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
  #1  
Old 06-19-2007, 08:37 PM
mizpeh mizpeh is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,749
Sola,

The doctrine of the eternal Son is being discussed over at the GNC. I'm involved in three threads and soon to be involved in two more which address the scriptures you chose in Colossians and Hebrews. If you want to go over there and discuss it, it would be much easier for me than trying to be in both places. The discussions are on the Answering Orthodox Trinitarianism section of the board and each passage has its own thread. There is also a thread here in Deep Waters about the eternal Son. Surprisingly on this topic I agree with Chan!

Quote:
Originally Posted by sola gratia View Post
2) the equivocation of the word, God
Not sure what you mean here…..
Here's an example of what I mean:
Below I asked a Trinitarian to interpret the word, God.

How do you interpret the word, God, in these 8 examples?

1. Jesus is God. Ontologically.
2. God is a Trinity. Relationally.
3. The God of our Fathers. God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).
4. And the Word was God. Ontologically.
5. God the Father One of the persons within God
6. Being in the form of God. Ontologically.
7. In the beginning, God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).
8. 2Cor5: 18-19 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation ....I'd say the Father.

As you can see, he attributes multiple meanings to the word, God, depending on the context. I'm not sure why in #8 he chose to say "Father" because I think this verse would cause a problem for Trinitarians as it is vague.

A Trinitarian will say the Father is God and the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God but they are not each other. (yet there is only one God) the word, God, in these instances they say means nature, the divine persons are individually 100% God. (Like a 100% cotton t-shirt) Then they will use the word, God, to mean 'the Trinity'. In the OT the word, God, is usually the Trinity because there is no incarnate Son to make a differentiation.

In the NT they will say 99% of the time the word, God, is referring to the Father, and the meaning will be found in context. In John 1:1 the word, God, is used twice. 1:1b and the Word was with God, 1:1c and the Word was God. Same Greek word, Theos, but they attribute different meanings to each. 1:1b they read as Father and 1:1 c they read as nature or God in a qualitative sense.

The word, God, is used in such a way by Trinitarians to suit their purposes. When I see the word, God, I think, my Creator. I don't have to rationalize which God ie: Father, Son, Holy Spirit or the Trinity as a whole, the Bible is speaking of. I don't think Jesus had a problem figuring out who God was either.

The quote below was written by a Unitarian:
Quote:
Trinitarians end up having three Gods as to person and 1 God as to nature. So in one respect they have three Gods and in another they have one God..

It makes it sound like Trinitarians are playing a shuffle game where they keep shuffling the word "nature" to the forefront and saying "See? We believe in ONE God"....to avoid the fact that when it comes to PERSONS they believe in THREE Gods


3) the absence of a Trinity in the OT See the first post on this thread by MOW and also click onto the link below:

Thank you for all the commentaries on the word Echad and Elohim. They are prime examples of Trinitarians reading their doctrine into scripture. The commentaries addressed the Shema:
Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

On the surface a person without any preconceived ideas would read this as being one in number not a compound unity or a united YHWH. A child would read this is such a way. Then to add to it all the singular pronouns associate with the LORD, like I, me, myself, he, him, his, etc found in the OT, a simpleton would easily deduce God to be one in number, monotheistic.

The quote below is taken from David Bernard's book The Oneness of God. In the Shema...one LORD is the same as one YHWH. YHWH according to DB means "He is" when spoken of in the third person or "I am" when God is speaking. If the word, one or echad, in the shema is meant to be a compound unity and not a numerical one then it doesn't seem to fit grammatically in describing a YHWH which is represented by first person singular pronouns.

Quote:
Yahweh (Jehovah) is the redemptive name of God in the Old Testament (Exodus 6:3-8), and the unique name by which the one true God distinguished Himself in the Old Testament from all other gods (Isaiah 42:8). It means the "Self-Existing One or the Eternal One." This concept also appears in the phrases "I AM THAT I AM" and "I AM," used by God of Himself. Flanders and Cresson explain that Yahweh is the third person form of the verb "to be" in Hebrew. [7] Yahweh means "He is." When used by God, the verb form is in the first person, or "I Am." In other words, Yahweh and "I Am" are different forms of the same verb. Furthermore, both connote an active (possibly causative or creative) existence rather than just a passive existence.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...al/One-Ch3.htm

Here's a link to something Praxeas wrote on this: http://www.goodnewscafe.net/forums/s...8&postcount=19

Something from another Oneness believer:
http://www.christiandiscussionforums...86&postcount=7
__________________
His banner over me is LOVE.... My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?

To be a servant of God, it will cost us our total commitment to God, and God alone. His burden must be our burden... Sis Alvear
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:03 AM
H2H's Avatar
H2H H2H is offline
HART2HART


 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 626
"How about God the ventriliquist? God in heaven with using his "big voice" "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased" God now in His little voice "thank you Father, I have fulfilled all righteousness"

This actually has some truth in it! It really only is problematic when we view it as Jesus (the begotten Son) the ventriliquist!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:06 AM
sola gratia's Avatar
sola gratia sola gratia is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2H View Post
"How about God the ventriliquist? God in heaven with using his "big voice" "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased" God now in His little voice "thank you Father, I have fulfilled all righteousness"

This actually has some truth in it! It really only is problematic when we view it as Jesus (the begotten Son) the ventriliquist!
Not for a trinitarian
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:12 AM
H2H's Avatar
H2H H2H is offline
HART2HART


 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by sola gratia View Post
Not for a trinitarian
I am saying if one believes the Son was speaking in the garden and then answering from heaven it becomes problematic - and ventriliquism.

But if it is viewed as the Son (God incarnate) speaking to the Father (God apart from the incarnation) it makes perfect sense.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:08 AM
H2H's Avatar
H2H H2H is offline
HART2HART


 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 626
The Trinitarian doctrine was formulated primarily by well-meaning church leaders who wished to purge the church of heresies much more damnable than Trinitarianism it'self.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:13 AM
sola gratia's Avatar
sola gratia sola gratia is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2H View Post
The Trinitarian doctrine was formulated primarily by well-meaning church leaders who wished to purge the church of heresies much more damnable than Trinitarianism it'self.
I agree with this....I think.... unless the "damnable" is linked to the "Trinitarianism"
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:16 AM
H2H's Avatar
H2H H2H is offline
HART2HART


 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by sola gratia View Post
I agree with this....I think.... unless the "damnable" is linked to the "Trinitarianism"
Are you Trinitarian yourself?


The Trinitarian and Oneness doctrines are much closer than some of the Christology the early church Fathers were fighting.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:19 AM
SDG SDG is offline
Guest


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2H View Post
Are you Trinitarian yourself?


The Trinitarian and Oneness doctrines are much closer than some of the Christology the early church Fathers were fighting.
SG is a special breed .. a hybrid that I love!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-18-2007, 06:42 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2H View Post
Are you Trinitarian yourself?


The Trinitarian and Oneness doctrines are much closer than some of the Christology the early church Fathers were fighting.
Actually there were MANY early church history "heresies" that were called Trinitarian heresies because they all believed in FAther, Son and Holy Ghost and that they were distinct from one another. When did Trinitarians begin using the word Person...so you know Sola?
__________________
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
  #10  
Old 06-19-2007, 10:25 AM
Chan
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas View Post
Actually there were MANY early church history "heresies" that were called Trinitarian heresies because they all believed in FAther, Son and Holy Ghost and that they were distinct from one another. When did Trinitarians begin using the word Person...so you know Sola?
Trinitarians didn't start using the word "person" of "persons" in the trinity until it came to exist in the English language (which did not exist at the time the Nicene fathers formulated the Nicene and Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creeds). The Nicene and Ante-Nicene fathers used the Greek word prosopon or the Latin word persona to individually describe Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In the fifth century, Cyril insisted that hypostasis should be used in the places of prosopon, contrary to the way hypostasis is used in Hebrews 1:3 for God alone and not individually for Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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
Oneness and Trinitarian Unity? RunningOnFaith Deep Waters 178 11-01-2016 10:35 PM
The Trinitarian Appreciation Thread - We Thank You. SDG The D.A.'s Office 472 02-11-2011 05:43 PM
A Statement By Bro Barnes Ron Deep Waters 30 07-25-2007 09:40 PM
What does this statement mean for ex-Upcers? Pressing-On Deep Waters 67 05-01-2007 11:56 AM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Salome
- by Amanah

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.