ECT Our triune God

[Nang]

The concept that the eternal can be created, is an oxymoron. As soon as eternal is defined as a creation, it ceases to be eternity.

The eternal is the Divine spiritual realm; creation is a material realm, with a beginning and end. The chasm between the two is absolute.

That is why the eternal Son was sent into the world as Man, to reconcile His brethren with God. Creatures will only know everlasting life, IN HIM, for God alone is the source and reality of eternity.

Spiritual Principle: Romans 4:1-5

An earthly reflection of this truth is reflected in the doctrine of justification by faith, alone . . . grace vs works. As soon as the creature attempts to contribute any creaturely effort to please God, there is no longer grace.

Nang

 

[meshak]

That is why the eternal Son was sent into the world as Man, to reconcile His brethren with God.

If Jesus was already eternal, He could not be our Lord as Lamb. Jesus was replacement of Adam which was not immortal who failed Gog's will.

Your logic or reasoning is not so biblical.

 

[Squeaky]

This thread is specifically for triune believers. No other need or should post here.

I'm personally boycotting these cultists threads against our view. I have found none of them are here to learn a thing and they certainly don't make a cogent or compelling presentation. Its a waste of bandwidth and time from my experience. This thread is for posting material to help us on our way.

I said
lolol Can you do that? Boycott? This is the only triune god I have found in the scriptures. Is this the one your talking about?

2 Cor 11:14-15
14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.
(NKJ)

II Th 2:4-5
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?
(NKJ)

Rev 12:9
9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(NKJ)

 

[godrulz]

If Jesus was already eternal, He could not be our Lord as Lamb. Jesus was replacement of Adam which was not immortal who failed Gog's will.

Your logic or reasoning is not so biblical.

Remnant JW misunderstanding of Second Adam balancing scales of first Adam.

Only God can save. Jesus is eternal God in the flesh. Watchtower views of Christology and soteriology are wrong. Meshak does not officially belong (not sure why not), but still has their errors between the ears.

Jn. 1:1; Jn. 8:58; Jn. 10:30-33; Jn. 5:18; Jn. 20:28 Jesus is YHWH.

 

[Squeaky]

Remnant JW misunderstanding of Second Adam balancing scales of first Adam.

Only God can save. Jesus is eternal God in the flesh. Watchtower views of Christology and soteriology are wrong. Meshak does not officially belong (not sure why not), but still has their errors between the ears.

Jn. 1:1; Jn. 8:58; Jn. 10:30-33; Jn. 5:18; Jn. 20:28 Jesus is YHWH.

I said
Are you still spreading that? God was in Christ for awhile saving people through Christ. But God left Jesus. To die on the cross. God works through people, He will work through us in the same way He worked through Jesus. It won't make us God no more than it made Jesus God.

2 Cor 5:18-20
18 Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation,
19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God.
(NKJ)

Mark 15:34
34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" which is translated, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"
(NKJ)

 

[Lon]

I'm not speaking of eternality, the intrinsic trait or characteristic, etc. I'm speaking of eternity. God INhabiteth eternity. I'll ultimately end up posting an exegesis.

God didn't create His "eternality". God created eternity. He tents there. It's His abode. It's not an intrinsic and inate internal constitutent attribute. Eternality is that.

Not that such can hold Him. This is going to be a problem because it is suggesting problematically, that 'anything' can contain God. Nothing can.
He 'inhabits' something as He 'dwells' with His people, --> partially, not entirely. You cannot contain God by finite conceptualization and why would we even want to try other than as it relates to God's interaction with us?
Again, orthodoxy is concerned with getting what He has revealed to us, right, not trying to figure out 'beyond' revelation. Such, I believe, is impossible. Speculation? Yes, but that's as far as we get by our own bootstraps. Such is 'stuck' in speculation. You cannot (impossible) pose such for considerations of orthodoxy. On top of that, you also cannot step upon what is given in revelation. What God says is true (leaving us speculating).

There's duration and elapsation and sequentiality and perpetuity in heaven.

Only insomuch as it is engaged with temporal (created).

Eternity is a place. And abode for God. It's not God. It's not inherently Himself. It's external to Him. He spoke it into existence and filled it with His Pneuma and His Logos. He EX-pressed and EX-haled His Spirit and His Word when/as He created eternity of the heavenly realm.

Metaphysically, existentially, there is no 'outside' of God logically speaking or something is/would be larger than God and it'd be eternal, rather than Him. You just fell into a hole in which yesterday, you attempted avoiding from another.

I don't differentiate according to Vines. He's far inferior to Zodhiates. Doc Z clearly and correctly indicates that aidios is eternal (without beginning or end) and aionios is everlasting (without end). Eternity had an inception. God's aidios dunamis and Theiotes (and by inclusion, His Theotes) are eternal. All things aionios are everlasting and had an inception.

Let me tackle this logically: An 'inch' is defined by a beginning and end point. Without the points, you have nothing to measure. Measurement (and the 'concept' of measurement), requires a point A and a point B as well as a contrived, created randomly generated instrument (inches are marked by random elbow to wrist length of the inventor). Needless to say, we think it all very static and absolute, but it is not. No man's measurement is concrete or absolute, it only appears that way to finite beings. The ticking of a durative clock is incredibly man-made. We act like it is a fuction of the universe, is it absolutely not. It is random and 'tries' to measure what God has more accurate measured and made. We are incapable of measuring any aspect of God (finite vs infinite). The only qualification/quantification we have of God is what limited and finite amount that He chooses we should know and what we are finitely capable of (same thing really).

Your "eternal" life had a beginning. It's everlasting, without end. That's aionios.

Except in the mind of God. Yes I'm finite, but even 'finite' is misunderstood within the (un)bounds of the eternal. We, not being God, are limited in capacity (there is a point A and B where we are concerned).

That's not even God. I know what they profess. Every Open Theist I encounter and engage leaves it behind.

Wow. I heard it here. GR, get ready to lose your Open Theism, unless of course you are the first he encounters who can resist.

No. The Logos and the Son are co-terminous.

Well, so are a lot of names for Him, see again Isaiah 9:6. If you are advocating a 'durative' sonship, I think it problematic in conception. Hebrews 13:8

Check the Greek.

Or Hebrew. Is Hebrews 13:8 both qualitative and then incidentally quantitative to you? Regardless, think on this: If "sonship" were a "state of being" to you, Christ is unchanging. Iow, Logos didn't 'become' Son. Such, inadvertently or otherwise, is still thinking within limited and finite time constraints. God is not confined or expressed by such other than to give us handles on concepts needed to grasp a salvific idea and respond to Him.

No. Conception fulfilled/manifested it.

Good.

You don't really know what it means in overall context. Unless and until one sees the createdness of eternity and understands the Rhema, it always looks like something else.

We'll see. I think you not seeing your own conceptual finite limitations. It is enough for me to say again, we can only be sure of what we are implicitly told in revelation. To a degree, we can link between points, such as a necessary triune understanding would convey, but we are very much glued to scripture for asserting truth. We can't do it other than as we have been expressly given it. Such is beyond the realm of revelation.

The eternality of the Son is the eternality of the Logos. I present the ONLY Eternal Son. The DyoHypo Son is eternally UNbegotten. And via an INternal procession. You don't understand the nature of this gross error. Maybe you never will.

Actually? I see 'you' as not understanding your logical limitation. You cannot trounce upon any scriptural revelation or you or I necessarily get it wrong.

You don't seem to be tracking on the actual context.

Notice 1 John 4:10 doesn't say "His Logos." If you are trying to draw a time-related distinction, such is, imho, an artificial one ("context" here meaning scripture, unless you meant your content or point?).

I hadn't intended to unfold it in such detail, actually. I just came here to present an apophatic challenge to the DyoHypo error. There's really no way to get to this depth without exclusively presenting it via lexical expression.

Probably not.

 

[godrulz]

Is PPS a pantheist?

 

[Nang]

Is PPS a pantheist?

Who knows? pps manages to cover an entire heretical landscape with his posts . . .

All I know, is that he laughs and sneers at the historical church creeds and confessions, faithfully worked out according to Holy Scripture by the early church fathers, in order to protect God's little flock of Christians from false prophets and ravenous wolves!

Whatever he is, he is not right. He is to be considered suspect by the redeemed and faithful sons of God.

I John 4:1--6

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

What are you talking about?!

I'm talking about the false DyoHypostatic Trinity doctrine that has predominantly morphed into modern Triadism.

Are you attacking straw man caricatures of sound theology?!

No. I'm attacking the fallacious DyoHypoTrin doctrine that God is three hypostases/one ousia that is NO sound theology.

Go ahead and provide scripture that God is three hypostases ("persons"). He isn't, and there isn't any scripture for it. Unscriptural doctrines aren't "sound" theology. LOL.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Do you have formal training or are you self-taught?

I have formal training AND have been taught by the Holy Spirit by/through the Word.

Has AMR tried to reason with you?

I don't know who AMR is or why that would matter. The DyoHypoTrin doctrine specifies three hypostases that aren't in scripture.

I don't need AMR or anyone else to "reason with me" to inflict DyoHypoTrin doctrine on me. I know every cobweb of DHT, and it's fallacious. I was lost as a DyoHypoTrin. 95% of the truth isn't the truth.

Again, feel free to provide three hypostases from the text. Anyone else can provied three hypostases from scripture if they want. Unless and until someone does, the DyoHypoTrin doctrine remains unscriptural.

ALL "persons" terminology comes from hypostasis. Without three hypostases, there aren't three "persons", regardless of personal pronouns or any other inferential minutiae.

It's that simple.:wave:

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

The concept that the eternal can be created, is an oxymoron.

Eternity isn't eternal. It's merely everlasting, without end. It had a beginning. An inception. Only God alone is eternal (without beginning OR end).

As soon as eternal is defined as a creation, it ceases to be eternity.

Maybe you should look at both the Hebrew and the Greek text instead of clinging to conceptual ideology with no scripture whatsoever.

The eternal is the Divine spiritual realm;

The everlasting is the spiritual realm. Now you've made eternity Divine. Eternity is now God. LOL.

creation is a material realm, with a beginning and end.

The cosmos is. Eternity also had a beginning, though it will have no end. Even though you think eternity is God. Maybe you should also pray to eternity in addition to the three unscriptural hypostases.

The chasm between the two is absolute.

Clueless. A Triadist claiming eternity is UNcreated and Divine as God. A Divine eternity.

Blatantly and blasphemously unChristian. There is only one true and living God, and He isn't eternity. One of His Self-existent/-subsistent attributes is eternality, which is why ALL things are upheld by the Rhema of His dunamis.

That is why the eternal Son was sent into the world as Man, to reconcile His brethren with God.

The eternality of the Son is the eternality of the Logos. "In the beginning was THE LOGOS..."

Creatures will only know everlasting life, IN HIM, for God alone is the source and reality of eternity.

Wow. This is actually correct.

Spiritual Principle: Romans 4:1-5

An earthly reflection of this truth is reflected in the doctrine of justification by faith, alone . . . grace vs works.

Yep. Very good.

As soon as the creature attempts to contribute any creaturely effort to please God, there is no longer grace.

Then don't do it. I don't.

And none of that makes eternity into God. Where's you scriptural evidence that eternity is both UNcreated and Divine? (And that God is three hypostases.):wave:

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Is PPS a pantheist?

Let's see...

I believe there is one supremely transcendent God who is the self-existent uncreated prime source for all else; and is the sole giver of life and love from Himself as Life and Love. I believe He is beyond gender as Spirit, and is intrinsically unknowable apart from His own self-expression. I believe He desired to procreate, though He alone was Uncreated.

So He spoke the very substance of His own essence forth, and that expression brought into being a near-endless expanse of time-space-matter external to Himself that represents a glimpse of His infinite and eternal multi-omni glory. And that array of unfathomable creation was merely a peripheral backdrop as the canvass upon which He would depict Himself within that which came about by Him breaking His silence.

That which was spoken specifically of His total Uncreated substance was thought, purposed, reasoned, and willed to ultimately be His whole Divinity personified within that which He created as the earthly image of Himself. According to eternal plan, He embodied Himself in literal created flesh of a man to lay down that created life as a love-sacrifice to cover sin that man had taken upon Himself.

This was accomplished in a specific manner that, like everything else, He pre-determined to reveal of the invisible to the visible. His intent was to be known and seen, so He made a way for it to be so. Since He IS existence and the origin of all, He knew exactly how to make Himself known from the non-corporeal to the corporeal. He placed the seed of the Rhema content of His Word for the Virgin to believe in her heart; and that faith brought forth a the birth of the internal Word as the only begotten Son... born from the eternal realm into the temporal realm. The singular Divinity begat the eternal substance of Himself within a human body. The propagation process of that soul-spirit was the condescension of Deity to know the plight of created life and bring Uncreated life within those who believe.

God literally became a part of creation while maintaining His Divinity; then after life, ministry, death, and resurrrction He ascended to whence He came and separated His own Spirit to give to all who believe and receive. As the Uncreated, He became created so that those He created might also ascend to share His Uncreatedness eternally.

Then there is this. Atop Gnosticism, comes this:

Here's your fallacy: God is NOT the Father. God is F-S-HS. The Father doesn't HAVE a soul, the Father IS God's Soul.

You perceive that God and Father are interchangeable and synonymous. They're aren't for Trinity OR your Triadism. either. The Father is one of three. It's about HOW these three are God. You say discrete beyond Trinity persons. Trinity says persons. Scripture clearly.. in English... says God's Soul/The Father is well pleased in the Son.

You simply have no comprehension of spirit-soul-body, even as it relates to man. That's almost universal within the church.

It gets worse:

God is a Spirit... period. The indivisible conscious sentience as the mind-will of God is His Soul... His Self. Self is the essence of being... existence. The substance of that being is Spirit. The mind-will of God's Soul "Fathered" all creation by thinking and willing to speak forth the temporal realm from Himself to personify Himself in flesh. Nothing had been external to God before He spoke.

God spoke the uncreated eternal substance of Himself forth into the created temporal. The Rhema Divine Content and Logos Divine Expression preceded the act of the utterance; being borne forth by His Spirit-breath according to His mind-will (Soul).

There's MUCH more here, but Trinis will just presume 3 different God-people always existed, and will never account for the procession of the Son and Holy Spirit in John 8:42/17:8 and John 15:26/14:26.

The Logos was thought and spoken, and that expression was the Rhema subject matter of God's substance being uttered by His breath (Spirit). He spoke that substance of Himself into flesh so the Logos would divide*asunder His Spirit to distribute to man. That Word became a man that would transcend to embody God's Soul and Spirit. Contained, but not constrained. That's the Christ in us that is our hope of glory.

Trinity is a Philoso-Gnostic construct.

Answer: Yes, gr, he is, along with asserting plenty of other heresy. Avoid this fellow and do not take his moonbeam theology as bait.

AMR

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Is PPS a pantheist?

LOLOL. Ummm... not even close. Though in an elevated sense, you and most others come dangerously close. It's unwitting out of pure ignorance and indoctrinated, though; so there's mercy for that.

Functional Triadists professing to be Trinitarians really shouldn't consider themselves any standard for absolute truth. God is not three hypostases. Period.

Riding the dialectic consensus of men, their doctrines, and the degradation and dilution OF that doctrine into Triadism doesn't give anyone any credibility. It doesn't take much to regurgitate an erroneous creed and have no real understanding of God or the doctrines attempting to depict Him by feeble humans in a power struggle for political and religious control.

That's all it still is. A power struggle for professing DyoHypo Trinitarians to maintain a tenuous grasp on that same type of control over alleged O/orthodoxy.

With an UNcreated eternity that contains and constrains God's inherent essence as Spirit, He remains subordinant to a realm OF existence and is NOT Self-existent and Self-subsistent. THAT's your elevated cousin to Pantheism.

Oh... And Open Theology is just another cousin to Emanationism (if you're one of them). So professing DyoHypoTrins who are Open Theists are double cousins to Emanationsists. The heresey never stops, especially among those who accuse others from an O/orhtodox perch and perspective that isn't (O/orthodox, that is).

The consensus of men doesn't determine absolute objective truth. God as a singular hypostasis does by His Logos and through His Pneuma.

 

[godrulz]

Huh? Do you attend a local church? What other thinkers agree with you? Names, books, websites, articles?

Lon, your comment about modalist before incarnation, trinitarian after incarnation, etc. is not an Open Theistic view?!

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Let's see...

No need to "see". I'm not a Pantheist in the least, unlike most others unwittingly are.

Then there is this. Atop Gnosticism, comes this:

I'm not Shodan D'Souza. He is a former Modalist who copied my content onto his personal blog with my permission. I don't know him apart from brief acquaintance online.

It gets worse:

Answer: Yes, gr, he is, along with asserting plenty of other heresy. Avoid this fellow and do not take his moonbeam theology as bait.

AMR

Interesting captures from some early writings. I wouldn't still express it all in exactly those terms since that was just prior to my undestanding that eternity is created.

You're not the final arbiter of truth by any means, especially most likely being a functional Triadist professing to be an O/orthodox Creedal Trinitarian.

You surely are a major player of some kind in the long-standing false dichotomy of Calvinism/Arminianism (by whatever coloquially preferred respective labels of semantics).

In any case... God is not three hypostases ("persons") in scripture (nor three prosopoa for any assertion of a singular hypostasis for the one "being"). And you have an immanent and impotent God who couldn't and didn't create ALL. The DyoHypoTrin God is dependent upon an UNcreated realm of existence that contains and constrains Him, not being Self-existent and Self-subsistent. And the processions of the Logos and the Pneuma were ex- and ek- (John 8:42 and 15:26), NOT INternal as is purported by the Early Fathers and Thomas Aquinas.

But nobody ever wants their unbiblical ideology and indoctrination corrected, preferring the cognitive dissonance that always ensues from presuming to be correct after following dogma with no scrutiny.

I'm not a Pantheist. I'm not an Emanationist. I'm not Gnostic of ANY discipline or variation (though DyoHypoTrin semantics are probably share with Valentinianism; we don't know for sure, because Vali's original treatise doesn't survive except where excerpted in opponents' writings).

My contention that the utterly transcendent God's literal substance became flesh rules out any form of Gnosticism; and I disaffirm any of the nonsense of Aeions and Demi-Gods, or that there's a "Mother Wisdom". So your veiled-ad hominem insisnuations that I'm Gnostic are without merit and typically despicable of a DyoHypoTrin who can't defend multiple hypostases for God from the text. And you're a staunch Sola Scripture guy. Sad.

I'm not many other things that I've been labeled and called, either. I'm a Monohypostatic Trinitarian. My affirmations speak for themselves, both the Apophatic and the Cataphatic.

Oh... And Augustine wasn't part of the Theotes/Theiotes, contrary to popular Reformed belief. LOL. (That was humor, BTW.)

 

[godrulz]

I suspect there are no end to logical fallacies (straw man, non sequitur, etc.).

Do you affirm creation ex nihilo?

I already asked, but did not see an answer. Do you believe eternal now/timelessness or endless time=eternity?

Still no answer about church, sites, etc.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I suspect there are no end to logical fallacies (straw man, non sequitur, etc.).

No. You just claim such to hide behind your leveraged false doctrine of three hypostases. I notice you can't and won't address that. I wouldn't, either, if I were a DyoHypoTrin. I'd just gloss over it forever and maintain my unbiblical indoctrination (though it's technically extra-biblical rather than un-).

Do you affirm creation ex nihilo?

Yes, though I think there's a better term than the Latin that I haven't yet found. Maybe "Instantiation of existence". NO emantionism. I'm also uncomfortable with terms like effluence, effusion, and exudation, etc. The cosmos had/has NO pre-existence or divinity.

But Nang has already affirmed eternity is DIVINE. It's an unwitting truth that DyoHypoTrins can't face or admit, even when they actually do (above). LOL.

What else IS an UNcreated realm of existence that contains and constrains God? It must be Divine, and is therefore God. Ridiculous.

God created ALL. God alone is UNcreated. God alone is Self-existent and Self-subsistent. Eternity is NOT Self-existent and Self-subsistent, and God does NOT inherently have His inate and intrinsic existence IN eternity. He INhabiteth it, when/as He created it by His Logos and the Pneuma of His mouth.

I already asked, but did not see an answer.

I answered. I'll do so again. I don't hide behind anything.

Do you believe eternal now/timelessness or endless time=eternity?

As I indicated before, I don't know that I'd use or mean the same things by those semantics.

The everlasting heavenly realm (eternity and heaven) has a sense of perpetual nowness, but has sequentiality and elapsation and duration and perpetuity in some sense. There are events that occur in succession, etc. It had a beginning and has no end.

The cosmos had a beginning and will have an end, regarless of the duration and perpetuity of the aion/s of the earth.

God alone had no beginning and has no end (AND that which proceeded forth/proceedeth from Him... the Logos and the Pneuma). Neither the created eternity of heaven nor the created natural universe of the cosmos proceeded forth/proceedeth from Him. They are not UNcreated, they are not Divine, and they did not emanate from Him. They are not of the Divine substance that was the subject matter and content of the Rhema of the Logos. Both created realms came into existence at the Divine Utterance. They were not pre-existent in any manner.

That should go a long way toward answering your questions, even if my semantics don't coincide with yours.

(And you still don't have scripture that God is three hypostases. Why don't you ever address that? Likely the same reason others don't, or they just excuse it away and ignore it or make some grandiose excuse based on philosophical criticism of terms and pronoun usage, etc.)

Still no answer about church, sites, etc.

I attend a large DyoHypoTrin church with a large Pastoral Staff. I'm Assistant Director of Prison Ministries and Pastoral Care Ministries. It's a conservative and non-denominational "Protestant" Evangelical fellowship.

Continutationist, but not Charismatic or Word of Faith. Predominantly Arminian, but with some strongly-Reformed Pastoral staff. Certainly not Antinomian, but also nowhere any hints of Pelagianism.

And several of the Pastoral staff are now embracing the Monohypostatic Trinity view because they are seeing the paradoxical errors of the DyoHypoTrin position that none of them can profer any exhaustive apologetic to defend. I'm always gracious, non-condescending, and non-schismatic. I just present the truth and allow the fruit of ministry to speak for itself.

Maybe they got it slightly wrong at Nicea and beyond. You and most others can't fathom that for some reason. The Council wasn't inspired, nor were its results. They omitted one consideration. ONE. Eternity was created, and that's an additional demarcation that must be accounted for in formulation with the processions of the Logos and the Pneuma.

All other sub-tenets must be maintained. No emantion. No createdness for F/S/HS. No beginning for the Logos/Son. True transcendent eternality and Divinity for F/S/HS. Con-essential. Con-substantial. No docetism. No modalism.

It all has to be transferred and accounted for while having the foundation of a created eternity. That means no more band-aids. No more three hypostases. The singular hypostasis is two-fold, but is QUALitatively distinguishable rather than QUANTitavely individuated.

There aren't three hypostases ("persons"). It was a compensating band-aid for omitting the created eternity. All other opposing historical God-models share the same foundational fallacy. That's why there was such conflict; and that's why the DyoHypoTrin doctrine has to utilize an extra-biblical quantity of hypostases.

And ALL "person/s" terminology derives from hypostasis. Period. Can't just have them in English. They came from the Greek, and English doesn't work anyway. In English etymology and definition, ALL persons are beings (though all beings aren't persons).

(And there's always the further paradox of the Father hypostasis contrasted to the God ousia.)

And no, I don't yet have a website, though I should (and hopefully will soon). No other websites or sources present this view or challenge of DyoHypoTrin. Opponents to O/orthodox Trinity generally drift to other historical camps or just apostatize, etc.

Now... Where are those scriptural three hypostases? They're not there.

 

[Krsto]

All I know, is that he laughs and sneers at the historical church creeds and confessions, faithfully worked out according to Holy Scripture by the early church fathers, in order to protect God's little flock of Christians from false prophets and ravenous wolves!

It seems you and Lon have a different bible than the rest of us. Our bibles ended with Revelation, but you have added some creeds and councils that in your mind are just as authoritative and binding as the bible. No wonder there's such a lack of unity between us.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I missed this response in all the hubbub.

Not that such can hold Him.

YOU have an eternity that "holds" God. I don't. Eternity is created and God pervasively fills and indwells it by His Logos and His Pneuma.

(Picture a "talk-balloon" God speaks into existence to contain His breath and the substance of His essence.)

This is going to be a problem because it is suggesting problematically, that 'anything' can contain God. Nothing can.

And yet... YOUR eternity DOES. I'm presenting a biblical created eternity that does NOT contain God. He INhabiteth it when/as He created it. It only contains Him because He prevades it. He remains ALSO transcendent to it.

He 'inhabits' something as He 'dwells' with His people, --> partially, not entirely.

Yep. He ALSO remains utterly transcendent to it. He "occupies" it unto everlasting by His Logos and His Pneuma.

My view isn't the problem. I'm solving the problem of an UNcreated and Divine eternity that IS God.

You cannot contain God by finite conceptualization

I'm not. You do. God is NOT contained by any finite conceptuatlization, yet that's what all DyoHypoTrins do while anathematizing the rest of the world.

and why would we even want to try other than as it relates to God's interaction with us?

Fine, then stop. Stop propogating an UNcreated eternity that is Divine, even if it's something passive to which you've never given any thought.

God. Created. Eternity.

Again, orthodoxy is concerned with getting what He has revealed to us, right, not trying to figure out 'beyond' revelation.

Nope. Eternity has been declared to be God Himself by Tertullian and others, including a thorough ridicuous 13th-century treatise by Thomas Aquinas the pompastic.

Such, I believe, is impossible. Speculation? Yes, but that's as far as we get by our own bootstraps. Such is 'stuck' in speculation.

LOL. And yet this somehow doesn't apply to the adamant assertions of you and other DyoHypoTrins about at UNcreated eternity that is Divine and contains/constrains God and His very existence. Okie-dokie.

Surely you see the silliness of that. I had high hopes of such from you, unlike most others I've encountered.

You cannot (impossible) pose such for considerations of orthodoxy. On top of that, you also cannot step upon what is given in revelation. What God says is true (leaving us speculating).

And yet O/orhtodoxy is even farther-reaching and more nebulous while omitting the central fixture of creation being eternity. Alrighty then. :wave:

Only insomuch as it is engaged with temporal (created).

Really? So there is no movement of anything or anyone to various places in sequence? That's silly, too. Why not just embrace the fact that O/orthodoxy made a HUGE omission at its foundation for Theology Proper. Eternity is NOT Divine or UNcreated. It doesn't prescribe the parameters of existence for the Self-existence God. It isn't the subsistence that contains Him. God is Self-subsistent.

I'm'onna have to say "Good Grief!" at this point. Open your heart, Bro. Eternity is a created what/where. If not, God is immanent and impotent, among other UN-God kinda things.

Metaphysically, existentially, there is no 'outside' of God

This is an odd philosophically-derived false limitation. The processions of the Logos and the Pneuma were ex- and ek-. Since God pervasively filled created eternity with Himself when/as He created it, it isn't "outside" Himself in a literal sense that we comprehend. God isn't a "what". God isn't relative to "wheres". He created ALL "what" and "where". So all created "what/where" isn't juxtaposted to His "whatless and whereless Self-ness of existence and subsistence" as eternal essence of Spirit. He couldn't help but fill the created eternity with His Breath when/as He spoke to create it by His Word. It inheren't happened because He is the all in all.

You're just constrained to the fallacies of the O/orthodox error. You should see my criticisms clearly. Eternity is a what/where. It's created, and it doesn't contain God via its own inherent parameter and properties or whatever. It isn't Divine or UNcreated. This shouldn't be hard at this point. I've done all the hard work for over a decade. You don't have to initiate the understanding. Just process it via noeo. You don't get the concept and the criticism of your faulty concept.

logically speaking or something is/would be larger than God and it'd be eternal, rather than Him.

Nope. Read above. God isn't a "what" at a "where". He created all those parameters apart from Himself and pervasively filled it all with Himself in the process with no interruption or distinction. Otherwise, you have PanENtheism in some manner. Creation isn't IN God. God is IN creation. God isn't a fishbowl for creation.

You just fell into a hole in which yesterday, you attempted avoiding from another.

Nope. Not in the least. The hole is in your comprehension. Try praying Ephesians 1:17 for the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge (epignosis) of him.

Let me tackle this logically: An 'inch' is defined by a beginning and end point. Without the points, you have nothing to measure. Measurement (and the 'concept' of measurement), requires a point A and a point B as well as a contrived, created randomly generated instrument (inches are marked by random elbow to wrist length of the inventor). Needless to say, we think it all very static and absolute, but it is not. No man's measurement is concrete or absolute, it only appears that way to finite beings. The ticking of a durative clock is incredibly man-made. We act like it is a fuction of the universe, is it absolutely not. It is random and 'tries' to measure what God has more accurate measured and made. We are incapable of measuring any aspect of God (finite vs infinite). The only qualification/quantification we have of God is what limited and finite amount that He chooses we should know and what we are finitely capable of (same thing really).

Yep. So stop doing it. Stop making eternity UNcreated and Divine, containing and constraining God. Stop making the measurement of eternity greater than God Himself. He created it. He created ALL.

Except in the mind of God.

LOLOLOLOLOL. And yet you'd decry ANY Unitarians for saying the Logos was in the mind of God but is still the Son.

EVERYTHING was in the mind of God before He created. But the ONLY thing in His mind that was HIS subsance of HIS essence was the Logos and the Pneuma. They weren't indivudated "persons" by ANY terminology or definition. They were His Word and His Breath, by which He embodied the substance of Himself in flesh as the Son. The Son was in His mind as the Rhema OF His Logos. The entirety of the Divine Expression was for the Son to embodied in flesh to reveal Himself to man by personal appearance and presence.

The Logos is NOT the Father, but is the Son. This must be understood aspectally FROM immanence of creation. If this were all the event of a parade, God simultaneosly sees and experiences the entire parade from every aspectal observation point relative to the parade. Front, side, rear, and all other aspects. God is unconstrained by time and space. He's outside it because He still exists apart from it in utter transcendence even while pervading it by His Spirit and His Logos.

Yes I'm finite, but even 'finite' is misunderstood within the (un)bounds of the eternal. We, not being God, are limited in capacity (there is a point A and B where we are concerned).

Right. So why do the vast majority of Trinitarians think they have it all locked down in spite of the egregious paradoxes they so adamantly declare? LOL.

Wow. I heard it here. GR, get ready to lose your Open Theism, unless of course you are the first he encounters who can resist.

I was speaking of those I encounter in person in live teaching settings. Anyone can be online and retain their fallacious views without acquiescence.

Well, so are a lot of names for Him, see again Isaiah 9:6. If you are advocating a 'durative' sonship, I think it problematic in conception. Hebrews 13:8

The Son isn't durative. The Son is the eternal Logos made flesh.

Or Hebrew. Is Hebrews 13:8 both qualitative and then incidentally quantitative to you?

It's not quantiative in regards to essence or substance at all. The Son is the prosopon ("person") of the hypostasis (substance) or the ousia (essence) of God. Distinct from Him because all creation was by/through/for the Logos.

You have the inverse problem... in spades. If the Son wasn't ever the literal and actual Logos, then the Son wasn't/isn't the Logos.

Not a mere fiat of thought as a concept, but as the substantial of the essential to be expressed outwardly, individuated as the Son relative to the realm in which the Logos was manifest as a "prosopon".

Your Son wasn't and isn't the Logos. Your Logos is merely an individuated hypostasis that doesn't even scriptrually exist. Vapor.

Regardless, think on this: If "sonship" were a "state of being" to you, Christ is unchanging. Iow, Logos didn't 'become' Son.

Though they are eternally and inherently coterminous, there is a distinction relative to the created realms.

If the Logos didn't "become" the Son via some semantics, then the Son was never the Logos or the Logos never has been the Son. That's an absurd pardox of many within the DyoHypoTrin doctrine.

And the pervasive modern Triadist dilution exaggerates those paradoxes exponentially.

Such, inadvertently or otherwise, is still thinking within limited and finite time constraints.

Nope. Your is. I present the Son who eternally was and is the Logos. You only present a Son. No Logos. Logos is name as descriptor only. Literally another "being", not another "person". Huge problem. That's why others refer to Trinity as presenting mulitple Gods. It kinda does in the DyoHypo format. It's unavoidable. More three than one. That's a problem.

God is not confined or expressed by such other than to give us handles on concepts needed to grasp a salvific idea and respond to Him.

DyoHypoTrin doesn't do that. And the morphed Triadist perversion exacerbates that dilemna.

Good.

Yep.

We'll see. I think you not seeing your own conceptual finite limitations.

Sure I do. You just don't see yours yet. You caricature and project upon my view rather than being able to comprehend it divested of inherent bias. I'm accustomed to it.

It is enough for me to say again, we can only be sure of what we are implicitly told in revelation.

There isn't ANY revelation that has given us three hypostases ("persons"); nor have we been given an UNcreated and Divine eternity that contains God instead of Him being Self-existent.

To a degree, we can link between points, such as a necessary triune understanding would convey, but we are very much glued to scripture for asserting truth.

I am. DyoHypoTrins aren't. You still maintain the same ideology of "persons" whether you can realize that or not. It's the default indoctrinated concept of threeness. You still won't abandon it in pursuit of truth by seeing its problems.

Whatever hypostasis is defined as in English, it's singular. And there's no plural scriptural term in Greek for "persons". Eisegesis. LOL.

We can't do it other than as we have been expressly given it. Such is beyond the realm of revelation.

Then why DO you? And why do ALL DyoHypoTrins? Scripture NEVER gave us multiple "persons" by ANY terminology. It's a preconceived concept because of immanent fragile minds.

Actually? I see 'you' as not understanding your logical limitation.

Of course you do. But you still think eternity is UNcreated and Divine, containing God while saying He can't be contained. :salute:

You cannot trounce upon any scriptural revelation or you or I necessarily get it wrong.

I don't. You do.

Notice 1 John 4:10 doesn't say "His Logos."

First of all, Mary was instructed to call his name Jesus. That wasn't a name until she gave it to him in this reality of the cosmos.

That's why it's in the Perfect Participle Active. The Perfect Participle (for other readers to know) stresses the state brought about by the finished results of the action.

Generally as a verbal adjective, the participle has a wide range of meanings. In the Perfect Tense, it describes an action, or more correctly a process, the results of which have continued to the present. (It has no exact equivalent in English, but is usually translated by using the auxiliary verbs "has" or "have".)

Your point is beyond moot according to the grammar. It wasn't an individuated hypostasis of three that hypostasized as a dual-natured prosopon. The passage in NO way intimates that except by mandate of DyoHypoTrin presumption. Fail.:salute:

If you are trying to draw a time-related distinction, such is, imho, an artificial one ("context" here meaning scripture, unless you meant your content or point?).

I'm not drawing a time-related distinction. Once processed from the transcendent ousia, the hypostasis of the Logos was already IN time of the everlasting durative heavenly realm. Nor was it a change in ontology. I make NO hint of any implication that the Son wasn't immutable. Your doctrine has no immutable point of the Son being the Logos.

Probably not.

Definitively not.

Great convo. I'm not being remotely adversarial.:wave:

 

[Nang]

Your doctrine has no immutable point of the Son being the Logos.

"Eternal Generation of the Son."