Spammers wasteland

[lifeisgood]

Do you affirm Monotheism?

Deut. 6:4 Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our Eloheem[PLURAL] is one[SINGULAR] Jehovah:

 

[patrick jane]

Describe your own mother, fool . . .

You're quite a piece of work with that mouth

 

[Tambora]

(BTW, Did you attribute this post quoted from somewhere else?}

People with common sense could tell right away it was copy and pasted from a site.
The word links in blue are usually a dead giveaway.
Shouldn't have been a need for PJ to have to state the obvious to you.
It was clear he was not posting his own work, or at least clear to those with common sense.

Reporting it was silly.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I'm sure that you're aware (since you're the smartest person ever) that there are many anthropomorphism's in the Bible that are there for our feeble human mind and are never meant to bring God down.

Even the great PPS said this: "The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work together. It's called perichoresis."

But of course, we cannot just say "work together" for that would be too simple for your brilliant mind.

No. It wouldn't be too simple, it would be wrong. Synergy is a term of contingency. It's sad that you're a professing Believer and alleged Trinitarian and you have no idea what your own historical theology and doctrine is, or who your God is and how to appropriately represent Him instead of running your mouth with whatever you autonomously decide can be asserted.

You are truly the most arrogant person on earth.

No. I yield to the last minutiae of the oracles of God unto salvation instead of nominally proof-texting and winging it on my own. It's all you Modernist functional Tritheists whose arrogance surpasses the anything and anyone on this earth.

Arrogance is what makes someone inist they can innovate and self-determine synergy applies to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Arrogance is what emanates from every pour of your being. You have to call God's faith and epignosis knowledge in me arrogance because you're barely clinging to hope and think it's faith.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

He doesn't know that because
I did no such thing.

This is a straight-out lie. You have continuously insisted upon synergy for Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

It would be wonderful if you could actually quote what Tambora said so that we don't have to take your word for it.

It was quoted repeatedly. Go find it, lazy reprobate.

 

[Nang]

This is a straight-out lie. You have continuously insisted upon synergy for Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Yep. Now begins the back-pedal, denial phase of her prolonged argument. Even her supporters have begun to demand quotations to evidence what she
has posted for days, in order to plant the seed of doubt upon her opposers.

Kinda reminds me of dirty, present day politics . .

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I'm not a synergist.
I don't believe that it took the works of two (me and Christ).
Christ did the work.


My WORKS didn't save me.
I'm not the one that lived a sinless life.
I rely on the righteousness and obedience of one.

Liar liar pants on fire.

I guess you just instantly became a Monergist, then. Congrats.

I guess you're wrong again. Congrats.

Tam:

One cannot be a Monergist and a Synergist at the same time.

There is no middle position to take; one is either or.

I agree.

I agree.

However, I do not think one has to be one only for all situations and for all time.

The trinity being an example.
Was it one (acting alone - Monorgist) that assured our salvation, or three (acting together - Synergist)?

Neither you nor Nang want to say whether GOD (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) acted alone or acted together.
Why is that?

Because the question is wrong.

There is no such thing as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit acting independently for God is One.

There is no concept of either "alone" or "togetherness" within the Godhead. "Alone" would deny Triune God, and "togetherness" depicts Tritheism.

Monergistic (acting alone).
Synergistic (acting together).

Does GOD (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) act alone or act together?

It's been entertaining to watch you think you have all the correct words about GOD all bottled up.
Keep up the laughs!

noun: synergism

• the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. ---"the synergy between artist and record company"

• synonyms:

  cooperative interaction, cooperation, combined effort, give and take "there's no synergy between the two, so no costs are saved"

  
  

Origin
mid 19th century: from Greek sunergos ‘working together,’ from sun- ‘together’ + ergon ‘work.’

Notice that the examples given are not "ONLY in reference to God's relation with man".
Well I'll be, imagine that.

Not to mention that some in the Reformed camp also that God acts both ways with mankind.

Some Calvinists teach that Monergism only applies to regeneration, and that sanctification is synergistic. Reformed Baptist Andrew Naselli expressed this view

when he wrote, “A monergistic view of regeneration is biblical, but a monergistic view of sanctification is not.”

