ECT Our triune God

[Arsenios]

Follow this sequence...

Pretend I am 9 years old...

You multienhypostatic & polysyllabistically challenged canine!

Arsenios

 

[patrick jane]

Why? Because everything that we see was already there prior to the cloning. The cloning created a dichotomy. - Lon

i appreciate this thread Lon, PPS Arsenios and all, i am following the thread a bit, understanding most of it and learning. good analogy on the clone, not to nitpick but i don't think science will ever create a fully grown clown of anything. "already there" in flesh and dna, etc., maybe or unless cloned at birth, even then, 2 'different' lives, souls, minds. sidebar, off subject, i''ll shut up -

 

[patrick jane]

Pretend I am 9 years old...

You multienhypostatic & polysyllabistically challenged canine!

Arsenios

i thought you told me you were 7 and a half ?:sam: - had to

 

[Lon]

I had not seen this one before, thanks Tam

I had not seen this one before, thanks Tam

A pictorial of GOD as the one that rides the sky/clouds/heaven/wind.
​

Deuteronomy 33 KJV
(26) There is none like unto the God of Jeshurun, who rideth upon the heaven in thy help, and in his excellency on the sky. (clouds)


Psalms 68 KJV
(33) To him that rideth upon the heavens of heavens, which were of old; lo, he doth send out his voice, and that a mighty voice.
(34) Ascribe ye strength unto God: his excellency is over Israel, and his strength is in the clouds.


Psalms 104 KJV
(3) Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind:


Psalms 68 KJV
(4) Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him.


Psalms 18 KJV
(10) And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: yea, he did fly upon the wings of the wind.


Isaiah 19 KJV
(1) The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.


2 Samuel 22 KJV
(11) And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: and he was seen upon the wings of the wind.

Now, here's the kicker ...
​

Daniel 7 KJV
(9) I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: (Rev 1:14) his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. (Ezekiel chapter 1)
(10) A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
(11) I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
(12) As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
(13) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
(14) And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

Jesus quotes this when asked while He was on trial if he was the Christ, the Son of God.
​

Matthew 26 KJV
(63) But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
(64) Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(65) Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.

BOOM!
The high priest knew instantly who Jesus was claiming to be.
He tears his clothes and charges Jesus with blasphemy.
When Jesus said this, it couldn't have been more clear to the high priest who knew right away what Jesus was claiming.
​

 

[Lon]

i appreciate this thread Lon, PPS Arsenios

Thank you.

and all, i am following the thread a bit,

understanding most of it and learning.

Well, page 166 :noway: I should thinks so Kudos.

good analogy on the clone, not to nitpick but i don't think science will ever create a fully grown clown of anything. "already there" in flesh and dna, etc., maybe or unless cloned at birth, even then, 2 'different' lives, souls, minds. sidebar, off subject, i''ll shut up -

No, don't shut up! The analogy really has us thinking about the nature of God in Father, Son and Spirit, all ways around and I 'think' provides a framework for understanding scripture like:

Hebrews 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

John 5:19 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.

Thus, I think helpful, but you are correct, the clone idea carries with inherent limitations. No finite limited analogy will ever suffice.

 

[Tambora]

When John wrote about the WORD becoming flesh (a VISIBLE form), it was not a new concept.

It is based on OT precepts.​

Genesis 15 KJV
(1) After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, [VISIBLE form] saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.

(4) And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.



1 Samuel 3 KJV
(1) And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before Eli. And the word of the LORD was precious in those days; there was no open vision.

(Visions - the VISIBLE had been scarce in those days.)​

(2) And it came to pass at that time, when Eli was laid down in his place, and his eyes began to wax dim, that he could not see;
(3) And ere the lamp of God went out in the temple of the LORD, where the ark of God was, and Samuel was laid down to sleep;
(4) That the LORD called Samuel: and he answered, Here am I.

(Samuel thinks it is the old man, Eli, that was speaking. But it was YHWH.)​

(5) And he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou calledst me. And he said, I called not; lie down again. And he went and lay down.
(6) And the LORD called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And he answered, I called not, my son; lie down again.
(7) Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, neither was the word of the LORD yet revealed unto him.

