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
See more
See less

My brief (and polemical) thought about Christianity...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
    No it wouldn't, because three people is not equal to three beings.
    Some people don't understand what "three persons" means.

    The word “person” carries a lot of baggage in my opinion. The use of the word “person” brings to our minds three people, like Tom, Dick and Harry. All three are people and all three are separate beings.

    This is not how the word “person” is used in the Trinity. In the nature of the one God, the One Being who is God, there are three centers of consciousness, who we call “persons.” These persons are equal. The Trinity is an absolute unity and they relate to one another in love. The Trinity is relational.

    Unlike people or human persons the persons of the Trinity are not separable from one another, they indwell each other.

    “Persons” means there are three personal distinctions within God, each who is fully God, yet only one God.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Christian3 View Post
      Some people don't understand what "three persons" means.

      The word “person” carries a lot of baggage in my opinion. The use of the word “person” brings to our minds three people, like Tom, Dick and Harry. All three are people and all three are separate beings.

      This is not how the word “person” is used in the Trinity. In the nature of the one God, the One Being who is God, there are three centers of consciousness, who we call “persons.” These persons are equal. The Trinity is an absolute unity and they relate to one another in love. The Trinity is relational.

      Unlike people or human persons the persons of the Trinity are not separable from one another, they indwell each other.

      “Persons” means there are three personal distinctions within God, each who is fully God, yet only one God.
      On a less serious note, I've had the opportunity to sit under the teaching of Dr J I Packer for a week, and when he would talk about the Trinity, he would refer to "God in three PAIRsons*". I don't know why, but I always got a kick out of that.


      *British accent, and all
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        On a less serious note, I've had the opportunity to sit under the teaching of Dr J I Packer for a week, and when he would talk about the Trinity, he would refer to "God in three PAIRsons*". I don't know why, but I always got a kick out of that.


        *British accent, and all
        Funny. I have J.I. Packer's book, "Knowing God" and it is excellent.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Christian3 View Post
          Funny. I have J.I. Packer's book, "Knowing God" and it is excellent.
          Yes, he shared some insights from that work at this conference I reference.
          "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Christian3 View Post
            Some people don't understand what "three persons" means.

            The word “person” carries a lot of baggage in my opinion. The use of the word “person” brings to our minds three people, like Tom, Dick and Harry. All three are people and all three are separate beings.

            This is not how the word “person” is used in the Trinity. In the nature of the one God, the One Being who is God, there are three centers of consciousness, who we call “persons.” These persons are equal. The Trinity is an absolute unity and they relate to one another in love. The Trinity is relational.

            Unlike people or human persons the persons of the Trinity are not separable from one another, they indwell each other.

            “Persons” means there are three personal distinctions within God, each who is fully God, yet only one God.
            I'm not sure what your point is?
            ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Seeker View Post
              More likely, he knows very well who he is talking to. And he knows it is not worth it.

              And you call yourself a Christian?
              Again amateurish. Can't argue well, can't do 'you are not real Christian well', suggestion of demi is to stay out of Apologetics 301.
              Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                Again amateurish. Can't argue well, can't do 'you are not real Christian well', suggestion of demi is to stay out of Apologetics 301.
                At least I can spell properly, dude...or should I say, troll.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                  JP Holding's short e-book on the Trinity explains it in a way that even I can understand. (Though the obvious question is that if his interpretation is correct, why did the early church fathers have so much trouble understanding it?)
                  I have read Holding's articles on the Trinity a decade ago, and I remember it making some sense to me. Perhaps I should look for them again.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                    JP Holding's short e-book on the Trinity explains it in a way that even I can understand. (Though the obvious question is that if his interpretation is correct, why did the early church fathers have so much trouble understanding it?)
                    Assuming Holding's interpretation/understanding of the Trinity is correct the reason why the ECF would have had trouble understanding the doctrine would probably be because they were the ones who had to lay all the groundwork that made it possible for Holding to present/explain the Trinity in such a simple manner in the first place. I.e, JPH's explanation of the Trinity is only possible because of the ECF's struggle/hard work of trying to make sense of the Trinity in the first place.
                    ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                      Assuming Holding's interpretation/understanding of the Trinity is correct the reason why the ECF would have had trouble understanding the doctrine would probably be because they were the ones who had to lay all the groundwork that made it possible for Holding to present/explain the Trinity in such a simple manner in the first place. I.e, JPH's explanation of the Trinity is only possible because of the ECF's struggle/hard work of trying to make sense of the Trinity in the first place.
                      The ECFs struggled rather more over the nature of Jesus Christ than the Trinity per se.
                      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                      sigpic
                      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        The ECFs struggled rather more over the nature of Jesus Christ than the Trinity per se.
                        The two aren't mutually exclusive. Maybe they did both, though I have no historical knowledge or background to confirm that.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                          The two aren't mutually exclusive. Maybe they did both, though I have no historical knowledge or background to confirm that.
                          They're not mutually exclusive, but once Jesus Christ was agreed to be homoousious with the Father, Arianism rapidly disappeared, whereas the Nestorian and Monophysite disagreements were more permanent.
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                            The two aren't mutually exclusive. Maybe they did both, though I have no historical knowledge or background to confirm that.
                            Basically the first and biggest struggle was to figure out concepts and terms to describe the relationship of God the Father and God the Son. The issues arise because of the descriptions of Jesus as being born of woman and as God incarnate and subservient to Father. The difficulty is for the creation to understand the Creator in a fashion that people can comprehend.

                            The additional discussion of the Holy Spirit was added later after the focus shifted away from the place of Jesus in the Godhead. The Holy Spirit debate was simpler since no incarnation aspect had to be figured out here.

                            Comment


                            • #59

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I should have also mentioned this isn't even ''Apologetics 301'', but ''General Theistics 101''. So, one more thing you didn't get right...

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X