SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : godhead

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 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 Next Page )
PosterThread
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
If we accept that God is three individuals, we come to a contradictory conclusion. God is of one substance. Therefore, God is of an individual substance. This means, he cannot be three individuals for that would be the equivalent of saying He is three substances. As established above, we cannot divide the substance. So how can God be three persons?



The same way the space consists of L X W X H or Time is Past/Present/Future or matter is solid/liquid/gas.

This Trinity of Trinities shows us how it is possible and yet not a contradiction.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/11/7 17:06Profile
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2734
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re:

Quote:
What you are doing is taking an infinite and perfect God, and placing Him into your own finite mind of logic and reason. I am not so sure we should do that, for it immediately leads to error.



This argument is a contradiction, for you are using logic and reason in describing your own understanding of the Godhead.



Quote:
I don't have all the answers. However, my point is this: the trinity is a contradiction.



You should carefully consider what it takes for something to move from the realm of difficulty to the realm of contradiction. You have yourself admitted here that you don't have all the answers yet in the same breath you make a definite statement of contradiction?

Please consider that the doctrine of the Trinity is not something that was merely invented to answer questions about God. To quote Francis Schaeffer..

[i]Every once in a while in my discussions someone asks me how I can believe in the Trinity. My answer is always the same. I would still be an agnostic if there were no Trinity, because there would be no answers. Without the high order of personal unity and diversity as given in the Trinity, there are no answers.

The Persons of the Trinity communicated with each other and loved each other before the creation of the world. This is not only an answer to the acute philosophical need of unity in diversity, but of personal unity and diversity... We must appreciate that our Christian forefathers understood this very well in A.D. 325 when they stressed the three persons in the Trinity as the Bible had clearly set this forth. Let us notice that it is not that they invented the Trinity in order to give an answer to the philosophical questions which the Greeks had at that time understood. It is quite the contrary... The Christians realized that in the Trinity, as it had been taught in the Bible, they had an answer that no one else had. They did not invent the Trinity to meet the need; the Trinity was already there and it met the needs.

Let us notice again that this is not the best answer; it is the only answer. Nobody else, no philosophy has ever given us an answer to unity and diversity. [/i]

-from [i]He Is There and He Is Not Silent[/i] by Francis A. Schaeffer

In Christ,

Ron


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2005/11/7 17:24Profile
philologos
Member



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

 Re:

Quote:
I don't have all the answers. However, my point is this: the trinity is a contradiction. ??Just because I cannot explain in finite terms the way in which God can exist both as a son and father in communication to each other, does not mean that they must in fact be seperate persons. What you are doing is taking an infinite and perfect God, and placing Him into your own finite mind of logic and reason. I am not so sure we should do that, for it immediately leads to error.

But what you are doing is exactly what you accuse me of doing. The 'trinity' is a contradiction to [u]your[/u] logic and [u]your[/u] reason. The logic of your logic is quite contradictory to the logic of my logic, so where do we go from there?

Quote:
However, I found none yet. Anyhow, let's begin this discourse at the beginning. The trinity is Catholic dogma, established by the Catholic Church.

No, it is not. No more that the canon of scripture is 'catholic dogma'. You just don't seem to understand that the councils did not create doctrine they sought to affirm the truth and disclaim error. The canon of scripture was 'endorsed' by councils NOT established by them; similarly the truth of One God in Three Persons.

Quote:
There are two ways in which to read this: Either God is three persons who are three identities, or God is three persons in that He is three individuals. Either God has three faces, or He is three seperate beings.

This is where your logic and reason continually founders. Because your logic and reason cannot grasp the testimony of scripture you are reduced to declaring that it is 'contradictory'; only because your logic and reason are demanding the final say rather than submitting to the testimony of scripture.

Quote:
If we accept that God is three individuals, we come to a contradictory conclusion. God is of one substance. Therefore, God is of an individual substance. This means, he cannot be three individuals for that would be the equivalent of saying He is three substances. As established above, we cannot divide the substance. So how can God be three persons? ??Can you see this contradiction?

You have quoted large sections of the Catholic dogma, but I doubt that you have understood hardly any of it. The testimony of scripture is that the Word was with God; this is identity. And that the word was God; that it unity for 'there is one God' is the cardinal point of the Shema. The creeds have sought to defend the truth of these two statements without attacking one to defend the other. They are historical documents arising from the controversy of their day. The 'contradiction' lies in your mind and your own view of 'logic and reason'. The Father and the Son and the Spirit are clearly self-conscious and yet there is One God; traditional Christianity has called this mystery Trinity.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/7 18:33Profile
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re:

Hi brother. I think what I'm reading here, and I've followed this thread with careful reading, checking and re-reading, as it a very useful and fruitful teaching thread for the discerning, ...again what I think I hear you saying is that worship shouldn't go directly to the person of the Holy Spirit? The godhead has no division in it. Unlike humans we have jealousy envy etc... But not with God. So one of the biggest tricks of the enemy is to get us to reason about God from our humanity. God doesn't get jealous over us worshipping The Father, over the Son or the Holy Spirit over the Father etc...I think that you may have some misunderstanding on what true worship is. (hint: it's not singing 3 fast songs 2 slow songs and hoping for the Lord to move with giftings of the Holy Spirit in a church service) That actually is a very shallow view of worship. The truth is that we can't even approach unto God in worship without the help of the Holy Spirit. Jesus said He would send us "Another" comforter and He would etc..... You need to think about that. True worship is an expression of worth-ship toward God, esteeming obedience to His teachings and Word above our own wills,reasonings and ways. In the very act of doing God's word you are worshipping the Holy Spirit
:-o since without Him there is no genuine obedience. Don't let the devil mess with your head over this name , that name or the other name :-)


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/11/7 19:01Profile
philologos
Member



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

 Re:

a quotation from Augustus Strongs' Systematic TheologyIn the nature of one God there are three eternal distinctions which are represented to us under the figure of persons, and these three are equal. This tripersonality of the Godhead is exclusively a truth of revelation. It is clearly, though not formally, made known in the New Testament, and intimations of it may by found in the Old.
The doctrine of the Trinity may be expressed in the six following statements:1. In Scripture there are three who are recognized as God.
2. These three are so described in Scripture that we are compelled to conceive of them as distinct persons.
3. This tripersonality of the divine nature is not merely economic and temporal, but is immanent and eternal.
4. This tripersonality is not tritheism; for while there are three persons, there is but one essence.
5. The three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are equal.
6. Inscrutable yet not self-contradictory, this doctrine furnishes the key to all other doctrines.Robert has drawn our attention to some of the passages in the Old Testament which seem to be understandable only in the later light of tri-personality. eg the famous 'we' passages in the creation narrative is a natural starting place and also the 'Shema' which in a strictly literal translation would read "Hear O Israel, Jehovah our gods is one Jehovah". The objectors say that this is only a formal 'honourific' use of the plural of 'elohe' (elohim) but there is room within this phrase for a deeper significance.

One of the most thrilling narratives of the Old Testament is Isaiah's vision recorded in Isaiah 6. The treishagion or 'Holy, Holy, Holy' is itself a startling phrase. In Hebrew 'Holy, Holy' might be a way of saying 'Most Holy' as in the Holy of Holies (and eg Song of Songs). This idiom of doubling a word to intensify its impact is a regular feature of the Hebrew mind. But why three times 'Holy'? There is room here too for a deeper significance. My Hebrew is very basic although I have acquired some understanding of its grammar. I use a version of the KJV known as the Newberry Bible which often draws attention to things which would be missed in an ordinary English translation. The Isaiah 6 passage has an interesting feature. Not only is the word 'holy' repeated three times but the word for Lord... Is. 6:1 (KJVS) In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also [u]the Lord[/u] sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.

Is. 6:8 (KJVS) Also I heard the voice of [u]the Lord[/u], saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me.

Is. 6:11 (KJVS) Then said I, [u]Lord[/u], how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, ... is in a plural form. Hebrew is capable of expressing 'single, dual and multiple'; this is the multiple form. It seems that this word was originally Jehovah in the Hebrew text but was changed by the Sopherim to the word 'Adonai' being 'lord' in its multiple form.

This passage contains another 'we' section. “Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me.” (Is. 6:8, KJVS) Campbell Morgan believed that this was a 'conversation' of the kind overheard in Psalm 2. Isaiah responded, at an earthly level, to this appeal but I can't help but wonder if Isaiah was not hearing one of these 'eternal' declarations which exist 'long before' they come into time. Suppose we have here a conversation within the Godhead... This is not conscription but the call for a volunteer, and yet the 'one' who was chosed to 'go' would go on behalf of all.