Your view is not indisputable.
It has been debated both within the Reformed camp and without.

Give it up, Tambora.

The definition of synergy does not apply to the Godhead, for the Trinity is not made up of separate parts.

...

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Synergy.
The interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects.

Applied by Tambora to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as they interact and cooperate as organizations/substances/agents to produce the combined effect of a God who is greater than the sum of their separate effects.

It's a term of contingency for a Non-Contingent God.

It's a term of creation she's applied to the uncreated.

And now the sum of these parts that are organizations/substances/agents is a God that is greater than Father, Son, and Holy Spirit combined.

Three beings who have combined for a sum that is a fourth being that is a God greater than Father, Son, and Holy Spirit together.

I wonder what His name is, this fourth thing that is a God greater than F/S/HS.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Yep. Now begins the back-pedal, denial phase of her prolonged argument. Even her supporters have begun to demand quotations to evidence what she
has posted for days, in order to plant the seed of doubt upon her opposers.

Kinda reminds me of dirty, present day politics . .

A Hillary clone. Or maybe a Chelsea clone.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

A Hillary clone. Or maybe a Chelsea clone.

Perhaps YOU are a clone of Nangster or Nangster is a clone of you? This could quite possibly become confusing?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Yep. Now begins the back-pedal, denial phase of her prolonged argument. Even her supporters have begun to demand quotations to evidence what she
has posted for days, in order to plant the seed of doubt upon her opposers.

Kinda reminds me of dirty, present day politics . .

It sounds as if you may be plagued by a hefty portion of "Paranoia" Nangster? I hope I'm wrong because you're one of the few around here that I can't trust to speak the truth of Scripture to me.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

[MENTION=14978]PneumaPsucheSoma[/MENTION]
Copy this one too.

noun: synergism The interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. "The synergy between artist and record company."​ Synonyms: cooperative interaction, cooperation, combined effort, give and take Origin: Mid 19th century: from Greek sunergos ‘working together,’ from sun- ‘together’ + ergon - ‘work.’

The definition alone shows that the word itself is not ONLY used in relation to God and mankind.
So right off the bat we see that PPS's statement is false.

​

But let's not jump the gun on that.
PPS tries to insist that in the theology rings, it has a definite meaning that fits his view.

But as also shown within the very ring of the Reformed, it's not cut and dry
Some in the Reformed camp also believe that God acts both ways with mankind.

Some Calvinists teach that Monergism only applies to regeneration, and that sanctification is synergistic. Reformed Baptist Andrew Naselli expressed this view when he wrote: "A monergistic veiw of regeneration is biblical, but a monergistic view of sanctification is not."

Just because one theology ring uses the same word that other theology rings use does not mean that they both have the same view of the word.
In other words, the word's theological meaning is not universal among all theology rings.
That's what happens when you try to put so much limitation on a word as to force it to fit your own view.

By using the definition of the word as the dictionary states, it most certainly can be used of other groups working together, and is not limited to the relation between God and mankind only.
One family, of mankind (father, mother, child), can work together.
One family, of the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), can work together.
God and man can word together.

It is not limited to ONLY the relationship between God and mankind.
Making up your own theology meanings to words does not negate the actual meaning of the word, which is simply "working together".

You are the one who is making up your own theology, premised upon a dictionary definition, no less.

Here is the historic church creed:

https://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html

You are violating this, by thinking the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are separate (rather than distinct) and must necessarily co-operate. That defines Tritheism, not the Unity of Trinity.

20. "So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords."

Please prayerfully give this creed some careful thought . . .

The dictionary definition is correct.

But it does not apply to Triune God, Tam!

It sure can.
We can clearly see Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) "working together".
The very definition of the word is "working together".

Only by your own theological view do you need to force a limited meaning that the very definition of the word itself does not do.
So, no, it is not me that is changing the definition of the word.

There is no necessity existent within the Godhead for synergistic "working together," when there is only "one Lord."

That is the Unity of the Trinity, which it seems you do not understand.

That is why I provided you with a link to the Athanasian Creed to show you this is not my private theological view, but the historical view of the Church of Jesus Christ.

I do not attempt to change the definition. I am objecting to your application of the word and building a wrong theology off of it. That is very dangerous and non-scriptural.

