SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : The Triunity (my slightly differing view/ understanding)

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 Next Page )
PosterThread
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
davidt on 2008/11/21 0:38:11
Can anyone prove that the Logos was eternally the Son? Because no one has and it seems after my initial responses no one has tried and I suspect and believe it is because no one can. The topics of the person has been brought up though and on that I will also question.

Does you word and spirit have a different personality?I believe the answer is no but I still want you to answer. So why do you say that God's word and spirit have distinct personalities and therefore claim that God has 3 different personalities. If He did then you would have 3 personalities.


I have more sympathy with some of your ideas than you might have guessed although fundamentally I believe you are in serious error. My sympathy has to do with the first of these questions. I think you have them in the wrong order and it is because your 'second' question is the bad foundation for your thinking on No 1 that I have said little about your question 1.

If you had not introduced the idea of a multi-part God which you seem to think is more worship-worthy than a multi-person God, the conversation might have taken a different route.

Are you familiar with the language of Eternal Sonship versus Voluntary Sonship? Theologians get very twitchy about this as I have found to my own cost at times. The question could be expressed like this...

[b]Was the Word always in a Son-Father relationship or did the Word choose that Son-Father relationship at a 'time' in eternity?[/b] This is a difficult concept to get a hold of because the revelation of the Word that pertains to our creation is the revelation that we encounter as the Son of God. In other words almost all our data is coming from the 'redemption history' that we find in the Bible. This will affect every revelation statement about the Word with the exception of those that consciously reach back before the beginning of anything when 'only God was'.

Sometimes in the scripture we have a phenomena called [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolepsis]prolepsis[/url]. It is the phenomena which results in references to the land of the Philistines at a time when the Philistines had not settled the land. Bible skeptics falsely think it is anachronism but it is not. If I say "the mighty Columba has flowed Oregon into the Pacific for millennia." I am using a prolepsis; Oregon has not existed for millennia, only the place that we [u]now[/u] call Oregon. This is a bit complex but I think it is important to undestand the perspective of the Bible.

I think the reason that good theologians are so suspicious of the idea of anything 'less' than Eternal Sonship is that they are trying to make sure that we do not have a 'distinct being' coming into existence at a point in 'time'. In other words they are anxious that we do not give the Word a beginning. To do so, they rightly understand, would be to diminish his worth and glory.

But if we can maintain the Eternity of the Word and see the Word making a choice to become Son in order to fulfill the purposes of redemption I think there is value in that.

Let me state my current position here carefully so that it can be understood.

The Word is an identifiable person within the Godhead and always has been. He was always 'with God' and 'was God', co-equal, co-personal, co-substantial. He is distinguishable from 'God' but not separable from 'God'. (This is where you and I disagree so fundamentally.)

...but I do believe that there is a biblical case for 'Voluntary Sonship' and that it does not diminish but enhances the wonder of God's love for his creation without lessening his essential glory. Some time ago I preached on this topic and if you are interested you can listen to it [url=http://mp3.biblebase.com/download_244.html]here.[/url]


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2008/11/21 5:32Profile
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2737
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re:

Quote:
I have provided scripture, reasons, over and over throughout all these posts. I have done my best to answer every question straightforward. I dont understand how you can say this.



I sense your frustration, forgive me if I'm not making myself clear. I say this to get you to consider that your position creates tremendous problems when it comes to fundamental philosophical questions such as the meaning of love as we know it. I am hoping to stir you to think through your philosophy and consider whether you can live consistently by it.

There is nothing contradictory by the laws of reason in the Trinity. Now we may have a hard time picturing this - is this some kind of three-headed beast? I can't picture it in my mind.

Why is it that you can't accept the truthfulness of something if you can't image it in your mind? Tell me what love looks like. Tell me what God looks like. You can't image God in your mind. In fact, you are prohibited from trying to do so. The First Commandment, by the way. You can't image God. You can't image love. You can't image justice. But we have good reason to believe they are real things and we know that. So it is not a liability because we can't image the Trinity in our mind. What we need to find out is if it is taught. And the teaching of the Trinity is there is one God and there are three Persons. And Jesus Christ is the second Person, fully human and fully divine.