Perhaps we hear another echo of this in Paul's revelation in Philippians: “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Phil. 2:5-11, KJVS) This includes the statement that prior to the incarnation the Word was 'in the form of God'. What can this mean? The word is repeated in 2:7 as 'the form of a servant' where it seems to precede being 'made in the likeness of men'. I want to explore a little speculative theology here and ask other readers to 'destruction test' it. Is the phrase "took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: " one stage or two? Did he 'take upon him the form of a servant' BEFORE he 'was made in the likeness of men'?

I am not trying to create a timetable but just an order of events. Did the Son choose to 'take upon him the form of a slave'? If so, we are touching thrilling secrets. Within the Godhead, the question 'who will go for us' which implies a delegated role 'for us' was answered by the Son who 'took upon himself the form of a slave'. This is referred to as 'emptying himself'. It is key to see the subject of the verbs in these passages. It was the Son who1. was in the form of God
2. who did not grasp at 'equality' with God
3. who emptied himself
4. who took upon himself the form of a slave
5. BUT who was 'made' in the 'likeness of men'. Points 2-4 are all active where the subject of the verb (or the one performing the action) is the Word, but point 5 is 'passive'; this is not something the Son 'does' but something which 'happens to him'.

The Son offers Himself, within the Godhead, to 'go for us'. He empties himself (or makes himself of no reputation) and is 'given' a body to fulfil the will of the Godhead “Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, But a body didst thou prepare for me;” (Heb. 10:5, ASV) This 'moment' is captured in the exultant declaration of “Then said I, Lo, I am come In the roll of the book it is written of me To do thy will, O God.” (Heb. 10:7, ASV)I am not being disrespectful when I say I get the feeling of 'we have lift-off' when I read these verses. We are hearing the echoes here of things beyond our reach. In some sense 'changes' are taking place with the unchangeable godhead. The changes however have to do with preparation for incarnation.

Incarnation was not God only in 'the likeness of men' but the 'Word became flesh'. That is more than identification it is 'trans-form-ation'. The Word was in the beginning and who was with God and was God became 'man'. He laid aside His 'glory' for the purpose of redemption. In an inexplicable way He made God's glory 'visible' “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14, KJVS) and yet this glory manifest in flesh was a 'glory' in between two other periods of shared 'divine glory'. “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17:5, KJVS) This is 'glory...with thee'. The Greek preposition here is 'para' 'by the side of. And yet God had plainly said: Is. 45:6 (KJVS) That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

Is. 45:21 (KJVS) Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. This is Jehovah, the name shared by Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Some 'names' are not shared, others are. The Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Father. The Spirit is not the Son nor the Father. This is not independence but individuality. Unity in Trinity and Trinity in Unity.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/8 6:32Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

To buttress Ron's points that indeed all of the persons within the Godhead are called 'Jehovah' I wish to draw attention to more passages that demonstrate the same truth:

Compare these passages:

I [YAHWEH/Jehovah] have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear... (Isaiah 45:23)


That at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:10, 11)


Compare also Isaiah 44:6 to Revelation 1:11, 17

Thus saith the [u]LORD[/u] the king of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; [u]I AM the first and I AM the last[/u]; and beside me there is no God... (Isaiah 44:6)


I Am alpha, and omega the first and the last... v. 17... Fear not I am the first and the last: I am that liveth and was dead; and behold, I am alive for evermore. (Revelation 1:11, 17)


God told Moses to tell the children of Israel, "I AM THAT I AM"... I AM hath sent me unto you. Yet, when Jesus told the people in John 8:58... "Before Abraham was, I AM" it was a clear allusion to Exodus 3:14. Knowing full well what Jesus was saying they tried to kill Him.

Further we read in Isaiah 42:8:

I Am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, further in Isaiah 48:11...and I will not give my glory unto another

Compare that to what Jesus said to the Father in John 17:5:

And now, O Father, glorify thou [u]me with thine ownself[/u] with the glory which [u]I had with thee[/u] before the world was.

It is grammatically impossible to understand this passage any differently than one 'person' speaking to another 'person'. It seems to me that to further Ron's point and use his "we have lift off...' it is as though Christ was manifest in the flesh and the time of His departure was at hand. He had near to 'finished' His course with a mighty 'mission accomplished.' Christ, the second person of the Godhead in anticipation of assuming again all those things that He had 'emptied Himself' of and will soon [i]sit down in His Father's throne[/i] with the glory He had before His incarnation.

