JWhite said:
The Bible tells us there are three classifications of personal beings---God, man, and angels. What is personality? The ability to have emotion, will, to express oneself.
duck2low said:
[size=-1]Ok, cats have emotions, whill and can express themselves, [/size] [Irrelevant] [size=-1]Rocks have none of these abilities so rocks have no personalities.[/size]
Dr. White did not say rocks had personalities. You apparently have a reading comprehension problem. As for cats, see next reply, below.
JWhite said:
Rocks cannot speak. Cats cannot think of themselves over against others, and, say, work for the common good of "cat kind."
[size=-1]False, first Dr. Cats know they aren't some other cat.[/size] [Irrelevant] [size=-1]Mother cats work for the common good of their kittens.[/size] [Irrelevant] [size=-1]Cats in a pride of lions work for the common good of killing a buffalo in the hunt. they all cooperate to bring down a hugh animal to eat.[/size] [Irrelevant] [size=-1]Wrong Dr. white again.[/size] [Yourre the one that is wrong!] [size=-1]Besides even if cats were totally out for themselfs it wouldn't disprove that cats have no personality.[/size] [Knee jerk false statement] [size=-1]cats have emotion, cats have their own will, and cats express themselfs, especially when they are hungry.[/size] [Irrelevant, see definition of personality.]
All your comments are irrelevant, nothing you said, or can say, can make a cat have a
PERSONality. Here is the definition of
personality. You keep ragging on about
contradictions, illogic, and nonsensical statements To say a cat has a
personality is
contradictory, illogical, and [a] nonsensical statement
Common sense dictates that ONLY a
PERSON can have a
PERSONality. Here is the definition, show me a cat having a personality? A cat has a disposition, traits, characteristics, maybe even moods, etc. but a cat cannot have a
PERSONALity, because a cat is
not a
PERSON! The fact that some people informally and mistakenly apply the word personality to animals, does not change the technical meaning of the word.
Main Entry:
per·son·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: "p&r-s&n-'a-l&-tE, "p&r-'sna-
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural
ties
Etymology: Middle English
personalite, from Late Latin
personalitat-, personalitas, from
personalis
1 a : the quality or state of being a [size=+1]
person[/size]
b : [size=+1]
person[/size]al existence
2 a : the condition or fact of relating to a particular [size=+1]
person[/size];
specifically : the condition of referring directly to or being aimed disparagingly or hostilely at an individual
b : an offensively [size=+1]
person[/size]al remark <angrily resorted to [size=+1]
person[/size]alities>
3 : the complex of characteristics that distinguishes an individual or a nation or group;
especially : the totality of an individual's behavioral and emotional characteristics
4 a : distinction or excellence of [size=+1]
person[/size]al and social traits;
also : a [size=+1]
person[/size] having such quality
b : a [size=+1]
person[/size] of importance, prominence, renown, or notoriety <a TV [size=+1]
person[/size]ality>
synonym see DISPOSITION
JWhite said:
Hence, we are saying that there is one eternal, infinite [size=+1]being[/size] of God, shared fully and completely by three [size=+1]persons[/size], Father, Son and Spirit. One what, [being] three who's.[persons]
[size=-1]this came out of left field. one being [ (3.)persons, (1.) life, or (2.) essences esp. personalities] that are shared by 3 persons??????[/size] [Is this rambling supposed to make any kind of sense?] [size=-1]He is just saying one person is shared by 3 persons.[/size] [False, he said no such thing!] [size=-1] Or one life is shared by 3 persons. [/size] [False, he said no such thing!] [size=-1] I don't think he meant personality here when he said being. surely he believes Jesus is more than a personality. ??????[/size] [Is this rambling supposed to make any kind of sense?]
Once again you apparently cant read simple declaratory sentences and understand what the writer is saying. In the paragraph immediately above, which you appear to be replying to, where did White say personality
? Dr. White began by showing the distinction between
being and person. But you have your anti-Trinitarian blinders on and you cant seem to see anything but what you want to see.
I think, your first sentence here refers to 4
out-of-context words from the definition of being. I have shown how you blatantly, deliberately, misrepresented this definition before. If you have the truth, the whole truth, it is not necessary to resort to this insidious, blatant, trickery, deceit, and falsification.
