One-on-One: AMR and God's Truth — The Holy Trinity

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 28, 2013

Thank you, Knight for arranging this One-On-One between TOL member God’s Truth and myself! This One-on-One will hopefully provide some edification and, yes, even some entertainment, for interested readers that are taking a break from the start of the holiday season frenzy.

For some time GT has been making claims and demands that have at their root a view that GT is right and most others are wrong, especially when GT is posting heresies. GT even demands an account be given by others.

GT’s boldness has increased of late to the point that ignoring GT’s denial of the Trinity is not possible:

I was minding my own business (ahem) in a recent Trinity thread, pointing out the many heresies denounced by the Chalcedonian Definition, to wit:

Our Lord was fully God and fully man in an indissoluble union whereby the second person of the Trinity assumed a human nature that cannot be separated, divided, mixed, or confused. One can best understand this hypostatic union (together united in one subsistence and in one single person) by examining what it is not, thus from the process of elimination determine what it must be.

The hypostatic union is not:

1. a denial that Christ was truly God (Ebionites, Elkasites, Arians);
2. a dissimilar or different substance (anomoios) with the Father (semi-Arianism);
3. a denial that Christ had a genuine human soul (Apollinarians);
4. a denial of a distinct person in the Trinity (Dynamic Monarchianism);
5. God acting merely in the forms of the Son and Spirit (Modalistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/United Pentecostal Church);
6. a mixture or change when the two natures were united (Eutychianism/Monophysitism);
7. two distinct persons (Nestorianism);
8. a denial of the true humanity of Christ (docetism);
9. a view that God the Son laid aside all or some of His divine attributes (kenoticism);
10. a view that there was a communication of the attributes between the divine and human natures (Lutheranism, with respect to the Lord's Supper); and
11. a view that Jesus existed independently as a human before God entered His body (Adoptionism).

The Chalcedonian Definition is one of the few statements that all of orthodox Christendom recognizes as the most faithful summary of the teachings of the Scriptures on the matter of the Incarnate Christ. The Chalcedonian Definition was the answer to the many heterodoxies identified above during the third century.

In that same thread GT opined (all emphases added in my quoting of GT in this One-on-One will be my own unless otherwise noted):

God's Truth said:
God made the plan for salvation through Jesus before He created anything. God created the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus before the creation of anything. Jesus is the First and the Last. The Spiritual body of Jesus is the kind of body we will receive at the resurrection. God created everything through Jesus, for him, by him, and through him. Jesus was the visible of the invisible God before the creation of the world, and Jesus was the visible of the invisible God in human form on earth.

God's Truth said:
There is only One God---and He is the Father. God came as a Son of God, a Son of Man.

God is Spirit.
Jesus is Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is Spirit.

There is only One Spirit.

There are three, and the three are One and the same.

See Ephesians 4:4, and Ephesians 2:18.

The trinity doctrine is false because it says Jesus is God, but not the Father who is God, and the Holy Spirit who is God.

The trinity doctrine says there is One God the Father, and another God Jesus, and yet another God called the Holy Spirit. That makes three different Gods that makes a three –headed god.

I called attention to GT’s errors, especially related to the “three-headed god” bit above, by noting

1. There is in the divine Being but one indivisible essence (ousia, essential), see Deuteronomy 6:4, 1 Corinthians 8:4, Galatians 3:20, 1 Timothy 2:5.
2. In this one divine Being there are three personal distinctions (what the church calls persons), or individual subsistences, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, see Genesis 1:1, 26, 3:22, 11:7, Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1, Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14.
3. The whole undivided essence of God belongs equally to each of the three persons, see John 6:27, Romans 1:7, 1 Peter 1:2, John 1:1, 14, Romans 9:5, Colossians 2:9, Hebrews 1:8, 1 John 5:20, Acts 5:3-4, 1 Corinthians 3:16.
4. The subsistence and operation of the three persons in the divine Being is marked by a certain definite order, see Luke 22:42, John 5:36, John 20:21, 1 John 4:14, John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, John 16:13-14.
5. There are certain personal attributes by which the three persons are distinguished, see 1 Corinthians 8:6, Revelation 4:11, Revelation 1:1, John 3:16-17, 1 Corinthians 8:6, John 1:3, Colossians 1:16-17, John 1:1, 16:12-15, Matthew 11:27, Revelation 1:1, 2 Corinthians 5:19, Matthew 1:21, John 4:42, Genesis 1:2, Job 26:13, Psalm 104:30, John 16:12-15, Ephesians 3:5, 2 Peter 1:21, John 3:6, Titus 3:5, 1 Peter 1:2, Isaiah 61:1, Acts 10:38.
6. The church confesses the Trinity to be a mystery beyond the comprehension of man (Romans 11:33-34).

In the remainder of the thread I challenged GT to this One-on-One, which was accepted. GT then wished to impose conditions, generally that I do not treat GT badly, and that I should really, really, really, post first in the thread despite my offering GT the first post advantage.

With that background, the purpose of this One-on-One is to discuss the Trinity. In particular, I will be affirming the orthodox Christian view and challenging GT to support what can only be described as an amalgamation of Mormonism, Gnosticism, and Monarchianism underlying GT’s views of the Trinity (see GT’s own words above and elsewhere).

A representative overview of the Trinity can be seen from the pix below:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/blog.php?b=1886

I have no intention of treating GT gently on this topic. It is of utmost importance to one’s eternal destiny. In my view anyone who declares themselves a teacher of others—after having been properly instructed on important matters of the faith—who then continues to teach a view contrary to Scripture is a false teacher of the worst kind. Furthermore, anyone who denies the Trinitarian nature of the Godhead is outside the bounds of orthodoxy with no rightful claim to calling themselves “Christian”. GT has amassed over eleven thousand posts since joining TOL a short fifteen months or so ago. A significant portion of those posts resemble the following:

God's Truth said:
I am no more a modalist than I am a trinitarian. The trinity doctrine is not in the scriptures. Explain how Jesus is God but not the Father who is God.