(VISIBLE)​

(8) And the LORD called Samuel again the third time. And he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And Eli perceived that the LORD had called the child.
(9) Therefore Eli said unto Samuel, Go, lie down: and it shall be, if he call thee, that thou shalt say, Speak, LORD; for thy servant heareth. So Samuel went and lay down in his place.
(10) And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.


(19) And Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him, and did let none of his words fall to the ground.

(YHWH was with Samuel through His word.)
​

(20) And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established to be a prophet of the LORD.
(21) And the LORD appeared again in Shiloh: for the LORD revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the LORD.



Jeremiah 1 KJV
(2) To whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign.
(3) It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, unto the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah the son of Josiah king of Judah, unto the carrying away of Jerusalem captive in the fifth month.
(4) Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
(5) Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
(6) Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.
(7) But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.
(8) Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD.
(9) Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.

This above one may seem a bit ambiguous, but it does relay the concept of YHWH in bodily form that can speak and touch and be with Jeremiah.
And it is done by the word coming to Jeremiah.
The concept that the word of God in a form that could come to be with you, and speak to you, and touch you, was not foreign to the OT saints.
So, when the NT speaks of the Word of God coming to live among you in a tangible form, it is derived from well known OT concepts.​

 

[Arsenios]

i thought you told me you were 7 and a half ?:sam: - had to

Well. I mean, I DID ask him to pretend...

Mind you...

A.

ps - 7.5 is generous...

5 is closer...

Not to get too ocd...

 

[patrick jane]

When John wrote about the WORD becoming flesh (a VISIBLE form), it was not a new concept.

It is based on OT precepts.​

Genesis 15 KJV
(1) After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, [VISIBLE form] saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.

(4) And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.



1 Samuel 3 KJV
(1) And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before Eli. And the word of the LORD was precious in those days; there was no open vision.

(Visions - the VISIBLE had been scarce in those days.)​

(2) And it came to pass at that time, when Eli was laid down in his place, and his eyes began to wax dim, that he could not see;
(3) And ere the lamp of God went out in the temple of the LORD, where the ark of God was, and Samuel was laid down to sleep;
(4) That the LORD called Samuel: and he answered, Here am I.

(Samuel thinks it is the old man, Eli, that was speaking. But it was YHWH.)​

(5) And he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou calledst me. And he said, I called not; lie down again. And he went and lay down.
(6) And the LORD called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And he answered, I called not, my son; lie down again.
(7) Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, neither was the word of the LORD yet revealed unto him.

(VISIBLE)​

(8) And the LORD called Samuel again the third time. And he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And Eli perceived that the LORD had called the child.
(9) Therefore Eli said unto Samuel, Go, lie down: and it shall be, if he call thee, that thou shalt say, Speak, LORD; for thy servant heareth. So Samuel went and lay down in his place.
(10) And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.


(19) And Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him, and did let none of his words fall to the ground.

(YHWH was with Samuel through His word.)
​

(20) And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established to be a prophet of the LORD.
(21) And the LORD appeared again in Shiloh: for the LORD revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the LORD.



Jeremiah 1 KJV
(2) To whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign.
(3) It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, unto the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah the son of Josiah king of Judah, unto the carrying away of Jerusalem captive in the fifth month.
(4) Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
(5) Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
(6) Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.
(7) But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.
(8) Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD.
(9) Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.

This above one may seem a bit ambiguous, but it does relay the concept of YHWH in bodily form that can speak and touch and be with Jeremiah.
And it is done by the word coming to Jeremiah.
The concept that the word of God in a form that could come to be with you, and speak to you, and touch you, was not foreign to the OT saints.
So, when the NT speaks of the Word of God coming to live among you in a tangible form, it is derived from well known OT concepts.​

are you ant-trinity ? - atrol:

 

[Lon]

are you ant-trinity ? - atrol:

No. I believe she is saying

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
Joh 1:5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

With all the OT passages▲ and then John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

[patrick jane]

No. I believe she is saying
With all the OT passages▲ and then John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

yes, i see, she's showing in Scripture what PPS is putting in theological terms, i usually start with John 1:1-4 to show anti-trins and go from there, NT and OT references -

 

[Tambora]

No. I believe she is saying


With all the OT passages▲ and then John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Right.