What could possibly be more marvelous than the fulfillment of the, "whom shall I send and who shall go for Us" of Isaiah 6? So much was at stake and so much was hanging in the balance. [i]Wherefor God hath highly exalted Him and given Him a name which is above every name..."[/i]

Christ willingly laid down all that the Devil so wrecklessly sought for Himself. Satan wanted to be 'like the Most High God', yet Christ, took on Himself the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men. Our minds stop past finding out the blunt force trauma laid upon the Devil's head enough to bruise our Lord's 'brass' heel! That is a first class stomping.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/11/8 8:52Profile
Nasher
Member



Joined: 2003/7/28
Posts: 404
Watford, UK

 Re:

Quote:
May I ask you some questions?


Hi Hans, yes, I will try. Will you try and answer mine?

Quote:
When Jesus spoke, did He speak as Jesus, did He quote the Holy Spirit or did He speak as the Holy Spirit?


I don't know what you mean by "speak as Jesus", Jesus was Jesus so He spoke as Jesus, however He spoke what His Father gave him to speak:

John 12:49-50
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.


Quote:
When Jesus praised and worshiped the Father, did He worship the Holy Spirit?


When Jesus was worshipping the Father He was worshipping the Father.
He is an example of Jesus Worshipping the Spirit though:
Matthew 4:1
Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.


Quote:
When Jesus told us “in that day” to ask Him no longer any questions but to ask the Father in His name, did He mean the Holy Spirit?


I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. The Father is the Father, and the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit.



Quote:
When you pray “in the Spirit,” do you pray led by the Spirit, or do you pray to the Holy Spirit?


Please tell me what [u]you[/u] mean by "in the Spirit" and I'll try and answer the question.



Quote:
When you have received the Holy Spirit, i.e. the Spirit of His Son and – according to God’s Word - you cry out Abba! Father! what does this mean? Does it mean that you cry out Holy Spirit, or does this mean that you cry out Jesus, or this it mean that you cry out Holy Spirit, or all three of the Triune Godhead. Or just maybe, it means that you cry out Abba! Father! just as it is recorded in God’s Word.


I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. The Father is the Father, and the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit.



Quote:
Is the uneasy witness to the spirit of these Christians just a misunderstanding of the “power of God,” or is it the warning by the Holy Spirit that something is radically wrong?


1 Corinthians 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace

Therefore it is not a warning by the Holy Spirit but "another" spirit



Quote:
How do we test the spirits that operate in an environment as the Toronto Blessing, when they primarily worship the Holy Spirit, One God of our Triune God?


1 John 4:1-3
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

This is one test, another is that the Holy Spirit will not contradict the Bible, such as 1 Cor 14:33


_________________
Mark Nash

 2005/11/8 8:56Profile
beenblake
Member



Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA

 Re:

Dear Robert and Philologos,

In an attempt to understand what you are saying, I have made a summary of your posts. Here goes:

God is three persons. He is three persons who are unified by one essence. When we say person, we are not just speaking of a "persona" or "face" but rather, three individuals. The word individual means a subdivision by which cannot be divided any further (in-divide-ual). Therefore, by this, you are saying God is a "godhead" which is another way of saying that God is a council of three persons who are in perfect agreement.

The name of the council is Jehovah. This name, however, has been substituted with the word LORD in the bible. The council of three shared everything. They shared all authority, knowledge, power, glory, everything, so much so, that they are considered "one." So much so, that when Jehovah spoke, He said, "I" instead of "We." So much so, that when we look upon one, we look upon them all. That is why Jesus said if you have seen me, you have seen the father.

The three members of the council have always existed. They are infinite. Their union is perfect in that it is a true commitment of love. The council is complete in three. There are no more than three and no less than three.

God is three persons in one. This means that God is an essence or substance or nature. This essence exists within three persons who make up the Godhead. They share this essence in agreement. This essence or substance or nature is Holy love. The three members of the council share love. No individual member of the council is God. Rather, all three members of the council unified together in love are God. They share a perfect relationship of love. Therefore, God is three persons without conflict.

Each member of the council, therefore, is a recognizable individual not to be confused with the other members of the council. The father is not the son. The son is not the Holy Spirit. etc.

Therefore, God is divisible into three seperate persons: the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit. However, these three persons are indivisible in essence. They all bear the essence of God.

The story continues....

Humanity needed a savior, and so God asked, "Who shall we send?" Who shall we send to become a man and do what man cannot? This was something only God could do. A member of the council stepped forward and agreed to take on the lowly position of becoming a man. This member submitted Himself unto the Council and came to earth. He was given the name Jesus Christ.