You reject God’s Truth. THE SCRIPTURES says the LORD IS THE SPIRIT.

Why do you go against the written Word of God?

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

There is ONLY ONE GOD. IF JESUS IS GOD, AND HE IS, then he is ALSO the FATHER, and the HOLY SPIRIT WHO IS ALSO GOD.

Stop bringing in the JW’s. You are so desperate. The JW’s do not believe Jesus is God.

You are lying. You are lying just to defend and protect the lie you believe in.

You are acting ignorant.

Tell me the ways in which Jesus is different from the Father and the Holy Spirit! YOU say they are NOT the same and that they are different. YOU BELIEVE AND TEACH FALSENESS.

Clearly, GT denies the Trinity and spends much time attempting to spread this damnable heresy to others. Yet when asked to fully state a position, GT waffles. Hopefully in this One-on-One, GT will finally take the time to give a more complete picture of these peculiar views.

Given the complexity of the topic, I will begin simply.

GT, you have stated, God created the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus before the creation of anything andthat the Spiritual body of Jesus is the kind of body we will receive at the resurrection .

Does this statement mean that you, GT, believe the glorified body now possessed by Jesus Christ in heaven pre-existed the Incarnation?

If this is not what you mean, then please explain the statement.

GT, a few months ago you wrote to me:

God's Truth said:
You do not debate me because you know you will lose.

Well, here at last is your chance to put some teeth into that bravado. :AMR:

I will await your response that will perhaps include some substantive content outlining your full position on the nature of the Triune Godhead.

AMR
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

God's Truth · Nov 28, 2013

First, I would like to clear up some untruths that you stated about me.

I do not “waffle” from stating my position, as you stated. You should be more careful in what you claim others are doing. This leads me to ask you, please keep out your personal assessment of me during this one on one. I am not here to read what you think I am doing or what I am thinking. I also do not want to spend time reading what you think of me personally. I am not here to be judged by you. Call my beliefs false to your heart’s desire, but refrain from calling me names such ‘fool’, or anything else.

Another important point, please leave out all the other beliefs and doctrines; I am not here to read through a long post by you speaking about the Ebionites, Elkasites, Arians, semi-Arians, Apollinarians, dynamic Manarchianists, Modalists, Sabellians, Eutychianism, Monophysistism, Eutiychianists, Monophysitism, Nestroianists, docetism, kenoticism, Lutheranism, and Adoptionism.

I do want to say that I am glad that you asked me to this one-on-one.

God's Truth · Nov 28, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Given the complexity of the topic, I will begin simply.

GT, you have stated, God created the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus before the creation of anything andthat the Spiritual body of Jesus is the kind of body we will receive at the resurrection .

Does this statement mean that you, GT, believe the glorified body now possessed by Jesus Christ in heaven pre-existed the Incarnation?

The scriptures say Jesus was the firstborn over all creation; he created all things. The spiritual body is glorious, and Jesus was glorified with the same glorious body he had with God before coming to earth. It is the same kind of body our immortal physical bodies will be changed into, at the resurrection.

Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Colossians 1:16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

1 Corinthians 15:44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

1 Corinthians 15:43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power;

1 Corinthians 15:42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable;

1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

Philippians 3:21 who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body

John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 29, 2013

I asked a pointed question to GT:

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT, you have stated, God created the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus before the creation of anything and that the Spiritual body of Jesus is the kind of body we will receive at the resurrection .

Does this statement mean that you, GT, believe the glorified body now possessed by Jesus Christ in heaven pre-existed the Incarnation?

If this is not what you mean, then please explain the statement.

In response, GT offers:

God's Truth said:
The scriptures say Jesus was the firstborn over all creation; he created all things. The spiritual body is glorious, and Jesus was glorified with the same glorious body he had with God before coming to earth. It is the same kind of body our immortal physical bodies will be changed into, at the resurrection.

GT, again I ask, are you stating that the glorified body Jesus Christ now possesses pre-existed the Incarnation? It appears from your answer that I have underlined that you would answer my question with a “yes”. Am I correct?

[FONT=&quot]GT, you then posted several verses of Scripture with some highlighted portions. Is this what I am to expect for your exegesis of Scripture? Highlighting and boldfacing of Scripture is not exegesis. Of course I believe all Scripture to be truth, so merely quoting it to me serves no purpose in defense of your position until and unless you are able to properly interpret that which you are quoting.

Finally, I can assure you that I will read all of the contents of your post rather than just wave them off unread only to press onward with pat answers to complex questions. I want to understand your position once you make it more plain for examination. You have my full attention in this One-on-One, which is the advantage of this venue.

AMR
[/FONT]<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

God's Truth · Nov 29, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I asked a pointed question to GT:

In response, GT offers:

GT, again I ask, are you stating that the glorified body Jesus Christ now possesses pre-existed the Incarnation? It appears from your answer that I have underlined that you would answer my question with a “yes”. Am I correct?

[FONT=&quot]GT, you then posted several verses of Scripture with some highlighted portions. Is this what I am to expect for your exegesis of Scripture? Highlighting and boldfacing of Scripture is not exegesis. Of course I believe all Scripture to be truth, so merely quoting it to me serves no purpose in defense of your position until and unless you are able to properly interpret that which you are quoting.

Finally, I can assure you that I will read all of the contents of your post rather than just wave them off and press onward with pat answers to complex questions. I am seriously worried that you do not take this topic very seriously if you can exhibit such flippancy to what I have written.

AMR
[/FONT]

I have stated my beliefs, and have given the scriptures to prove my beliefs.
You just cannot go against the truth so you merely pretend it is not there.

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 29, 2013

GT,

Can you please provide a direct answer to my latest question so I am not to misunderstand what you have written?

[FONT=&quot]

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT, again I ask, are you stating that the glorified body Jesus Christ now possesses pre-existed the Incarnation? It appears from your answer that I have underlined that you would answer my question with a “yes”. Am I correct?

[/FONT]<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

AMR

God's Truth · Nov 29, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT,

Can you please provide a direct answer to my latest question so I am not to misunderstand what you have written?