Scripture paints a picture.

The Jewish mindset had no problem conceptualizing YHWH as a unity, rather than a singularity.

In fact, if you read the Targums (which were the OT scriptures translated into Aramaic, with commentary, written well before the time of Christ born in the flesh), the Rabbinical teaching was that there appeared to be more than one "person" (or powers, or whatever you want to call it) of YHWH.
Thus concluding that YHWH was a unity of "persons", rather than a singularity of a "person".

They rightly perceived that there were just too many of the OT scriptures that could not be ignored to arrive at their conclusion.
Sometimes switching grammatically between 1st person and 3rd person within the same verses.
Verses that show two distinct "persons", while both are claiming to be the one unity that did the act - YHWH.
The VISIBLE and the INVISIBLE.

For example:

Amos 4 KJV
(11) I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the LORD.


Genesis 19 KJV
(24) Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;​

In other words, I did it as He did it.
Or to put another way, the one unity of GOD/YHWH did it.

 

[Arsenios]

Scripture paints a picture.

The Jewish mindset had no problem conceptualizing YHWH as a unity, rather than a singularity.

that YHWH was a unity of "persons", rather than a singularity of a "person".

For example:

Amos 4 KJV
(11) I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the LORD.

Genesis 19 KJV
(24) Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;​

In other words, I did it as He did it.
Or to put another way, the one unity of GOD/YHWH did it.

Nice work, Tam...

The fragmented nature of our post-modern personal isolation really does prevent us from 'having' the understanding of a unity of two or more persons... And yet this is the quintessential meaning of communion and its cognates... God as an individual Person separate from all other self-existent entities (or some other formulaic way of saying the same thing) is simply not the God of the Bible...

So that to understand God as a Communion of Persons rather than an Isolation of a Person would accord with Biblical precepts, and especially so when Scripture writes:
"Let US make man in OUR Image..."

And indeed, it is the Holy Communion of our Lord, wherein we eat His Body and drink His Blood, that makes us all One in Him...

The polarity is that between communion and isolation of persons...

Satan is the master is division and isolation...

God is Communion...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

SEMPETERNITY

SEMPETERNITY

The Fathers all pretty much agree that ALL time is created time, and that God is outside of time... So that while we think we live and die IN time, and that thus the Kosmos is itself the container of time, should it not be affirmed that the Kosmos is not itself contained within time...

Hence in our isolation from God as fallen mankind, we see life and death as a line segment within time, yet we know that we continue on after death... And we know that fallen life in Adam is death and ends at death, and that Life in Christ is Life Eternal...

If I have PPS's sempeternity aright, God's Time is True Eternity because it has no beginning AND no end - Is self existent... Temporal life is fallen life that has an end... And that heavenly life is created having no end, so is endless but not beginning-less... And it is this latter that he sees as sempeternal life...

Hence three 'kinds' of time...

With NEITHER beginning nor ending...

With ONLY a beginning but no ending...

With BOTH beginning and ending...

And beyond this division of time, he understands each of them as its own realm of containment, speaking of sempeternal existence, temporal existence, and eternal existence...

Maybe we can open these things to a discussion...

Arsenios

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Epignosis is a synonym for pistis (faith). Love abounds in it while working faith, which underlies future-reaching hope. Faith, hope, and love; these three. (THERE's a Trinity.)

That's a trinity I can live with.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I was worried this was going to get long. I think it is manageable:

I have no issues with length of posts on such topics. This ain't Romper Room or Sesame Street, so it takes some space with low-context language when discussing minutiae of Theology Proper.

In a philosophical sense of logic, this isn't true. That is, to the best of my mental ability to grasp, creation ex nihlo isn't, then a duality of reality.

No duality. But God's transcendent Self-existence is not the same existence as creation. That would be Pantheism (or at least PanEntheism/PanenTheism). God is inherently beyond creation AND present and pervading creation. Creation is not self-existent. God's Rhema carried it forth and is upholding it. His very hypostasis is underlying the created sempiternity of both heaven and the cosmos. He's both "external" to creation and "internal" within creation. Heaven is not a "God jar".

Self-phenomenon as Self-existence is not created phenomenon and existence. This is why the Gnostics thought God's transcendence was unapproachable. They were half right.

God spoke forth creation from noumenon and gave heaven and the cosmos His own Self-phenomenon as the foundation for all created phenomenon.

Ex Nihilo is instantiation into phenomenal existence, having never been anything but noumenon. Potentiality in God's mind became actuality when uttered forth by His Logos, which was the thrusting of the sword of the Rhema as the sword of the Spirit (His Rhema IS His singular hypostasis).

God isn't inherently subject to where, when, what as created parameters of existence. In transcendence, God is no"where" and no"when", because where"ness" and when"ness" are created phenomena. God within creation does not change, and is not subjegated to time-space. In creation, He is every"where" and every"when", just as He is no"where" and no"when".

God is both transcendent and immanent, and He did not change. He's immutable, and His immutability is the foundation for all created existence whille He remains uncreated Self-existence.

This isn't a duality. God IS the Singularity, and He gives His inherent reality to underlie creation that has no inherent reality; but creation's reality derives from God alone without it being ontologically divine.

God's Logos proceeding forth at creation is what Arians mistake as a creative act. The eternal Logos is the eternal Son. They're coterminous. The Logos is inherently God's own literal Logos, and it's both phenomenological and noumenological. The noumenon is the Son relative to pre-utterance noumenon of creation; just as the Holy Spirit is the exhaled noumenon of Himself AS Spirit into creation.

After the divine utterance to create, if one begins to formulate God's constitution it LOOKS like the expressed Logos and exhaled Pneuma are individuated distinct hypostases. The Father's inherent in-shining transcendent prosopon is the unapproachable light in which He dwells within sempiternal heaven. And the Logos processed as the Son with a localized prosopon, co-inherently "shared" with the omnipresent Holy Spirit (just as the Son participates in the omnipresence of the Holy Spirit).

The only thing "missing" is an individuated prosopon for the Holy Spirit; but WE are the co-prosopon for the Holy Spirit to conjoin us to the Son while ultimately having our own glorified prosopa for all everlasting. This is the perichoretic, and it's God's intrinisic phenomena coinciding with His processed noumena into creation, also extending to us by the hypostasis of faith as we're indwelt by the Holy Spirit of promise.

It is yet the reality of God,

As outlined above, it cannot be. God's reality of existence is innate to His Self-conscious Self-existence. Our reality is created, being noumena that is given His reality of existence as its foundation.

just with temporal finite parameters.

No. Temporality is but an age within created agelessness. The "line" as God's eternality (aidios) is not punctuated by having the "ray" as sempiternality (aionios) with the subset of temporality as a "line segment". Eternity and sempiternity (and thus temporality) cannot be combined as a linear 2D singular reality of existence.

God is Self-existent and creation is not. God is transcendent and immanent. Creation is immanent. Transcendence is beyond immanence. God created and condescended to His creation while remaining transcendent to His creation. He cannot be contained or constrained, and creation cannot ascend to be uncreated and beginningless.

Go back to your line analogy: This would be the segment 'within' the line (that's an incredibly limited 2-D analogy so should be understood with severe limitations as far as analogy goes).

No. The line underlies the ray and the line segment. The latter are not subsets of God's inherent uncreated Self-existence.

Another way: If I cloned a woman, I could use all of her parts to make the new person. We'd 'think' the 'replicant' (it isn't accurate to say that since all of the second being was always there in the first), a new being. That isn't correct. It is but an exact form of what already exists. This has to get back to the simplicity of God as such: Jesus' existence, even in the flesh, is eternal, because flesh comes but from God AND His eternality.

Clones have a beginning as an inception.. The eternal Son did not. He is the eternal Logos. The distributed inherent noumenon from the inherent phenomenon. The instantiation of creation included the procession of the noumenological from the phenomenological that is God's Logos. This is the uncreated and eternal Son in noumenological creation. Creation is not ontologically God's hypostasis, but the Logos is. Again, this is why Arians mistake the procession as a creative act (just as Unitarians mistake the hypostasization of the conception at the Incarnation as a creative act).

That is why the triune view isn't as accurate: the woman wouldn't be two beings or just one being, but both with and is, the same person in a way that language is no longer adequate to describe. We can appreciate the two/one idea, but we are limited to explain it.

You're still in 2D mode. God's hypostasis underlies creation. His very Self-existence is the foundational underlying substantial objective reality as subsistence for existence (hypostasis). The "line" underlies the "ray" and its subset "line segment".

The simplicity of God has to do with His nature of Spirit. Physical is an expression of that. We often think exactly backwards: that spirit/Spirit comes from the physical rather than vise-versa.

Agreed.

Because of that, the Unitarian and modalist gets this wrong. It is physical from Spirit, NOT spirit or indeed His Spirit, from physical. AND to explain God's nature, it is Essential that we change this back the way it HAS to be: Physical FROM Spirit.

And then some. Still need 3D over 2D.

It 'looks' like dualism to me.

No. Dualism is relative to tov (good) and ra'a (evil) (better defined as function/al and dys-function/al). God and His creation are tov. Ra'a is a later negation of function as dys-function. That was the onset of temporality for the cosmos, "falling" from sempiternity.

This is about Self-existence being distinct from all other existence. Transcendence distinct from immanence. Uncreated distinct from created. They cannot be the same existence. And God could never be ra'a in any manner.

The segment exudes from the eternal

No. This is (unintentional) Pantheism.

and is part of that eternal line from our analogy.

No. The line (God as eternity) is Self-existent. The ray (created sempiternity) is underlied by the line, not a point ON the line; nor is the line segement.

The reference isn't the segment, it is the line. We as part of the finite segment, are constricted in our understanding of the eternal line (again as reminder, the line/segment is very limited in conveyance but perhaps simple enough that most can follow the point of it).

The line is Self-existence. Naught else is Self-existent, and all else was created. Transcendence is not immanence. The line underlies the ray and line segment; they are not self-existent points on the line. Divinity is not bestowed upon non-divinity. The created does not become uncreated. God is transcendent, just as He is immanent. Creation does not contain Him nor constrain Him.

Again, if I am following you,

Not quite, but getting there.

this seems to confuse the simplicity of God. The Simplicity of God states that God 'cannot' be broken up into 'parts.' As such, I've always appreciated your correction of 'persons.' God is one being, indivisible (being might also convey a finite restriction, I 'think' anything numerical relates to a finite universe). "Hear O Israel, the Lord Our God is One" is an exclusion, rather than a numerical expression, primarily, I believe. The Hebrew word isn't just/only translated 'One' but also 'exclusive' or 'alone.'

The phenomenon and noumenon are intrinsic. Total simplicity. Same ousia. Same hypostasis. Qualitative distinctions are economy as action relative to creation, not a change or constituency of "parts". God externalized the noumenon of His Logos and Pneuma as the Son and Holy Spirit. The economy of procession is not inception. It is from the energies of His immutable essence. The Logos is the economy of His immutable nous.

God = eternity (line; never needing the ray or line segment which it underlies)
Heaven/Cosmos = sempiternity (ray, NOT as a demarcation on the line)
"Fallen" Cosmos = temporality (line segment as a demarcation on the ray)

I don't believe that makes a 'binity' though.

It doesn't. But, just like all other views, it can LOOK like a binity to Binitarians, because the Holy Spirit has no individuated prosopon and is the co-perichoretic with the Logos as God's noumena in creation conjoining His co-processed phenomena as the Father.

A multi-phenomenal "threeness" as qualitative hypostatic disinctions; one in-shining transcendent prosopon and one sempiternal immanent prosopon. No inherent individuated third prosopon, for WE are the co-prosopon of the Holy Spirit to conjoin our glorified prosopon to the ascendend prosopon of Christ for all everlasting.

Remember the segment is 'within' the line such that is it subsumed by it. Again even "One" when referring to no beginning/no end, is beyond numerical expression. God is rather 'All.' Deuteronomy 6 is concerned with 'exclusive', I believe, rather than numerical.

No. It is only subsumed by the externalized Logos and Pneuma as the Son and Holy Spirit. The line is phenomenological Self-existence alone, underlying the ray and line segment as God's noumena is within it. This is the missing 3D. Noumena given phenomena is not intrinsic phenomena.

Back to my cloned woman analogy for a moment: We have 'two' representations, but not really. It is actually wrong to say there are 'two women.' Even "there are two woman" doesn't convey well because, specifically, there is yet isn't another woman after the cloning. Why? Because everything that we see was already there prior to the cloning. The cloning created a dichotomy.

Clones have an inception. A beginning. The Son had no inception. The Son is God's eternal Logos. (Though I know you're trying to make an anology. It just isn't possible. No analogy of creation will suffice for the uncreated.)

A Unitarian is right in a sense to say "two" but it is incredibly simplistic and really stuck in physical understanding and expression. They don't understand the Simplicity of God. He cannot be divided, much the same as this woman is not actually divided. She simply exists as two 'entities' (or persons if we stayed with that difficult term for a moment). She isn't two persons, though she can talk to herself, literally. It is weird, because we are finite and this kind of scenario is beyond our skill-set to adequately express without a LOT of description. That, imo, is why the Triune position is so misunderstood. It is very hard to express what we see when we see Father, Son, Spirit, as God. They don't 'share' divinity among three. "Three" is simply the way we say there is distinction.

Gotta go 3D. Layers of phenomena; with created phenomena being noumena in God's mind as mere potentiality, but instantiated into existence at the procession of the eternal uncreated Logos and Pneuma.

Yes, but when Jesus clarifies between Spirit, Himself, and Father, we have to account for those distinctions that a binity cannot accommodate, imho. I understand your point, because Spirit cannot be divided, but then we are back to simply a Modal God, expressed with distinction.

No. Non-modal. Layers of phenomena. Not a 2D God who didn't create His own tent abode as sempiternal heaven.

I believe even you said Spirit is indivisible so there has to be consistency here.

Merismos (dividing asunder) is not division or separation. It's partioning for distribution. God, by His Logos (the thrusting of the Rhema sword), partitioned the noumenon from Himself AS phenomenological Spirit and breathed it to animate all created life while being the omnipresent Holy (set apart) Spirit in creation; still conjoined to God's innate phenomena AS Spirit (by which economy, His hypostasis co-processed into creation).

By His Logos, God divided asunder His own Spirit out from His own Self (Soul) into creation. He set apart (hagios) the noumenon of His Spirit from His Self-phenomenon AS Spirit to make us holy as He is holy. That only happens when we, by the hypostasis of faith, are hypostatically united with the ascended hypostasis of Christ while we yet physically live.

Our prosopon is reckoned crucified, dead, and buried (along with our ousia and its physis); with our hypostasis resurrected and in the prosopon of Christ. We've put on Christ. Our robe of righteousness. No sin is imputed to our hypostasis, for the law ceased in Christ. There's no sin imputed where there is no law, and Jesus was the distibution (law) of God's full righteousness to fulfill the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants.

The sin is in the members (soma) of our prosopon, and in the physis of our being. All left dead in the tomb as we're already hypostatically resurrected into the Son. NOW. THAT's Paul's Gospel, entrusted to him by God.

"Distinction" isn't 'apart from.' Again, back to the line/segement: A segment is still part of the line. It isn't separate from it, other than as the two reference points. That, btw, is how Christ Jesus was limited as man on earth. He was, according to the analogy, simply within the confines of the segment. Philippians 2 makes better sense if we understand that the constraint was simply between the segment points of entering and leaving earth (the physical with is the segment of the eternal).

See above.

This is fair, and certainly not all can grasp metaphysical thinking so God expressed Himself as plainly as possible, but it is much like trying to come up with language for clone between one and two expressions. It is very difficult and I do understand why Unitarians, Modalists, and even Trinitarians don't always follow along.

i teach and disciple the truth constantly. Anyone can understand it if given a grid for it based on Greek lexicography. This venue is difficult.

I don't fault them but I do worry if they are not indwelled by God, as new creations. I believe Jesus reveals Himself as God to those He indwells and recreates. It worries me if they don't get that. It is a divine knowledge, we can't argue them into being new creations. This is the work of God.

Two keys:

> The ontological innate uncreated divinity of Jesus Christ as Theanthropos.

> ONE center of eternal sentient volitional consciousness for Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (though with the Son taking on a human rational soul with a mind/will in complete hypostatic union with God's singular mind/will. Just as ours is to be.)

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

The Fathers all pretty much agree that ALL time is created time, and that God is outside of time...

Yes, but because of mystery and eschewing rationality in favor of intuiting, they never attempted to account for the creation of the sempiternal heaven and cosmos, thus unintentionally combining eternity and sempiternity while still declaring heaven created.

Among the Latin Scholasticists, Aquinas attempted to address this, but failed. Then came straw-time for him, which I applaud. He damaged the faith.

So that while we think we live and die IN time, and that thus the Kosmos is itself the container of time, should it not be affirmed that the Kosmos is not itself contained within time...

The cosmos was sempiternal (everlasting) until Edenic spiritual death and sin onset. Then it "fell" to some kind of greater tangibility with chronological time and imminent ensuing physical death.

The elements will melt with a fervent heat, and this temporality will fold up like a garment; and there will be a new heaven and new earth that is sempiternal.

Hence in our isolation from God as fallen mankind, we see life and death as a line segment within time, yet we know that we continue on after death... And we know that fallen life in Adam is death and ends at death, and that Life in Christ is Life Eternal...

Yes. That's what I've spent 17 years fasting nigh unto death to have the noetic intuitive understanding of.

If I have PPS's sempeternity aright, God's Time is True Eternity because it has no beginning AND no end - Is self existent... Temporal life is fallen life that has an end... And that heavenly life is created having no end, so is endless but not beginning-less... And it is this latter that he sees as sempeternal life...

Yes. But eternity is timelessness. Sempiternity is endless linearity in some fashion. Only current "fallen" temporality and its chronological time do we marginally comprehend as we experience tangibly.

Hence three 'kinds' of time...

With NEITHER beginning nor ending...

With ONLY a beginning but no ending...

With BOTH beginning and ending...

Almost. Eternity is timelessness. And the utter simultaneity and concurrency of all creation is in the eternal immutable mind of God as the multiversity of all contingent potentialities.

That's right. String theory and the quantum fields are just potentialities in God's nous, with only one reality of existence rolled out as creation's scroll. (Modern Scientific Naturalism and Empiricism are wrong at their foundation. God's Rhema [His hypostasis] is the foundation; and the Logos is the thrusting of the Rhema sword.)

Eternal Timelessness. (God)
Endless sempiternal sequentiality. (Heaven and the Cosmos)
Chronological temporal time. (The "fallen" Cosmos)

And beyond this division of time, he understands each of them as its own realm of containment, speaking of sempeternal existence, temporal existence, and eternal existence...

Sorta. God subsumes all creation via the noumena of His processed Logos and Pneuma as the Son and Holy Spirit in noumenal creation.

(Read my previous post to Lon. It may help. .............or not.)

Maybe we can open these things to a discussion...

Arsenios

The can has the lid off. Let's do.

 

[Arsenios]

The line is Self-existence.

IF Self-existence is timelessness/true eternity, then
HOW can it be linear (eg a line)?

Naught else is Self-existent, and all else was created.

"Line" is a cognate term only derived from creation...

Transcendence is not immanence.

I should think each IS the other, for God is both...

The point here being that timelessness is not knowable to man...

That calling timelessness a line with rays anthropomorphizes it... eg Brings it into human cognates of consciousness which it is not...

Arsenios

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

IF Self-existence is timelessness/true eternity, then
HOW can it be linear (eg a line)?

A line is the best/only means of expressing it from creation-constrained reality. Eternity is simultaneity and concurrence without durative sequential linearity and elapsation.

