Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PneumaPsucheSoma and AMR Discuss Trinitarianism

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Nang View Post
    Perhaps you gentlemen should consider a private conversation, rather than casting any pearls amongst these swine, and thus opening yourselves to suffering insults worse than what have already been put forth, prior to any discussion at all.

    Either that, or ask for a 1 on 1 from Knight, that will prevent inane and ignorant commentary from the peanut gallery.
    yes. unfortunately that's likely what they are already doing or will do. because even the wise considerate people like me & you can't keep from being nice and respectful. imagine the ones that don't care. AMR does one on one, pps might know enough to put in digestable words later. oh well - - Patience
    Last edited by patrick jane; February 17th, 2015, 10:05 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      I did not want to burden the management team with a one-on-one. I also think the time limits of the one-on-one format are restrictive for me at least at present. I am already on the hook for a one-on-one that I have not been able to support given the home situation.

      This discussion is likely to be moving at a slow pace. I usually have only very late night or early mornings, when all is quiet at home, to devote any time in these discussions.

      I have also noted in a post above that I will regrettably be ignoring posts from others once things get going. I have also asked PPS to do the same.

      As for tomfoolery, mockery, and what not from drive-by posters just wanting to be seen, I think I will be able to overlook them and feel no obligation to respond.

      AMR
      Embedded links in my posts or in my sig below are included for a reason. Tolle Lege.



      Do you confess?
      Founder, Reformed Theology Institute
      AMR's Randomata Blog
      Learn Reformed Doctrine
      I fear explanations explanatory of things explained.
      Christian, catholic, Calvinist, confessional, Presbyterian (PCA).
      Lex orandi, lex credenda: everyone is a Calvinist on their knees.
      The best TOL Social Group: here.
      If your username appears in blue and you have over 500 posts:
      Why?


      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post
        I did not want to burden the management team with a one-on-one. I also think the time limits of the one-on-one format are restrictive for me at least at present. I am already on the hook for a one-on-one that I have not been able to support given the home situation.

        This discussion is likely to be moving at a slow pace. I usually have only very late night or early mornings, when all is quiet at home, to devote any time in these discussions.

        I have also noted in a post above that I will regrettably be ignoring posts from others once things get going. I have also asked PPS to do the same.

        As for tomfoolery, mockery, and what not from drive-by posters just wanting to be seen, I think I will be able to overlook them and feel no obligation to respond.

        AMR

        we understand. the good kids do. easier to keep up, digest, pray over etc. thanks in advance for yours and PPS's time and effort. i will do my best to observe only God Bless you and this thread ! ! ! -

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Nang View Post
          Either that, or ask for a 1 on 1 from Knight, that will prevent inane and ignorant commentary from the peanut gallery.
          I corrected it for you:...prevent inane and ignorant commentary from the peanut gallery, or wicked, wolf-ette's, such as myself, Nag.


          No charge.


          Get saved.
          Saint John W

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post
            ...2. God's literal Logos and Pneuma are the two-fold, singular, external, economic procession of His hypostasis into creation when / as He spoke to create....
            Three hypostases goes to one hypostatis and one procession, you got it.
            "Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch."

            It's either true, or it's not true.
            Its truth does not influence how it is heard.
            How it is said does not influence its truth.
            How it is said influences how it is heard.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post
              A thread for PPS and myself to drive a few things to ground related to some particular sacred theology proper topics in hopes of edification and glorifying God.

              Background...

              An Olive Branch (AMR):
              http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...85#post4222285

              A Welcomed Response (PPS):
              http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...34#post4224234


              Let's begin, PPS.
              Let's.

              And my intention is to severely limit any other cross-talk with others. The time limitations of a 1-on-1 make this thread the most feasible solution.

              One of my priorities is clearly determining and representing both cataphatic (what something is) and apophatic (what something is not) statements.

              As I understand your posts on the topic, it seems to me your basic thesis statement is as follows:

              1. God is a singular transcendent hypostasis underlying an ousia.
              Yes, and we'll need to clearly define transcendent/transcendence, along with hypostasis and ousia (and physis and prosopon, etc.).

              2. God's literal Logos and Pneuma are the two-fold, singular, external, economic procession of His hypostasis into creation when / as He spoke to create.
              Yes. The foundation is also understanding the definition of Rhema and it's interrelation with Logos, and the definition for Logos.

              I'd also specify God's Logos and Pneuma to be intrinsically and ontologically divine (again acknowledging the need to define terms such as ontology).

              3. Each (Logos and Pneuma) are qualitatively, rather than quantitatively distinct.
              Yes, the foundational premise partially being that God, in His inherently immutable and transcendent UNcreated Self-existence, cannot be measured or otherwise quantified.

              Rather than start too much beforehand, I need to know if I have accurately captured your basic starting premise. Have I?

              AMR
              Yes, though it will all require cohesive lexical and exegetical narrative.

              --------

              And I'll follow up with the below general affirmation outline that will demonstrate that I clearly eschew any form of Sabellianism/Semi-Sabellianism, Arianism/Semi-Arianism, or Socinianism/Unitarianism/Ebionism/Adoptionism; or any formulaic that includes a created angelic being as the Son (SDA, JW) or any form of Tritheism (LDS, etc,). Nor I'm an Emanationist, Docetist, or Gnostic of any "flavor".

              I affirm:
              There is One Deity.
              The Father is Deity.
              The Holy Spirit is Deity.
              The Word (Son) is Deity.
              These are One Deity.

              The Father is Eternally Pre-Existent.
              The Holy Spirit is Eternally Pre-Existent.
              The Word is Eternally Pre-Existent.

              The Father is Uncreated and Unbegotten.
              The Holy Sprit is Uncreated and Unbegotten.
              The Son is Uncreated and the Only Begotten.

              The Father is not the Holy Spirit nor the Son (Word).
              The Holy Spirit is not the Father nor the Son (Word).
              The Son (Word) is not the Fahter nor the Holy Spirit.

              The Son proceeded forth and came from the Father, Sent by the Father.
              The Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father, Sent by the Father and the Son.
              (The Holy Spirit proceedeth NOT from both the Father and the Son [Filioque], though Sent by Both.)

              Jesus is the Son of God and is Fully and Authentically Divine, Begotten of the Father by the Holy Spirit.
              Jesus is the son of man and is fully and authentically human with a rational soul, born of the virgin by the Holy Spirit.
              The Virgin Birth of Jesus was a Supernatural Procreative Act of God, NOT a Creative Act.

              Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all distinct, uncreated, eternal, non-modal, non-sequential, concurrent, con-essential, con-substantial, inherently ontological Deity.

              The Father is not the Son is not the Father (are not the Holy Spirit).

              --------

              I predominantly affirm Cappadocian resolution of the regional definitions and usages for the major terms, but ultimately I disagree with the final application and quantity of "hypostasis/es".

              I also affirm Chalcedonian Dyophysitic Christology of the Hypostatic Union, though allowing for some inclusion of Cyrillian Miaphysitism. I DISaffirm Nestorian, Eutychian, and Apollinarian variants of Christology and any hint of pure Monophysitism. Theanthropos is the singular qualitatively-processed divine hypostasis, having taken on (and underlying) a human physis to accompany the inherent divine physis for God's singular ousia.

              Contrary to Western innovation, the ousia does not "have" the hypostasis/es. The hypostasis is the underlying foundational reality for the ousia. And the prosopon "has" the hypostasis, being the outward observable appearance with both intangible and tangible reality. There is no ousia distinct from the hypostasis/es as a "second/fourth aspect". The only "being" of the ousia is that of the hypostasis/es as its foundation for existence.

              The Logos and Pneuma are qualitative ontological distinctions, economically and externally processed out from (exerchomai and ekporeuomai, respectively) God's singular hypostasis at creation, and are not quantitatively distinct as individuated hypostases.

              This contrasts to the Orthodox formulaic that Father (eternally unbegotten), Son (eternally begotten) and Holy Spirit (eternally proceeding) are both qualitatively and quantitatively distinct as multiple hypostases (underlying the ousia) according to internal procession/s.

              And my further premise is that there is clear distinction between eternal (aidios: without beginning or end), everlasting (aionios: having a beginning, but without end), and temporality (chronos and chairos: chronological time and seasons relative to the cosmos, having both a beginning and an end). Orthodoxy has virtually universally and interchangeably combined the former two (aidios and aionios).

              Other contrasted pairings of terms that will need definition will include essence/energies, ontology/economy, phenomenological/noumenological, and others.

              --------

              That may be a bit of a big initial chunk, but we can distill it down in various manners. My intention is to both preempt and prompt questions in addition to those you already have.

              My primary and preferred lexical source is Spiros Zodhiates, the late preeminent native first-language Greek scholar; but no single lexical source could suffice, for obvious reasons.

              And... Off we go. I pray immeasurable blessings on your heart and life as iron mutually sharpens iron. And I do so with great heaviness, not having known of your home hardships until your last rep to me.

              Feel free to set the pace and tone; and to ask whatever you will for clarity to begin and beyond.
              Last edited by PneumaPsucheSoma; February 18th, 2015, 02:49 PM.
              Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
              “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

              Comment


              • #22
                "I also affirm Chalcedonian Dyophysitic Christology of the Hypostatic Union, though allowing for some inclusion of Cyrillian Miaphysitism. I DISaffirm Nestorian, Eutychian, and Appollinarian variants of Christology and any hint of pure Monophysitism. Theanthropos is the singular qualitatively-processed divine hypostasis, having taken on (and underlying) a human physis to accompany the inherent divine physis for God's singular ousia......."