Jesus came to earth, died, and was resurrected. In doing this, Jesus was given all authority over Heaven and Earth. Jesus Christ was made Lord. He was not given authority over the council (Jehovah), however, this one person (Jesus) of the council became Lord.

What of the other two members? They still exist under the council called "Jehovah." Jesus is only one member on the council (only one person), and yet His name is above all other names. Jesus is Lord. The rest of the council, therefore, has no authority or power, for they have given it to Jesus.

Jesus has been made Savior, Redeemer, King, Judge, and Lord.

Jesus is Lord for a time until all things have become subject unto Jesus. This means that anyone who does not submit unto Jesus, who does not accept Him as thier Savior, will be judged and cast to Hell. Once this has been completed, Jesus will again submit unto the council, giving His authority back to the council, so that God will be all in all.

By saying that God will be all in all, we are saying that God's essence will be all in all. God Himself, the three persons, will not be in all.

Although, right now, the Holy Spirit lives inside of us. This person, the Holy Spirit, lives inside of us and controls us. Jesus does not live inside of us, because He is a seperate person. God lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us. However, Jesus is not the Holy Spirit, and thus, Jesus does not live in us.

....

Does this summarize what you are saying? What things would you change?

Thanks,
Blake


_________________
Blake Kidney

 2005/11/8 11:26Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi BeenBlake,

Without going through the whole of your summary, I need to first point out that it appears you are trying to make a mental model of what we are saying and this is impossible.

Let me explain. If I were to ask you if an atom has a 'nucleus' filled with protons and neutrons you would likely say yes. If I said it had electron(s) you would likely agree. Now here comes the problem. We just established that there is a trinity of items here (protons/neutrons/electrons); but what would a model look like in three dimensions?

The classic model looks like a solar system; but now we know that on a quantum level particles behave like waves so completely different models were envisioned. No one has ever been inside of an atom to look around real good, so we are left to make a visual model from certain factors that we believe to be true.

Many questions have been asked as some conclusions seemed to be impossible. I.e. how can a bunch of 'like charged' particles (that should repel each other) exist in a tiny concentrated nucleus? What is holding that together? The proof that something is holding it together is in the fact that 'splitting' it creates an atomic blast (God is upholding all things by the Word of His power BTW).

What does this atom look like? Some say that the behavior of the electron resembles a 'cloud' and others have made
[url=http://science.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=atom.htm&url=http://www.davis-inc.com/physics/wavegrph.html]diagrams[/url] that make visible 'that which is invisible.' regardless, these models can only serve as tools to help us get our head around such a marvelous and mysterious phenomena.

Now lets turn the microscope the other direction. Better yet, lets leave off physical examination and consider that God exists beyond the three dimensions of space and time our finite minds are limited to in its ability to comprehend. The term 'counsel' may well be a valiant attempt to make a model of the Godhead for our understanding, but it must inevitably fall along with those models that have described the Trinity as a "three headed god." We simply cannot make a model of God in that way without falling short and ruining the whole.

Example: If I ask a 'line' to describe a triangle or a square he could never do it. Why? because he is a one dimensional line and lines cannot comprehend two dimensional objects. So what if I ask a triangle or square to describe a cube or a pyramid? How would he make a model in two dimensions and do justice to three dimensional object? The cube could make a square model, but not vise versa. This is our delima.




_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/11/8 13:24Profile
philologos
Member



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

 Re:

Quote:
In an attempt to understand what you are saying, I have made a summary of your posts. Here goes:


Quote:
God is three persons. He is three persons who are unified by one essence.

Wrong.


Quote:
Therefore, by this, you are saying God is a "godhead" which is another way of saying that God is a council of three persons who are in perfect agreement.

Wrong.


Quote:
The name of the council is Jehovah.

Wrong.


Quote:
This means that God is an essence or substance or nature. This essence exists within three persons who make up the Godhead.

Wrong.


Quote:
This means that God is an essence or substance or nature. This essence exists within three persons who make up the Godhead.

Wrong.


Quote:
No individual member of the council is God.

Wrong


Quote:
Rather, all three members of the council unified together in love are God. They share a perfect relationship of love. Therefore, God is three persons without conflict.

Wrong.


Quote:
The father is not the son. The son is not the Holy Spirit. etc.

Right!!!


Quote:
Therefore, God is divisible into three seperate persons:

Wrong


I cannot believe that you believe we are saying the things that I have outlined above. If this is the kind of Trinity you oppose, then I too am anti-trinitarian. But this is not Trinitarianism but a 'straw man' that you have set up in order to knock down.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/11/8 17:33Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy