No Pre-existing Son... Before Christ's Birth?

[Thomas Trini]

Originally Posted by Sam

I've only heard that song sung at one church
and the folks at that church consider themselves trinitarian.

I always appreciate your insights, Sam. You're a good guy.

[Sam]

We CAN say that we believe in a God who is a triunity
or three personas in one
but
we CANNOT say that we believe in a God who is a trinity
or three persons in one.

Does that seem a little strange to anyone here?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Sam

We CAN say that we believe in a God who is a triunity
or three personas in one
but
we CANNOT say that we believe in a God who is a trinity
or three persons in one.

Does that seem a little strange to anyone here?

I tought we lost the triune language with the editing of A.D Urshans book.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Sam

We CAN say that we believe in a God who is a triunity
or three personas in one
but
we CANNOT say that we believe in a God who is a trinity
or three persons in one.

Does that seem a little strange to anyone here?

Not really. It depends on what you mean by "Persons." Many Trinitarians go to length to stress that they only use the term analogously; that is, "It is as if the Son and the Father were two Persons..."

As long as no one's being pilloried or burned for what they do say, I think an open dialogue is healthy. Let's not say, "You can't say..." until we are a bit more certain about what we must say.

Of course, everything is just my humble opinion.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by thomas trini

i always appreciate your insights, sam. You're a good guy.

+1

:-)

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Many OP believe as Prax has pointed out, but there are also several teachers that would state the Son was pre-existent. I have heard this taught myself, though I won't try to quote here.

there are some OPs that teach the Son pre-existed as the LOGOS. However I did not assert simply some OPs deny the Son pre-existed. They deny He pre-existed as a second person called Son. I believe the Son did pre-exist...pre-exist what? Pre-exist being born, being human...being the Son. How? In what Form? He pre-existed as God, the I AM, Yahweh and His logos...not as "The Son"

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Anyone besides me find this interesting?

Dictionary.com Has one definition of Person as "Any of the three hypostases or modes of being in the Trinity, namely the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost"

Nicea used the word Hypostasis for what Trinitarians mean today by "person", that is a consciously aware subsistance, not in the same sense as the Latin Persona or the greek Prosopon. Interesting is that Tertuallian and all the pre Nicean fathers used Persona, not Hypostasis, as far as I know

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Nicea used the word Hypostasis for what Trinitarians mean today by "person", that is a consciously aware subsistance, not in the same sense as the Latin Persona or the greek Prosopon. Interesting is that Tertuallian and all the pre Nicean fathers used Persona, not Hypostasis, as far as I know

I believe Tertullian used the Latin "persona" as a translation for the Greek hypostasis?

[JTTNMinistries]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

there are some OPs that teach the Son pre-existed as the LOGOS. However I did not assert simply some OPs deny the Son pre-existed. They deny He pre-existed as a second person called Son. I believe the Son did pre-exist...pre-exist what? Pre-exist being born, being human...being the Son. How? In what Form? He pre-existed as God, the I AM, Yahweh and His logos...not as "The Son"

We deny the pre-existence of the Son but we affirm the pre-existence of He who came as the Son. 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tim 3:16 etc etc.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by JTTNMinistries

We deny the pre-existence of the Son but we affirm the pre-existence of He who came as the Son. 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tim 3:16 etc etc.

Amen.