Jesus existed in the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus before the creation of anything.

Nathon Detroit · Nov 29, 2013

I normally don't interrupt One on One threads but just an FYI I have setup a discussion thread here so the rest of TOL can talk about this interesting debate.

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 30, 2013

Thank you Knight for setting up the parallel discussion forum!

And, GT, thank you for confirming I was properly interpreting your previous response:

God's Truth said:
Jesus existed in the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus before the creation of anything.

And that spiritual body, according GT, is

God's Truth said:
…the kind of body we will receive at the resurrection.

Sadly, your view, GT, is not a new one. Please click the spoiler button below and read further:

Spoiler

In an effort to satisfy the accusations of Jews who denounced the notion of three Gods (Father, Son and Holy Ghost) as polytheistic, and at the same time incorporate ancient but appealing Greek philosophical concepts of an all-powerful moving force in the universe, the Christian church began to redefine the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One classic work describes the intersection of Christian theology and Greek philosophy: “It is impossible for any one, whether he be a student of history or no, to fail to notice a difference of both form and content between the sermons on the Mount and the Nicene Creed. … The one belongs to a world of Syrian peasants, the other to a world of Greek philosophers. … The religion which our Lord preached ... took the Jewish conception of a Father in heaven, and gave it a new meaning.” In short, “Greek Christianity of the fourth century was rooted in Hellenism. The Greek minds which had been ripening for Christianity had absorbed new ideas and new motives.”

What is the result? Such Platonic concepts as the immutability, impassibility and timelessness of God made their way into Christian theology. As one group of Evangelical scholars has stated: “Many Christians experience an inconsistency between their beliefs about the nature of God and their religious practice. For example, people who believe that God cannot change his mind sometimes pray in ways that would require God to do exactly that. And Christians who make use of the free will defense for the problem of evil sometimes ask God to get them a job or a spouse, or keep them from being harmed, implying that God should override the free will of others in order to achieve these ends. ...

“These inharmonious elements are the result of the coupling of biblical ideas about God with notions of the divine nature drawn from Greek thought. The inevitable encounter between biblical and classical thought in the early church generated many significant insights and helped Christianity evangelize pagan thought and culture. Along with the good, however, came a certain theological virus that infected the Christian doctrine of God, making it ill and creating the sorts of problems mentioned above. The virus so permeates Christian theology that some have come to take the illness for granted, attributing it to divine mystery, while others remain unaware of the infection altogether.”

I suspect there are not a few, especially the open theist and GT, when reading the spoiler above that would feel themselves resonating with the words contained therein. And no wonder, given that the second quotation being used above is from Clark Pinnock, Richard Rice, John Sanders, William Hasker and David Basinger, from the book, The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God (Downer Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1994), 9–10.

Let’s see what else the writer of the above has to say. The author of the content above, goes on to say:

Latter-day Saints believe that the simplest reading of the New Testament text produces the simplest conclusion — that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are separate and distinct personages, that They are one in purpose. We feel that the sheer preponderance of references in the Bible would lead an uninformed reader to the understanding that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are separate beings. That is, one must look to the third- and fourth-century Christian church, not to the New Testament itself, to make a strong case for the Trinity.

… God is an exalted man , that He is a separate and distinct personage from the Son and the Holy Ghost.

Yes, you read the above correctly. The view GT clings to, that Jesus pre-existed the Incarnation in a spiritual body, a glorified body that we are all promised one day, that the early history of the church capitulated to Hellenistic thought, is part and parcel Mormonism. I mean, if the former Dean of BYU, the author of the above content, says so, it must be true, no? :AMR:

At this point, GT will complain loudly that no labels can be attached to GT’s views. In fact, GT wants to avoid any such discussion, but this is an impossibility given the nature of the topic before us. The chronological snobbery of modern era church folk would have us believe that they have a “new” truth, or a “refined” vie of Scripture that has escaped the scrutiny of the Lord’s church over the centuries. Yet, as my opening post demonstrated, these “new” or “refined” views are nothing more than heresies denounced by the church councils of yesteryear. Nevertheless, every few years or so, another so-called “new” view or “new” perspective pops up and the church is once again required to speak, denouncing heresy and protecting the faith that we hold dear. Such is the wonderful providence of God—heresy arises—the church denounces it—the faithful persevere to the end.

In my next post I will turn my attention to what the Scriptures have to say about the Triune Godhead.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 30, 2013

I am making my next post in haste to avoid GT’s inevitable lachrymose complaints about how GT is being treated.

Concerning our One-on-One, GT writes:

God's Truth said:
I am so excited. Thank you for getting this whole thing going.

I can only hope GT’s excitement includes an enthusiasm for explaining in detail GT’s position for closer examination. To date, all we have to examine are some very sparse assertions.

The Trinity is often explained by the use of a learning aid device, as shown in the picture illustrating how to think about the Triune Godhead at the following link:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/blog.php?b=1889
[Note: Apparently One-on-One forums do not allow attachments to be uploaded into posts.]

Of the Triune Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the figure basically illustrates:
1. the Father is God,
2. the Son is God,
3. the Holy Spirit is God,
4. the Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit,
5. the Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit,
6. the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son, and
7. they are not three gods, but one God.

Church creeds and confessions contain similar expresssions of the Triune Godhead. One of the best is the Athanasian Creed. You can read it here.

Some may ask, “Why is the doctrine of the Trinity even necessary?”

Point 1:
In Scripture we find monotheism, e.g., the Shema from Deuteronomy 6:4, “The Lord our God, the Lord is one!” See also Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 45:5; Ephesians 4:5-6; 1 Timothy 2:5. That the Scriptures insist God is one cannot be more plainly stated.

Point 2:
In Scripture we find more than one being called God. In fact, our Lord required baptism to be performed in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). The Holy Spirit was called God, for the Apostle Peter knew that lying to the Holy Spirit was in fact lying to God (Acts 5:3-4). Our Lord was called God ((John 20:28-31; Romans 9:5; Philippians 2:11). In 2 Corinthians 13:14, we find the equal pronouncement of the three names of the one God in the benediction “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.”

Answer:
The answer to the question “Why is the doctrine of the Trinity even necessary?” is that Scripture demands it be so for there is an obvious more than just oneness to the one God—there is a plurality in the oneness of God. Furthermore, this plurality in the oneness of God is not merely some plurality of attributes or functions, but in how this plurality relates to one another. From Scripture we see communion, fellowship, love, and more existing between this plurality. The doctrine of the Trinity is an indiscoverable truth by natural reason. Attempts to draw triad-like analogies from nature and metaphysics to describe the Trinity will always fail. The doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed doctrine and the God who is to be worshipped must be worshipped along Trinitarian parameters. This revealed truth shows its self-consistency when we observe that once a believer embraces this truth and its consistency with other known truth, the negative service of reason to faith makes the Trinity the only adequate conception of God. Is there no wonder, then, that Christian theism is the most stable theism?

The relationship of the three to the one and the three to each other are not the topics of philosophical discussion. Rather they are the topics of the Scriptures. If Jesus was less than fully God then He must not be worshipped, if Jesus is a different God then we have two Gods and then Muslims and Jews are right to accuse the Christian of being polytheists.

The doctrine of the Trinity is not just a New Testament concept. In fact, the New Testament’s teachings are not of a trinity in the making, but one that is presupposed, accepted, and only perfect, extend and enlarge that which we find in the Old Testament. You will not find the New Testament writers debating or proving the doctrine as you would in the Apostle’s sinfulness of man arguments presented in Romans 1-4. The fact that the New Testament writers are all converted Jews (hardcore monotheists) makes this all the more remarkable!

The Old Testament teaches us of the Triune Godhead. The Elohim (“Lord”) of the Old Testament is a Hebrew plural noun. The New Testament shines the light on the Old Testament wherein from John 1 we find that the us in Genesis 1 is the Father and the Son. In Genesis 16:10 the angel of the Lord in Genesis 16:10 is God. We find other theophanies in the Old Testament, e.g., Genesis 22:17, 48:16. I am personally convinced that we find the plurality of the one God described in Psalm 33:6 (emphasis mine):

By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,
And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth.

Similarly, see Isaiah 61:1; 63:9-12; Haggai 2:5, 6 and Proverbs 8 where the personification of wisdom corresponds well with our Lord 1 Corinthians 1:24. The divinity of the promised Messiah is never in question in the Old Testament, for example, Genesis 19:24; Psalm 45:6-7; 110:1; Daniel 7:13-14; Isaiah 48:6-7; Hosea 1:6-7; Zechariah; 3:2; Malachi 3:1-2.

In the New Testament, the salvific experience reveals the Trinity. From Ephesians 1 we find the agencies of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit at work in predestination (Ephesians 1:3), redemption (Ephesians 1:7), and sealing (Ephesians 1:13), respectively. More could be cited, but the Trinity as a doctrine arises never more needed than as a consequence of the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Recall my earlier argument that we cannot have multiple Gods, so the deity of our Lord means there is a plurality of the oneness of God that must be considered.

For example, consider the titles of our Lord that ascribe deity to Him.
1. Our Lord is Theos (John 1:1; John 1:18; John 20:28; Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1).
2. Our Lord is Kuios (Acts 9:42; Matthew 22:41-44; Mark 1:2; Romans 10:9; 1 Corinthians 12:3; 16:22; James 1:2; 2:1; Philippians 2:10.
3. Our Lord’s preferred self-designation was Son of Man. This was not the title of His humanity. Here Jesus reminds us who He really is, the Son of Man in Daniel 7. Jesus reminds us I am that Son of Man.

The plain facts of history are that Jesus saw himself as divine and the first Christians and early church believed He was divine. The calling of the divinity of Jesus into question was but one of the so-called “new” or “refined” heresies I spoke about in a previous post.

Note that, in support of the argument of the divinity of our Lord, I did not bother to call attention to the wonderful I AM verses, e.g., John 8:58, from Scripture, nor the verses wherein our Lord states his co-eternality in the divine perfection, e.g., John 17. Nor did I call attention to how our Lord used the Son of God in a Semitic manner such that it was clear to the Jews around him that He was not merely claiming some inferior position, but was in fact equal to God (John 5:18), even just “God” (John 10:33). Rather than play into the hands of those that would cavil about the meaning of these verses endlessly, I choose to rely upon plenty of other evidences from Scripture to make my point and disarm those that would choose to “ready, fire, aim” rather than devote themselves studiously to my arguments.

From Scripture we should now begin to see that our God is no mere abstract monad and cannot be anything but Triune. For an interesting and compelling argument on the necessity that God be Triune, see St. Victor’s De Trinitate. B. B. Warfield draws upon Victor when arguing the perfect love of God would require a Trinity, to wit: “The best love cannot, however, confine itself to these two persons; it must become condilectio by the desire that a third should be equally loved as they love one another.” Portions of De Trinitate are available here.

[FONT=&quot]GT, as you can see, I am meeting you fairly in this discussion. I am not unwilling to carry the freight of this discussion in hopes that you may learn from it. Yet, I look forward to your responses in the hopes that you will now take up your burden to substantively present your arguments for your denial of these wonderful Trinitarian truths.

AMR
[/FONT]<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

God's Truth · Nov 30, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
And that spiritual body, according GT, is
Sadly, your view, GT, is not a new one. Please click the spoiler button below and read further:

I do not care to read about what other people believe. This thread is about you and me.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I suspect there are not a few, especially the open theist and GT, when reading the spoiler above that would feel themselves resonating with the words contained therein. And no wonder, given that the second quotation being used above is from Clark Pinnock, Richard Rice, John Sanders, William Hasker and David Basinger, from the book, The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God (Downer Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1994), 9–10.

I have asked you from the beginning not to cloud this one on one with the doctrines and beliefs of others.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Let’s see what else the writer of the above has to say. The author of the content above, goes on to say:
Latter-day Saints believe that the simplest reading of the New Testament text produces the simplest conclusion — that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are separate and distinct personages, that They are one in purpose. We feel that the sheer preponderance of references in the Bible would lead an uninformed reader to the understanding that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are separate beings. That is, one must look to the third- and fourth-century Christian church, not to the New Testament itself, to make a strong case for the Trinity.

