 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 |
Resident Skeptic |
| Christlaw wrote: | | Resident Skeptic wrote: |
Just to keep this discussion on track, I refer back to my very first comment on this thread in answer to Casey's comments....
| Quote: | Yes, those who believe in Christ's deity (no matter the label you attach to it) have to wrestle with these questions.
First of all, God is a "He", and indivisible "being". Yet this He is triune in his revelation to us. Some call the trifold way he reveals himself to us "persons", "manifestations", or other terms.
So when we see interaction between the three aspects (persons/manifestations, etc) of this He/being, is he talking to himself?
Are his three "selves" having a conversation with each other?
Again, ALL Christians who believe there are distinctions within God have to wrestle with this.
Yet some have the audacity to poke fun at the others interpretation as if they themselves don't have the same questions to answer, and as if though their own beliefs don't produce the same questions. |
|
It is not clear how the above 'problems' you say we must wrestle with are problems in trinitarian theology. Trinitarianism affirms that each individual person within the Godhead speak to and relate to each other as distinct persons. It is only something to wrestle with for those who deny the triune nature of God. |
It's not a problem to you. But when you are accused of having a God who talks to himself, your confidence in your own beliefs won't cut it with a critic. He will point out that your God is one being, a He and must be talking to himself. Maybe that won't be fair, just like it's not fair to say Oneness adherents think Jesus was praying to himself.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/3/12 1:13 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Brad...nope |
Aaron Scott |
Jesus also called "God" "God" when he told Mary that he must ascend to her God and HIS God.
If I remember, there may be even be another one or two.
Jesus IS God...in the same way that my clone IS me. He has my DNA, etc....but he is not ME in the fullest sense. Thus, it is right to call Jesus God and to worship Him. But it is not correct to call Him the ONE GOD. That's His Father. |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
10/3/12 3:53 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Brad...nope |
Resident Skeptic |
| Aaron Scott wrote: | Jesus also called "God" "God" when he told Mary that he must ascend to her God and HIS God.
If I remember, there may be even be another one or two.
Jesus IS God...in the same way that my clone IS me. He has my DNA, etc....but he is not ME in the fullest sense. Thus, it is right to call Jesus God and to worship Him. But it is not correct to call Him the ONE GOD. That's His Father. |
Then you could not be labeled an orthodox Trinitarian. According to the doctrine of the Trinity, the Trinity is the "ONE GOD". You have equated the Father as being the "ONE GOD", while the doctrine of the Trinity states that the Father is the first person within the being of God.
Don't take me wrong. This does not effect me one way or another. But many Trinitarian apologists would label you a heretic.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/3/12 4:00 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Christlaw |
I hope he's just pretending and really does believe in the Deity of Christ, but he's been arguing against that and the doctrine of the Trinity for years.
_________________
If ye love me, keep my commandments. |
Friendly Face
Posts: 349
10/3/12 4:49 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Resident Skeptic |
| Christlaw wrote: | | I hope he's just pretending and really does believe in the Deity of Christ, but he's been arguing against that and the doctrine of the Trinity for years. |
Most so-called Trinitarian believers would not see any thing wrong with what he said. This is because doctrine is not being taught anymore in our churches.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/3/12 5:00 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Ventureforth |
I agree. It's very confusing for me to think of Jesus frequently talking to Himself. This especially the case in the gospel of John.
| Quote: | But Jesus answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I am working.”
John 5:17 |
| Quote: | | And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen,,,John 5:37 |
Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning, God..."
However in verse 26, it says
| Quote: | | Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,.. |
If God speaks of "us", who else was there to co-create man?
It is apparent to me that the "us" are present together and not modes of the same.
However, God makes very sure that the Israelites regard Him as one God. Perhaps, avoiding the polytheism of other peoples factored into this along with the fact that they could not begin to comprehend the Trinity. How many years have passed we still can't comprehend it?
They are to be thought of as one.
But if we really think about the Trinity in the right way, it is a beautiful thought! And there are reflections of the Trinity in His creation, or should be.
"We'll understand it better by and by."
Sometimes I think it must amuse God when His children try to figure him out. But let's not think we have it all figured out this side of glory. |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
10/4/12 10:23 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Ventureforth... |
Aaron Scott |
Venture, on what grounds do we assume that God was speaking to Jesus and the Holy Spirit when He said "Us"?