I understand that the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) do work together, which it seems you do not understand.

"Together" wrongly suggests a plurality that MUST co-operate in order to be united as One. And you are not offering any Scripture that uses this kind of language.

There are no such necessities nor contingencies within the Godhead. God does not have to do anything in order to be God. That is basic theology proper.

Are you saying grandmothers cannot know theology?

IMO the Father and the Son are distinct, but the same Lord God.

Perichoresis

"Perichoresis" means every act of God is worked in full unity & harmony, premised upon unchangeable and propositional Truth, Sovereign Will, and Covenant Purposes. (My words & understanding.)

A scriptural example would be John 15:26.

No. But that is not what we discuss. You insist on using a term to describe the works of God that denies His attribute of Simplicity.

...

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

[MENTION=14978]PneumaPsucheSoma[/MENTION]
Copy this one too.

noun: synergism The interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. "The synergy between artist and record company."​ Synonyms: cooperative interaction, cooperation, combined effort, give and take Origin: Mid 19th century: from Greek sunergos ‘working together,’ from sun- ‘together’ + ergon - ‘work.’

The definition alone shows that the word itself is not ONLY used in relation to God and mankind.
So right off the bat we see that PPS's statement is false.

​

But let's not jump the gun on that.
PPS tries to insist that in the theology rings, it has a definite meaning that fits his view.

But as also shown within the very ring of the Reformed, it's not cut and dry
Some in the Reformed camp also believe that God acts both ways with mankind.

Some Calvinists teach that Monergism only applies to regeneration, and that sanctification is synergistic. Reformed Baptist Andrew Naselli expressed this view when he wrote: "A monergistic veiw of regeneration is biblical, but a monergistic view of sanctification is not."

Just because one theology ring uses the same word that other theology rings use does not mean that they both have the same view of the word.
In other words, the word's theological meaning is not universal among all theology rings.
That's what happens when you try to put so much limitation on a word as to force it to fit your own view.

By using the definition of the word as the dictionary states, it most certainly can be used of other groups working together, and is not limited to the relation between God and mankind only.
One family, of mankind (father, mother, child), can work together.
One family, of the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), can work together.
God and man can word together.

It is not limited to ONLY the relationship between God and mankind.
Making up your own theology meanings to words does not negate the actual meaning of the word, which is simply "working together".

The dictionary definition is correct.

It sure can.
We can clearly see Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) "working together".
The very definition of the word is "working together".

Only by your own theological view do you need to force a limited meaning that the very definition of the word itself does not do.
So, no, it is not me that is changing the definition of the word.

I understand that the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) do work together, which it seems you do not understand.

Tambora is using terminology that depicts the necessity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit working "together" as a plurality of separates, but this is a denial of the Godly attribute of Simplicity.

"Synergism" is a theological term that suggests it is necessary that sinners, separated from God, co-operate with God to achieve a holy life.

Such necessity is not found within the fellowship of the Godhead so the terminology does not come close to being applicable when discussing the Trinity.

I use the word as the dictionary does.
You don't.
Plain and simple.

There is no reason to not use the dictionary definition of "working together" for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; because they certainly do work together.
It is only your theology that claims it shouldn't be used of God.
The dictionary makes no such distinction, nor should it.

Nope.
There is nothing within the definition of the word itself that demands it can only be done to achieve a holy life.
There are many things the word can be used for that have nothing to do with achieving a holy life.

You want simplicity?
Here it is ....
"Working together" is the definition of the word.
The word itself does not in any way deny the simplicity of GOD.
It is you that denies the simple meaning of the word --- working together.

There is no error.
The meaning of the very word itself is "working together".

Oh, I'm copying this for sure.

I'm just deciding whether it's worth the time and effort to destroy this crap for the sake of any others who might be deceived by it.

There are layers of epic heresy, just from you using the dictionary definition, since Father, Son, and Holy Spirit aren't organizations or agents; and substances would have to be according to pre-Cappadocian (Nicean) English translation as ousia, NOT hypostasis.

Hence, it begins by being Tritheism; and that's not even the worst of it.

