Discussion thread for AMR and God's Truth Trinity Debate.

[lifeisgood]

I revised it for you:

"Excellent read for those interested: 'The Forgotten Trinity' by James R. White*

*James White is a Calvinist-strike 1
James White is a bible corrector/agnostic/mystic-strike 2"

You are welcome.

Thank you for letting me know.
Excellent read on the Trinity nevertheless.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I will try to summarize the whole matter one more time for GT's benefit...and for PPS. Stay tuned.

AMR

I guess I don't know what this means in regard to me. I was pointing out to her that the Orthodox Trinity doctrine was in no way Polytheism as originally formulated and understood.

 

[godrulz]

This is the scripture that comes to my mind, when reading all this Arian resistance on these boards:

II Thessalonians 2:7-12

Arian/Unitarian, yes, but GT is modalistic-like.

 

[godrulz]

No, I think it just started. :rotfl:

Dec. 17 (I think it lasts a day before technically waning).

 

[godrulz]

Thanks for your agreement in support of the Trinity. i get that you may have issues with folks like godrulz and myself, but it is heartwarming to see you being able to set aside these differences when it comes to defending the sacred doctrine of the Trinity.

Much appreciated, brother!

AMR

Sarcasm?

 

[godrulz]

Excellent read for those interested: "The Forgotten Trinity" by James R. White.

Was very cheap for kindle a day or two ago. Got it...yes, will be good.

 

[godrulz]

Thank you for letting me know.
Excellent read on the Trinity nevertheless.

White has done more for apologetics and the kingdom than jw will ever do. What an idiot.

 

[God's Truth]

Is Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit one and the same?

I already told you they are.

No, they are not the same.

Yes there are.

Since Christ at His baptism prays to the Father AND the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove, they cannot be the same for there are three present at Jesus' baptism: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

You have not disproved that they are not the same.
God testified that Jesus was His Son. Jesus is God come as a Son of God, a Son of Man. The Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of God descended on Jesus and baptized him with power for his earthly ministry.

 

[God's Truth]

You didn't lose the debate based on the fact that the Multihypostatic Trinity is correct and scriptural. It's not.

You lost the debate because of AMR's superior skills and content, while you presented emotional conceptualizations.

Saying that you lost the debate is neither personal nor hateful. One can neutrally make that observation without it being insulting or demeaning in any way whatsoever.

You didn't present any substantial and cohesive scriptural challenge to refute the opponent or establish your position as superior.

You're no further from truth than the Multihypostatic Trinity doctrine, but you didn't make much progress in the debate according to neutral and objective standards of such a debate.

I could not care less what you think and what you say.

 

[God's Truth]

The only person that is 'adding' to the finished work of Jesus Christ is GT by saying that a person has to obey (do something) TO BE SAVED.

Jesus accomplished all that we need TO BE SAVED and STAY SAVED on the Cross.

All that we need, we have in Jesus.

All we need to do TO BE SAVED, to be JUSTIFIED before God, is to TRULY BELIEVE in Jesus Christ and what He did at the Cross. This is why the Bible says we are justified by faith (Rom. 5:1) BECAUSE OF HIM.



How easy it would be if sinners wished to be saved.
Jesus would not have had to die on the Cross of Calvary.

Then be ensnared by the devil.

 

[God's Truth]

So, let me see if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the Holy Spirit did not woo you to Jesus Christ and what He did at the Cross of Calvary for you to be able to hear THOSE WORDS FROM GOD for your salvation?

The Holy Spirit did not propitiate those circumstances so that you could hear the message to be saved?

The Holy Spirit had nothing to do with your salvation, right?

There is no scripture that says what you say.

Salvation is all about BELIEF: Jn. 3:16, Rom. 10:9-10, Rom. 3:22, Rom. 3:24, Rom. 3:26, Rom. 3:28-30, Rom. 4:3, Rom 4:5, Rom. 4:11, Rom. 4:16, Rom. 5:1, Rom. 5:9, Rom. 9:30, Rom. 9:33, Rom. 10:4, Rom. 10:9-10, Rom. 11:6, Gal. 2:16, Gal. 2:21, Gal.3:5-6, Gal. 3:8, Gal. 3:14, Gal. 3:22, Gal. 3:24, Eph. 1:13, Eph. 2:8, Phil. 3:9, 1 Tim. 1:16

You do not even understand those scriptures.
Scriptures that say to believe, they do not nullify scriptures that say obey. Why do you not think we should be told we have to believe? Of course, we have to believe in Jesus. You cannot obey God without believing in Jesus.


Jesus says he saves those he is PLEASED to save, see John 5:21 NIV.

Jesus saves those who are on the side of truth, see John 18:37.

Jesus saves those who do right and come to the light, see John 3:21.