So then we go to the Bible and we see in John 20 where it seems to indicate that Jesus is a human being and that He is different from the Father because He calls God "My God". I say, what's the problem with that? Well, you see, Jesus is different from the Father. He's a different Person. But is He a different Being? No, it doesn't say that. Also in John 20, there is Thomas calling Jesus God. Since there is only one God in the Bible, Jesus must be that God that is the only God. We have His divinity right there, and we have His separateness the page before. We look in the beginning of the Gospel of John and we have Jesus being identified as the Word, being called God in the very first verse. We see in the third verse that He is identified as the Creator of all things. We see in the 14th verse that this Word becomes flesh and dwells among us. That's the human being.

In Christ,

Ron


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2008/11/21 7:07Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Rbanks,

Quote:
I may be wrong but I believe you have come to this area of understanding because of your desire for the glory of God.


Yes this is my desire and I have come to it based on Scripture. I do not want God to be misrepresented to believers or unbelievers. I think that the doctrine that God has multiple personalities i both unbiblical and unedifying specifically more so with emphasis toward unbelievers.


Quote:
I think you have a problem with saying trinity because it is not in the bible and because it makes it seem like God is 3 Gods in unity, when the scriptures make it clear that God is one and that there is none else. I have also experience things that I have had a problem with like worshipping the trinity when the word is not even in the bible and is not fully explain neither in the bible nor by those who believe in it. There are different views of the trinity and the one that makes God be three God’s in unity with one another I disagree with and I also believe most on SI would also disagree with this view. The trinity to most is the best way man has come up with explaining the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. We Christians all must believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all God. There are so many scriptures that prove that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. I think in order to be a true Christian we all must believe this.


I have no problem with saying Trinity I would rather use the term Triunity as it is more descriptive. I am okay with it being a term for a concept in the bible though the actual title is not in the Bible. I do not think even the mainstream view of the Triunity teaches 3 Gods. I understand the unity but it is the seperations of the Word and Spirit into separate personalities that I do not agree with. I am well aware the Logos, God, and Spirit are all God.


Quote:
Here is something I have discovered concerning the Godhead and this became more real to me after I experience an infilling of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. There is an order in the Godhead. The Father is God and is first. The Son came from the Father, being God from Him, and is second. The Holy Ghost is from the Father and the Son, being God from the Father,


I do not believe that there is an order or ranking in the Triunity. It may seem this way in the case of the Son but that is only in His humanity that He is 2nd to God. The Logos however is not second in rank to God or He is Gods. It also may seem that the Logos and the Spirit are 2nd in rank to God because they do what He wants but they are not. Just as our spirit and word does what we want to do and is not second so is God's word and spirit.


p.s. It seems to me generally from this post that you think I have the classic problems with the mainstream view of the Triunity that many have. I do not mine are very different. I believe the Son became the Son when He was born as a human and before that He was always the Logos who is God. As for the multiple personalities as I originally posted at the very beginning philosophically I can accept this but it is not Biblical. And I also think the view that I hold to Biblically just happens to be more completely philosophical.

 2008/11/21 8:46Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Bog, thank you very much for the order of this post. I did have problems with your questions in the sense that you did not understand much of what I was saying and on that basis you asked false questions since your premise was false. I also thought that many of your questions were more what sounds right to the mind philosophically then what the Bible says though I am not saying that you completely based you arguments solely on that.


Quote:
The Bible specifically mentions Father, Son, and Spirit with exact references and distinct manifestations.


God can and does manifest Himself in different ways and can because He is spirit. He can be 2 places at once and relate to Himself. For instance He can sit on the Throne and His Spirit can search Him. In analogy we are also this way with multiple functions.


Quote:
You say you don't believe in a God of multiple personalities, ok fine. How interesting that the Son prays to the Father to send another Comforter (the Spirit).


