User Tag List

Page 5 of 67 FirstFirst ... 23456781555 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 996

Thread: Discussion thread for AMR and God's Truth Trinity Debate.

  1. #61
    Over 1000 post club dreadknought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    just outside the forrest
    Posts
    1,314
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Blog Entries
    90
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    8031
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz View Post
    This negates hundreds of verses and makes them redundant, contrary to face value reading, etc. GT does not have truth on his side.
    Nevermind

  2. #62
    ☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) ☜☜☜☜☞☞☞☞ A Calvinist! ☜☜☜☜☜ Ask Mr. Religion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chandler, Arizona USA
    Posts
    5,949
    Thanks
    3,135
    Thanked 2,868 Times in 1,739 Posts

    Blog Entries
    143
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2147670
    Sorry, gr, but oneness gets no claim to being Christian. Oneness by definition denies the triune nature of the Godhead. This necessarily implies something is amiss when it comes to who Jesus is and who the Holy Spirit is. We either worship the God who is, or we are idolaters. There is no middle ground.

    This does not mean a Christian must understand the Trinity at the depths that some others may understand it. The Trinity is not beyond the grasp of any true believer. You cannot read the Scriptures plainly without seeing the Trinity in evidence. Christian reason dictates that when you read Scripture it cannot be teaching that there are three Gods and one God for that would be a contradiction. Thus, this same reason dictates you dig deeper, seek the instruction of your church, review what the church as declared in history, as well as the interpretations of the community of believers, for we worship and interpret in community.

    Those that deny the Trinity are to be rightfully considered as outside the faith for they are without excuse for not coming to a proper understanding of the doctrines made clear in Scripture about the very God they claim to worship.

    As to the Pinnock reference, it is made to show how the view of one of the fathers of open theism lends itself so easily to Mormonism and Mormon-like notions. Point being, if your views are being hailed by cults, and your group's founders become the cult's co-belligerents, that should give you great pause, if nothing else. Just sayin'.

    AMR
    WARNING: Embedded link content that may be in my post above or the many embedded links my sig below are not for the faint of heart.



    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?



  3. #63
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11791
    GT "If you do not debate in an honest way, you will forfeit by default. Mormons do not believe that Jesus is God. I know that Jesus is God. I ask you again to stop derailing this debate and carrying on with long posts about things that are not related to our discussion."

    JWs do not believe Jesus is God. They say He is Michael the Archangel, a created being. He is Jehovah God's first creation with Jehovah alone being true God (Jesus is a god in a sense in their view).

    Mormons, including the Book of Mormon, explicitly says that Jesus is Jehovah (they say the Father is another god, Elohim), the Alpha and Omega, I AM (titles for Deity). Their view is polytheistic, but they do not deny that Jesus is God like JWs, Unitarians, Muslims do. I do not say they affirm the true God, since Jesus was not always God and uniquely God. Their polytheism puts them outside of Christianity, just as JWs Arianism does.

    Just as you misunderstand/misrepresent LDS views, so you do the same with trinitarian views. This is why you should listen to AMR even if you disagree with the views. At least understand what you are rejecting (vs straw man arguments that show your lack of expertise and credibility; even if AMR was wrong, at least he knows what he believes about the trinity, unlike you).

    You do not want to hear about early church history or theology. There is nothing new under the sun. Your views are rehashed heresies that have been refuted centuries ago (similar, not identical). If someone from the first century stated your views, you would appeal to them. If they refuted the trinity, you would or could appeal to them. The reality is that it is your view, not trinitarianism, that came later as an attack on orthodoxy. By dismissing or disdaining the evidence, you remain in your error. This lack of teachability negates your right to teach with credibility or integrity.

    I do not agree with AMR on many things, but his academic rigour will be more honourable/persuasive than your lack of it.

    By the end of this, if not now, neither one of you will like me, but I am trying to be objective, reasonable, fair.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  4. #64
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11791
    That trinity doctrine “picture” proves that the trinity doctrine makes a three-headed god, or even four gods. That trinity diagram is not explainable, and therefore cannot be defended against the truth that I said about it.


    Exhibit A of straw man caricature ignorance. The diagram is imperfect, but does set out the biblical parameters that are defensible. AMR gives you substance to back up statements and you tell him to remove them. I do not give substance, but statements, in some posts, and you complain about that. You make statements without substance and expect us to embrace them despite the contrary evidence?!

    This debate needs substance. Shorter posts would help, but this is not like a usual fly by thread. It is meant for more detail and slower, thoughtful responses. You need to pick it up more if you want him to scale it back.

    Regardless of who is right, AMR would more likely win in a debate or court of law at this point (the point is not to have heat and win an argument, but have light and discover biblical truth).
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  5. #65
    Over 750 post club Brother Vinny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Tulsa, dig it?
    Posts
    767
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 30 Times in 24 Posts

    Blog Entries
    23
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    94155
    I think AMR took a wrong turn by trying to tie GT's beliefs to Mormonism. I have heard the theory that the image of God was the first thing to be created, and that the pre-incarnate eternal Christ inhabited this image of God and thus literally qualifies as being the firstborn of creation (while still maintaining His eternal attributes), and it was this image that the physical likeness of man was patterned after.

    Don't know that I buy it, but I really don't see anything in the above paragraph that would be outside the pale of what is considered mainstream Christianity.
    "To deny Calvinism is to deny the gospel of Jesus Christ." - Charles Spurgeon

  6. #66
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11791
    Quote Originally Posted by Brother Vinny View Post
    I think AMR took a wrong turn by trying to tie GT's beliefs to Mormonism. I have heard the theory that the image of God was the first thing to be created, and that the pre-incarnate eternal Christ inhabited this image of God and thus literally qualifies as being the firstborn of creation (while still maintaining His eternal attributes), and it was this image that the physical likeness of man was patterned after.

    Don't know that I buy it, but I really don't see anything in the above paragraph that would be outside the pale of what is considered mainstream Christianity.
    Again, Mormons and JWs are not wrong about everything. If a Catholic affirms the Deity/resurrection of Christ, as do I, that does not mean I am endorsing the other extra/contrabiblical Catholic views.

    Denying the trinity is serious, but reducing personal distinctions to modes/offices is not as serious as denying the Deity of Christ. Some fundamentalists have a never ending list of what must be believed to be Christian. Some counter-cult ministries consider SDA to be Christian enough, while others say no. Some experts think Oneness can be Christian, while others do not. AMR, like all of us, is right about many things and wrong about some things. None of us is infallible.

    I think we can agree that Muslims are not Christian. Those who think Pentecostals or charismatics may not be Christian (John MacArthur) are misguided. I personally know Oneness people who are wrong, but I do not doubt the grace of God in their lives. I cannot say the same about Mormon and JW friends.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  7. #67
    TOL Legend God's Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hidden with Christ in God, Col 3:3
    Posts
    29,200
    Thanks
    1,825
    Thanked 2,066 Times in 1,876 Posts

    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    163228
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz View Post
    I am making statements that have been backed up elsewhere, including during 2000 years of church history by the best Spirit-led thinkers in the church. The burden of proof is on you for your fringe views.
    Again, you have not disproved anything that I have said, and you haven't proved anything you believe.
    Oh how I love the Word of God!
    Do not just read the word do it.

  8. #68
    Over 1000 post club JosephR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,292
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    123399
    can someone please state for me AMR and GT positions?

    who is arguing what side of the debate?

    In laymans terms please

  9. #69
    TOL Legend God's Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hidden with Christ in God, Col 3:3
    Posts
    29,200
    Thanks
    1,825
    Thanked 2,066 Times in 1,876 Posts

    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    163228
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz View Post
    You have a form of Oneness/modalism whether you like it or not. There are nuanced views within any major view. Arian-like views are not identical to everything Arius taught. JWs are not identical to Unitarians despite sharing a common rejection of trinity, Deity of Christ, in favor of some form of Christ as creature. UPCI talks about one type of modalism, while you have your pet view of it, but both are anti-trinitarian, not Arian. Not all Calvinists agree on all details. Not all Pentecostals agree on everything. You have a minority view that most fits under a form of modalism. Sabellianism is the general category, but modern Oneness is Sabellian-like, not identical to the historical figure on every detail.
    I am no more a modalist than I am a trinitarian.
    Oh how I love the Word of God!
    Do not just read the word do it.

  10. #70
    TOL Legend God's Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hidden with Christ in God, Col 3:3
    Posts
    29,200
    Thanks
    1,825
    Thanked 2,066 Times in 1,876 Posts

    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    163228
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz View Post
    This negates hundreds of verses and makes them redundant, contrary to face value reading, etc. GT does not have truth on his side.
    I am on the side of truth.
    Oh how I love the Word of God!
    Do not just read the word do it.

  11. #71
    Over 750 post club Brother Vinny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Tulsa, dig it?
    Posts
    767
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 30 Times in 24 Posts

    Blog Entries
    23
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    94155
    Quote Originally Posted by FraterJoseph View Post
    can someone please state for me AMR and GT positions?

    who is arguing what side of the debate?

    In laymans terms please
    AMR is the champ-peen for the classical, mainstream Trinitarian view of God (accept no substitutes).

    GT is playing the heretic, posing some sort of oneness/modalistic Unitarian God (I think) that inhabited a spiritual body of sorts prior to the Incarnation, and who returned to the spiritual body at the resurrection.

    This makes me want to ask why the scars appeared on the spiritual body. Also makes me think if we lose an appendage down here, our spiritual bodies would also be missing it.
    "To deny Calvinism is to deny the gospel of Jesus Christ." - Charles Spurgeon

  12. #72
    TOL Legend God's Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hidden with Christ in God, Col 3:3
    Posts
    29,200
    Thanks
    1,825
    Thanked 2,066 Times in 1,876 Posts

    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    163228
    Quote Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post
    Sorry, gr, but oneness gets no claim to being Christian. Oneness by definition denies the triune nature of the Godhead. This necessarily implies something is amiss when it comes to who Jesus is and who the Holy Spirit is. We either worship the God who is, or we are idolaters. There is no middle ground.
    That does not make sense what you just said. You are misrepresenting the Oneness doctrine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post
    This does not mean a Christian must understand the Trinity at the depths that some others may understand it. The Trinity is not beyond the grasp of any true believer. You cannot read the Scriptures plainly without seeing the Trinity in evidence. Christian reason dictates that when you read Scripture it cannot be teaching that there are three Gods and one God for that would be a contradiction. Thus, this same reason dictates you dig deeper, seek the instruction of your church, review what the church as declared in history, as well as the interpretations of the community of believers, for we worship and interpret in community.
    You know you cannot explain your trinity doctrine. In the trinity doctrine, it states that it is unexplainable.
    However, we are to explain our beliefs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post

    Those that deny the Trinity are to be rightfully considered as outside the faith for they are without excuse for not coming to a proper understanding of the doctrines made clear in Scripture about the very God they claim to worship.

    As to the Pinnock reference, it is made to show how the view of one of the fathers of open theism lends itself so easily to Mormonism and Mormon-like notions. Point being, if your views are being hailed by cults, and your group's founders become the cult's co-belligerents, that should give you great pause, if nothing else. Just sayin'.
    You are “just sayin’” anything. You do not care if you speak the truth or not.
    Oh how I love the Word of God!
    Do not just read the word do it.

  13. #73
    Over 1000 post club JosephR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,292
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    123399
    Oh I see and thanks BV
    Trins, they believe God is God Jesus and Holy Spirit all in one..A non created being.

    And Unis say all came from God including Jesus and Holy Spirit.

    And I get the vibe that Trins is the main or popular view, right?seems I see Meshak allways talking bout them.

  14. #74
    Over 1000 post club JosephR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,292
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    123399
    Quote Originally Posted by FraterJoseph View Post
    Oh I see and thanks BV
    Trins, they believe God is God Jesus and Holt Spirit all in one..A non created being.

    And Unis say all came from God including Jesus and Holy Spirit.

    And I get the vibe that Trins is the main or popular view, right?seems I see Meshak allways talking bout them.
    And I am guessing the first line of the BIBLE wont stop this debate either?

    In the Beginning GOD.
    ?

  15. #75
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11791
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Again, you have not disproved anything that I have said, and you haven't proved anything you believe.
    See other threads where we have engaged more. I am making observations here since you are the two hashing out the doctrinal dispute on the other thread. This is not the place to usurp your debate in detail. If so, you should cancel the one-on-one with him and make one for us (not necessary, of course).
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

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