God IS. Where and when are created. If there is inherent where and when for God, He could "move". He doesn't change, even by "moving". There's no "where" for Him to intrinsically move "from" or "to". He's no"where" and no"when" because He created all where and when. He tents in the everlasting where and when as His sempiternal abode.

(This is what Aristotle erroneously considered "the unmoved mover" with his fallacious perspective of "forms" and "matter", etc. It's also what Plato egregiously considered the non-existent impersonal "One" that created existence; positing ideation as noumena to be beyond mere phenomena. Both somewhat reflective of aspects, but only horrifically failed attempts at portraying truth by their own unregenerate and non-intuiting rational logoi.)

God created and inhabited sempiternity as heaven and the cosmos. And He did so by speaking forth His eternal Logos as the eternal Son while breathing forth His eternal Spirit as the Holy (set apart) Spirit. Hypostatically co-processing, yet with His immutable ousia/physis and His innate transcendent prosopon remaining transcendent; though His prosopon shines through into sempiternity because of the co-inherent procession of His noumenal Spirit from His phenomenological Self AS Spirit.

The Son and Holy Spirit are the expressed and exhaled noumena of His inherent phenomenal Logos and Pneuma. Ontology processed by energies in economy. Qualitatively distinct, yet His own singular inherent hypostasis with a prosopon in sempiternity.

Just as the sempiternal Son hypostasized into the cosmos to take on humanity and the schema (form) of a servant, the eternal Logos had already hypostasized into sempiternity to take on the phenomena of created heaven and the schema of divinity as the Son. (God's inherent transcendent prosopon in-shining to illuminate all creation as the unapproachable light in which the Father dwells.)

"Line" is a cognate term only derived from creation...

Right. But it's a means of illustration to initially break minds loose from their 2D perspective. Once processed, the eternal Son and Holy Spirit give the inception of sempiternity the illusion of having existed in perpetuity as "eternity past", but there is not linearity in arrears for creation.

Technically, there is no line. God IS. Relative to creation, God is comparatively a line, but timelessness as eternity is not endless time (forwards or backwards), just as infinity is not endless quantity (like decimalic Pi) but is quantitilessness.

I should think each IS the other, for God is both...

He is, but one is phenomenon and the other is noumenon. He's both. But creation is not transcendent, though God is both transcendent and immanent. They are not each other, for noumenon is not phenomenon. But He is inherently both.

The point here being that timelessness is not knowable to man...

Right, except by apophatic negation. "Un"-time. "Non"-time. His ousia is unknowable, but the energies-based economy of His hypostasis is knowable, and that includes His Logos into whom we are hypostatically translated.

That calling timelessness a line with rays anthropomorphizes it... eg Brings it into human cognates of consciousness which it is not...

Arsenios

Agreed. But the steps to the apophatic often include some cataphatics for the process of elimination to rid rational interference in intuiting by the Spirit. A divestiture.

God is not phenomenologically the line, because there is no line. But God IS noumenologically the comparative perceived projection of the line relative to the ray of created sempiternity and the subset of the line segment as temporality (the fallen cosmos from its sempiternal origin).

He is the linelessness (lineless line) of concurrent simultaneity, "rolled up" as a "where"less, "when"less point as the Singularity. The uncaused (and/or Self-caused) cause. Self-conscious and Self-existent transcendent divine uncreated phenomonological and noumenological hypostasis underlying ousia/physis with a prosopon. (Any "line" would be an "indexed" Self-awareness in His Self-conscious noumenon relative to His own Self-existent phenomenon AS the I AM.)

Chronology began with the Edenic onset of spiritual death and sin. That's why Scientific Naturalism cannot ever account for anything empirically. Nor can we by intellect and reason. Only by intuiting in communion from our hypostatic union with the eternal Son.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Pretend I am 9 years old...

Alas, I can't. You are of mature age and understanding, and many Greek terms are irreducible.

You multienhypostatic & polysyllabistically challenged canine!

Arsenios

Woof? Arf?

Behold... the single syllables.

 

[TFTn5280]

Delete