Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 72 (9010 total)
62 online now:
PaulK, Tangle (2 members, 60 visitors)
Newest Member: Burrawang
Post Volume: Total: 881,668 Year: 13,416/23,288 Month: 346/795 Week: 47/95 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Meaning Of The Trinity
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 10 days)
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 391 of 470 (849108)
02-24-2019 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 384 by Phat
02-24-2019 6:03 AM


Re: About the Holy Spirit. (question)
quote:

I will agree with the idea that pauls Epistles helped form the bedrock of Christianity, particularly later Protestant Dogma. They are well written and in some parts seem inspired by more than a simple authors imagination, but of course we have no objective proof.

There did seem to be a collection, of some of Paul's letters, quoted (as scripture? probably) in what early non-Biblical Christian writings we have today.

Just because the earliest 100 A.D. writings are European writings loaded with quotations of Paul's Letters, alongside the Old Testament "Scripture", might not mean it is representative of early Christianity.

The Gospels might generally follow "Pauline Christianity", or perhaps a European mutant version of Paul's Christianity. The Christianity of Irenaeus (180-200) was a multi-fold mutation of the mutation.

European Mutant Christianity Chronology:

(Semitic individual, but Greek Letters) First (sort of)mutant: Paul

(intermediate stage mutants): Greek Matthew, Gospel of Mark.

Second level mutants: Colossians, II Thessalonians, Gospel of John,

Super mutant: Irenaeus (and the earlier strain of Pastoral Epistles plus Ignatius, Barnabas, Didache)

Current descendants of Super Mutant stage: Roman Catholics, Coptic Church, Eastern Orthodox, "Protestant", etc.

However:

Paul is difficult to classify. He was actually a Jew, and he did write 7 of the letters attributed to him (in Greek). The fact that he wrote in Greek made him an easy person for European Mutants to access (and claim ownership of). Scholars have this "Pauline School" thingy going. (something written "...in the tradition of his school"). European "Christian" fraudsters.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by Phat, posted 02-24-2019 6:03 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
candle2
Member (Idle past 88 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 12-31-2018


Message 392 of 470 (849111)
02-25-2019 6:39 AM
Reply to: Message 390 by LamarkNewAge
02-24-2019 4:38 PM


Re: Semitic gender of the "Holy Spirit". (question)
Spirit (pneuma) is neuter in gender. This is why in Romans 8:16,26 that the Spirit (pneuma) is called "lt."

16. "The Spirit itself bears witness with our Spirit that we are the children of God."

Just as our Spirit is not another person, neither is the Spirit of God another person.

W/o the human Spirit we would be no different than animals. We would not be capable of abstract thought, nor would we be capable of having a r/s with God.

"Word" in John 1 is from Logos. Jesus is the Spokesman for the God family. He is the Being who spoke and said "Let there be light." And, "Let us (more than one) make man in our (more than one) image after our likeness.

The Logos spoke with all the prophets and apostles. He is the only member of the God family who has met and spoke with humans.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by LamarkNewAge, posted 02-24-2019 4:38 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
candle2
Member (Idle past 88 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 12-31-2018


Message 393 of 470 (849112)
02-25-2019 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 388 by Phat
02-24-2019 2:49 PM


Re: About the Holy Spirit. (question)
Exactly! There is one God, not three. There is one Theos comprised of two Beings. People close their minds to this; yet, they will believe in some kind of psychotic god with three personalities.

Paul, in all his Epistles, sent salutations from both the Father and the Son. Why no mention of the Holy Spirit? Didn't Paul get the memo that the Holy Spirit is also a person?

When the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit was another being living inside all of them? How is it possible for one person to live inside millions at the same time?

The Holy Spirit is our earnest (down payment) of our inheritance, which is to be born into the family of God.

Luke 1:35 states that the Holy Spirit shall come upon Mary and the "power" of the Highest shall impregnate her. Here the Holy Spirit is called exactly what it is

If the Holy Spirit were a person, He would be the Father of Jesus. Do people actually believe that God the Father adopted Jesus from the Holy Spirit?

Sounds stupid doesn't it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by Phat, posted 02-24-2019 2:49 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 394 by Phat, posted 02-25-2019 9:07 AM candle2 has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14672
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 394 of 470 (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 responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by candle2, posted 02-25-2019 11:34 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 396 by candle2, posted 02-25-2019 8:36 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
candle2
Member (Idle past 88 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 12-31-2018


Message 395 of 470 (849124)
02-25-2019 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 394 by Phat
02-25-2019 9:07 AM


Re: Discussing God In Familiar Terms
I am a member of the United Church of God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 394 by Phat, posted 02-25-2019 9:07 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
candle2
Member (Idle past 88 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 12-31-2018


Message 396 of 470 (849140)
02-25-2019 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 394 by Phat
02-25-2019 9:07 AM


Re: Discussing God In Familiar Terms
I don't want anyone to think that I do not realize the importance of the Holy Spirit. I u/s full well Romans 8:9 "...Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.

Only those who are led by God's Spirit have access to eternal life.

Verse 16: "For as many as ate led by the Spirit of God, they are sons of God.

Since we are to become sons of God (in fact, God Beings ourselves) righteous character is absolutely necessary.

To be a true Christian is perhaps the most difficult task ever undertaken.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 394 by Phat, posted 02-25-2019 9:07 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14672
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 397 of 470 (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 Kūrma Purāṇa, 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 responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16580
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 398 of 470 (879507)
07-17-2020 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 397 by Phat
07-17-2020 12:05 AM


Re: Ellis Potter & Trinitarianism
It might be a little unfair to respond to Anastasia when she isn’t here to defend herself.

Suffice to say that I don’t find her points convincing - even as a possible explanation of the Trinity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 12:05 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 399 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 10:45 AM PaulK has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14672
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 399 of 470 (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 responded

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

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16580
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 400 of 470 (879514)
07-17-2020 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 399 by Phat
07-17-2020 10:45 AM


Re: Ellis Potter & Trinitarianism
I’m not seeing much here to comment on, but I think this example can be greatly improved
quote:
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.

The big problem here is that you are not your hypothetical son.

If you were to make it entirely about yourself it would be better. Intellectually you know that you shouldn’t eat the cookie. If there was another instance of you outside the room, he would say that you should not eat the cookie. But because you are there, in the room with that cookie you eat it anyway.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 399 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 10:45 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 401 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 11:03 AM PaulK has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14672
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 401 of 470 (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 responded

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

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16580
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 402 of 470 (879518)
07-17-2020 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 401 by Phat
07-17-2020 11:03 AM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
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?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 401 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 11:03 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 403 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 2:00 PM PaulK has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14672
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 403 of 470 (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 responded

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

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16580
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 404 of 470 (879543)
07-17-2020 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 403 by Phat
07-17-2020 2:00 PM


Re: Rebellious Sons & Obedient Sons
quote:
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.)

I think that taking Genesis 3 literally and forcing it into Christian belief is a mistake in the first place. It does read much more like a pagan myth than Genesis 1.

But consider - if God truly is omniscient there is no possibility, only inevitability. And Adam and Eve lacked the understanding of right and wrong. It really is like your five year old, only more so.

quote:
Leaving an apple on the table could well be called a deliberate set-up, but it allowed for the possibility of disobedience.

But if it is a deliberate set-up the person who set it up must bear some of the responsibility - especially if the child is unable to understand that they are doing anything wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 403 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 2:00 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 405 by Phat, posted 07-17-2020 8:13 PM PaulK has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14672
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 405 of 470 (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 responded

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

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020