This is the Logos speaking from His humanity He was praying for God to send His Spirit not another personality.


Quote:
Or is it true that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and for ever?


He is but He didn't even exist until He was born in the sense of His humanity. The Logos always existed but the name Jesus and the title Son were not in existance specifically til He was begotten.


Quote:
These are personality traits.


I am not denying that the Spirit and Logos/Son have personalities. I am only saying that they do not have a different personality from each other.


Quote:
Then does this mean that the "deep things of God" are out in the world?

These are the only differences?

Here is a question: is the Spirit 1) the Father's Spirit (Matthew 10:20) 2) the Spirit of Christ Jesus (Galatians 4:6; Philippians 1:19) or, 3) the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; Acts 2:33)?


The Spirit searches the Father's depths and then reveals them to Christians. As for the Spirit He is the Spirit of God and Christ for they all share one Spirit. I dont know if I can say that Christ in Him humanity has a separate spirit since I think to be a human you have to have one I am not sure but I can say in His Divinity the Logos/God all have the same spirit as you do.


Quote:
The Logos is the glory of God, the express image of His person, the word of God. Your word and such does not carry another personality the same goes with your spirit.

This is foolish. We are created in the image and likeness of God; not an exact copy. Just because our finite human words or our spirits do not have different personalities is no bases for claiming that God does not.


The analogy was given in part to show that there are not separate personalities but the Logos and the Spirit are just different functions within the Godhead. However mainstream Christianity has not seen this and therefore has come to the erroneous conclusion that God has 3 consciousness and personalities. This is crazy both the faulty interpretation and the philosophy. If I were to say I had 3 personalities within myself I would seem crazy. To note I am not basing my doctrine solely on this philosophy this is merely a sideline comment. I think you have not answered this question satisfactorily all you have stated is that the analogy does not apply when it does.


Quote:
both with God and is God.


TO be with does not necessarily mean that one is separate from the other. My arm is with me and is connected. Gods word is with Him His glory is with Him. To be with does not also mean that there is a distinct personality my soul is with my spirit is with me but does not have a different personality.


Quote:
Jesus also said, "Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are." Does this mean Jesus is going to make us humans One and the Same as the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Shall we become part of the "triunity" ... or shall we say "quad-unity"? Or does every single person count as an individual addition to this unity (ie. 10 billion-unity)?


I believe that this word one can be use in 2 senses. I am not the only person to use the text of Jesus saying He is one with the Father to prove His Divinity most apologists do. First I can state that I know we will not be part of the Trinity. We are sons of God but only as far as with the Logos in His humanity as Jesus. Jesus is our brother and so we are one with Him in His humanity and we are one in fellowship with the Father but not with His Divinity. We are partakers of the Divine nature but only in the sense that we are His temple.


Quote:
Ok, you say there is only One-Personality. Yet, this One-Person speaks to Himself through 3 different expressions. This is quite unnecessary and confusing if they are all the Same-Person without distinction. And as I previously mentioned, Jesus distinguished His own will from the Father's will.


This is what the Scriptures teach. I have no problem with it. You do not find the Spirit talking to the Father or the Logos. Mostly you find the Logos speaking from His humanity. In reference to Jesus having a distinguished will this is only in His humanity.


Quote:
Why not? What does it mean to be "the Son"? Do you also believe the Father has not always been "the Father"?


Because the Scripture teaches that the Son was not in existence til He was born. The Logos however has always been. The Father also always existed. He was not always the Father of Jesus though just of other like angels and men. The Father is the Head who sits on the throne and is mainly called God though His spirit and son are equally and He sends forth His word and spirit.


Quote:
Jesus is referred to as "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." And again, "Jesus Christ is also the same yesterday, today, and for ever". Truly there is a dispensational revelation to the world, a distinct difference in the way we humans relate to God, but what thing has changed in the Godhead? Nothing. The immutable God, divine, perfect, without change or deviation. So, you tell me, when did God change, that is, when was He not the Eternal Son?


Yes from the foundation of the world but not actually only prophetically as surely. Nothing has changed in God He is spirit but He took on the form of man and then the Son was.


Quote:
That is the reason I have not been forthcoming with many scriptures; why should I give you more scriptures which you have already extensively read and yet still come to your "slightly differing" view & understanding? Would it change your mind if I repeat those scriptures you say you have already studied?


I have studied all these things a million times. All the things you are saying I have heard a million times I even used to teach them as a street preacher/ evangelist/ apologist. It is not as if I am ignorant and just have not heard these teachings that you are teaching. I have heard them and from Scripture and reason have rejected them as error. So it is not that I am not enlightened it is that I am. I was hoping though that someone could bring something I have not heard. I must say though that this has been very helpful to me in strengthening me in my position exponentially since I have been tested on such details and I am very glad about that.


So, in conclusion I have not answered every thing you posted and I am sorry I just dont really want to write so long. Most of the things I have already spoke about on this thread multiple times. I have tried to touch on some points that I deemed important to some degree. From now on I will try to keep it short since I have already covered most of the ground. I am thankful that you wrote so thoroughly it would be great if you could write shortly and make your point concisely thought there is benefit in expounding in such a way. Lastly, I must say that there has been no proof that Jesus was the Son from eternity only questions and the comments that were made were easily answered. Also, the multiple personalities view is not substantiated. Specifically I will point out that the philosophies do not stand and the verses I have cleared up. Most specifically there was no answer to the main question of a word and a spirit not having a personality. To say that an analogy does not apply is not acceptable. Most of your arguments are based upon the analogy the Jesus is the Son so it is also hypocritical and contradictive to make such a statement.

 2008/11/21 9:38Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Philologos,

First, I would like to say I appreciate your scholarship and careful thought. I am glad that there is someone who cares so much about these things.


Quote:
voluntary sonship


I am not saying that at some point the Logos volunteered to be a Son. I am saying that the Son did not exist until He was born as a man. The only reason that He is a Son is because God gave birth to him as a man and is therefore the father. The Logos has always existed though.


Quote:
with God and was God


I want to remark on this topic once more because I feel I have a couple more thoughts. To be with does not mean you are seperate. My spirit is with me but it is not separate. My thoughts/word is with me but not separate. To be with does not necessarily mean there is a distinct personality. My thoughts/word is with me but it does not have a separate personality. And if you "was" something or "were" or "are" something then you do not have a different personality from that thing. If I "was" Davidt then I do not have a different personality from myself.

 2008/11/21 9:48Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Inthelight,

Quote:
I have provided scripture, reasons, over and over throughout all these posts. I have done my best to answer every question straightforward. I dont understand how you can say this.

I sense your frustration,


I dont think I wrote this to you. Also, frustration was not main it was a plead for reason and to avoid offense.


Quote:
your position creates tremendous problems when it comes to fundamental philosophical questions such as the meaning of love as we know it.


God does not need multiple personalities in order to have someone to love. He is love itself and is satisfied in Himself and loves Himself. He is not like man who was made but love and is needy.


Quote:
Why is it that you can't accept the truthfulness of something if you can't image it in your mind?


I never said this I have actually said the opposite from the out start and continually since then. I base everything on Scripture. I could accept the mainstream view of the Triunity and for a while I did until I found the Scriptures to teach otherwise.


Quote:
The First Commandment, by the way. You can't image God.


The image being talked about here is a statue not a thought. We were made in the image of God. John in revelation had revelations of God and and spoke of it thereby creating visual images of God. God wanted to keep us from worshipping statues since He is spirit and didnt want us getting caught up in pagan type image worship like a golden calves and such. Man always wants something in the natural as Israel which made the gold image but God is spirit. They wanted gold because it was rich and probably a calf since it symbolized prosperity for food and what not. Jesus said do not follow me for the food but for the sign itself.


Quote:
So then we go to the Bible and we see in John 20 where it seems to indicate that Jesus is a human being and that He is different from the Father because He calls God "My God". I say, what's the problem with that? Well, you see, Jesus is different from the Father. He's a different Person. But is He a different Being?


