You guys so invite it. Have you not noticed that I reply according to people's reply to me? I am perfectly able and willing to discus things like adults. But if people want to act like children with snarky and cryptic replies, I'm very good at that also (even though it's waste of time). Like I said, in wit and doctrine, I have no equals here at gsc. Stop messing around and stay on topic.
You guys so invite it. Have you not noticed that I reply according to people's reply to me? I am perfectly able and willing to discus things like adults. But if people want to act like children with snarky and cryptic replies, I'm very good at that also (even though it's waste of time). Like I said, in wit and doctrine, I have no equals here at gsc. Stop messing around and stay on topic.
You forgot about humor. You're way up there in humor, too.
Okay, so why is the Trinity humorous? If you find it funny, there's something that rubs you the wrong way about it and I'd like if you'd articulate those reasons clearly.
2 hours ago, rrobs said:
I did forget about the humour. The best part. Thanks...
Hey not to interrupt the trolling or anything, but I did want to post in this other link w/r to the doctrine of the Trinity. This thread linked has some higher level discussion from a member in theology school.
If you have The Trinity, can you have Stiles version of "all nine all the time"?
Yeah most threads hit a wall here.
I think what most Waybrained people do is if someone has the Trinity, they go all "mean girl" on them, label them, tune them out, and look upon them as a lesser life form, all while denying doing that vehemently. The "household of God" effect as separate from the "body of Christ". So God can't inspire someone to rescue a kid from sex slavery overseas with a mission, to pick up on spiritual intel, to bring justice and healing, all because somebody cites ritualistically a 1000 year old creed with the Trinity in it weekly and got taught an outdated doctrine in Sunday school once? I think God is not bound by the stupid things people are bound by. Including man's view of God mysticized into a doctrine or some dumb catch phrase trying to make someone feel more spiritual about themselves than they are.
I think God has to be mystery or he/it/she is not a god. No God would not be bound.
I think Waybrain is reductionist. It is reductionist because it is controlling. Because people are not gods they have to create a world in their mind that is oversimplified. All reasoning must be controlled in their Totalitarian System. Simple reasoning is easier to control.
A forever on-going discussion, like, "What's The Trinity?", can't be controlled, can it?
But I also suspect their non-trinatarian view helps in supporting other Way Doctrine.
Questions about the identity of Jesus Christ are almost as old as Christianity itself. The gospels and epistles are, at least in part, a rebuttal to early claims about exactly who Jesus was, both before and after his resurrection.
He's the Son of God. Why? In Mark it's at his baptism. In Luke and Matthew it's by virtue of him not having an earthly father. In John it's a relationship that predates his birth. All answers are Biblically defensible. The inescapable conclusion from the gospels: he is the Son of God.
But John is the only gospel that explicitly appears to make the case that he is actually God as well (although John would probably be denounced as a heretic for claiming that the Father is in any way greater than the Son).
The Trinity as a doctrine developed over time.
That Christ was a being who existed prior to his earthly life can reasonably be deduced from the writings of Paul.
We in TWI made the mistake of thinking there was something Biblically unreasonable about a doctrine like "the incarnation," as though there were no Biblical support for it. To the contrary, the Biblical support is strong and must be addressed for a Socinian model (his existence began at conception/birth, just like ours) to hold water.
It should be noted that the biggest controversy around the time of Nicea was whether Jesus pre-existed as God or as an angel. That he was "just a man" was not even a finalist.
You could (and we did) make a Biblical case that because he is not God (John 14:28) and he was not an angel (Hebrews 1), then he must have been a man, although an extraordinary one. But the case for Jesus as God is far from non-existent. And the case for Jesus as a pre-existing angel is perhaps even stronger (that's the Jehovah's Witness position).
For what it's worth, I find it interesting that after he became an agnostic, Bart Ehrman (very recently) began subscribing to the belief that the earliest Christians were Arian (that is, they believed Jesus to be an angel prior to his birth, "the firstborn of all creation" in a very literal sense.
