A Trinitarian Statement

Originally Posted by mizpeh

5. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father. This is how Trinitarians attempt to make those statements true.

Oneness do not add anything else to those statements except that the Son is God in the form of a man.

We make these true because the Bible is our guide. The Bible doesn't say that Jesus is the Father or the Holy Spirit.

Do Oneness believe that the Father is the Son?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Believer

We make these true because the Bible is our guide. The Bible doesn't say that Jesus is the Father or the Holy Spirit.

Do Oneness believe that the Father is the Son?

I answered your question on another thread.

Jesus himself says that he and the Father are one.

Romans 8:9-11 describes the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead as being Christ. IOW the Spirit of Christ raised Jesus Christ from the dead. And if we follow Trinitarian logic then the Spirit of him is one person and Jesus is another person which is not what this passage is saying.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I answered your question on another thread.

Jesus himself says that he and the Father are one.

Romans 8:9-11 describes the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead as being Christ. IOW the Spirit of Christ raised Jesus Christ from the dead. And if we follow Trinitarian logic then the Spirit of him is one person and Jesus is another person which is not what this passage is saying.

saying he and the father are one is not really the same as saying he is the father....

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Believer

The question was answered, just not to your satisfaction. I’ll say it again, God is one Being. There isn’t anything wrong with using personal pronoun when speaking about God as one Being. I don't think Trinitarians care either way because it doesn't change the doctrine. I think the problem is that Oneness are using their own definition for the word "person" and not what it meant when it was first used to describe the distinctions. It was about the same time period that the terms “modes” were coined.

Now you've done it.... stop speaking truths.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Believer

You mean like one cluster of grapes means there is only one grape? Or, like one body of Christ is only one person? Or how a man and a woman becomes "ONE" flesh? (speaking spiritually not physically).

Let me try this again:

In the One [ to most people this implies a numerical one] True God [to most people this implies identity or a "Who "], who reveals Himself in three distinct persons ; God [ identity] the Father, God [identity] the Son, and God [identity] the Holy Spirit. The Three being one [a united one similar to how husband and wife are one flesh] and equal and eternally self existent as the Great "I [ implies one singular identity not a united one] AM."
http://www.spiritoffire.org/statementoffaith.html

The equivocation of terms here is evident. Does this answer your question?
Your examples are not what I mean. I know you are being facetious. Especially with spiritual flesh!

You go ahead and try to decipher this definition of the Trinity and define the words, God and one, as you go. Because the definitions change and thus the ambiguity.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Believer

The question was answered, just not to your satisfaction. I’ll say it again, God is one Being. There isn’t anything wrong with using personal pronoun when speaking about God as one Being. I don't think Trinitarians care either way because it doesn't change the doctrine. I think the problem is that Oneness are using their own definition for the word "person" and not what it meant when it was first used to describe the distinctions. It was about the same time period that the terms “modes” were coined.

What is the Trinitarian definition of person? I know what TheLayman says it is but what do you think it is?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

but anytime you try to refer to God in terms of humanity you are not going to be able to explain it on a sensible, logical, and non-contradictory level... There will always be flaws as long as we are trying to explain God in our terms...

but all we have is our terms... To say any view of the Godhead that maintains that there is just one God while confirming Christ's divinity, the Father's divinity, and the Holy Ghost's divinity is flawed is, in my opinion, a flawed view of God and the Bible....

Still, using grammar a statement of faith of the Trinity can be a lot more concise or less contradictory. They can say "There is One God in being and nature that is shared by the Three Divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost" instead of referring to that one God as a WHO or a HE that is revealed in three WHOs or HEs when we know that is not really what the Trinity is.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Believer

The question was answered, just not to your satisfaction. I’ll say it again, God is one Being. There isn’t anything wrong with using personal pronoun when speaking about God as one Being. I don't think Trinitarians care either way because it doesn't change the doctrine.

And I repeat, that is an equivocation fallacy. It's not that it wasn't to my satisfaction. It's that it is still contradictory. Trinitarians use the concept of PERSONAL PRONOUNS to prove distinct PERSONs of Father, Son and HOly Ghost. That is inconsistant with then using it to say BEING. If it shows BEING as well then logically one could argue you have three BEINGS. IF it shows person then logically one could argue such a statement is teaching one PERSON that exists as 3 Persons.

I think the problem is that Oneness are using their own definition for the word "person" and not what it meant when it was first used to describe the distinctions. It was about the same time period that the terms “modes” were coined.

No, the problem isn't what Oneness does. The topic is TRINITY. Second, the issue is PRONOUNs. Third, They say it means person, then it means being...I don't know how that becomes now an issue of what Oneness define the word PERSON as, unless you are just trying to introduce a red herring and get people off the topic of the Trinity.

Speaking of TLM, I always found it interesting that he would say Oneness don't define what they believe but rather define what they don't believe or resort to attacking the Trinity instead (saying what they don't believe about the Trinity) and in all my years of experience in trying to discuss the Trinity with Trinitarians they always do the same thing.

Now....what is it you think MY definition of the word Person is as opposed to yours?

BTW PERSON comes from the greek prosopon (face, person), not Hypostasis (substance, foundation)

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Darcie

Prax, I'm glad to see this lighter side of you!

[SDG]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

What is the Trinitarian definition of person? I know what TheLayman says it is but what do you think it is?

Once again the existence of this inane debate revolves around:

1. semantics over words such as persons, distinctions, modes, etc.
2. pride in presenting facts, figures,scripture, grammar, logic, scholarship and Church history while debunking the other side's facts, figures, logic, interpretation of scripture, grammar, scholarship and Church history. {I want to be right and prove you wrong while never admitting when I am wrong}
3. prejudices and hatreds based on a century old feud

eventually leading to more circular debates on:

4. the proper baptismal formula and questioning the other's salvation

and most often culminates in:

5. name calling, sensitivities hurt, and insults
---------------------------

In the end, this is what matters ... both sides whole heartedly agree and believe in:

1. One God
2.The Mighty God in Christ
3. Jesus is fully man and fully God
4. Jesus is the Son of God
5. Jesus died for our sins and was raised to give us new life.
6. Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

Carry on ... lol.

Once again, I'll reiterate ... the minute I can fully explain and define an infinite and Almighty God ... He ceases to be God ....

I've become an idolater.