(Some time ago, someone made a telling argument about this necessarily being God, but I cannot remember what it was, or who it was.)
Even from my earliest days, I took these words to mean something along the lines of God speaking with the collective "we" to other members of the heavenly host, NOT at all necessarily to other members of the Godhead. (For instance, when a preacher say, "we are so happy to be here.") |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
10/5/12 4:46 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Resident Skeptic |
| Ventureforth wrote: |
I agree. It's very confusing for me to think of Jesus frequently talking to Himself. This especially the case in the gospel of John.
| Quote: | But Jesus answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I am working.”
John 5:17 |
| Quote: | | And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen,,,John 5:37 |
Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning, God..."
However in verse 26, it says
| Quote: | | Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,.. |
If God speaks of "us", who else was there to co-create man?
It is apparent to me that the "us" are present together and not modes of the same.
However, God makes very sure that the Israelites regard Him as one God. Perhaps, avoiding the polytheism of other peoples factored into this along with the fact that they could not begin to comprehend the Trinity. How many years have passed we still can't comprehend it?
They are to be thought of as one.
But if we really think about the Trinity in the right way, it is a beautiful thought! And there are reflections of the Trinity in His creation, or should be.
"We'll understand it better by and by."
Sometimes I think it must amuse God when His children try to figure him out. But let's not think we have it all figured out this side of glory. |
So you believe God was talking to himself in Genesis. If you want to accuse Oneness folk of that, then you also have the same problem. The triune God is a "He", a being. From a trinitarian standpoint, He is a being with three "selves".
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/5/12 5:35 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Ventureforth |
| Resident Skeptic wrote: | | Ventureforth wrote: |
I agree. It's very confusing for me to think of Jesus frequently talking to Himself. This especially the case in the gospel of John.
...
Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning, God..."
However in verse 26, it says
| Quote: | | Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,.. |
If God speaks of "us", who else was there to co-create man?
It is apparent to me that the "us" are present together and not modes of the same.
However, God makes very sure that the Israelites regard Him as one God. Perhaps, avoiding the polytheism of other peoples factored into this along with the fact that they could not begin to comprehend the Trinity. How many years have passed we still can't comprehend it?
They are to be thought of as one.
...
|
So you believe God was talking to himself in Genesis. If you want to accuse Oneness folk of that, then you also have the same problem. The triune God is a "He", a being. From a trinitarian standpoint, He is a being with three "selves". |
I suppose, in a sense, one could say God is talking to himself in that the three are one. And I guess you could say a husband or wife is talking to self when he or she is talking to the spouse(this illustration falls far short but hopefully you get what I mean). But saying God is talking to Himself is neglecting the aspect of distinctiveness each person of the Trinity has. Now mind you, I am not saying they are three Gods but they are three distinct beings in one Godhead. This is the way I understand the Trinity. Although I don't claim to understand it fully, I believe God has given us what is necessary to understand.
So no, I don't think God is talking to himself in Genesis. If God was talking to Himself, then why use the plural "us".
The Spirit of God was there:
....And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Genesis 1:2
The Son was there:
| Quote: | | ...the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him. John 1:2 & 3 |
Even though the OT testified to the Son, the Son had not yet been incarnated. So the Israelites probably knew of God only as Father - or "He".
By the way, Gen. 1:26 wasn't the only reference to "us".
| Quote: | | 22 Then the Lord God said, (W)“Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Genesis 3:22 |
Anyway, that's the way I understand it. |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
10/5/12 3:58 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Venturforth |
Resident Skeptic |
Please keep in mind that I'm speaking to from the viewpoint I had before embracing the Oneness doctrine. The thoughts here are what I , as a Trinitarian would have said to you when I was still with the AoG. This is NOT NOT NOT a Oneness viewpoint.The only time I will mention the Oneness viewpoint is to clarify one point.
| Quote: | | I suppose, in a sense, one could say God is talking to himself in that the three are one. And I guess you could say a husband or wife is talking to self when he or she is talking to the spouse(this illustration falls far short but hopefully you get what I mean). |
Like I heard a diehard Trinitarian say on this board...The persons of the Godhead are not one in the same sense that a husband and wife are one, rather the three persons are one in substance or being.
| Quote: | | But saying God is talking to Himself is neglecting the aspect of distinctiveness each person of the Trinity has. Now mind you, I am not saying they are three Gods but they are three distinct beings in one Godhead. |
I don't really think the triune God is "talking to himself". But neither do I think it is fair to say that Oneness adherents believe that "Jesus was praying to himself" Perhaps the misconception of the term "Jesus only"(a term that Oneness adherents reject) is what misleads people. That term is what our detractors labeled us with concerning our baptismal formula. It had nothing to do with our view of the Godhead. We believe, as do our Trinitarian brothers, that there are real distinctions within the being of God.We only differ as to how those distinctions came about. We believe they are a result of the incarnation.
But both camps believe that God is one, sovereign being (though it seems more and more Trinitarians are not thinking of the triune God as a being, but rather a group of beings).
But I'd like to comment on your view that the persons within the being of God are "three distinct beings". That description of the persons of the Trinity was unheard of 30 years ago except among a few like Swaggat and Dake who felt that each person of the Trinity had his own body, and that we would literally see three, distinct beings standing side by side in Heaven.
Back then Trinitarians were divided into two primary camps. One believed in "Eternal Sonship" , while the other believed in "Incarnational Sonship". I was a part of the latter. We believed that the triune God foreknew which role each of his persons would take in the task of redeeming mankind. The Word would assume the role of the Son of God to die for the sins of mankind.
The term "persons" can be misleading. At a recent national dialog between Oneness and Trinitarian Pentecostals, the Trinitarians made it clear that the term "persons" as it is used to describe the distinctions within the Triune God does not mean "persons" in the sense humans understand the term. Other Trinitarians echo this sentiment....
| Quote: | Some people take issue with the use of the word "Person" in the doctrine of the Trinity when the word is applied to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They wrongly assume that the doctrine of the Trinity inadvertently teaches that three Gods exist.
This is a common misconception about what the Trinity doctrine says, which actually has the opposite intent – to preserve the biblical witness to the oneness of God’s Being, yet at the same time accounting for the divinity of the Father, Son and the Spirit. The answer is that we must not confuse tritheism with the Trinity or think of "[b]persons" as we do in the human sphere when we speak of God’s divine nature. [/b]What the Trinity says is that God is one with respect to his essence but is three with respect to the internal distinctions within his Triunity. |
Notice that the Triune God is considered to be a "He", "him" and a "being". Notice also the emphasis that the term "person" cannot be thought of in the human sense of the word.
Now listen to this startling admission....
| Quote: |
It is legitimate to speak about the limitations of using the word "person" when explaining the nature of God. Do we really understand how God can be one in Being and three in Person? We have no experiential knowledge of God as he is. Not only is our experience limited, but so is our language. Using the word "Persons" for each of the three hypostases of God is in some ways a compromise. That’s true. But, when speaking to God’s nature, we need a word that emphasizes his personalness in relationship to us human creatures and within himself, and yet, that carries with it the concept of distinctiveness. "Person" just happens to be the most appropriate word we have in the English language to do this. |
As a trinitarian, I would have agreed with this line of reasoning. But today it seems hard to find a Trinitarian that will admit that God is a "being". There seems to be an overemphasis on his distinctions, to the neglect, if not out right ignoring of his oneness in being.
Continuing this writer said...
| Quote: | Unfortunately, the word "person" also contains the notion of separateness when used of human persons. How can we deal with this? The thing to understand is that God does not consist of the kind of persons that a group of human beings do. But, then, what is a "God-kind" of person? We can say that human persons are separate from each other and have separate wills because they only have external relations with each other, while the Persons of God have internal relations and share the same essence.
The Trinity doctrine uses the word "Person" for each hypostasis of God because it is a personal word, and above all, God is a personal being in his dealings with us. Only a personal being can love, and love is the defining essence of God, according to the biblical witness (1 John 4:8; John 3:16; 15:9-10)
The word "persons" distinguishes between the three Persons of God and the one Being of God in the sense that the three Persons constitute his one Being. Thus, the doctrine preserves both the biblical revelation that there is but one God and no other, as well as its testimony that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are all equally divine and true God of true God.
Those who reject the Trinitarian explanation of God’s nature are in a quandary. If one rejects the theology of the Trinity, he or she has no explanation that preserves two witnesses to God’s Being: God is One Being and also he is Triune in his Being. |
I appreciate the honesty of this writer.
| Quote: |
That is why Christians formulated the doctrine in precise technical language – so that we could rightly speak of God, according to the witness he has left us of himself through Christ and in the Spirit, as attested to by the New Testament. The Church confesses the biblical testimony that God is one divine Being. But Christians also confess that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are divine, true God of true God, according to the New Testament.
The Trinity doctrine was developed precisely with the intent of explaining, as well as human words and thought would allow, the reality that God has existed from eternity both as One Being and yet as three Persons. The Trinity doctrine says that God is one and that in his oneness he is Triune.
On the other hand, the Trinitarian explanation takes into consideration the divinity of the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit – and the biblical truth that there is only one God. That’s why the doctrine of the Trinity has survived for centuries as the explanation of God’s nature that preserves the truth of the biblical witness of who God is – and that he has saved us in himself through the Son and in the Spirit. |
Here is how Christian scholar Emery Bancroft described it in his book Christian Theology, pages 87-88:
| Quote: | The Father is not God as such; for God is not only Father, but also Son and Holy Spirit. The term Father designates that personal distinction in the divine nature in virtue of which God is related to the Son and, through the Son and the Spirit, to the church.
The Son is not God as such; for God is not only Son, but also Father and Holy Spirit. The Son designates that distinction in virtue of which God is related to the Father, and is sent by the Father to redeem the world, and with the Father sends the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not God as such; for God is not only Holy Spirit, but also Father and Son. The Holy Spirit designates that distinction in virtue of which God is related to the Father and the Son, and is sent by them to accomplish the work of renewing the ungodly and sanctifying the church. |
As a Trinitarian, I never believed that human types of communication happened between the persons within God's being prior to the incarnation. I never envisioned the members of the Trinity working out the details of creation ("let us") because God is all knowing and does not need to plan anything. Isaiah asked the question.....
| Quote: | | Who has directed the Spirit of the LORD, Or as His counselor has informed Him? (Is. 40:13) |
I viewed scriptures like Psalm 2:7 and 110:1 as being strictly prophetic in nature and not Old Testament records of conversations between persons in the Godhead. To me, it was Christ's limitations as a man that necessitated communication as humans understand it.
In my opinion, Trinitarianism has slowly changed into something unrecognizable to me over the last 20 years.
What say you?
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/5/12 5:34 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Ventureforth |
Ok, I'm a little clearer on your position.
In mentioning the marriage illustration I wasn't trying to say something like, "There are three totally separate persons. We only think of them as one." On a side note, human relationships can be a reflection of the Trinity. (John 17:20 & 21). But I don't want to get sidetracked so I will move on. The husband and wife example may not express clearly the point so I will concede it may not be useful in this discussion.
Just to confirm, I'm not denying the "oneness" of the Trinity. When God said, "The Lord is one" I know He wasn't contradicting Himself. When I use words like "person" and "being" when referring to the distinctiveness within Trinity I know these are imperfect terms but, to be honest, it is not easy to find terms that don't have at least a little risk of misinterpretation.
The pronoun "He" is in itself a an incomplete word, but I believe God uses it because it helps us relate to certain aspects of God as does Father and Son. God is not really a man as we know men. Some even like to emphasize the feminine qualities of the Holy Spirit. And these terms do help avoid making God seem like an impersonal, unrelatable force - which God is not.
Regarding Genesis:
| Quote: | | As a Trinitarian, I never believed that human types of communication happened between the persons within God's being prior to the incarnation. I never envisioned the members of the Trinity working out the details of creation ("let us") because God is all knowing and does not need to plan anything. |
So I guess I'm not understanding what are you calling a "plan"? I see the scripture as telling us God is all knowing and does have plans. The Son was "slain from the foundation of the world." It was God's plan for the Son to be born and die on earth. Not to mention the plans God has for us.
Sure God foreknew that He/They were going to create man. Couldn't it be that God was saying it was now time and how it would take place? The verse Genesis 1:26 is very important in communicating to humans how they were made in the image of God. Apparently, He needed to let us in on that communication. The Trinity may not communicate in the same way as Humans but we may not be able to understand how the Trinity communicates. The bible is replete with anthropomorphisms.
| Quote: | Back then Trinitarians were divided into two primary camps. One believed in "Eternal Sonship" , while the other believed in "Incarnational Sonship". I was a part of the latter. We believed that the triune God foreknew which role each of his persons would take in the task of redeeming mankind. The Word would assume the role of the Son of God to die for the sins of mankind.
|
Can we agree that the Word predated the incarnation and was a "person" of the Trinity?
John 1:1 "...the Word was with God" |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
10/6/12 12:26 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Venturforth |
Resident Skeptic |
| Quote: |
Can we agree that the Word predated the incarnation and was a "person" of the Trinity? |
All depends on what one means by "person" 
I certainly would say the Word was a distinction within the being of God. IMO the Word was the way in which God visually manifested himself to his creation through visions, dreams, and face to face encounters. There are different schools of thought on this even in the OP camp. Some say the visual manifestation was eternal. Others say the visual manifestation was manifest only when God created beings to communicate with. But as far as there being human style communication between the Word and the omni-present Eternal Spirit of God...most would say no and that it was not necessary.
But this certainly is an areas where we all have very limited knowledge. God really is beyond what our limited vocabulary can express.
Thank you for a very civil and thought provoking dialog.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI
Last edited by Resident Skeptic on 10/6/12 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/6/12 9:11 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Randy Johnson |
| Resident Skeptic wrote: |
The point here though is not which Godhead model is the best. That is entirely up to the individual. The point is the seeming problem that is created by communication within the being of God himself. Does this communication constitute God talking to himself? Does God have "three selves"? |
Perhaps not, but the Chinese do!
_________________
Randy Johnson, Pastor
Ickesburg Church of God
85 Tuscarora Path
Ickesburg, Pennsylvania |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5431
10/6/12 9:41 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Venturforth |
Ventureforth |
[quote="Resident Skeptic"] | Quote: |
I certainly would say the Word was a distinction within the being of God. IMO the Word was the way in which God visually manifested himself to his creation through visions, dreams, and face to face encounters. |
Interesting. I believe I read somewhere that there are those that believe one of the visitors that visited Abraham in Genesis 18 was the Son of God, Jesus. Quite possible.
| Quote: | But this certainly is an areas where we all have very limited knowledge. God really is beyond what our limited vocabulary can express.
Thank you for a very civil and thought provoking dialog. |
Your welcome and thank you. |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
10/6/12 10:06 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Who was Jesus talking to on the cross? God or himself? |
InspiredHillbilly |
| caseyleejones wrote: | ........when he said "My God My God". Did he pray to himself other times?
Jesus standing at the right hand of God. Wait.......What??????
Acts 7:55 (KJV)
55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
....and to really mess things up....the Holy Ghost was inside of Stephen..... |
Would love to answer you here... but I'm not allowed....
_________________
Rev. C. Todd Robbins
Evangelist - Emmanuel Churches of Christ
The Greatest Risk... is the Risk of Regret... |
Golf Cart Mafia Associate
Posts: 2118
10/9/12 8:25 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Who was Jesus talking to on the cross? God or himself? |
John Stokes |
| caseyleejones wrote: | ........when he said "My God My God". Did he pray to himself other times?
Jesus standing at the right hand of God. Wait.......What??????
Acts 7:55 (KJV)
55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
....and to really mess things up....the Holy Ghost was inside of Stephen..... |
Not sure about the motive of this post, but I'll give my 2 cents. I believe he was worshipping the father in song (Psalm). Obviously this quote of the popular psalm would've been very familiar to many of those at the foot of the cross. Maybe in His time of deepest sorrow and unspeakable pain, He was still teaching. Leading in worship. Being an example.
Maybe, just maybe, it was not at all a cry of despair, but of worship. A faith statement of upcoming victory.
What if as he started the song, those at the cross softly joined in. One last moment of worship with the Savior King.
_________________
John Stokes
Church | Facebook |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 875
10/9/12 9:17 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Mods & Admins |
Poimen |
Shouldn't this thread be moved to the Oneness/Triniatarian forum ???
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher
Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay." |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
10/9/12 11:56 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Mods & Admins |
Resident Skeptic |
| Poimen wrote: | | Shouldn't this thread be moved to the Oneness/Triniatarian forum ??? |
You mean the same forum where this thread is?..........
http://www.actscelerate.com/viewtopic.php?t=72344
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
10/10/12 3:33 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
