Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Meaning Of The Trinity
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 394 of 1864 (849113)
02-25-2019 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 393 by candle2
02-25-2019 7:13 AM


Discussing God In Familiar Terms
I think I have always believed this way. Sometimes, other readings throw me off.
It never made sense to me why there had to be a Trinity, but everyone I listened to believed in the doctrine without taking time to understand it. The Jehovah Witnesses were a bit misleading, but they did call the Spirit an "active force" which makes more sense than having an entirely Third person. I basically see Jesus as Gods character in human form. I don't see Jesus as identical to God, Creator of all seen and unseen, for the Bible says that Jesus Himself says His Father is greater....but its all nothing to get my mind twisted in a knot about. Heck, around here, its enough to even have a discussion without having to jump through the evidential hoops laid out by the secular science minds here at EvC.
They seek to frame the proper world view as being limited by and defined through evidence alone...thus to even attempt to talk about God is unproductive here. One of our older members once coached me the basic truism that IF God exists, God exists regardless of human belief, regardless of evidence for or absence of evidence, and irrespective of any attempt to define Him. I believe that I know about God and I believe that I have at one time had a touch, but apart from that, the whole personal relationship thing has become so complicated to fathom or attempt to define.
So tell me, candle2, what is your religious affiliation and spiritual growth history?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile

This message is a reply to:
 Message 393 by candle2, posted 02-25-2019 7:13 AM candle2 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by candle2, posted 02-25-2019 11:34 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 396 by candle2, posted 02-25-2019 8:36 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 397 of 1864 (879484)
07-17-2020 12:05 AM