Jesus saves those he accepts, see Acts 15:8 NIV.

Jesus accepts those who fear God and does what is right see Acts 10:35.

Jesus saves those who obey, see Acts 5:32.

Jesus saves those who practice what he preaches, see Luke 8:21.

Jesus saves those who get his teachings and obeys them see John 14:23.

 

[God's Truth]

You are misunderstanding and misrepresenting the view (especially 3 god talk).

No, I am not. You are denying the truth.

We actually do say the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ are titles for the person of the Holy Spirit.

They are not titles for the Holy Spirit they are the Holy Spirit.

If trinitarians believed the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Jesus, and the Holy Spirit were all the same Spirit, then you would have to admit that Jesus is the Holy Spirit.

You equivocate with terms failing to distinguish the human spirit of Christ,

You see you lied. You said the Spirit of Jesus was the Holy Spirit, now you say there was a human spirit of Christ. THE HUMAN SPIRIT IS NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT. You twisted double-tongued talker.

the eternal/uncreated spirit nature of God, the person of the Holy Spirit who shares this spirit (in distinction from Father/Son who also share the spirit), etc.

You see, trinitarians DO NOT believe the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are the same Spirit.

Go away. You are a nuisance into deep talk about God’s Truth.

You cause confusion.

Spirit is not spirit. Holy Spirit is spirit, but the terms are not interchangeable.

This is more nonsense talk.

A rejection of the trinity and incarnation leads to endless problems for you.

I have no problems; it is you who has the problems.

 

[God's Truth]

Penty is unbiblical and illogical. Your argument is vapid and fails to read “Peter, Paul, and Mary” closely. Your unbalanced is a works based caste system in the early church for some vs all, etc. The anti-intellectualism of your group also shows when you reject “The Modern English” evidence that contradicts your Penty proof texts. Context is also abused in your proof texting. Your arrogant personality is also grating.The key is proper exegesis in context, not importing Penty ideas into proof texts. The key is to translate/interpret/apply properly.

So there.

I can hardly believe that you called him arrogant. You made a hypocrite out of yourself, among other distasteful things.

 

[God's Truth]

Thanks for your agreement in support of the Trinity. i get that you may have issues with folks like godrulz and myself, but it is heartwarming to see you being able to set aside these differences when it comes to defending the sacred doctrine of the Trinity.

Much appreciated, brother!

AMR

You should rebuke him for speaking the way he does to others. You should have nothing to do with him until he repents. Instead, you look for approval from men instead of God. That is why you cannot believe the truth.

 

[God's Truth]

Thank you for letting me know.
Excellent read on the Trinity nevertheless.

Another book is the last thing you confused in false doctrines need.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Article 9 of the Belgic Confession captures the church’s views related to the Trinity:

1. There is but one divine being, God, against all notions of polytheism (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 44:6; James 2:19).
2. Within this one God, there are three modes of existence, each of said modes we refer to as “person”, of which each one, the only true God.
3. These three persons, are distinguished from each other as they assume objective relations to one another, love each other, interact with each other, and address one another.
4. While each of these three persons equally possess the singular same divine substance, we know from Scripture that in terms of personal existence the Father is the Father is the first, the Son the second, and the Holy Spirit the third. Also, we know from Scripture that the Son proceeds from the Father, and that the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son.
5. The order of their personal existence is reflected in their workings, since the Father works through the Son, and the Father and Son work through the Spirit. While no subordination exists as regards possession of the divine substance, there is a subordination as regards the manner of working among the persons of the Trinity.
6. The one divine substance is not divided between the three persons. The persons do not each possess one-third of the one divine substance. Also, there is no new divine substance behind these three persons. No analogies are possible to describe the Trinity and each of the persons’ possession of the entire one divine essence.

What follows below is an explanation of some terms associated with this topic.

Spoiler

1. Ousia (οὐσία)is the being of God in the abstract which is common to all three persons. Hypostasis (ὑπόστασις) means the personal existence mode of this being, what we call person. Greek philosophy is the origination of both terms, with ousia being Platonic, and hypostasis from the Stoic. Hypostasis originally means “self-existence” and was used by theologians to say the same as ousia. While not occurring all at once, the word ousia took on the sense of “person”. This has resulted in much confusion, for it would be read and heard that there was simultaneously one hypostasis and three hypostases in the Godhead.

2. “Nature” in the Greek is physis. The word, physis was also used to indicate God’s substance versus distinctions from the persons of the Godhead. That said, physis and ousia are not the same. As noted above, ousia is the being of God in the abstract, while physis includes all the unique attributes of the divine being of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The attributes of the divine being are inseparably joined to the divine being (φύσις).

