ECT Our triune God

[Cross Reference]

You ought to know that the Christ led the Israelites in the wilderness and spoke to those before the flood through the preacher of righteousness who Noah was.

Christ is the name above every name, given by paternal right and due to His sons overcoming, which name is also upon the Bride of Christ.

Rev 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

Kill the truth if you want but it is on your head not mine.

I do not think you will be going to hell for it, but you think I will.

You are a fake.


LA

Moses led them through. In this Moses was a type Jesus, the man, who took his lesding from God.

 

[Cross Reference]

A mystery allows for doubt. That is, if a thing is not explained, we may wonder whether we are apprehending or able to apprehend information we are given. In our comparison we see God and Christ used interchangeably as creator. There is nothing from the text that would allow us to deny that God and Christ are equated in scripture. If the scripture does not support denial, denial is purposefully against the written word. If the author of Colossians had wanted to make a stark distinction to how the world was created, he didn’t do so. We cannot assume he neglected this. If he intended that we should see distinction, the text does not give any inclination. Knowing full the Genesis account, this one is written blurring the lines between Genesis 1 and Colossians 1:16. Not novel to the Colossians author, the Apostle John states in similar fashion:[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]

Lon, Why is it that you ignore the fact "Christ" is a Title, a Title given the respresentative of God very much as the "Angel of the Lord" was a representative of God that He was God who appeared in the various instances mentioned in the Bible.. . . which all relates to intimacy to the nth degree as "anointed" can best be described. However, in the case of Jesus, He was the messiah.

Do we not say the "Word" was "Christ"? Yes. Then "Christ" was God; the Title was place within a human body and made subservient to it . . . and it, the body, to the "Christ" of Himself; Divine Union, unfailing in every way irrespective of anything that came against him. The body was Jesus, the "Christ" of God.

That same pattern established in Jesus is that which Jesus spoke of to Nicodemus and probagated throughout the NT that the new born receive the same "Christ" of God for their lifes to be lived out IN God . . as Father: "This is eternal Life . . . . ." John 17:3. This is the Good News!

 

[Lon]

Get back to the OP - Psalm 107

Get back to the OP - Psalm 107

The Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophecy of Psalm 107 as God

Psa 107:28 Then they cried to the LORD in their trouble, and he delivered them from their distress.
Psa 107:29 He made the storm be still, and the waves of the sea were hushed.

Mar 4:37 And a great windstorm arose, and the waves were breaking into the boat, so that the boat was already filling.
Mar 4:38 But he was in the stern, asleep on the cushion. And they woke him and said to him, "Teacher, do you not care that we are perishing?"
Mar 4:39 And he awoke and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Peace! Be still!" And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.
Mar 4:40 He said to them, "Why are you so afraid? Have you still no faith?"
Mar 4:41 And they were filled with great fear and said to one another, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?"

Not even a Jew could miss the importance of messianic fulfillment nor that the Lord Messiah would be God.

 

[Lon]

Stop contending the thread or you'll be removed from it permanently. I desire your discussion and questions but it is not for banter. This particular thread is supposed to serve Trinitarian doctrine. It isn't that it cannot stand against scrutiny, it surely can, but it is not a thread to platform countering views. Serve the thread intent, please, or you'll have to watch it proceed as a spectator.

 

[Cross Reference]

Lon, Why is it that you ignore the fact "Christ" is a Title, a Title given the respresentative of God very much as the "Angel of the Lord" was a representative of God that He was God who appeared in the various instances mentioned in the Bible.. . . which all relates to intimacy to the nth degree as "anointed" can best be described. However, in the case of Jesus, He was the messiah.

Do we not say the "Word" was "Christ"? Yes. Then "Christ" was God; the Title was place within a human body and made subservient to it . . . and it, the body, to the "Christ" of Himself; Divine Union, unfailing in every way irrespective of anything that came against him. The body was Jesus, the "Christ" of God.

That same pattern established in Jesus is that which Jesus spoke of to Nicodemus and probagated throughout the NT that the new born receive the same "Christ" of God for their lifes to be lived out IN God . . as Father: "This is eternal Life . . . . ." John 17:3. This is the Good News!

Since, a while back I posted the above. I agreed with you on certain aspects you brought up and as yet you haven't addressed, having been asked to and for which by your present threat now makes me see to understand they were manipulative conclusions by you in the guise of sincerity that I responded to. Will you do me the courtesy of addressing the above instead of offering up anther threat because you don't make sense to me except for digging in your heels against by understanding? I am no threat to your religion re mans salvation. I just see it as incomplete.

With regards to my above reply, if read for understanding, WHAT PART DO YOU DISAGREE WITH RE THE TRINITY?? What prt do you believe can't be supported by scripture? To me, the whole of your understanding of your new birth by God, hangs in the balance.

What part of this do you not understand: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace", as not yet having been fulfilled?? Isaiah 9:6 (KJV)

 

[Lon]

Since, a while back I posted the above. I agreed with you on certain aspects you brought up and as yet you haven't addressed, having been asked to and for which by your present threat now makes me see to understand they were manipulative conclusions by you in the guise of sincerity that I responded to. Will you do me the courtesy of addressing the above instead of offering up anther threat because you don't make sense to me except for digging in your heels against by understanding? I am no threat to your religion re mans salvation. I just see it as incomplete.

1) I have you on ignore, as I told you BUT you are still contending in this thread. This thread is NOT for contentions.
2) It is rather for a) reference b) discussing clarity c) answering questions in politeness, but not to be disrupted by non-Trinitarians. It is not here for that latter purpose and I've stated so repeatedly.
3) Finally, I saw your post. In a nutshell, my kids call me "Dad." -Both name and title.
4) Having giving you clear instructions, you cannot side-rail or shame me from my thread intent. :nono: Not going to happen. There will be no 'special pleading' or 'special priveleges' other than by a certain amount of my absence. Such is abused grace from my perspective. Don't do it.

What part of this do you not understand: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace", as not yet having been fulfilled?? Isaiah 9:6 (KJV)

Realize for God, there is no timeline, no physical restriction. In interest,grace, mercy, and love, God participates, therefore what is future for us, is not with God. He already decreed the truth of the matter and it was already so. Example: "Before Abraham was (past tense), I AM (present tense from 'before' Abraham)."
The rest of your points are from time constraints:

Spoiler

Lon, Why is it that you ignore the fact "Christ" is a Title, a Title given the respresentative of God very much as the "Angel of the Lord" was a representative of God that He was God who appeared in the various instances mentioned in the Bible.. . . which all relates to intimacy to the nth degree as "anointed" can best be described. However, in the case of Jesus, He was the messiah.


Do we not say the "Word" was "Christ"? Yes. Then "Christ" was God; the Title was place within a human body and made subservient to it . . . and it, the body, to the "Christ" of Himself; Divine Union, unfailing in every way irrespective of anything that came against him. The body was Jesus, the "Christ" of God.

That same pattern established in Jesus is that which Jesus spoke of to Nicodemus and probagated throughout the NT that the new born receive the same "Christ" of God for their lifes to be lived out IN God . . as Father: "This is eternal Life . . . . ." John 17:3. This is the Good News!

Without realizing it, I believe you have God time-constrained thus a product of creation/the universe rather than being alone-eternal. It will prove difficult to all of your theological understanding because you will never realize your logic-conclusions are creation-constrained. You have to have metaphysical thinking to understand the universe and God imho. Is it salvific? :idunno: I rather see it as problematic and making God in our own image. You at least have to acquiesce that God says He is not like a man and it is very important to grasp that this truth extends far-reaching.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Lon,

Do Trinitarians believe Jesus was a conscious living person who had fellowship with the Father, before Jesus was born??

LA

 

[Cross Reference]

1) I have you on ignore, as I told you BUT you are still contending in this thread. This thread is NOT for contentions.
2) It is rather for a) reference b) discussing clarity c) answering questions in politeness, but not to be disrupted by non-Trinitarians. It is not here for that latter purpose and I've stated so repeatedly.
3) Finally, I saw your post. In a nutshell, my kids call me "Dad." -Both name and title.
4) Having giving you clear instructions, you cannot side-rail or shame me from my thread intent. :nono: Not going to happen. There will be no 'special pleading' or 'special priveleges' other than by a certain amount of my absence. Such is abused grace from my perspective. Don't do it.


Realize for God, there is no timeline, no physical restriction. In interest,grace, mercy, and love, God participates, therefore what is future for us, is not with God. He already decreed the truth of the matter and it was already so. Example: "Before Abraham was (past tense), I AM (present tense from 'before' Abraham)."
The rest of your points are from time constraints:


Without realizing it, I believe you have God time-constrained thus a product of creation/the universe rather than being alone-eternal. It will prove difficult to all of your theological understanding because you will never realize your logic-conclusions are creation-constrained. You have to have metaphysical thinking to understand the universe and God imho. Is it salvific? :idunno: I rather see it as problematic and making God in our own image. You at least have to acquiesce that God says He is not like a man and it is very important to grasp that this truth extends far-reaching.

To me, Lon. You and your convoluted thinking crowd are lost causes. Put me on ignore and keep me there. I pray God have mercy on you all for refusing His admonition to move on into Him and that by your "willful ignorance" and misrepresentation of the facts have aided others in their misunderstanding the salvation of Jesus Christ in that it is for the ultimate intention of God per John17ff for having redeemed mankind and not simply a free ticket out of hell.

 

[Lon]

Lon,

Do Trinitarians believe Jesus was a conscious living person who had fellowship with the Father, before Jesus was born??

LA

Yes. PPS would correct 'person' though.

 

[Lon]

To me, Lon. You and your convoluted thinking crowd are lost causes. Put me on ignore and keep me there.

You are on ignore, but not for this thread.

I pray God have mercy on you all for refusing His admonition to move on into Him and that by your "willful ignorance" and misrepresentation of the facts have aided others in their misunderstanding the salvation of Jesus Christ in that it is for the ultimate intention of God per John17ff for having redeemed mankind and not simply a free ticket out of hell.

I'm not into fire-insurance, but the Savior. There is no heaven without Him. Essentially, to want heaven, is to want Jesus. -Lon

 

[Cross Reference]

You are on ignore, but not for this thread.

I'm not into fire-insurance, but the Savior.

Your whole expounding is nothing more than about selling Jesus as a "fire insurance" policy. I am into Him because Jesus is LORD.

There is no heaven without Him.

Irrelevant in this. Shows you haven't been paying attention that you now present your strawman argument..

Essentially, to want heaven, is to want Jesus. -Lon

"Essentially", I want Him for Who He is. Heaven is the only place I can go when I die. There is nowhere else for a Christian to go..

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Yes. PPS would correct 'person' though.

I would contend more explicitly against multiple sentient centers of volitional consciousness as multiple minds/wills. Otherwise, the Son AS the Logos would also have a distinct logos (even if in agreement), as would the Holy Spirit.

It is the physis (nature) of every sentient being (ousia) to have a mind (and therefore a will). Only via His authentic humanity in the Incarnation did the Son have a will in any manner distinct from the Father.

Within the physis of the ousia are the faculties of the nous (mind) and thelo/boule (will), while within the hypostasis is the inner functionality of those faculties. So with multiple phenomenalities OR hypostases, multiple minds and wills are not necessary for multiple functionalities of God's one mind and will.

This is the heart of the Simplicity of God for pure Monotheism with co-equality of divinity for both the Son and the Holy Spirit.

 

[Lon]

Your whole expounding is nothing more than...

Irrelevant... you haven't been paying attention...strawman argument...

Look, I'm long-suffering, or at least trying to be but this is not necessary for this thread. It is about lifting Him up. Okay, you have a huge chip on your shoulder and even some sort of beef with me. Pleas again, not this thread.

 

[Cross Reference]

Look, I'm long-suffering, or at least trying to be but this is not necessary for this thread. It is about lifting Him up. Okay, you have a huge chip on your shoulder and even some sort of beef with me. Pleas again, not this thread.

Quick with your accusations, Lon. I have no chip on my shoulder however unhappy I am with your replies which never address my comments re Trinity, but use them instead to advance your bias against me.

I am sorry you have been left with a biased inflexible perspective steeped in Calvin that you feel you must protect. I don't have that problem. I am able to let the scriptures say what they say and base my understanding on the findings. You have such a problem with that you can seem to reply to this, I wrote: God's ultimate intention from the beginning is to place the whole of the Godhead into glorified human flesh. That means the whole of the Trinity. Proof? We need go no further than Jesus Christ, the man Himself. Now do something with that Lon, instead of accusing me of heresy.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Quick with your accusations, Lon. I have no chip on my shoulder however unhappy I am with your replies which never address my comments re Trinity, but use them instead to advance your bias against me.