Ellis Potter & Trinitarianism
I wanted to browse the archives of this old topic to see if we (here at EvC) have covered this question concerning what PaulK calls the "obvious contradictions". Here is our conversation reproduced:
PaulK writes:
I have to say the idea that the Trinity are three separate Gods is not one that orthodox Christianity accepts. But if they are really only one God isn’t that a form of what Potter calls monism ?
(I wonder how much Potter is influenced by Hindu belief. The Hindu Trimurti is usually presented as three Gods - at least in Western material - even if they are thought to be aspects of one The Christian Trinity is far more explicit about them being one God).
Phat writes:
This is how he explains it:
quote:
According to the third circle, when we look around at the world we see both unity and diversity. In this way we are like the people of the first circle. But whereas the people of the first circle conclude that unity is good and diversity is not, and that unity is real and diversity is illusion, people of the third circle have a different view. They regard the original perfection, which is called God, as both perfectly unified and perfectly diversified. We see a clear description of this reality in the Bible. God is perfectly unified as One God, and yet God is perfectly diversified in the three persons of the Father,Son, and Holy Spirit. There is unity and diversity in absolute reality. There is not One God who chooses to reveal Himself in three ways in order to create the appearance of diversity, and there are not three persons who choose to unite and cooperate in order to create the appearance of being unified. The original reality is 100% unified and 100% diversified. Its a 200% reality that cannot be comprehended by simple logic.
Thats what I think he meant when I quoted him in Message 1
I actually misquoted. The correct quote he used was:
God alone is God,and God is not alone.
He mentions that no other God in human imagination has this attribute. You can say Buddha alone is Buddha, but thats all. (The rest is silence)
You can say Krishna alone is Krishna, or Allah alone is Allah, but again...the rest is silence.
quote:
If the God of the third circle wants to talk to somebody, He talks among Himself because He is three persons. A God who wasn't diversified could not talk among Himself. He would have to create something else to talk with. He would require a creation in order to be personal, whereas (Ellis argues) the God of the third circle is intrinsically personal, independent of His creation.
Thus Potter explains his understanding of Trinitarianism as the centrality of the third circle.
In a sense, his concept unifies Yin and Yang(the 2nd circle) back into monism(One God) while preserving the belief in the Trinity and a subsequent explanation of his understanding of it. Which sorta makes sense in that the first Adam fell from unity into diversity and the 2nd Adam, Jesus, reunified the diversity caused by that pesky snake back into perfect unity....through acceptance of GOD in the personality of Jesus Christ and preserved eternally through the presence of the Holy Spirit. I mean, it all makes sense to me. I know Tangle insists its all made up Bushwa, but in a strict sense, any belief can be accused of being made up. Ellis Potter expanded my own understanding of Christianity in that his explanations felt intuitively sound. I suppose a critically thinking scientist would challenge the assumptions, but without throwing all belief away and relying solely on objective evidential discovery, what else can one do?
PaulK writes:
Explains is a bit strong. Doubling down on the contradictions of the Trinity is an interesting take but not one I can take seriously. (...)How about the Trimurti?
quote:
The identification of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva as one being is strongly emphasized in the Krma Pura, wherein 1.6 Brahman is worshiped as Trimurti; 1.9 especially inculcates the unity of the three gods, and 1.26 relates to the same theme
...I have to say that Potter looks like another apologist with nothing of great value to say.
Phat writes:
As far as the Trimurti goes, I think it differs in the whole image thing.
wiki writes:
... a single three-headed body...
Which is why Christians were always encouraged to see God as an UN-imaged concept. One would never know it by all of the statues of Jesus, (a white Jesus at that!) but this is one reason Protestants don't trust Catholics. The Orthodox try and get around it all through the use of icons, which they claim are "windows to heaven"...but I never really understood it all. I know that for me personally, it helps when I pray to not have any physical image in my mind as to the God I believe I am talking with...though jar would likely argue that by giving God attributes(friendly to Phat, loving, quick to forgive, etc etc...)I have essentially created Him in my own mind. I disagree, but can see the point.
PaulK writes:
But that image is as good a representation as you can get of what Potter is saying - diversity and unity together.The usual Christian view downplays diversity, which is contrary to Potter’s ideas - Potter places diversity on the same level as unity. And a lack of images does nothing to counter that.
Phat writes:
Christians have never been able to clearly explain the concept of the Trinity, but the idea of God being unified(Monotheistic) yet also diversified(Father and Son) cant really be explained any better...dont you think?
PaulK writes:
I think that doubling down on the contradiction makes a dubious concept even worse.
Phat writes:
Why not? One obvious example that comes to mind is the family unit. Ideally complete and unified. Also fully separate. I see no contradiction here.
PaulK writes:
Because they are opposites. It’s like being absolutely identical and completely different.
quote:
One obvious example that comes to mind is the family unit
Which is neither completely separate nor completely unified. I’m not talking about mere aspects of both, but of totality. The family unit is not a hive-mind with a single will, in a single body and never will be.
And for any way in which they are unified they are not separate. Those are opposites.
So here we are. In an old topic started by long ago member sidelined, who I note has no replies from you in this topic, though you (PaulK) were around at that time.
Let me synopsis comments from this old topic relevant to Trinitarianism:
sidelined, Topic Starter writes:
I have long wondered just what the notion of a trinity was supposed to explain if the common understanding requires that the three are one.
I responded: Message 3
Anastasia writes:
I didn't say Jesus had no existence prior to being born. Trust me, when the church developed the doctrine of the Trinity, they didnt skip over John 8. I said that Jesus HAS NO existence outside of God, not that He didnt exist before He was born as a man.
Just think about it; does your mental image of yourself exist if you don't exist? Are you its 'creator' or did it create you? Now, I don't want you to go thinking that God created Jesus, in theological circles that's incorrect; because it means God used 'stuff', that He planned to 'make' Jesus. It is more like Jesus HAS to be there just because God is there. God's image of Himself is eternal, having no beginning or end as He has no beginning or end. If The Word/Image disappeared, it would mean God disappeared, but the Word could not have existed without God. Get it?
Now, it is only at a certain point in time that the Word was put into a physical body...Jesus was born, BUT before Abraham existed, He Is. He does not say 'I Was' because that is a finite term. It is past tense. God has no past or future, all is NOW, which is a big clue in the Bible for how the Trinity came about as our 'solution'.
After all of that, the person of the Holy Spirit is simpler to understand, but more complex in a way also. The Spirit is a force, a power, a conduit. He is the means by which God accomplishes something...God's Will in Action. God willed Jesus to become Man. His Spirit is the Force which made it happen. There can be a misunderstanding that the Spirit of God was put into Mary; that is easy to picture...half man, half God. But, no, Jesus was put into Mary, and the Spirit is what put Him there. 'By the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus became man'. The wording of the creed is very careful and precise. So, we have the Power of God which comes out of Him, (proceeds from Him). It can't exist without God, and it is not a seperate Being. God uses His power all over the place, He sends out His Spirit, so to speak, but the Spirit does not divide into a million tiny Gods, it is all His Spirit, it is all God, omnipresent, and indivisible. Yet the Spirit is distinct from God. It is God being in all places as a Power, yet not splitting Himself up.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