3. Another Greek word, prosōpon (πρόσωπον) had the original meaning of mask or face. In the Latin, persona, the origin of our English word “person”, had the same meaning as the Greek prosōpon. Unfortunately, the Sabellians willingly made use of these words to garner acceptance of their heresies. As a consequence the orthodox avoided these words, the Greeks using hypostasis for “person”, even when earlier using prosōpon.

4. At first, using ambiguous terms was seen as difficult by the Western Latin church. The Latin words substantia, and subsistentia were both sometimes used for substance and and for person, sometimes using the one word for substance and the other word for person. The solution that emerged was as described below:

4.a. The word substantia was done away with as relates to God. That is, substantia is related by contrast with accidentia (accident, chance), so calling God substance would erroneously give the impression that “chance” is in God.

4.b. The word substantia was replaced by a more precise word, essentia (being, essence), which corresponds to ousia.

4.c. God’s nature, inclusive of the attributes of His being is natura from the Latin, agreeing with the Greek word physis.

4.d. In order to indicate the personal mode of existence, the word subsistentia remained in the theological lexicon. In other words, subsistentia is what we call person. The word, suppositum, is in the same sense, translating hypostasis and hypokeimenon (ὑποκείμενον).

4.e. The Greek words perichoresis or enyparxis (περιχωρήσις, ἐνυπάρξις) and the Latin words circumcessio or inexistentia mutual , (mutual in-being) were used by the early church. From their use was the implication that the persons of the Trinity are reciprocally in each other (John 14:20; 17:21; 1 Cor 2:10–11)—an internal movement (an interpenetration) within the being of God.​

5. It is their character (hypostatius sive personalis, τρόπος ὑπάρξεως) that distinguishes the persons of the Trinity. This uniqueness is made known in the names of the three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The uniqueness is demonstrated by the Father begetting the Son, the Son’s being begotten by the Father, and the Holy Spirit’s being breathed out (spirated) by the Father and the Son.

6. From the above there is the question of exactly how the persons of the Trinity are distinguished from the substance. Sabellianism must be avoided as it only claims one person, this one person having revealed himself in three forms. Likewise, tritheism is to be avoided for it claims no unity of substance for the three persons. Some hold that the persons are distinguished from the substance according to the mode—as the substance in the abstract and the substance in a certain mode with specific ways of existence. Still others hold that the persons are distinguished from each other in actuality, but not essentially or rationally.

7. There is no consensus on an agreed upon view of the idea connected with the words hypostasis, subsistentia, suppositum, persona. The frequent use of “person” is a useful aid, but often one that causes more confusion in these modern times where the word has taken on more meanings than that used by theologians. One of the earliest definitions of the word “person” comes from Boethius: Person is an independent entity, indivisible, rational, incommunicable, not sustained by another nature and not a part of something else." A proper definition of person when used of the Trinity, must
- not obscure the unity of God;
- include elements common to divine and human personality; and
- support the impersonality of the human nature.

From these constraints, we may define “person”, as relates to the Trinity, to be the divine essence in a specific mode of existence, said mode of existence being distinguished from that essence and the other persons. If we wanted to be more precise, we could state that a person is a rational, incommunicable, indivisible entity which is not sustained by another nature possessing in itself the principle of its operation.

8. We use the phrase opera ad intra (internal works) to define the activities of each person of the Trinity that are distinct from each another. These personal activities are incommunicable and not common to all the persons of the Trinity.

9. In contrast to these internal works are the “external works” (opera ad extra) that are not divided, belonging to the entire being (see Genesis 1:26; John 5:17, 19).

9.a. These external works are performed by God’s power—an attribute belonging to God’s being.

9.b. Each person of the Trinity has a unique task, such that we speak of the economy or management of God. We will also read of the aspects of the economic Trinity. Examples of this would be creation as the work of the Father, salvation the work of the Son. That said, in a certain sense the three persons work together, the Father through the Son and the Spirit, the Son through the Father and Spirit.

9.c. The economy within the Godhead can be seen in the narrower sense when considering salvation. Here the persons of the Trinity exist in judicial fellowship—nothing takes place wherein each person is not involved judicially. We have the Father as Judge who is wrathful from the violation of His holiness. Yet, His Fatherly heart wells up with the thought of salvation and the Father sends the Son as our Mediator and the Holy Spirit who applies salvation. Accomplishing the Mediator’ work, the Son does so for the sake of the Father, and through the Holy Spirit the Son’s merits are applied. The Holy Spirit’s works in the heart of the elect, but does so for the sake of the Father and the Son.​

The distinctions within the Godhead are important because they denounce the pantheistic identification of God with the world and the Deism that would keep God and the world separate.

AMR

 

[Lon]

Your little opinion is wrong.