True historians and theologians would not make this horrendous error to destroy the very incommunicable attributes of God with fallacious ignorance.

There is NOTHING theologically more egregious than you have done in this thread. NOTHING. You are heretically beyond ANY of the cults or Gnostics. And you think your casually employment of a word to project upon God is accurate in contrast to the cautious efforts of two millennia of scholars.

This is the difference between me and all you rogue Modernist idiot heretics, and why you despise me so. I stand on the shoulders of ALL the theologians and historians of the entirety of the Christian ages.

This gaffe alone is enough to be considered anathema beyond salvific faith.

I'll probably take the time to correct this, even though it will be futile for you personally as an utter reprobate.

Steko and Right-Divider, you should be ashamed. It's YOU who should be correcting this woman. It's YOU who should be standing for God's Necessity and Simplicity if you ARE indeed Believers.

This is no time for ganglandstyle sticking together for Dispensationalists. This woman has thrown God to the wolves in a way that exceeds the JWs, the LDSers, and even the Atheists.

This is heinous. Shame on you other Dispies for not shutting her down FOR HER OWN SAKE.

:thumb:

That's a lot of words just to say that you don't believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work together.

There ain't a dispy here that would have any problem correcting me if needed.
Dipsies haven't corrected me on this because dipsies have common sense.

Here's the thing... Monergism versus Synergism cannot be applied internally to the Immanent Trinity (in contrast to the Economic Trinity). Synergism, as it is utilized in theology is a CONTINGENT relation between God and man. One of God's incommunicable attributes is Necessity, which is NON-Contingency. And to presume Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are contingent "parts" of God (despite the additional fact that "substance" in the English definition for synergy would be "ousia" rather than "hypostasis"), then it denies His incommunicable attribute of Simplicity.

If Neccessity and Simplicity are tossed out, then Eternity and Infinity and Immensity and all the others have to go away, too. This leaves us with no God of the Christian faith.

The internal co-inherence and circumincession and interpenetration of Father, Son, and Holy is perichoresis. This is what is being thrown under the bus, along with the cascade of EVERY incommunicable attribute of God.

And all for the sake of her not admitting she's wrong, and making up a transferance of Synergism to be projected upon God Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

And the kicker is... This STILL doesn't address the relation of God and man, and instead makes God even MORE Monergistic relative to Election and Salvation.

So Tamobra has destroyed every incommunicable attribute of God while taking a Hyper-hyper-hyper-hyper-hyper-hyper-hyper-hyper-hyper-Calvinist position. And all without having a clue.

This is an unparalleled heinous theological error beyond anything I've encountered or could imagine.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work together. It's called perichoresis.

You're the most heinous reprobate in the history of the Christian faith, and you can't even know it.

Here at TOL?
hehe!

Actually, I'm using the Greek words themselves and their definitions.
I could care less if any theology ring wants to use the words in a different way just to suit their own doctrine.
I know what the Greek words mean.
Working alone.
Working together.

And I bet most everyone knew what you meant without you having to create a special dictionary maze that tells you can only use those Greek words the way their ring specifies.
Common sense folks know that is not the only way those Greek words have to be used.

...

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

[MENTION=14978]PneumaPsucheSoma[/MENTION]
Copy this one too.

noun: synergism The interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. "The synergy between artist and record company."​ Synonyms: cooperative interaction, cooperation, combined effort, give and take Origin: Mid 19th century: from Greek sunergos ‘working together,’ from sun- ‘together’ + ergon - ‘work.’

The definition alone shows that the word itself is not ONLY used in relation to God and mankind.
So right off the bat we see that PPS's statement is false.

​

But let's not jump the gun on that.
PPS tries to insist that in the theology rings, it has a definite meaning that fits his view.

But as also shown within the very ring of the Reformed, it's not cut and dry
Some in the Reformed camp also believe that God acts both ways with mankind.

Some Calvinists teach that Monergism only applies to regeneration, and that sanctification is synergistic. Reformed Baptist Andrew Naselli expressed this view when he wrote: "A monergistic veiw of regeneration is biblical, but a monergistic view of sanctification is not."

Just because one theology ring uses the same word that other theology rings use does not mean that they both have the same view of the word.
In other words, the word's theological meaning is not universal among all theology rings.
That's what happens when you try to put so much limitation on a word as to force it to fit your own view.

