User Tag List

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 127

Thread: Another tally of anti-trinitarian threads

  1. #76
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by djhow View Post
    Jesus said he was the light that lights all men, you point them to God in them for we all know and bear witness to "something" do not the weeds produce beautiful flowers if allowed to bloom?
    Most flowering plants are weeds ... I'm not sure how that affects your analogy.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to fzappa13 For Your Post:

    patrick jane (May 30th, 2016)

  3. #77
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    Man has no divinity, and cannot acquire and become divinity. Your musings are an autonomous nothingness.
    You couldn't be more wrong. This is exactly what Christ died for.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to fzappa13 For Your Post:

    patrick jane (May 30th, 2016)

  5. #78
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    You couldn't be more wrong. This is exactly what Christ died for.
    Wow. Seriously? There's no greater schismatic heresy than to represent the Son as merely created and/or man as divinity in any manner.

    One cannot be authetically Christian and contend for either of the above.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  6. #79
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    Wow. Seriously? There's no greater schismatic heresy than to represent the Son as merely created and/or man as divinity in any manner.

    One cannot be authetically Christian and contend for either of the above.
    I didn't suggest either thing. We were offered an opportunity to become sons of god ... better said, Elohiym.

    This is why the Pharisees wanted to stone Jesus when he rubbed their noses in psalm 82. This is what John was saying in John 1:12 and 1John:3. This is what Paul was saying in Rom 8:19.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to fzappa13 For Your Post:

    patrick jane (May 30th, 2016)

  8. #80
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    I didn't suggest either thing. We were offered an opportunity to become sons of god ... better said, Elohiym.

    This is why the Pharisees wanted to stone Jesus when he rubbed their noses in psalm 82. This is what John was saying in John 1:12 and 1John:3. This is what Paul was saying in Rom 8:19.
    Man cannot acquire and become divinity. Being (hypostatically) translated into Christ by faith is Believers partaking OF God's divine nature; but man never intrinsically acquires divinity as his own ousia. Only the Son and Holy Spirit are homoouisos with the Father. The Redeemed are in everlasting hypostatic union with the Son, just like the Son's hypostatic union of divinity and humanity.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to PneumaPsucheSoma For Your Post:

    JonahofAkron (May 30th, 2016)

  10. #81
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    Man cannot acquire and become divinity.

    No. It's a gift for those that would receive it.

    John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

    20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to fzappa13 For Your Post:

    patrick jane (May 30th, 2016)

  12. #82
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    No. It's a gift for those that would receive it.
    No, a human ousia cannot become a divine ousia. Being "given" a divine ousia would mean man would then become eternal and uncreated with no beginning. Man already has a beginning as created. Man does not become beginningless and uncreated.

    What you have insisted upon is the antithesis of the Christian faith, and is the emphasis of many anti-Christian belief systems.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  13. #83
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    No. It's a gift for those that would receive it.

    John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

    20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
    This is hypostatic, not ousiac. Man is not given divinity. Man is hypostatically translated into Christ.

    Man cannot be homoousios with God as divinity. Humanity is created and had a beginning. God is uncreated and had no beginning. Man cannot be given uncreatedness and beginninglessness.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  14. #84
    TOL Legend Ktoyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Alabama and Florida
    Posts
    9,105
    Thanks
    2,039
    Thanked 5,938 Times in 4,181 Posts

    Blog Entries
    7
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2147704
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    This is hypostatic, not ousiac. Man is not given divinity. Man is hypostatically translated into Christ.

    Man cannot be homoousios with God as divinity. Humanity is created and had a beginning. God is uncreated and had no beginning. Man cannot be given uncreatedness and beginninglessness.
    You are more correct than fzappa13. Yet man never shares in Christ's divine essence. We become in the Grace of God, which is to say, "in Christ", get it?
    Quote Originally Posted by marhig View Post
    Christian theology isn't to be in Christ.


    So, what?

    believe it!

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Ktoyou For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2016)

  16. #85
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    This is hypostatic, not ousiac. Man is not given divinity. Man is hypostatically translated into Christ.

    Man cannot be homoousios with God as divinity. Humanity is created and had a beginning. God is uncreated and had no beginning. Man cannot be given uncreatedness and beginninglessness.
    The perceptual problem that I see here is that you see the subject of divinity through the lens of post Christ creeds defined by the Greek. Unless and until you understand the term Elohiym you will forever be looking at the subject through the wrong end of the telescope. Your favored Greek has no equivalent for the term nor does the English. The term alternately is applied to Jehovah, Jesus, angels and men in the O.T. What is said on the subject in the N.T. should be seen with this as a reference point and not the dictates of some creed or a language which has no direct equivalent word.


    Said another way, defining Hebrew concepts using Greek or English has the tail wagging the dog.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to fzappa13 For Your Post:

    Krsto (June 1st, 2016)

  18. #86
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    The perceptual problem that I see here is that you see the subject of divinity through the lens of post Christ creeds defined by the Greek. Unless and until you understand the term Elohiym you will forever be looking at the subject through the wrong end of the telescope. Your favored Greek has no equivalent for the term nor does the English. The term alternately is applied to Jehovah, Jesus, angels and men in the O.T. What is said on the subject in the N.T. should be seen with this as a reference point and not the dictates of some creed or a language which has no direct equivalent word.


    Said another way, defining Hebrew concepts using Greek has the tail wagging the dog.
    I well understand the scope of the Hebrew term Elohiym, including back to the pictographic paleo-Hebrew. Just because I prefer Greek references to Hebrew does not mean I'm illiterate in Hebrew. My wife is a Hebrew scholar.

    You fail to see that there's a difference between essence and substance as "what-ness" and "who-ness", respectively. Man cannot become eternal and uncreated. Man does not transcend creation. God has condescended to man.

    Man is given the qualitative functionality of God's hypostasis (substance) by being joined to Christ for everlasting. Man is not given a divine ousia (essence).

    Hebrew has no means of addressing any of this in the manner necessary for the ontological Gospel, and the necessary accompanying epistemology for economony and methodology.

    Elohiym is more titular, while YHWH is substantial/essential. You're actually Judaizing at this point.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  19. #87
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by Ktoyou View Post
    You are more correct than fzappa13. Yet man never shares in Christ's divine essence. We become in the Grace of God, which is to say, "in Christ", get it?
    I didn't say anything about Christ's divine essence (ousia). I specifically referred to Christ's divine substance (hypostasis).

    And there's no reason for me to converse with you. I only commented to correct your misrepresentation of what I said.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  20. #88
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    I well understand the scope of the Hebrew term Elohiym, including back to the pictographic paleo-Hebrew. Just because I prefer Greek references to Hebrew does not mean I'm illiterate in Hebrew. My wife is a Hebrew scholar.

    You fail to see that there's a difference between essence and substance as "what-ness" and "who-ness", respectively. Man cannot become eternal and uncreated. Man does not transcend creation. God has condescended to man.
    You mash the ideas of being eternal and uncreated together in a way I think your wife would confirm is not necessarily reflective of the meaning of the term Elohiym. Those who are Christ's most certainly will be eternal ... the difference between them and God being the point of demarcation on the road to eternity. That said, they most certainly are not and will never be uncreated. Though creeds may demand the connection you offered as it concerns "divinity" I don't think the Hebrew term does and that is important when trying to understand the term and the subject.


    Man is given the qualitative functionality of God's hypostasis (substance) by being joined to Christ for everlasting. Man is not given a divine ousia (essence).
    I'm not sure I understand the distinction your are trying to make here.


    Hebrew has no means of addressing any of this in the manner necessary for the ontological Gospel, and the necessary accompanying epistemology for economony and methodology.

    If the Hebrew wasn't sufficient unto salvation then God Himself was ineffective in His efforts for lack of using the Koine. I'm going to have to pass on that notion.

    Elohiym is more titular, while YHWH is substantial/essential. You're actually Judaizing at this point.

    I think that an unnecessary and unwarranted dismissal of a very important term when trying to understand the subject of what we maybe errantly refer to as divinity in our culture.





    Let me end with an equation or three:


    Jehovah = Elohiym

    Sons of God = Elohiym

    Sons of God does not equal Jehovah
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  21. #89
    TOL Subscriber PneumaPsucheSoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    316
    Thanked 639 Times in 494 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    107043
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    You mash the ideas of being eternal and uncreated together in a way I think your wife would confirm is not necessarily reflective of the meaning of the term Elohiym.
    No, since she is also a Greek language scholar. She's a linguist, currently competent in 12 languages.

    Those who are Christ's most certainly will be eternal ... the difference between them and God being the point of demarcation on the road to eternity.
    No. Eternal and everlasting are not the same. Eternal is timeless, with no beginning or end. Everlasting is durative, with a beginning and no end. God is eternal. Man can never be eternal.

    This is part of the core misunderstanding of virtually everyone within the Christian faith (and beyond). God is eternal. Man can only be everlasting. Aidios versus aionios.

    That said, they most certainly are not and will never be uncreated.
    That's my point.

    Though creeds may demand the connection you offered as it concerns "divinity" I don't think the Hebrew term does and that is important when trying to understand the term and the subject.
    Elohiym is applied in a broad sense. It's vocational and positional, not necessarily ontological.

    I'm not sure I understand the distinction your are trying to make here.
    And that is the problem. If one doesn't understand the distinction between ousia (essence) and hypostasis (substance), one cannot address this topic sufficiently or accurately. And the same is true relative to the contrast between eternal and everlasting.

    If the Hebrew wasn't sufficient unto salvation then God Himself was ineffective in His efforts for lack of using the Koine. I'm going to have to pass on that notion.
    That's not what I indicated at all.

    I think that an unnecessary and unwarranted dismissal of a very important term when trying to understand the subject of what we maybe errantly refer to as divinity in our culture.
    No. See above. Only divinity is eternal as uncreated and timeless.

    Let me end with an equation or three:


    Jehovah = Elohiym

    Sons of God = Elohiym

    Sons of God does not equal Jehovah
    Exactly my point.
    Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda secundum verbum Dei
    “The Church reformed and always reforming, according to the Word of God.”

  22. #90
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    247349
    Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma View Post
    No, since she is also a Greek language scholar. She's a linguist, currently competent in 12 languages.

    Good. So maybe we can return to the term Elohiym vis a vis divinity at a later point. BTW, it's likely helpful that your wife is a polyglot in that she can say what she wants to you without offending you if needs be.


    No. Eternal and everlasting are not the same. Eternal is timeless, with no beginning or end. Everllasting is durative, with a beginning and no end. God is eternal. Man can never be eterna.



    This is part of the core misunderstanding of virtually everyone within the Christian faith (and beyond). God is eternal. Man can only be everlasting. Aidios versus aionios.



    That's my point.

    I see your point.



    Elohiym is applied in a broad sense. It's vocational and positional, not necessarily ontological.



    And that is the problem. If one doesn't understand the distinction between ousia (essence) and hypostasis (substance), one cannot address this topic sufficiently or accurately. And the same is true relative to the contrast between eternal and everlasting.

    I would here have to disagree though, again, we circle back to the term "Elohiym". We shared in the Elohiym's substance from our beginning as that is the image in which we were made. We are being offered something else via Christ's sacrifice and I think that is the essence of what it is to be Elohiym.
    Last edited by fzappa13; May 31st, 2016 at 06:48 AM.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us