My personal belief is that you can't get to one answer because there isn't one answer at the core of the argument. Finding out what the Bible says about who Jesus really was is complicated, perhaps irreparably, by the fact that the Bible's writers don't seem to agree with each other on the subject.
Raf, yes!!! Yes, what the Bible says about JC really is complicated!! I personally think he was a great man of God, and the focal point of Human History. But, I like to keep things simple; other people have a right to their opinions about him.
I guess that supports the idea that VPW chose a non-Trinitarian view because he was looking for certain types of minds. TWI was not for just any type of mind.
Bol, you have raised an interesting question. If TWI, wasn't for just any type of mind, what type of mind was it for?? I have often wondered why some were attracted to TWI, and others weren't.
Bol, you have raised an interesting question. If TWI, wasn't for just any type of mind, what type of mind was it for?? I have often wondered why some were attracted to TWI, and others weren't.
The phrase "the word" is repeated 3 times in John 1. All three times it is O logos in the Greek. That "O" is the word "the." It points out a particular thing. It is not at all like saying "a word." If it did say "a word" I think you might be correct. But "the word" is something different. All three references are to "the word." "The word" is always "the word." Not one "word" here and another "word" there.
I think Christ certainly had a divine nature. Now that you and I are born again, so do we. Part of the new creation God created in us. Now I don't know about you, but I'm sure I'm not God. You're probably not God either. My divine nature doesn't make me God nor did Jesus' divine nature make him God.
I didn't check out Phil 2 or Col 2, but I will.
I have no idea how you misconstrued what I said.....What I said was - THE word was with God and THE word was God - I did NOT say "A word" . Hopefully that was an honest misunderstanding on your part...or misreading of my post , and not a deliberate misdirection....Let me throw in John 1:14 for good measure - THE word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
Also there is a major difference between Jesus' divine nature and what we have:
II Peter 1 says we are partakers of the divine nature - "partakers" in Greek as well as English means we take a given portion or share along with others - we participate in something greater than ourselves...we experience undeserved benefits from God at Christ's expense. I don't believe there is any scriptural support to suggest we become God or Gods.
Also consider the superlative descriptions of Jesus Christ found in Colossians 2 and Philippians 2 - to just reference one of them ought to be enough for now - in Colossians 2:9 NIV says - for in Christ all the fullness of The Deity lives in bodily form - - that is HIS divine nature - the infinite attributes of God! So contrary to what you said - it looks to me like Jesus Christ's DIVINE nature does indeed make him God.
It's funny how you and certain others followed me here. I thought the basement was pretty low. I guess you just don't want to miss any of my knowledge. That's cool. Stick around. I'll teach you a few things.
Rrobs, you'll teach us a few things???!!! My, what an ego you have!! I don't come here to "teach" anyone; I come to this site to learn. Have a nice day, I am waiting for my gentleman friend to take me out.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
41
26
22
19
Popular Days
Mar 8
23
Jul 8
21
Mar 10
17
Jul 20
17
Top Posters In This Topic
Bolshevik 41 posts
chockfull 26 posts
TLC 22 posts
Grace Valerie Claire 19 posts
Popular Days
Mar 8 2018
23 posts
Jul 8 2017
21 posts
Mar 10 2018
17 posts
Jul 20 2017
17 posts
Popular Posts
chockfull
What experience with churches today exactly do you have? Aren't you one of the ones that isolated and studied PFAL collaterals for a decade plus not attending churches? In my experience the trin
Raf
Questions about the identity of Jesus Christ are almost as old as Christianity itself. The gospels and epistles are, at least in part, a rebuttal to early claims about exactly who Jesus was, both befo
Bolshevik
We're not really trying to prove or disprove existence of anything in this thread. If many people over generations talk about it, that's good enough. It exists. Do the various views of trinity/
Bolshevik
Not sure what "you guys" means.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rrobs
Barf...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rrobs
In Latin it would be: "vos guys." Got it now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
No.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rrobs
It's not important.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
That's for sure! LMAO!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
You forgot about humor. You're way up there in humor, too.