You want to stab me in the back, and demand I be quiet about it too. You want to deny you did it, and you want me to pretend it did not even happen.

Saying you can't debate isn't stabbing you in the back. Sorry to break the news. You can say I don't have great assement skills or whatever. That's no stab in the back. Quit being a whiny martyr. You aren't good at debate /story.

I cannot even force myself to read all this nonsense you wrote.

I know, that is why you will never be good at debate or championing God's truth.
You are a lazy Jane. God doesn't bless the slovenly slackard. Proverbs 6:6-11
Sad. True.

AMR did NOT even answer my questions

I am aware that you think that. I believe, if anyone could be said to have answered your question, it would be one as thoughtful and as thorough as AMR. How would you know though? I assert you don't because you complain that you can't be bothered to read his posts. That's all on you. I read them and you are looking for answers to pop into your head from under your pillow at night. I do not believe you were worthy of his valuable time and efforts. Thankfully, others more worthy, have benefitted from His carrying this entire debate. You may count yourself priveledged to have been well cared for by him.

nor did he respond as asked;

:doh: You'll never get that he did when you are a lazy Jane. God doesn't bless the slovenly slackard. Proverbs 6:6-11

not only that, I have shown EXACTLY WHEN AND HOW he twists the scriptures.

:nono:

MR was a major failure at defending his false beliefs, just as all in falseness.

:chuckle:

 

[God's Truth]

Saying you can't debate isn't stabbing you in the back. Sorry to break the news. You can say I don't have great assement skills or whatever. That's no stab in the back. Quit being a whiny martyr. You aren't good at debate /story.


I know, that is why you will never be good at debate or championing God's truth.
You are a lazy Jane. God doesn't bless the slovenly slackard. Proverbs 6:6-11
Sad. True.


I am aware that you think that. I believe, if anyone could be said to have answered your question, it would be one as thoughtful and as thorough as AMR. How would you know though? I assert you don't because you complain that you can't be bothered to read his posts. That's all on you. I read them and you are looking for answers to pop into your head from under your pillow at night. I do not believe you were worthy of his valuable time and efforts. Thankfully, others more worthy, have benefitted from His carrying this entire debate. You may count yourself priveledged to have been well cared for by him.



:doh: You'll never get that he did when you are a lazy Jane. God doesn't bless the slovenly slackard. Proverbs 6:6-11

:nono:


:chuckle:

You have no understanding of God's Truth and righteousness. You make up things and take to slandering.

 

[God's Truth]

Article 9 of the Belgic Confession captures the church’s views related to the Trinity:

1. There is but one divine being, God, against all notions of polytheism (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 44:6; James 2:19).

There are three Divine beings. God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

These three are One and the same.

2. Within this one God, there are three modes of existence, each of said modes we refer to as “person”, of which each one, the only true God.

You have now made four Gods, for there is not a GOD with three inside Him.

There is One God, and He is the Father. See 1 Corinthians 8:6.

From God the Father proceeds forth are the Holy Spirit, and the Son. See John 15:26, and John 16:28. The two that proceed from the Father are the Father in different revelations.

Jesus is God the Father in the flesh, and now in a Spiritual BODY, the same body he had before coming to earth. The Holy Spirit is a moving Spirit without a body that is also God the Father.

3. These three persons, are distinguished from each other as they assume objective relations to one another, love each other, interact with each other, and address one another.



4. While each of these three persons equally possess the singular same divine substance,

The Divine “substance” is Spirit.

God the Father is Spirit and lives in unapproachable light.
Jesus is Spirit and is God the Father with a body.
The Holy Spirit is Spirit and is God that moves about without a body.

we know from Scripture that in terms of personal existence the Father is the Father is the first, the Son the second, and the Holy Spirit the third. Also, we know from Scripture that the Son proceeds from the Father, and that the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son.




5. The order of their personal existence is reflected in their workings, since the Father works through the Son,

The Son is the Father in the FLESH.

and the Father and Son work through the Spirit.

The Father and the Son ARE SPIRIT.

The Father is Spirit and lives in unapproachable light. The Son is the same Spirit that lives in a physical body. The Holy Spirit is the same Spirit as the Father but moves about without a body.

While no subordination exists as regards possession of the divine substance, there is a subordination as regards the manner of working among the persons of the Trinity.
6. The one divine substance is not divided between the three persons. The persons do not each possess one-third of the one divine substance. Also, there is no new divine substance behind these three persons. No analogies are possible to describe the Trinity and each of the persons’ possession of the entire one divine essence.

There you have it, as I have been saying. The trinity doctrine SAYS that what they confess and explain is NOT explainable, nor is it defendable from the errors it holds.

 

[Nang]

Well, I declare the Belgic Confession to be true, and God's Truth, to be false false.