                I affirm I prefer listening to Jethro, and Ellie Mae...
                Saint John W

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by john w View Post

                  I affirm I prefer listening to Jethro, and Ellie Mae...
                  Yes, they are much better than the Professor and Gilligan

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by MAD Max View Post
                    Yes, they are much better than the Professor and Gilligan
                    I reckon I'll take a "3 day" cruise away from this thread, and brush up on my ciphering, international nought nought seven spying, and my gazinta's. I might even smoke me some crawdads.
                    Saint John W

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by john w View Post
                      I might even smoke me some crawdads.
                      But first you need a little pot.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by User Name View Post
                        But first you need a little pot.
                        My bong is in the shop.

                        2 Corinthians 3 KJV

                        12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
                        Saint John W

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by john w View Post
                          My bong is in the shop.
                          you can use mine,while these 2 decide how they will slice correctly the Godhead.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by john w View Post
                            My bong is in the shop.

                            2 Corinthians 3 KJV

                            12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
                            Plainness*of*speech is an English word cluster used to translate the single Greek word "parresia"; and it, like most other English words, doesn't mean what many/most presume it means in their arrogant and ignorant presumption.

                            Parresia is freedom or frankness in speaking; freely saying all that one thinks, all that one pleases; confidence or boldness, particularly in speaking; plainness, particularly of speech; openness, making speech public; freedom, liberty; denotes being public or publicly known, in opposition to being concealed. Denotes the unwavering, fearless, and unhesitating confidence of faith in communion with God; in fulfilling the duties of the evangelist and holding fast our hope, and in every act which implies a special exercise of faith.

                            Parresia removes the fear and anxiety which characterize man's relation to God. It comes as the result of the ground of guilt being set aside and manifests itself in undoubting confidence in prayer.


                            I use nothing BUT great parresia, as evidenced in my above post and to the contrary of those who don't know what parresia means and make up their own false conceptual understanding.

                            English and its many varied concepts are irrelevant if not an accurate translated definition.

                            Parresia is not some dumbed-down form of simplicity to be demanded by those with puffed-up pseudo-knowledge.
                            Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
                            “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              NANG ,

                              WHO YOU CALLING SWINE.:ink:


                              The Swine has to be blessed by the Pope before it can be Kosher.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
                                Plainness*of*speech is an English word cluster used to translate the single Greek word "parresia"; and it, like most other English words, doesn't mean what many/most presume it means in their arrogant and ignorant presumption.

                                Parresia is freedom or frankness in speaking; freely saying all that one thinks, all that one pleases; confidence or boldness, particularly in speaking; plainness, particularly of speech; openness, making speech public; freedom, liberty; denotes being public or publicly known, in opposition to being concealed. Denotes the unwavering, fearless, and unhesitating confidence of faith in communion with God; in fulfilling the duties of the evangelist and holding fast our hope, and in every act which implies a special exercise of faith.

                                Parresia removes the fear and anxiety which characterize man's relation to God. It comes as the result of the ground of guilt being set aside and manifests itself in undoubting confidence in prayer.


                                I use nothing BUT great parresia, as evidenced in my above post and to the contrary of those who don't know what parresia means and make up their own false conceptual understanding.

                                English and its many varied concepts are irrelevant if not an accurate translated definition.

                                Parresia is not some dumbed-down form of simplicity to be demanded by those with puffed-up pseudo-knowledge.
                                "12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: "

                                vs.

                                "the single Greek word "parresia";


                                Thanks for proving my point, you proud, as puffed up as a bullfrog, in heat, and blowhard.


                                Stuff and shuck your pseudo "intellectual" fancy word(s), and your "Greek," as you can't speak it, write it, understand it, and would not know the difference between "Jimmy the Greek," and a gyros, and thanks for just looking in a Strong's Concordance, and "translating" a "Greek" word into "the English," and then thinking, "I impressed everyone, as I caint get enough from this 'the greek' addiction/high, and everyone looks up to me" jazz.

                                Fraud. Man pleaser, as the LORD God is quite capable of providing His word in English, without your "hep," Jethro.


                                And stuff this..


                                I also affirm Chalcedonian Dyophysitic Christology of the Hypostatic Union, though allowing for some inclusion of Cyrillian Miaphysitism. I DISaffirm Nestorian, Eutychian, and Apollinarian variants of Christology and any hint of pure Monophysitism. Theanthropos is the singular qualitatively-processed divine hypostasis, having taken on (and underlying) a human physis to accompany the inherent divine physis for God's singular ousia.


                                Anyones got sum ousia's or physis I can munch on?
                                Saint John W

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X