Jesus may be a distinct person from the Father but only in His humanity. The Logos took on human flesh and became the Son. The Logos however is not a distinct person. Also I am not teaching that the Logos is a different being but is the glory of God.


 2008/11/21 10:02Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

[b][color=FF0000]Note:[/color][/b] I am no longer going to answer extensively. I have already personally been satisfactorily tested. I have already stated what I believe and it should be clear I don't think anyone has to ask me. If they do need to ask or claim me to teach something that I am not then they have not read. I think there comes a point where one must say I have many things to tell you but you are not able to bear them yet and only the Lord can teach you. I will no longer answer to personal attacks or irrational questions as it is worthless and wearying. I will not dialogue in long because I have already done that. I have already answered all the questions and given all the answers. I will not answer 100 different people individually because that would be too much and they can read the posts. I will however answer those questions in discretion which are short, concise, and straight to the point since it is easier to keep order in thought and it takes less time and effort in the things I have already repeated multiple times. Here are to 2 main things that I still have to say:

[b][color=FF0000]No one has proved that Jesus was the Son before He was begotten as a man.[/color][/b]

[b][color=FF0000]Does your word and spirit have a separate personality? No. Then why do you claim that God's word and spirit have separate personalities?[/color][/b]


p.s. I may write a more thorough article with scripture proofs and a comprehensive answer list to FAQ.

 2008/11/21 10:15Profile
rbanks
Member



Joined: 2008/6/19
Posts: 1257


 Re:

Bro. David,

I have put this together with the help of Fausset Dictionary. I believe the Son was begotten from all eternity and the Love that the Father has for His Son as a daily delight was before the creation of Adam.

The Son of God is co-equal, co-eternal, co-essential (consubstantial) with the Father; by eternal generation (Colossians 1:15 (KJV) Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: ), "begotten far before every creature" (Greek), therefore not a creature. So Proverbs 8:22 (KJV) The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. (Hebrew), "Jehovah begat (qananiy related to Greek gennaoo) Me in the beginning of His way (rather omit "in"; the Son Himself was "the Beginning of His way", "the Beginning of the creation of God", Re 3:14) from everlasting ... or ever the earth was ... I was by Him as One brought up with Him. I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him" (Proverbs 8:22-31 (KJV) 22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:
30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.; John 1:1-3 (KJV) 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.).

The Son was the Archetype from everlasting of that creation which was in due time to be created by Him. His distinct Personality appears in His being "by God ... brought up with God," not a mere attribute; "nursed at His side"; "the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father"; to be "honoured as the Father" (John 1:18 (KJV) No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.; John 5:20 (KJV) For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.). Raised infinitely above angels; "for to which of them saith God, Thou art My Son, this day (there is no yesterday or tomorrow with God, His "today" is eternity from and to everlasting) have I begotten Thee?" and "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever" (Heb 1; Psalms 2:7 (KJV) I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.; Psalms 45:6-7 (KJV) 6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.). His divine Sonship from everlasting was openly manifested by the Father's raising Him from the dead (Acts 13:33 (KJV) God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.; Romans 1:4 (KJV) And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:; Revelation 1:5 (KJV) And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,). Nebuchadnezzar called Him "the Son of God," unconsciously expressing a truth the significance of which he imperfectly comprehended (Daniel 3:25 (KJV) He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. ).

What do you think of this. I believe it is dangerous to believe that the Son did not come into existence until he was born on the earth. I believe the scriptures show that he was begotten from eternity.

 2008/11/21 10:16Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Rbanks,

I know that the the Word is with God and all of the things that He does. But to be with does not necessitate separateness in either personality or consciousness as my spirit is with me but not essentially different in personality or consciousness.

Also, I do not see any passages which specifically say that Jesus was the Son from eternity past. I do believe that the Logos has always existed and then took on the form of the Son and at that time became the Son of God:

Luke 1:31-32 And behold, you will [b]conceive[/b] in your womb and [b]bear[/b] a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and [b]will be[/b] called the [b]Son[/b] of the Most High.