… God is an exalted man , that He is a separate and distinct personage from the Son and the Holy Ghost.
Yes, you read the above correctly. The view GT clings to, that Jesus pre-existed the Incarnation in a spiritual body, a glorified body that we are all promised one day, that the early history of the church capitulated to Hellenistic thought, is part and parcel Mormonism. I mean, if the former Dean of BYU, the author of the above content, says so, it must be true, no?

If you do not debate in an honest way, you will forfeit by default. Mormons do not believe that Jesus is God. I know that Jesus is God. I ask you again to stop derailing this debate and carrying on with long posts about things that are not related to our discussion.

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 30, 2013

Your response is no response, GT. I have taken pains to present my position in detail. Where is the same from you?

I await something other than your complaints to examine.

You claim you can teach me something. Please proceed. Perhaps you can start by stating in detail your view of the nature of the Godhead. Then the discussion will proceed accordingly. Otherwise it will continue to be one-sided wherein I present substantive content in support of my position while you just complain about having to read more than the usual snippet drivel you post all over this site.

A One-on-One is not just drive-by posting. You need to dig in, stand still, genuinely interact with your opponent's content, and contribute at length. When is that going to happen, if ever?

AMR

God's Truth · Nov 30, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
The Trinity is often explained by the use of a learning aid device, as shown in the picture illustrating how to think about the Triune Godhead at the following link:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/blog.php?b=1889
[Note: Apparently One-on-One forums do not allow attachments to be uploaded into posts.]

That trinity doctrine “picture” proves that the trinity doctrine makes a three-headed god, or even four gods. That trinity diagram is not explainable, and therefore cannot be defended against the truth that I said about it.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Of the Triune Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the figure basically illustrates:
1. the Father is God,
2. the Son is God,
3. the Holy Spirit is God,
4. the Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit,
5. the Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit,
6. the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son, and
7. they are not three gods, but one God.

If Jesus is God, and he is, then he must also be the Father who is God, also the Holy Spirit.

You have not explained how Jesus is God but not the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Church creeds and confessions contain similar expresssions of the Triune Godhead. One of the best is the Athanasian Creed. You can read it here.

Some may ask, “Why is the doctrine of the Trinity even necessary?”

Point 1:
In Scripture we find monotheism, e.g., the Shema from Deuteronomy 6:4, “The Lord our God, the Lord is one!” See also Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 45:5; Ephesians 4:5-6; 1 Timothy 2:5. That the Scriptures insist God is one cannot be more plainly stated.

Point 2:
In Scripture we find more than one being called God. In fact, our Lord required baptism to be performed in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). The Holy Spirit was called God, for the Apostle Peter knew that lying to the Holy Spirit was in fact lying to God (Acts 5:3-4). Our Lord was called God ((John 20:28-31; Romans 9:5; Philippians 2:11). In 2 Corinthians 13:14, we find the equal pronouncement of the three names of the one God in the benediction “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.”

Answer:
The answer to the question “Why is the doctrine of the Trinity even necessary?” is that Scripture demands it be so for there is an obvious more than just oneness to the one God—there is a plurality in the oneness of God. Furthermore, this plurality in the oneness of God is not merely some plurality of attributes or functions, but in how this plurality relates to one another. From Scripture we see communion, fellowship, love, and more existing between this plurality. The doctrine of the Trinity is an indiscoverable truth by natural reason. Attempts to draw triad-like analogies from nature and metaphysics to describe the Trinity will always fail. The doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed doctrine and the God who is to be worshipped must be worshipped along Trinitarian parameters. This revealed truth shows its self-consistency when we observe that once a believer embraces this truth and its consistency with other know truth, the negative service of reason to faith makes the Trinity the only adequate conception of God. Is there no wonder, then, that Christian theism is the most stable theism?

The relationship of the three to the one and the three to each other are not the topics of philosophical discussion. Rather they are the topics of the Scriptures. If Jesus was less than fully God then He must not be worshipped, if Jesus is a different God then we have two Gods and then Muslims and Jews are right to accuse the Christian of being polytheists.

The doctrine of the Trinity is not just a New Testament concept. In fact, the New Testament’s teachings are not of a trinity in the making, but one that is presupposed, accepted, and only perfect, extend and enlarge that which we find in the Old Testament. You will not find the New Testament writers debating or proving the doctrine as you would in the Apostle’s sinfulness of man arguments presented in Romans 1-4. The fact that the New Testament writers are all converted Jews (hardcore monotheists) makes this all the more remarkable!

The Old Testament teaches us of the Triune Godhead. The Elohim (“Lord”) of the Old Testament is a Hebrew plural noun. The New Testament shines the light on the Old Testament wherein from John 1 we find that the us in Genesis 1 is the Father and the Son. In Genesis 16:10 the angel of the Lord in Genesis 16:10 is God. We find other theophanies in the Old Testament, e.g., Genesis 22:17, 48:16. I am personally convinced that we find the plurality of the one God described in Psalm 33:6 (emphasis mine):
By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,
And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth.
Similarly, see Isaiah 61:1; 63:9-12; Haggai 2:5, 6 and Proverbs 8 where the personification of wisdom corresponds well with our Lord 1 Corinthians 1:24. The divinity of the promised Messiah is never in question in the Old Testament, for example, Genesis 19:24; Psalm 45:6-7; 110:1; Daniel 7:13-14; Isaiah 48:6-7; Hosea 1:6-7; Zechariah; 3:2; Malachi 3:1-2.

In the New Testament, the salvific experience reveals the Trinity. From Ephesians 1 we find the agencies of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit at work in predestination (Ephesians 1:3), redemption (Ephesians 1:7), and sealing (Ephesians 1:13), respectively. More could be cited, but the Trinity as a doctrine arises never more needed than as a consequence of the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Recall my earlier argument that we cannot have multiple Gods, so the deity of our Lord means there is a plurality of the oneness of God that must be considered.