Hahahahahahahaha!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rrobs
I did forget about the humour. The best part. Thanks...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Okay, so why is the Trinity humorous? If you find it funny, there's something that rubs you the wrong way about it and I'd like if you'd articulate those reasons clearly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
To clarify, this is the part of rrobs post I found humorous:
" Like I said, in wit and doctrine, I have no equals here at gsc."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I saw that.
Just waiting on some evidence to validate or support his claim.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Hey not to interrupt the trolling or anything, but I did want to post in this other link w/r to the doctrine of the Trinity. This thread linked has some higher level discussion from a member in theology school.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
It looks like that thread hit a wall, too.
But there are some good points in there.
If you have The Trinity, can you have Stiles version of "all nine all the time"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Yeah most threads hit a wall here.
I think what most Waybrained people do is if someone has the Trinity, they go all "mean girl" on them, label them, tune them out, and look upon them as a lesser life form, all while denying doing that vehemently. The "household of God" effect as separate from the "body of Christ". So God can't inspire someone to rescue a kid from sex slavery overseas with a mission, to pick up on spiritual intel, to bring justice and healing, all because somebody cites ritualistically a 1000 year old creed with the Trinity in it weekly and got taught an outdated doctrine in Sunday school once? I think God is not bound by the stupid things people are bound by. Including man's view of God mysticized into a doctrine or some dumb catch phrase trying to make someone feel more spiritual about themselves than they are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I think God has to be mystery or he/it/she is not a god. No God would not be bound.
I think Waybrain is reductionist. It is reductionist because it is controlling. Because people are not gods they have to create a world in their mind that is oversimplified. All reasoning must be controlled in their Totalitarian System. Simple reasoning is easier to control.
A forever on-going discussion, like, "What's The Trinity?", can't be controlled, can it?
But I also suspect their non-trinatarian view helps in supporting other Way Doctrine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Raf, yes!!! Yes, what the Bible says about JC really is complicated!! I personally think he was a great man of God, and the focal point of Human History. But, I like to keep things simple; other people have a right to their opinions about him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Bol, you have raised an interesting question. If TWI, wasn't for just any type of mind, what type of mind was it for?? I have often wondered why some were attracted to TWI, and others weren't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
This thread is an old and for the bin.
I don't know the answer, Grace.
Waybrain, just is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I have no idea how you misconstrued what I said.....What I said was - THE word was with God and THE word was God - I did NOT say "A word" . Hopefully that was an honest misunderstanding on your part...or misreading of my post , and not a deliberate misdirection....Let me throw in John 1:14 for good measure - THE word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
Also there is a major difference between Jesus' divine nature and what we have:
II Peter 1 says we are partakers of the divine nature - "partakers" in Greek as well as English means we take a given portion or share along with others - we participate in something greater than ourselves...we experience undeserved benefits from God at Christ's expense. I don't believe there is any scriptural support to suggest we become God or Gods.
Also consider the superlative descriptions of Jesus Christ found in Colossians 2 and Philippians 2 - to just reference one of them ought to be enough for now - in Colossians 2:9 NIV says - for in Christ all the fullness of The Deity lives in bodily form - - that is HIS divine nature - the infinite attributes of God! So contrary to what you said - it looks to me like Jesus Christ's DIVINE nature does indeed make him God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Just an FYI: the same could be said of ZERO when in the company of ones and twos.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Rrobs, you'll teach us a few things???!!! My, what an ego you have!! I don't come here to "teach" anyone; I come to this site to learn. Have a nice day, I am waiting for my gentleman friend to take me out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Bol, I think he means us mere mortals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Way, I think Rob's has a huge ego problem. I think there are way more people here at the GSC, who are funnier, and smarter. Nuff said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
In English, it would be Bullsheet! Got it??!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.