Dan Scott's Thought on Trinity

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I thought the article had a oneness slant.

I agree DG. Whats all the fuss A one God proponet teaching where the idea of the trinity came from.

Of course Dan didn't close his article with the words, " ALL Trinitarians will burn in Hell", so he will condemned by some.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Stephanas

Dan Scott blogged: "The first and most important of these creeds is called the Apostles' Creed. No one knows for sure when it was written. We do know that Christians were quoting it in the second century. A couple of centuries later another important creed, called the Nicene Creed, was written. There are few Christians anywhere, with all our differences, who do not accept the doctrines that these creeds teach."

If you accept the doctrine of an eternally begotten Son that the Nicene Creed teaches, you're a Trinitarian.

True. If he accepts the Nicene creed he is a Trinitarian but who knows he is great at doublespeak.

[Stephanas]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

True. If he accepts the Nicene creed he is a Trinitarian but who knows he is great at doublespeak.

Dan Scott is an ordained Anglican. Why would anybody question whether or not he is a Trinitarian? As far as I know there aren't any Oneness Anglicans.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Stephanas

Dan Scott is an ordained Anglican. Why would anybody question whether or not he is a Trinitarian? As far as I know there aren't any Oneness Anglicans.

That's amazing to me. I had to look it up to see for myself.

The group is called the Anglican Mission in America. (theamia.org)

"Pastor Dan Scott has his ordination with the Anglican Mission in America, a missionary movement that grew out of the East African Revivals of last century."
http://www.christchurchnashville.org/pastors.htm


In their doctrinal document they say:

Article I - Of Faith in the Holy Trinity

THERE IS but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the Maker, and Preserver of all things both visible and
invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

http://theamia.org/assets/39-Articles-Text.pdf

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

That's amazing to me. I had to look it up to see for myself.

The group is called the Anglican Mission in America. (theamia.org)

"Pastor Dan Scott has his ordination with the Anglican Mission in America, a missionary movement that grew out of the East African Revivals of last century."
http://www.christchurchnashville.org/pastors.htm


In their doctrinal document they say:

Article I - Of Faith in the Holy Trinity

THERE IS but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the Maker, and Preserver of all things both visible and
invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

http://theamia.org/assets/39-Articles-Text.pdf

That is all well and good, but it comes down to what their definition of "persons" is. This is usually what it always comes down to, IMO.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

That is all well and good, but it comes down to what their definition of "persons" is. This is usually what it always comes down to, IMO.

Well, whatever, MoW.

They're a Trinitarian Anglican group.
Let's not even try to spin it as being anything else.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Well, whatever, MoW.

They're a Trinitarian Anglican group.
Let's not even try to spin it as being anything else.

My purpose was not to spin or even defend. I was only making an accurate observation on the entire issue of what it usually comes down to in a discussion. Just because someone uses the term persons is NOT conclusive that they are tri-theists. The question must be asked what they mean by persons. Chancellor wrote a really good book on this subject, but I can't seem to locate it in my library right now!

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

My purpose was not to spin or even defend. I was only making an accurate observation on the entire issue of what it usually comes down to in a discussion. Just because someone uses the term persons is NOT conclusive that they are tri-theists. The question must be asked what they mean by persons. Chancellor wrote a really good book on this subject, but I can't seem to locate it in my library right now!

That's all well and good but...nobody even brought up the word "tri-theists" before you just did.

The issue is are they Trinitarian... and the answer is clearly yes.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

My purpose was not to spin or even defend. I was only making an accurate observation on the entire issue of what it usually comes down to in a discussion. Just because someone uses the term persons is NOT conclusive that they are tri-theists. The question must be asked what they mean by persons. Chancellor wrote a really good book on this subject, but I can't seem to locate it in my library right now!

It does confirm they believe in the Trinity.

At some point words have to have meaning. Trinitarians state that each "member" is a person and that they are each personally distinct from each other

[Amos]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I thought the article had a oneness slant.

An optimistic trinitarian would probably say it had a trinitarian slant.

Great way to use a bunch of words to basically say nothing.

Theonly way he could have said less was if he had written more.