Act 13:33 [b]this[/b] he has [b]fulfilled[/b] to us their children [b]by raising[/b] Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm, "'You are my [b]Son[/b], [b]today[/b] I have [b]begotten[/b] you.'


In conclusion I am not saying that the Logos did not exist only that the Son was not until He was born. The first verse shows that He was called "Son of God" when he was born. The second verse is in context to post resurrection but I also believe applies generally. It was on that day the day of being begot or born and Jesus was not born from eternity past so it was on that day that Jesus was called the Son of God and not before. If there was a verse in your post that I missed please let me know.

 2008/11/21 10:29Profile
boG
Member



Joined: 2008/5/21
Posts: 349
Las Vegas, NV

 Re: The Triunity (my slightly differing view/ understanding)

Quote:
God does not need multiple personalities in order to have someone to love. He is love itself and is satisfied in Himself and loves Himself. He is not like man who was made but love and is needy.



I am still waiting for the answer to this one: How does loving Himself satisfy "love does not seek its own" and "loving others"?

"God does not need multiple personalities in order to have someone to love." This is true but this is not a question of how many personalities God "needs" in order to love someone else who is not God in the first place -- but as I said previously this then makes God's love conditional upon something that is not God. Which means God does not have perfect love until there is something else "not God" for Him to fulfill His love that "loves others".

"He is not like man who was made but love and is needy" and "He loves Himself", these do not answer the question. If I say "I love myself" does that mean I am "loving others"? Ah, but God is love, so loving Himself is love indeed ... No, there must be a distinct other to love. This type of "loving love" is loving an abstract thought and is not loving the actual & realized fulfillment of that love.


Quote:
He is but He didn't even exist until He was born in the sense of His humanity. The Logos always existed but the name Jesus and the title Son were not in existance specifically til He was begotten.



Ah, so the name Jesus (which is above every other name) and the title Son were not in existence in humanity. Does this mean the name and title did not exist from eternity past?

You are preaching a Oneness doctrine, this is certain. You have no problem accepting the unity of the Godhead and neither do we. You also recognize that man is created in a "likeness" of God and you have thus been trying to model God's triunity after the likeness of the creature.

The Trinity is a beautiful balance of individuality and perfect unity and harmony -- this is the perfect representation of love. The Father loves the Son and the Spirit and seeks to exalt them; the Son loves the Father and the Spirit and seeks to exalt them; the Spirit loves the Father and the Son and seeks to exalt them. This is a relational emphasis which your Oneness doctrine cannot touch.

And again, if the Logos "became the Son" then the relationship between God and the Logos changed (God changed). This is not a matter of Jesus speaking with "his humanity" as though Jesus spoke sometimes out of humanity and sometimes out of Deity (a direct denial of Jesus being wholly man and wholly God). Not to mention Jesus said He doesn't even say anything of His own initiative, everything Jesus said and did He did according to the Father's will -- does this sound like humanity speaking?

Is the relationship between God and the Logos different than the relationship between the Father and the Son? You said there is which means the Godhead changed. You are getting this idea from the perspective of humanity and not the perspective of eternal Deity. Jesus, the Son, is exalted far above every name; does this mean the Logos was not always highly exalted far above every name?

You have shown yourself adept at accepting the interpretations of words that you so choose. Jesus says He and the Father are one -- this means they are One and the Same. Jesus prays that we may be one with Him as He is One with the Father -- this means we are just going to be individual members of His family as brothers and sisters. Well, why doesn't Jesus saying He is One with the Father also imply a distinct personality of His own that is also unified in the purpose of the Father? You say the Godhead has One-personality. We say the Godhead has Three-personalities that are without quarrelling or self-seeking and united in one eternally unchangeable purpose. Is there such a scripture that stands opposed to this doctrine? It will take more than scriptures that declare the unity of God for the Trinity is founded on this very cornerstone.


_________________
Jordan

 2008/11/21 15:13Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy