Fulness of the Godhead

[riverslivnwtr]

Originally Posted by Cindy

Doesn't the fullness of the Godhead abide in Jesus?

yes and we are in Christ..and have access to the Father by him..

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Cindy

Doesn't the fullness of the Godhead abide in Jesus?

Yes.

Does the fullness of the Godhead abide in every Holy Ghost filled believer?

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by seekerman

Yes.

Does the fullness of the Godhead abide in every Holy Ghost filled believer?

i believe we have a measure or portion of god's spirit. we do not have special knowledge of heaven, spiritual things or of creation before man outside of the bible like christ did.

[pelathais]

Don't frustrate Prax. He's doing a good job here.

The term "Godhead" in English is pretty much synonymous with "Deity." The underlying Greek words that are translated into this term both reflect using the concept or idea of "Deity" in an abstract form rather than referring to particularly to God Himself (or "a god").

It's like in English, when someone says... "the Deity cannot be likened to gold or siler or stone, graven by art..." It's an oblique reference to God and not a direct reference such as when someone says, "God is love..."

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by seekerman

I think the question was, does the fullness of the *GODHEAD* reside in every believer.

I knew what the question was. I answered it

[meetingplace]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The fullness of Deity does not reside in every believer

Nor are we "the fullness of Deity in bodily form"

It's not analogous

What part of the fulness is absent in every believer?

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

They don't.

As I said they get the Deity of the Son out of it. They use other verses to get the idea of three persons

BTW The Historical Doctrine of the Trinity never separates the persons. It only distinguishes them

When a Trinitarian says "separate" they are violating their own doctrinal tenets and moving towards Tritheism

Maybe Im wrong on this but I dont recall "separate"vs "distinct" being a part of the Oneness/Trinity debate until the last few years. I remember all Trins saying they were separate persons.

I was debating with Limey Bob on Paltalk this year sometime and I showed him in a Dictionary that separate and distinct are interchangeable.

If they are "distinct" persons they are "separate" persons.

I would say right now there are thousands of Trinitarian web sites that use the words "separate persons".

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by meetingplace

What part of the fulness is absent in every believer?

We don't possess any Divine attributes

We are not gods nor godlike beings

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Maybe Im wrong on this but I dont recall "separate"vs "distinct" being a part of the Oneness/Trinity debate until the last few years. I remember all Trins saying they were separate persons.

I was debating with Limey Bob on Paltalk this year sometime and I showed him in a Dictionary that separate and distinct are interchangeable.

If they are "distinct" persons they are "separate" persons.

I would say right now there are thousands of Trinitarian web sites that use the words "separate persons".

Distinct means "different". Two things that are separate will automatically be distinct but the converse is not true. For example, The Father and Son are distinct in Oneness. The are different, However due to the fact that Father and Son are the same in Divine nature/Spirit, they are not separate. To say the Father and Son are separate is to split the Father and Son into two Divine Spirits

I would agree that there are many Trinitarians that say separate. And they are theologically incorrect as far as the Trinity goes

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

We don't possess any Divine attributes

We are not gods nor godlike beings

no but the word theos has been used to represent man and no Just God, something to consider