Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Sanctuary > Deep Waters
Facebook

Notices

Deep Waters 'Deep Calleth Unto Deep ' -The place to go for Ministry discussions. Please keep it civil. Remember to discuss the issues, not each other.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-16-2007, 12:50 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
Now I am puzzled, are you saying that the Son IS the Father, that must be the case if you deny that the Son is someone other than the Father.
You are not puzzled, you just don't bother to pay attention. I have NEVER once said the Son is someone other than the Father. Just because I say there is a distinction between Father and Son does NOT mean that distinction is a personal one. It's an existential one and one partly of nature
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-24-2007, 05:00 AM
Iron_Bladder
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas View Post
You are not puzzled, you just don't bother to pay attention. I have NEVER once said the Son is someone other than the Father. Just because I say there is a distinction between Father and Son does NOT mean that distinction is a personal one. It's an existential one and one partly of nature


OK please tell me is the Son somebody other than the Father ... yes or no?


Secondly, how can the distinction between the Father and the Son be an impersonal distinction as that would imply that each are to 'it's.' You can't possibly be claiming that father is impersonal and Son is impersonal as father and Son are obviously personal terms. A Father is a 'he' and can never be described as an 'it.'

I think that part of your problem Praxeas is that you've turned theology and the Bible into a nose of wax which you can turn any way that you choose. So you've claim elsewhere that the Son is etenral but that he;s not an eternal Son .... this is a nose of wax and is meaningless and demonstrates your lack of understanding of basic theological terms.

Now your claiming (or you will claim) that the Father is impersonal and the Son is imperosnal, but there is a distiction between two impersonal things (Father and Son). if you understood the difference between the words personal and impersonal, you wouldn't make such basic errors, whcih demonstarate your inability to dialoge with Trinitarians like myself, to whom language possesses precise meaning and isn't to be changed and redefined on a whim. The word Father is the one word in human history which can never be or mean impersonal .... Father must mean personal, please think and pray about this.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-24-2007, 09:39 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
OK please tell me is the Son somebody other than the Father ... yes or no?
Are you serious? How many times have I told you already even on THIS forum, let alone others, that the Son is NOT NOT someone other than the Father? See it's your asking these questions that we have answered already and acting as though we have not already answered, that makes you seem like a troll. How can we take you seriously when you do that Robert?

Quote:
Secondly, how can the distinction between the Father and the Son be an impersonal distinction as that would imply that each are to 'it's.'
NO it would not imply they are two its. It would MEAN that the difference between Father and Son is one of nature and form of being. For example. A difference between you and I...a Distinction that is not one of person, is that you live in Britain and I live in America and yet we are not it's are we?

Quote:
You can't possibly be claiming that father is impersonal and Son is impersonal as father and Son are obviously personal terms. A Father is a 'he' and can never be described as an 'it.'
You are right, I never claimed that. You don't seem to be able or willing to grasp what it is I have plainly stated

Quote:
I think that part of your problem Praxeas is that you've turned theology and the Bible into a nose of wax which you can turn any way that you choose. So you've claim elsewhere that the Son is etenral but that he;s not an eternal Son .... this is a nose of wax and is meaningless and demonstrates your lack of understanding of basic theological terms.
This is your strawman argument, for you would rather quibble about what we actually believe than try to refute what we believe from the bible. My views remain consistant and unchanged. The PERSON of the Son is God Himself. He became the Son when HE added a human nature to His own person. Thus WHO the Son is (yahweh) has eternally existed AS God Himself. The Human nature of the Son has not always existed. The divine essence, ontologically united in the Son is eternal. The Son is then NOT a second eternally existing person named Son. The Son is the ONLY God incarnate. So when I speak of the Son's Deity in all it's implication I am referring NOT to the incarnation mode of being, but to the Divine person and essence that was incarnate.

Quote:
Now your claiming (or you will claim) that the Father is impersonal and the Son is imperosnal, but there is a distiction between two impersonal things (Father and Son).
Robert do you have a nose of wax on your face? I never EVER said Father and Son are impersonal. However PERSON is not the same thing as NATURE. That seems to be your problem. You don't understand terms

Quote:
if you understood the difference between the words personal and impersonal, you wouldn't make such basic errors, whcih demonstarate your inability to dialoge with Trinitarians like myself, to whom language possesses precise meaning and isn't to be changed and redefined on a whim.
I never said Father and Son were impersonal. YOU lied and claimed I said they were impersonal. All I said was that the DISTINCTION between Father and Son is not a personal distinction. In other words they are not two DIFFERENT PERSONS. They are the SAME person, but there are OTHER differences that make Father DIFFERENT from SON.

Quote:
The word Father is the one word in human history which can never be or mean impersonal .... Father must mean personal, please think and pray about this.
That's nice, now can you please start dealing with what I said and not what you keep inserting into what I said?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-06-2007, 08:55 AM
Iron_Bladder
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas View Post
You are not puzzled, you just don't bother to pay attention. I have NEVER once said the Son is someone other than the Father. Just because I say there is a distinction between Father and Son does NOT mean that distinction is a personal one. It's an existential one and one partly of nature

How can the distinction between a father and a son NOT be personal? The terms Father and Son are just about as personal as you can get. I'd agree that teh distinction between two stones or between two bridges isn't a personal distinction, but it's ontologically impossible for the Father and Son even to exist as impersonal beings or to have impersonal distinctions.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-06-2007, 09:09 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
How can the distinction between a father and a son NOT be personal? The terms Father and Son are just about as personal as you can get. I'd agree that teh distinction between two stones or between two bridges isn't a personal distinction, but it's ontologically impossible for the Father and Son even to exist as impersonal beings or to have impersonal distinctions.
Still resorting to strawman arguments I see. I never said Father and Son are impersonal things. Father and Son are both the same PERSONAL Deity. The DISTINCTIONS that means "differences" between Father and Son is NOT that they are two different persons or people, but that they are two different forms or modes of existence of the same Personal Deity. I have explained that before already
__________________
Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:


  1. There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
  2. The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
  3. Every sinner must repent of their sins.
  4. That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
  5. That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
  6. The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-15-2007, 08:15 AM
Iron_Bladder
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas View Post
Good grief. YOu just don't read.

The Son is NOT someone other than God. Get it? The Son is NOT another person from God. The Son and God are the same PERSON. The Son is that God incarnate. Deity AND Humanity hypostatically united.

The SON is BOTH Deity and Humanity. So as to The Son's PERSON and DEITY, HE is God. He is Creator. HE is Eternal, but HE was not always the Son until that Deity and Humanity were united. The Son is NOT just His humanity NOR just His Deity. The Son is that PERSONAL God and Divine nature hypostatically united with a Human nature



I never said otherwise
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-15-2007, 08:00 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
I never said otherwise
Yes you DID say otherwise. YOu have over and over told me and us that we believe the Son is someone other than God that the son is NOT both God and man and when I reiterate that you tell me you never said otherwise??oloroid
__________________
Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:


  1. There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
  2. The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
  3. Every sinner must repent of their sins.
  4. That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
  5. That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
  6. The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The righteous will scarcely be saved LaVonne Deep Waters 54 04-05-2007 04:34 PM
John 2:6 - Background? Pressing-On Deep Waters 19 04-05-2007 09:04 AM
Are You Really Saved ? Joelel Deep Waters 82 04-04-2007 08:35 AM
It Is My Sincere Hope & Prayer That All Trinitarians Be Saved. Digging4Truth Fellowship Hall 20 04-02-2007 12:02 PM
John Looper MissBrattified The Newsroom 0 02-20-2007 08:51 AM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.