For example, consider the titles of our Lord that ascribe deity to Him.
1. Our Lord is Theos (John 1:1; John 1:18; John 20:28; Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1).
2. Our Lord is Kuios (Acts 9:42; Matthew 22:41-44; Mark 1:2; Romans 10:9; 1 Corinthians 12:3; 16:22; James 1:2; 2:1; Philippians 2:10.
3. Our Lord’s preferred self-designation was Son of Man. This was not the title of His humanity. Here Jesus reminds us who He really is, the Son of Man in Daniel 7. Jesus reminds us I am that Son of Man.

The plain facts of history are that Jesus saw himself as divine and the first Christians and early church believed He was divine. The calling of the divinity of Jesus into question was but one of the so-called “new” or “refined” heresies I spoke about in a previous post.

Note that, in support of the argument of the divinity of our Lord, I did not bother to call attention to the wonderful I AM verses, e.g., John 8:58, from Scripture, nor the verses wherein our Lord states his co-eternality in the divine perfection, e.g., John 17. Nor did I call attention to how our Lord used the Son of God in a Semitic manner such that it was clear to the Jews around him that He was not merely claiming some inferior position, but was in fact equal to God (John 5:18), even just “God” (John 10:33). Rather than play into the hands of those that would cavil about the meaning of these verses endlessly, I choose to rely upon plenty of other evidences from Scripture to make my point and disarm those that would choose to “ready, fire, aim” rather than devote themselves studiously to my arguments.

From Scripture we should now begin to see that our God is no mere abstract monad and cannot be anything but Triune. For an interesting and compelling argument on the necessity that God be Triune, see St. Victor’s De Trinitate. B. B. Warfield draws upon Victor when arguing the perfect love of God would require a Trinity, to wit: “The best love cannot, however, confine itself to these two persons; it must become condilectio by the desire that a third should be equally loved as they love one another.” Portions of De Trinitate are available here.

GT, as you can see, I am meeting you fairly in this discussion. I am unafraid to carry the freight of this discussion in hopes that you may learn from it. Yet, I look forward to your responses in the hopes that you will now take up your burden to substantively present your arguments for your denial of these wonderful Trinitarian truths.

Please keep your posts shorter. I have not read anything that you posted right here. Having me read this is not debating and discussing. You also did not reply to my post explaining my beliefs and the scriptures I gave.

God's Truth · Nov 30, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Your response is no response, GT. I have taken pains to present my position in detail. Where is the same from you?

I await something other than your thin skinned whining to examine.

You claim you can teach me something. Please proceed. Perhaps you can start by stating in detail your view of the nature of the Godhead. Then the discussion will proceed accordingly. Otherwise it will continue to be one-sided wherein I present substantive content in support of my position while you just complain about having to read more than the usual snippet drivel you post all over this site.

A One-on-One is not just drive-by posting. You need to dig in, stand still, genuinely interact with your opponent's content, and contribute at length. When is that going to happen, if ever?

I am asking you to debate what I have said so far.

You need to start replying to what I posted:

The scriptures say Jesus was the firstborn over all creation; he created all things. The spiritual body is glorious, and Jesus was glorified with the same glorious body he had with God before coming to earth. It is the same kind of body our immortal physical bodies will be changed into, at the resurrection.

Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Colossians 1:16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

1 Corinthians 15:44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

1 Corinthians 15:43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power;

1 Corinthians 15:42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable;

1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

Philippians 3:21 who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body

John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

Try to prove the scriptures do not say what I believe they say. Start answering the questions that I do ask you.

Here are the questions again:

If Jesus is God, and he is, then he must also be the Father who is God, also the Holy Spirit.

You have not explained how Jesus is God but not the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 30, 2013

God's Truth said:
If Jesus is God, and he is, then he must also be the Father who is God, also the Holy Spirit.

You have not explained how Jesus is God but not the Father and the Holy Spirit.

I will be happy to do so. Stay tuned.

God's Truth said:
Please keep your posts shorter. I have not read anything that you posted right here. Having me read this is not debating and discussing. You also did not reply to my post explaining my beliefs and the scriptures I gave.

Given your request for explanation and your unwillingness to read my responses one does wonder how you intend to be open to correction. :idunno:

This topic is not one that lends itself to snippets and sound bytes. If you do not want to read what I have to say on the topic that is to your own destruction. Nevertheless I will press onward in hopes that you will reconsider your intellectual laziness about such an important topic. I asked you sincerely to teach me what you believe to be the truth. You have not offered anything of substance to support your view. Quoting Scripture here and there and then declaring you have met your burden is simply not sufficient.

Please show yourself worthy of that which you believe by contributing more than pithy statements in this thread.

AMR

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 30, 2013

God's Truth said:
I am asking you to debate what I have said so far.

GT,

You merely repeat some Scripture posts, highlight some words and declare everything to be self-evident. Again, that is insufficient. Back up your use of Scripture with even a hint of exegesis and I will take you seriously.

Also, you need not quote my entire post to respond to it. You can quote a small portion or extract specific portions you wish to respond to.

AMR

Ask Mr. Religion · Nov 30, 2013

It should be obvious that God’s Truth (GT) is not quite grasping the concept of the One-on-One. Rather than meet me here to discuss the topic she prefers to carry on elsewhere. So I have extracted some comments she has made to others in the parallel discussion thread as grounding for my next response.

GT on the nature of the Godhead:

God's Truth said:
I believe Jesus is God; therefore, he is the Father, because God is the Father. I believe Jesus is the Holy Spirit, because Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
I believe the three are One and the same.

God's Truth said:
Their personalities are the same.
Jesus says he only does what the Father does.
Jesus says he only says what the Father says.
How do you get that it means they are different and separate?