I am sorry you have been left with a biased inflexible perspective steeped in Calvin that you feel you must protect. I don't have that problem. I am able to let the scriptures say what they say and base my understanding on the findings. You have such a problem with that you can seem to reply to this, I wrote: God's ultimate intention from the beginning is to place the whole of the Godhead into glorified human flesh. That means the whole of the Trinity. Proof? We need go no further than Jesus Christ, the man Himself. Now do something with that Lon, instead of accusing me of heresy.

From the earliest Apostolic and Patristic teachings and writings, and through every era of the Christian Faith (including the corruption of the Latin Church), you would be a schismatic heretic and anathema. You are beyond the furthest boundaries of the Faith for orthodoxy and orthopraxy.

That is an objective fact and truth, and is not open for you to autonomously self-determine otherwise based upon your aberrant beliefs.

You are not a Trinitarian in any form whatsoever, regardless of your false assertions to the contrary. And you don't have the basic decency to heed the guidelines on this forum and avoid this thread. This is the only thread that is off-limits for challenging the broad scope of the Trinitarian Faith; but you have to camp right in the middle of it in utter obfuscation and self-justification.

You're a heretic of the highest order, and that by the proclamation of every valid theologian, scholar, linguist, philologist, and authority of the Church for its entire history since the ascension of Christ and Pentecost.

You don't get to resculpt the Christian Faith in your own image after your own tangential beliefs, regardless how stubborn or deluded you are in your Third Wave Charismatic stupor of self-important nothingness.

Take it to another thread. The mods have agreed in the past. The OP has repeatedly asked you. Leave this one thread on TOL without your responses or alleged contributions and challenges. How hard is that? One thread. Seriously?

 

[Cross Reference]

From the earliest Apostolic and Patristic teachings and writings, and through every era of the Christian Faith (including the corruption of the Latin Church), you would be a schismatiheretic and anathema. You are beyond the furthest boundaries of the Faith for orthodoxy and orthopraxy.

That is an objective fact and truth, and is not open for you to autonomously self-determine otherwise based upon your aberrant beliefs.

You are not a Trinitarian in any form whatsoever, regardless of your false assertions to the contrary. And you don't have the basic decency to heed the guidelines on this forum and avoid this thread. This is the only thread that is off-limits for challenging the broad scope of the Trinitarian Faith; but you have to camp right in the middle of it in utter obfuscation and self-justification.

You're a heretic of the highest order, and that by the proclamation of every valid theologian, scholar, linguist, philologist, and authority of the Church for its entire history since the ascension of Christ and Pentecost.

You don't get to resculpt the Christian Faith in your own image after your own tangential beliefs, regardless how stubborn or deluded you are in your Third Wave Charismatic stupor of self-important nothingness.

Take it to another thread. The mods have agreed in the past. The OP has repeatedly asked you. Leave this one thread on TOL without your responses or alleged contributions and challenges. How hard is that? One thread. Seriously?

Jesus Christ is part and parcel of the Trinity, is he not? Kindly show me where I have violated the OP? Got any specifics you can point to that might justify your ungodly opinion?

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Jesus Christ is part and parcel of the Trinity, is he not?

NO!! God is not comprised of constituent parts. Jesus Christ is NOT "part" and/or "parcel" of the Trinity.

Kindly show me where I have violated the OP? Got any specifics you can point to that might justify your ungodly opinion?

The OP has shown you. You've been asked by the OP repeatedly to cease and desist. Your heresies have been outlined in several posts on several threads. You refuse to acknowledge that you could, indeed, be a schismatic outside the Faith.

 

[Cross Reference]

NO!! Go is not comprised of constituent parts. Jesus Christ is NOT "part" and/or "parcel" of the Trinity.



The OP has shown you. You've been asked by the OP repeatedly to cease and desist. Your heresies have been outlined in several posts on several threads. You refuse to acknowledge that you could, indeed, be a schismatic outside the Faith.

Kindly show me where I have violated the OP? Got any specifics you can point to that might justify your ungodly opinion?

You show where I have, OK??

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Yes. PPS would correct 'person' though.

I think that is where the Trinitarians have it wrong.

Jesus is the first born of many bretheren.

LA

 

[Nang]

I think that is where the Trinitarians have it wrong.

Jesus is the first born of many bretheren.

LA

Spiritual brethren . . spiritual births . . Jesus Christ came as the last Adam, the Lord from Heaven, representing all the regenerated, not like the first Adam who represents only those merely made of dust. I Corinthians 15:44-49