Who was it that had that "treaty" analogy for the trinity? I thought that was a very good one.
Announcement
Collapse
General Theistics 101 Guidelines
This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.
The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.
Forum Rules: Here
The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
My brief (and polemical) thought about Christianity...
Collapse
X
-
I think the analogy of "two persons make one couple" is a Biblical analogy of the Trinity.
"So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them." (Gen. 1:27)
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostI think the analogy of "two persons make one couple" is a Biblical analogy of the Trinity.
"So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them." (Gen. 1:27)
Blessings,
Lee
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostWho was it that had that "treaty" analogy for the trinity? I thought that was a very good one.
Originally posted by Littlejoe View PostLet's suppose that there is a treaty drawn up between the US and Germany. How many treaties are executed? The answer is three: A treaty executed in English, a treaty executed in German, and a treaty executed in French (which of course is the language of the UN). Every one of the these three treaties is fully the treaty, they are not just copies of the treaty. The English Treaty is fully and actually the treaty apart from and separate from the other two. The French version is fully and actually the treaty...again apart from and separate from the others. At the same time, the German Treaty is also fully and separately the actual treaty. Yet, there is no question that the treaties are different as one is in English, one in French and one in German. So, you have one "Thing", the treaty between the US and Germany can be made up of three "Things" (the English, German and French treaty) where each of them is fully the "Thing" (the treaty) but each of the 3 things are distinct from each other.
There you have it, three things that are one thing.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Christian3 View PostSome think "three persons" means three people; it doesn't.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. Saying "3 people in one being" wouldn't really be the conventional way to phrase it, but I fail to see how it differs semantically from "3 persons in one being" even a little bit.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostThat would be ME!
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostSo LJ is hacking the prodder of bovines' account?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostRats.... you saw that, did ya?
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostJust an aside, I was talking with some pastor friends about expository preaching, and one of them mentioned the notion that, if you only preach expository sermons - going through the Bible book by book, verse by verse -- you will never preach on the Trinity.
No passage uses the word, "Trinity," and not all of those passages I cited may be relevant, but there are plenty of passages that do suggest multiple distinct persons all referred to as "I AM" or "God" or "Lord." You can't preach on them without saying *something* about what they mean.Last edited by NorrinRadd; 08-21-2019, 06:25 PM.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostWell... At *some* point, you'll need to address what is meant by "Let *US* make..." in Genesis, or "The Word was with God and the Word was God," or "Before Abraham was, I AM," or any number of other passages.
No passage uses the word, "Trinity," and not all of those passages I cited may be relevant, but there are plenty of passages that do suggest multiple distinct persons all referred to as "I AM" or "God" or "Lord." You can't preach on them without saying *something* about what they mean.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostYou think my post is somehow representative of New Atheism ideas? How did you come to that conclusion?
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostDon't bother taking anything demi-conservative says seriously. He's only here to troll.Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. Saying "3 people in one being" wouldn't really be the conventional way to phrase it, but I fail to see how it differs semantically from "3 persons in one being" even a little bit.
Comment
-
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment