Most complex explanation of the Godhead ever!

[1ofthechosen]

Those points y'all got so far was the ones I received too. That and the one where he said"everything created has visible, and invisible attributes." Also how he explained God being light. That you don't see the actual light, but the reflection of it.

I wish I could also get a copy of the text too, I could really chew on it and understand it better. Then I could really understand what all he's saying!! Lol

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This is the type of message that I would love to have the text.

Two months late, but you can order the syllabus (has all of the text from every session since it was more of a "scholarly presentation") at https://sotad.org/materials.

[jediwill83]

So is it a good thing to be "complex"?


Shouldn't veracity and simplicity be at the core of our doctrine?


Did He not choose the simple things to confound the wise?


Albert Einstein said "If you can't explain the topic to a 6 year old, you don't understand the subject well enough."


My beef isn't with Oneness...far from it...but are we lauding complexity over simplicity?


If I have a recipe for gumbo, the goal is to make an awesome tasting dish in the simplest way possible while still retaining the flavor and quality.


An excess of ingredients does not always a good pot of gumbo make.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by jediwill83

So is it a good thing to be "complex"?


Shouldn't veracity and simplicity be at the core of our doctrine?


Did He not choose the simple things to confound the wise?


Albert Einstein said "If you can't explain the topic to a 6 year old, you don't understand the subject well enough."


My beef isn't with Oneness...far from it...but are we lauding complexity over simplicity?


If I have a recipe for gumbo, the goal is to make an awesome tasting dish in the simplest way possible while still retaining the flavor and quality.


An excess of ingredients does not always a good pot of gumbo make.

No complex is not good. Btw that was the worst explaination of the Godhead I've ever heard, I couldn't even keep up with him.

I just wanted to see what others said about it, and find out if someone would translate what was said into layman's terms lol. But apparently everyone who listened to it that said something, heard the exact things I did pick up on. So this is my most unfavorite Brother Wilson teaching ever.

Complex is never good!

In fact this one was much better if you ask me.

[Michael The Disciple]

I was very disappointed. May be philosophically "complex" but would be no help at all sharing the Oneness of God with Trinitarians.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I was very disappointed. May be philosophically "deep" but would be no help at all sharing the Oneness of God with Trinitarians.

"Most of that discussion that was addressed earlier, was on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th Century, most of that discussion quickly became politicized and it was about who had more political power than any other thing. It really was not a sincere theological search. in many cases. It was, 'Let's get him. This is how we get him.' So, we are trying to avoid all of that here. The reason that I don't start out trying to describe stuff that was created in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries is that it is waste of time."

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I was very disappointed. May be philosophically "complex" but would be no help at all sharing the Oneness of God with Trinitarians.

Why do you say that? Can you share more details why your saying that bro

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Why do you say that? Can you share more details why your saying that bro

I thought he was going to teach a deep message on the Logos. Something much needed. He threw out tidbits but did not get into any real meat on the subject. I have been in many, many discussions with Trins and Oneness.

The Oneness are usually defeated because of their lame teaching on the Logos. Not that the Trins are right either but in that part of the discussions they do make the Oneness look bad.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I thought he was going to teach a deep message on the Logos. Something much needed. He threw out tidbits but did not get into any real meat on the subject. I have been in many, many discussions with Trins and Oneness.

The Oneness are usually eaten alive because of their lame and stale teaching on the Logos. Not that the Trins are right either but in that part of the discussions they do make the Oneness look bad.

what do you mean by "either" are you not a oneness believer?

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

what do you mean by "either" are you not a oneness believer?

I am a Oneness believer. Yet in the many discussions (contending for the faith) I have seen or been part of very few Oneness are able to hold their own. I'm not saying they dont believe in Oneness but they usually dont last very long in the discussions.

Oneness teachers are certainly hard to find.