GT’s obvious confusion about Trinitarian doctrine:

God's Truth said:
The trinity doctrines says they cannot explain how Jesus is God but not the Father who is God.
The trinity doctrine says they cannot explain how Jesus is God but not the Holy Spirit who is God.
I will not believe something just because you say so. Show me how Jesus is God but not the Father who is God.
The trinity doctrine also says that God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are different and separate.
God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not different and separate, they are always together and the same.
Study these scriptures harder: John 16:13-14; John 5:19; John 8:28; John 12:49; and, John 12:50.

While I am disappointed that GT prefers to say more about her views in other threads than in this one I am grateful to have these unsubstantiated assertions to work with in our One-on-One. I have asked several times for GT to explain her position in detail, yet she continues to deflect and merely reassert when asked. Fortunately earlier above, GT wondered, If Jesus is God, and he is, then he must also be the Father who is God, also the Holy Spirit. You have not explained how Jesus is God but not the Father and the Holy Spirit .

From the above quotations GT’s confusion lies in confusing ontology and distinctions with respect to the Godhead. Ontologically, there is no difference between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three, separate, divine essences (or beings). The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-participants of the one divine essence. When speaking of the Godhead in formal theological terms, we would properly say that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three personal subsistences of the one, divine, essence. I will explain what I mean by this later below.

The essence of something is that something’s being. In the Greek, the word is ousia. The word essence has its root in the Latin, to be. When speaking of God, the question arises as to how God’s essence makes its existence known, for God is more than having being or existence. Indeed, God is being , for He declared this to be so to Moses in Exodus 3:14-15:

14 And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM .” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
15 Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’

In the passage above (see also [FONT=&quot]John 5:26; Acts 17:24-25)[/FONT] God declares His self-existence (aseity), importing a boundless, ineffable, absolute, and transcendent being.

If we study in Scripture aspects of the composition of God’s essence, that is, His nature, several important attributes of God’s nature emerge:

1. ‘God is spirit’ (John 4:24) possessing
- personality (Genesis 3:9-23; Genesis 18:17; Exodus 3:3-6; Exodus 19:9-19)
- self-consciousness (Exodus 3:14; 1 Corinthians 2:9, 10)
- self-determination (Isaiah 40-66; Ephesians 1:5, 9, 11; Deuteronomy 29:29)
- life (Deuteronomy 5:26; Jeremiah 10:10, 11; 1 Thessalonians 1:9)
- activity (Psalms 84:1-2; Ecclesiastes 12:14; Mark 9:41)
- intelligence (Psalms 104:24; 1 Samuel 1:3; Isaiah 11:2; Job 38-41)

2. ‘the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath, there is no other’ (Deuteronomy 4:39)
- Scriptural doctrines of monotheism (Deuteronomy 4:35; Deuteronomy 6:4-5; Isaiah 44:6-7; James 2:19)

3. ‘our God is greater than all gods’ (2 Chronicles 2:5)
- self-existence (Exodus 3:14; John 5:26; Jeremiah 2:13; Psalms 36:9)
- eternity (Psalms 90:2; Isaiah 57:15; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:17)
- immensity (1 Kings 8:27; Romans 8:38, 39)
- omnipresence (Psalms 139:7-10; Jeremiah 23:23-24)
- omniscience (Hebrews 4:13; 2 Chronicles 16:9; Isaiah 46:9-11)
- omnipotence (Matthew 19:26; Genesis 17:1; Jeremiah 32:17; Isaiah 40:28; Ephesians 1:11; Revelations 19:6)
- incomprehensibility (Psalms 36:5-6; Romans 11:33, cf. 34-35; Job 11:7)
- absoluteness (1 Timothy 6:15; Romans 1:25)
- infinity (Ephesians 1:23; Jeremiah 23:23-24; Psalms 139:7-12; Psalms 147:5; Job 11:7-9)
- transcendence and immanence (Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 139:7-10; John 8:23)
- time and space, time-space (Psalms 90:1-2; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Romans 8:39; 1 Kings 8:27)

4. ‘Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good ’ (Psalms 107:1)
- holiness (Psalms 99:9; Psalms 51:11; Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 105:42; Psalms 89:35)
- righteousness (Psalms 11:7; Titus 1:2; 2 Timothy 2:13; Psalms 89:14; Psalms 119:137; Romans 3:21; Revelations 16:4-7)
- truth (John 17:3; Jeremiah 33:6; 2 Samuel 2:6; Exodus 34:6; John 1:17; Romans 3:4)
- faithfulness (Deuteronomy 7:9-11; Deuteronomy 32:4; Jeremiah 16:19; Psalms 89:18; Psalms 19:7; Deuteronomy 6:26)
- love (1 John 4:19; 1 John 4:12; John 4:8)
- mercy (Psalms 145:15-16; Psalms 106:1; Psalms 136:11; Acts 14:17)

5. ‘the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19)
Here we come to the “essence” of the discussion with GT and anyone else who would deny the Trinitarian nature of the Godhead. In this baptismal command, we find the distinctions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being made within the Godhead. As I noted in a previous post, it is in the New Testament where we find the Trinitarian truths within the Old Testament perfected, extended and enlarged.

I have spoken about the essence of God above. How does essence make its existence known? If we were in one of my past Jesuit philosophy classes we would examine in the abstract how essence individuates with respect to existence and the means of this individuation. Fortunately we are not, so we look to Scripture to learn how the essence of God exercises existence, that is, how the essence of God subsists. When something really exists we say this something possesses subsistence. And when we speak of the characteristics of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we are speaking about the individuated subsistences of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These subsistences do not divide the essence of God. God’s essence is common to the three subsistences, each possessing the essence as one undivided nature—‘as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ’, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father.

Contrary to Scripture, GT apparently believes that there is but one subsistence of God’s essence, for on the nature of the Godhead she writes:

God's Truth said:

I believe Jesus is God; therefore, he is the Father, because God is the Father. I believe Jesus is the Holy Spirit, because Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
I believe the three are One and the same .

Click to expand...

God's Truth said:

Their personalities are the same.
Jesus says he only does what the Father does.
Jesus says he only says what the Father says.
How do you get that it means they are different and separate?

Click to expand...

[FONT=&quot]In my next post I will discuss GT’s erroneous conclusions in greater detail.

