being consistent, all writers are inspired by the same God, Christians don't have to follow OT laws, etc. And ofc, the fact that Jesus wasnt the only one saying He's God the Son.
Debating with you has helped me learn the Bible even more, and now I see it differently, for the better ofc. Thank you and may God bless you. I hope people reading the debate can learn more about God and His amazing complexity.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
It could be viewed as a foregone conclusion or a concession, I am choosing the latter.
Con dropped everything after R1, and pro identified a key dropped point from R1 anyways... But the overwhelming politeness makes an exception for winning conduct through good behavior.
Sources are not awarded since the sources are to the subject, so nothing unexpected or exceptional. I cannot merely award this for whomevers interpretation I prefer.
Since you said, "Since it is and it isn't, this is a good topic," did you like how the debate turned out?
That sucks. Thank you for assuming the side of the opposition. Good luck!
Yes I am a christian, i realized my stupid mistake when you published your argument. I thought you were taking the con side, so that was why I joined the debate, so I could argue for the pro side, which wasnt what happened.
I do agree with your point of view, Jesus was in the Bible everywhere, and perhaps even the Holy Spirit had a few mentions in the Old Testament as well.
But that wouldnt be a fun debate. So I will assume the point of view of the Muslim or atheist just for this debate.
I was not expecting that Pastafarianism punchline at the end. It definitely caught me off-guard and got a chuckle out of me.
I’d say the big reason is the messiah hadn’t been born yet…hard to write books anbout… even while there were prophecies.
As for poly vs mono… it’s a way they used to say they’re different, but it was also stupid from a language standpoint. Angels exist, if you believe this you’re probably a polytheist. Yes, there’s a high god, but that doesn’t equate to denial of the power of the angels (or any other supernatural beings besides God).
Actually, I can name one religion which might truly be monotheistic… Pastafarianism!
It may not have been explicit, but it was definitely foreshadowed, giving hints and indications. The reason the Trinity is not clearly established in the Old Testament lies in the fact that Israel was surrounded by nations who were all polytheistic - they believed in many gods. It was important for Israel to realize that the God of the Bible is the only God who existed.
Hello! Thank you for participating in this debate. I was looking over some of your previous debates and noticed you have claimed to be a Christian. As a Christian myself, I just wanted to make sure you realized you were arguing against the Trinity in the Old Testament.
Since it is and it isn't, this is a good topic.