Replies to this message:
 Message 398 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 10:30 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 399 of 1864 (879510)
07-17-2020 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 398 by PaulK
07-17-2020 10:30 AM


Re: Ellis Potter & Trinitarianism
Here is more Trinitarian Fodder taken from another topic on the Trinity.
Guido writes:
Up until now I've always had a problem with the concept of the trinity. I am still not sure that I fully comprehend it.
Not too many people DO understand it, Guido. The concept explains God both in unity and in diversity yet it is not contradictory or paradoxical. Historically, God is known to be One in essence yet three in personality. On the one hand, the Bible affirms Gods unity (Deuteronomy 6:4)
Guido writes:
My personal perspective on the trinity is that there are three persons equal in authority and power made of the same substance and forming one God head: The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit.
Yes. Three personalities of One essence. There are two main heresies that challenge the Orthodox position, however.
Modalism -The error that there is only one person in the Godhead who manifests himself in three forms or manners: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
and
Tritheism-Which is the teaching that the Godhead is really three separate beings forming three separate gods. This erring view is often misplaced for the doctrine of the Trinity which states that there is but one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Guido writes:
My questions are these:
1) Does each of these three persons have a separate free will and consciousness? Do they each have a separate soul?
Both the Son and the Spirit proceed (originate from) the Father, according to Orthodox tradition. The Catholics maintained another view, expressed here. In fact, google will shed some light on church positions.
2) If the three each have a separate consciousness, then is there a fourth which is the collective consciousness of the three? Is there a collective person that is the three persons combined?
I don't think there is a need for a "fourth". The Father has full awareness.
3) Does God exist in the trinity simply because that is the way it is or did God chose to be a trinity?
I think you answered your own question: That's the way it is, according to Christian belief.
4) Was God always a trinity or did God become a Trinity at one point?
Well, Jesus coexisted "In the beginning" with the Father, according to Orthodox Christian belief. I am assuming that the Trinity always was. The comforter was "sent" to the earth, yet the comforter (Holy Spirit) was not created by God. The Comforter is the Third Person.
I assume that if 3 is choice and 4 is became that means God could make decisions across time.
5) Does each member of the trinity have a specific purpose that was there since eternity past?
Such as
1. The Father creates.
2. The Son redeems.
3. The holy spirit sanctifies?
Thats the way I read it, also. The Father initiates creation and redemption, the Son redeems the creation, and the Holy Spirit regenerates and sanctifies..applying redemption to us.
I would really like an answer to my questions, ones that are based on scripture.
These are the sources I found: Matthew 3:16-17, Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14, 1 Peter 1:2 and of course the Deuteronomy one. There are more, of course.
Jesus had the ability to disobey the Father, but not the inclination. (Being human fully, yet also being God incarnate) As for the Holy Spirit, I would assume that the Spirit has no free will.(Apart from God) Thus only Jesus had the ability to divorce from the three, yet did not do so...thus fulfilling purpose.
Just because God knows what one of us will decide does not mean that WE do not have free will, however.
Let me give you an example. Say I have a five year old son. If I were to leave a chocolate chip cookie on the table about a hour before dinner time and my son was to walk by and see it, I know that he would pick up the cookie and eat it. I did not force him to make that decision.
In fact, I don't even have to be in the room at all. I think I know my son well enough, though, to tell you that if I come back into the kitchen the cookie will be gone. His act was made completely free of my influence, but I knew what his actions would be.
Now to address your point:
You seem not to find any points convincing. I think that you are simply predisposed to not fall for any supernatural unevidenced explanations.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 398 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 10:30 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 400 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 10:56 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 401 of 1864 (879516)
07-17-2020 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 400 by PaulK
07-17-2020 10:56 AM


Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
Well the whole apologetic storyline is that Angels were created with Free Will and one of them dutifully actualized autonomy and broke from monistic authority. Having foreknown this to be destined to happen, God Himself was the perfect essence of authority and goodness and was Trinitarian to model the concept of perfect unity that the (fallen) angel eliminated by choosing autonomy(rebellion)
Thus in a sense, Jesus was the Plan A from the beginning, nullifying the successful action of rebellion by making the right choice(in His trial and death, burial and resurrection) rather than the wrong choice as Lucifer did.
In my example, your child is autonomous from you the Father and yet familiar to you in that you *know* what he will do(rebel)
In a sense, your wise inner child knows not to rebel...your flesh and blood son does not. Does any of that make any sense?