AMR
[/FONT]

God's Truth · Dec 1, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I will be happy to do so. Stay tuned.

I am still waiting.

God's Truth · Dec 1, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT,

You merely repeat some Scripture posts, highlight some words and declare everything to be self-evident. Again, that is insufficient. Back up your use of Scripture with even a hint of exegesis and I will take you seriously.

Also, you need not quote my entire post to respond to it. You can quote a small portion or extract specific portions you wish to respond to.

AMR

I do not have to post your entire post. You repeat nonsense too much.

God's Truth · Dec 1, 2013

-

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Fortunately earlier above, GT wondered, If Jesus is God, and he is, then he must also be the Father who is God, also the Holy Spirit. You have not explained how Jesus is God but not the Father and the Holy Spirit .

From the above quotations GT’s confusion lies in confusing ontology and distinctions with respect to the Godhead. Ontologically, there is no difference between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three, separate, divine essences (or beings). The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-participants of the one divine essence. When speaking of the Godhead in formal theological terms, we would properly say that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three personal subsistences of the one, divine, essence. I will explain what I mean by this later below.

The essence of something is that something’s being. In the Greek, the word is ousia. The word essence has its root in the Latin, to be. When speaking of God, the question arises as to how God’s essence makes its existence known, for God is more than having being or existence. Indeed, God is being , for He declared this to be so to Moses in Exodus 3:14-15:

14 And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM .” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
15 Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’
In the passage above (see also John 5:26; Acts 17:24-25) God declares His self-existence (aseity), importing a boundless, ineffable, absolute, and transcendent being.

If we study in Scripture aspects of the composition of God’s essence, that is, His nature, several important attributes of God’s nature emerge:

1. ‘God is spirit’ (John 4:24) possessing
- personality (Genesis 3:9-23; Genesis 18:17; Exodus 3:3-6; Exodus 19:9-19)
- self-consciousness (Exodus 3:14; 1 Corinthians 2:9, 10)
- self-determination (Isaiah 40-66; Ephesians 1:5, 9, 11; Deuteronomy 29:29)
- life (Deuteronomy 5:26; Jeremiah 10:10, 11; 1 Thessalonians 1:9)
- activity (Psalms 84:1-2; Ecclesiastes 12:14; Mark 9:41)
- intelligence (Psalms 104:24; 1 Samuel 1:3; Isaiah 11:2; Job 38-41)

2. ‘the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath, there is no other’ (Deuteronomy 4:39)
- Scriptural doctrines of monotheism (Deuteronomy 4:35; Deuteronomy 6:4-5; Isaiah 44:6-7; James 2:19)

3. ‘our God is greater than all gods’ (2 Chronicles 2:5)
- self-existence (Exodus 3:14; John 5:26; Jeremiah 2:13; Psalms 36:9)
- eternity (Psalms 90:2; Isaiah 57:15; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:17)
- immensity (1 Kings 8:27; Romans 8:38, 39)
- omnipresence (Psalms 139:7-10; Jeremiah 23:23-24)
- omniscience (Hebrews 4:13; 2 Chronicles 16:9; Isaiah 46:9-11)
- omnipotence (Matthew 19:26; Genesis 17:1; Jeremiah 32:17; Isaiah 40:28; Ephesians 1:11; Revelations 19:6)
- incomprehensibility (Psalms 36:5-6; Romans 11:33, cf. 34-35; Job 11:7)
- absoluteness (1 Timothy 6:15; Romans 1:25)
- infinity (Ephesians 1:23; Jeremiah 23:23-24; Psalms 139:7-12; Psalms 147:5; Job 11:7-9)
- transcendence and immanence (Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 139:7-10; John 8:23)
- time and space, time-space (Psalms 90:1-2; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Romans 8:39; 1 Kings 8:27)

4. ‘Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good ’ (Psalms 107:1)
- holiness (Psalms 99:9; Psalms 51:11; Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 105:42; Psalms 89:35)
- righteousness (Psalms 11:7; Titus 1:2; 2 Timothy 2:13; Psalms 89:14; Psalms 119:137; Romans 3:21; Revelations 16:4-7)
- truth (John 17:3; Jeremiah 33:6; 2 Samuel 2:6; Exodus 34:6; John 1:17; Romans 3:4)
- faithfulness (Deuteronomy 7:9-11; Deuteronomy 32:4; Jeremiah 16:19; Psalms 89:18; Psalms 19:7; Deuteronomy 6:26)
- love (1 John 4:19; 1 John 4:12; John 4:8)
- mercy (Psalms 145:15-16; Psalms 106:1; Psalms 136:11; Acts 14:17)

5. ‘the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19)
Here we come to the “essence” of the discussion with GT and anyone else who would deny the Trinitarian nature of the Godhead. In this baptismal command, we find the distinctions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being made within the Godhead. As I noted in a previous post, it is in the New Testament where we find the Trinitarian truths within the Old Testament perfected, extended and enlarged.

I have spoken about the essence of God above. How does essence make its existence known?

Use words the Bible uses. Where in the Bible does it say what you say? Where in the Bible does it say God is essence? State plainly what you believe God’s essence is.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

If we were in one of my past Jesuit philosophy classes we would examine in the abstract how essence individuates with respect to existence and the means of this individuation. Fortunately we are not, so we look to Scripture to learn how the essence of God exercises existence, that is, how the essence of God subsists. When something really exists we say this something possesses subsistence. And when we speak of the characteristics of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we are speaking about the individuated subsistences of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These subsistences do not divide the essence of God. God’s essence is common to the three subsistences, each possessing the essence as one undivided nature—‘as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ’, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father.

Click to expand...

You have explained nothing. You say God is essence, yet you have no scripture that says that. You say God is essence, but you do not state what kind of essence. Spirit and soul are essences. Why cannot you state plainly what essence you believe God is? Here, I will help you.
God is Spirit.
Here is the scripture that tells us that:
John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Is that the essence you are attributing to God, yes or no?

One-on-One: AMR and God's Truth — The Holy Trinity

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

LIFETIME MEMBER

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

New member

New member

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9