By using the definition of the word as the dictionary states, it most certainly can be used of other groups working together, and is not limited to the relation between God and mankind only.
One family, of mankind (father, mother, child), can work together.
One family, of the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), can work together.
God and man can word together.

It is not limited to ONLY the relationship between God and mankind.
Making up your own theology meanings to words does not negate the actual meaning of the word, which is simply "working together".

The dictionary definition is correct.

It sure can.
We can clearly see Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) "working together".
The very definition of the word is "working together".

Only by your own theological view do you need to force a limited meaning that the very definition of the word itself does not do.
So, no, it is not me that is changing the definition of the word.

I understand that the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) do work together, which it seems you do not understand.

I use the word as the dictionary does.
You don't.
Plain and simple.

There is no reason to not use the dictionary definition of "working together" for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; because they certainly do work together.
It is only your theology that claims it shouldn't be used of God.
The dictionary makes no such distinction, nor should it.

Nope.
There is nothing within the definition of the word itself that demands it can only be done to achieve a holy life.
There are many things the word can be used for that have nothing to do with achieving a holy life.

You want simplicity?
Here it is ....
"Working together" is the definition of the word.
The word itself does not in any way deny the simplicity of GOD.
It is you that denies the simple meaning of the word --- working together.

There is no error.
The meaning of the very word itself is "working together".

And I think any person with common sense has no problem understanding what working together and working alone means, without the need for an extra theologly ring's special dictionary.

No, I'm not inventing a teaching at all.
I just know what the Greek words mean.
Working together.
Working alone.

Rebuke away.

I'll keep right on telling what the Greek words mean.
Working together.
Working alone.

Because I know what the Greek words mean????
ROFL!

No. Because you applied a Greek word that makes God contingent when applied as you have.

There are layers to why you're wrong beyond the word itself. There is NOTHING worse than what you have done. NOTHING.

If the Spirit doesn't correct you, there is not even the remotest possibility you are a Believer. A heart of faith cannot make that profession about God.

You're a Tritheist of the lowest order. In any other ancient era of the faith, you would be exiled. This is not a peripheral area of doctrine for imbeciles to attempt to innovate ad hoc in self-importance.

This is the one Holy and Righteous God, who is NOT internally contingent as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Perichoresis is the means of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit working together, and it's not erga (works) as part of the word synergy.

You are reprobate. And that's a two-millennia-long position of the authentic Christian faith. It's not my subjective opinion.

Go ask a high-level theologian, linguist, and scholar. You're outside the faith, beyond Unitarians, JWs, and LDSers, etc.

It's disgusting to have to even read your balsphemy against the one true and living Almighty God. And you cling to it because you're so proud you innovated and applied a word that you think pertains to God. Pathetic.

Sorry, but I never added the words "out of necessity".

The term synergy comes from the Attic Greek word συνεργία synergia from synergos, συνεργός, meaning "working together".

OK then, so far so good.

The term synergy comes from the Attic Greek word συνεργία synergia from synergos, συνεργός,meaning "working together"

...

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

PPS only has "402" Thanks? :rotfl: Some how I find that amusing.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Seems like PPS doesn't like Tam very much? Could it possibly be that she is more intelligent than he? YES! She makes him look bad and he can't take it. :crackup:

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I think perhaps PPS is kind of a Weasel of sorts.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Oh, you're a regular Wallace Cleaver, high filootin', way above the Lumpy's, and Eddie Haskell's of the world, Mayor, having attended "State," being a member of a "the Geek" fraternity, and a country club, ain't you Mayor? Why don't you become Rush chairman, and tell the prospects you are a member of Kappa Epsilon Gamma, i.e., K.E.G.? Or Beta Tau Upsilon, i.e., "Better Than U?" You're a real scream, Mayor.

You are uneducated in Moulage Proper, as your attempts at making a moulage are amateur.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I think perhaps PPS is kind of a Weasel of sorts.

My guess is that someone called him a dummy as a child, and since then his life's mission is to portray himself as the most intelligent person and make others feel dumb. I charge $200 a day plus expenses for my analysis.