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 400 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 10:56 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 402 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 11:12 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 403 of 1864 (879542)
07-17-2020 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 402 by PaulK
07-17-2020 11:12 AM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
PaulK writes:
So you are arguing that your hypothetical 5 year old son is the devil and it’s entirely his fault he ate the cookie, even though you left it out there knowing he would eat it?
Not at all. Children need training and education by example. Many adults also need to learn the basic concept of delayed gratification. But you bring up a good point that Potter addressed in the book. (ringo will chomp at the bit to challenge this one!)
Potter talks of the necessity of the possibility of evil. In Genesis, why was the tree of knowledge even in the garden if it was potentially harmful? (To give them the possibility of disobedience.)
Did not Jesus have the possibility of failing and running from the cross? (Yes.)
Leaving an apple on the table could well be called a deliberate set-up, but it allowed for the possibility of disobedience.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 402 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 11:12 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 404 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 2:25 PM Phat has replied
 Message 408 by ringo, posted 07-18-2020 12:47 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 405 of 1864 (879546)
07-17-2020 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 404 by PaulK
07-17-2020 2:25 PM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
If God truly is omniscient there is no possibility, only inevitability.
No. Just because G o d foreknows does not make Him responsible ant more than you guessing your 5 year olds reaction makes you responsible if in fact you never placed the cookie in his path. And God does not place every temptation in our daily paths either. ringo would argue that Gods foreknowledge makes Him responsible for everything but thats a huge and convenient copout.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 404 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2020 2:25 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by PaulK, posted 07-18-2020 12:20 AM Phat has replied
 Message 407 by Tangle, posted 07-18-2020 2:27 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 409 of 1864 (879588)
07-18-2020 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 408 by ringo
07-18-2020 12:47 PM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
why is it so deplorable to think about obeying? Who do you think YOU are, anyway?
AddByEdit:
The problem of course is that you have never seen a reason (or evidence) to believe in a higher power---certainly not One you would trust--and thus have never considered the option. At best you once fit in with a church and human authority. The reality of God never got you. Otherwise it would then be impossible to throw it away.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 408 by ringo, posted 07-18-2020 12:47 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 416 by ringo, posted 07-19-2020 10:24 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 411 of 1864 (879590)
07-18-2020 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 410 by jar
07-18-2020 3:03 PM


Re: towards the topic
And how does your favored Nicene Creed skirt the issue? I know you will trot out that old canard..."and was made man" but that in and of itself says nothing.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 410 by jar, posted 07-18-2020 3:03 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 412 by jar, posted 07-18-2020 4:40 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 413 of 1864 (879612)
07-19-2020 2:39 AM
Reply to: Message 412 by jar
07-18-2020 4:40 PM


Re: towards the topic
jar writes:
The Nicene Creed is unrelated to the meaning or acceptance of the Trinity . It is an Article of Faith. It does say that at that time to be a Christian one must believe in the characters God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. (...)But it is also quite clear that they are all separate and distinctive individuals and also that there is one holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
Nonsense. Jesus and GOD were never meant to be separate and neither was the Holy Spirit...of which there would be no need for were "it" separate.
jar writes:
The idea though of some three in one, not just as expression of differing aspects or essences really is the product of the term "consubstantial". It's a great word because it can mean being of one substance or of one essence.
And yet you call the concept "silly". Did it ever occur to you that modern day logic does no service to belief in God? What ends up happening is a heresey much like your claim that Jesus was simply human while on earth and that the resurrection was nothing unique to Him that the rest of us won't experience. Which borders on blasphemy.
...something so silly, so unreasonable, so illogical, so irrational, so unexplainable that it must simply be accepted with ever actually thinking about what it means, what is signifies or how totally unsupportable it might be.
How about the idea of holy Communion? Why not label that as silly?
Luke 22:14-32 writes:
14 When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. 15 And he said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. 16 For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God."
17 After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, "Take this and divide it among you. 18 For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes."
19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."
20 In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. 21 But the hand of him who is going to betray me is with mine on the table. 22 The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed, but woe to that man who betrays him." 23 They began to question among themselves which of them it might be who would do this.
24 Also a dispute arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. 25 Jesus said to them, "The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. 26 But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. 27 For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves. 28 You are those who have stood by me in my trials. 29 And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, 30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
31 "Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
The story includes God (Holy Father) and Jesus, the Son of Man.(and the Son of God) Satan is a character.The supernatural exists, as does the power of God incarnate.It is folly to try and explain the tales in modern terms for you reduce them to stories that we ourselves could fulfill. Jesus becomes just another human and GOD again becomes unknowable and an irrelevant Mystery. We are not secular humanists nor were we ever meant to be.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 412 by jar, posted 07-18-2020 4:40 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 414 by jar, posted 07-19-2020 7:52 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 415 of 1864 (879630)
07-19-2020 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by jar
07-19-2020 7:52 AM


Re: towards the topic
Its because your reason isnt reasonable. You are breaking down the supernatural into natural explanations.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by jar, posted 07-19-2020 7:52 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 417 by jar, posted 07-19-2020 10:47 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 418 of 1864 (879640)
07-19-2020 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 416 by ringo
07-19-2020 10:24 AM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
Starting with Moose's Official Warning:
quote:
I'LL MAKE THIS AN OFFICIAL WARNING - ANY MESSAGES NOT HAVING SOME SORT OF CONNECTION TO THE TOPIC THEME MIGHT JUST TRIGGER A 2 DAY SUSPENSION OF THE POSTER.---Adminnemooseus
The main reason that I brought this topic back to life is that I wanted a place to discuss/debate the whole concept of the Holy Trinity. Ellis Potter pushes the belief that God(Jesus Dad,Creator of all seen and unseen...yes THAT One! ) is relational within Himself and that He talks to Himself just as we humans talk to ourselves in our own head and yet are not schizophrenic or bi-polar. Potter argues that no other human monotheistic gods do this.
This topic already had a somewhat well developed argument by old now inactive members such as sidelined and anastasia. My goal was to incorporate some of their points into our current debate/discussion. And then jar has to come along and attempt to upend the whole idea that God can be Trinitarian yet wholly monotheistic using modern logic and ignoring the fact that spiritual ideas are never formed through logic and evidence, as he attempts to do. They start with belief.
Moving on...
ringo writes:
The "reality" of God doesn't get to anybody because it isn't real. It's a fantasy.
It's possible that there is a GOD and it's possible that we will meet HER some day but until we do, there is no reality to it, only made-up and hoped-for fantasy.
Irrelevant assertions. First of all, Gods human character is male not female. (Jesus is male) Second of all, the story is not simply a fantasy. This is evident by the impact it has had on people, culture, and History. Fantasy's run out of steam long before having such impact.
(What I'm trying to emphasize to ringo is the idea that were we to apply;y the prodigal "son" parable to God and the Angels, Lucifer would be the prodigal. Its just that it is not yet time for reconciliation with this rebellious one.) Jesus is Gods character and God cannot rebel against Himself. )
ringo writes:
It has nothing to do with being "deplorable". You claimed it was "necessary". Why is it necessary?
The only reason that Monism within God and His creation was shattered is due to free will being allowed. Lucifers rebellion set up a limited dualism, limited only in that God has ultimate veto power. As far as human reality goes, however...dualism is the basic reality of life apart from the discipline of redemption through Trinitarian awareness.
ringo asks "why the need for obedience?" Answer: To preserve union as opposed to a dualistic diversity.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by ringo, posted 07-19-2020 10:24 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 419 by PaulK, posted 07-19-2020 11:26 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 420 by ringo, posted 07-19-2020 3:39 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 421 of 1864 (879662)
07-19-2020 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 406 by PaulK
07-18-2020 12:20 AM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
PK writes:
I say that God’s foreknowledge makes him responsible for the consequences of his actions - because they are all foreseeable - and forseen by him. And as the creator of all, that includes everything.
And I say that God is not responsible for free willed agents of His creation choosing to adapt a path that would not be preferable in the grand scheme of things. For if God was ultimately responsible---indeed liable---why even allow free will to potentially exist anyway?

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by PaulK, posted 07-18-2020 12:20 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 422 by PaulK, posted 07-19-2020 5:50 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 423 of 1864 (879665)
07-19-2020 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 422 by PaulK
07-19-2020 5:50 PM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
PK writes:
I don’t believe that libertarian free will can exist.
I'll have to look this term up. Potter makes a good point concerning Jesus temptations in the wilderness and before His crucifixion. Namely that there was a possibility that He could have failed. Thankfully for the Cosmos, He did not fail, however.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 422 by PaulK, posted 07-19-2020 5:50 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 424 by PaulK, posted 07-19-2020 6:12 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 425 of 1864 (879680)
07-20-2020 7:51 AM


Libertarian Free Will
I looked the term up.
Wiki writes:
Question: "What is libertarian free will?"
Answer:Libertarian free will is basically the concept that, metaphysically and morally, man is an autonomous being, one who operates independently, not controlled by others or by outside forces. According to the Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion (InterVarsity Press, 2002), libertarian free will is defined as in ethics and metaphysics, the view that human beings sometimes can will more than one possibility. According to this view, a person who freely made a particular choice could have chosen differently, even if nothing about the past prior to the moment of choice had been different. In the libertarian free will paradigm, the power of contrary choice reigns supreme. Without this ability to choose otherwise, libertarian free will proponents will claim that man cannot be held morally responsible for his actions.
As mentioned earlier, the word autonomous is key in understanding libertarian free will. The word basically means self-government. It is derived from two Greek words, autos and nomos, which mean a law unto oneself. This is libertarian free will in a nutshell. We, as free moral agents, can make our own decisions and are not subject to the will or determination of another. In any given situation, let’s call it X, we can freely choose to do action A. Furthermore, if situation X presents itself again, we can freely choose not to do A (~A).
The opposite of libertarian free will is called determinism, and determinism essentially denies free will altogetherour choices are determined and that’s that. In situation X, I will always choose to do action A, and in situation Y, I will choose to do ~A, etc. Instead of being autonomous beings, mankind is reduced to being automatonsbeings who perform programmed responses to certain situations.(...)
So this brings up Jesus and temptation in the wilderness and before the cross in Gethsemane.
PaulK writes:
I don’t believe that libertarian free will can exist.
Wiki basically agrees with you:
Wiki writes:
Can a human being, a creature, be autonomous if God is sovereign? The obvious conclusion is that libertarian free will is incompatible with the sovereignty of God. Consider this passage from the book of Proverbs: In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps (Proverbs 16:9). This does not paint a picture of man as an autonomous being, but rather as man operating within the confines of a sovereign God.
And ringo earlier challenged me on this sub topic:
ringo writes:
At the risk of creating a false dichotomy: Either God created evil or He didn't create everything. Whether He does something "directly" or not is irrelevant. He pulled the trigger so you can't blame the bullet.
Potter agrees with something I used to always push that people never understood where I made it up at. The fact that Potter also says it shows me that it is an intuitive conclusion of the living Spirit (which teaches us all things)

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

Replies to this message:
 Message 426 by PaulK, posted 07-20-2020 8:00 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 427 of 1864 (879683)
07-20-2020 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 426 by PaulK
07-20-2020 8:00 AM


Re: Libertarian Free Will
Lets keep this one focused on the Trinity. Also I apologize in that I never finished my line of thought...maybe you could start a new topic on Libertarian Free Will specifically and perhaps Free Will in general. We could use an uncluttered platform on which to rant.
Add:
One that we had going a few years ago ended up well summarized by several participants.
Note:
Message 353 and the next few summations after that.
Another oldie but goodie: Free Will vs Determinism
Personally, I want to examine free wwill philosophically (and obviously hypothetically) the way that God Himself might see it. Xongsmith examined human responses in his topic and did a fine job of it too.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 426 by PaulK, posted 07-20-2020 8:00 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 428 by PaulK, posted 07-20-2020 8:24 AM Phat has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024