JWhite said:
NOTE: We are not saying that the Father is the Son, or the Son the Spirit, or the Spirit the Father. It is very common for people to misunderstand the doctrine as to mean that we are saying Jesus is the Father. The doctrine of the Trinity does not in any way say this!
[size=-1]I say that he has rightly given the unavoidable conclusion that trinity doctrine leads to. [/size]
Who cares what you say or think? You have demonstrated more than once you cant even read a dictionary definition or simple declaratory statement and quote them correctly. You omit words, add words, change words around to make them say what you want them to say.
JWhite said:
The three Biblical doctrines that flow directly into the river that is the Trinity are as follows:
1) There is one and only one God, eternal, immutable.
2) There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture - the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another - that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons.
3) The Father, the Son, and the Spirit, are identified as being fully deity---that is, the Bible teaches the Deity of Christ and the Deity of the Holy Spirit.
[size=-1]No it is the 3 contradictory statements that flow into the trinity doctrine.[/size]
Once again, Who cares what you say or think? Meaningless blah, blah, blah. You have not proven anything contradicts anything, just spouting your knee jerk anti-Trinitarian rhetoric. You dont even understand what you have been reading. Dr. White was not trying to prove anything. Go back and read the title. He was providing Christians who had asked him,
A Brief Definition of the Trinity, by James White. DEFINITION
not evidence for.
JWhite said:
Hopefully these brief thoughts will be of help to you as you "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."
http://www.aomin.org/trinitydef.html
[size=-1]Nope, total confusion is his explanation.[/size]
And yet again who cares what you say or think. Anything you dont like, think is wrong, contradicts you, and you cant answer, just ignore it and say it is contradictory and total confusion. Everything is total confusion to you, English dictionaries, Greek and Hebrew lexicons, concordances, and grammars, everything, that is except, your knee jerk assumptions and presuppositions, based on a handful of out-of-context proof texts. And anything that doesnt fit your false doctrine, just twist it to make it fit.
Everything in the Bible can be explained away by claiming it is metaphorical, allegorical, figurative, symbolic, etc.
JWhite said:
One could possibly represent this as follows:
The three sides of the triangle represent the three Biblical doctrines, as labeled. When one denies any of these three teachings, the other two sides point to the result. Hence, if one denies that there are Three Persons, one is left with the two sides of Full Equality and One God, resulting in the "Oneness" teaching of the United Pentecostal Church and others. If one denies Fully Equality, one is left with Three Persons and One God, resulting in "subordinationism" as seen in Jehovah's Witnesses, the Way International, etc. (though to be perfectly accurate the Witnesses deny all three of the sides in some way---they deny Full Equality (i.e., Jesus is Michael the Archangel), Three Persons (the Holy Spirit is an impersonal, active "force" like electricity) and One God (they say Jesus is "a god"---a lesser divinity than Yahweh; hence they are in reality not monotheists but henotheists). And, if one denies One God, one is left with polytheism, the belief in many gods, as seen clearly in the Mormon Church, the most polytheistic religion I have encountered.
[size=-1]This diagram doesn't prove trinity it merely shows the differences in different churches doctrines. irrelevant ramblings.[/size]
Yours is the irrelevant rambling. You evidently cant even read, White was not trying to
prove anything! It does exactly what White wrote it for. It
illustrates the DEFINITION of the Trinity, and represents how non-Trinitarian false religions, such as yours, deny Biblical attributes of Jesus or the Holy Spirit, and the result.
DerAlter said:
Real easy to harmonize without ignoring any scripture, as you are doing. No man has seen the father, past tense, in the past. He who has seen me has seen the father, now, present tense.
[size=-1]the problem with that is that trinity teaches that Jesus is not the father, oneness teaches that Jesus is the Father. So from a trinitarian standpoint it cannot mean that Jesus is the Father. And therefore cannot be taken literally from a trinitarian standpoint.[/size]
The problem with your knee jerk response is, as I have shown, you cannot even read and accurately quote a simple definition of the Trinity, and you cant read and quote an English dictionary definition, but you are going to presume to lecture me on what this passage must mean,
from a trinitarian standpoint.
[size=-1]When you See Jesus you don't literally see the Father. You see the attributes of the father at work in Jesus would be my non literal and correct interpretation.[/size]
Where does scripture say you
dont literally see the father? Where does scripture say,
you see the attributes of the father at work in Jesus? Heb 1:3, 2 Cor 4:4, Col 1:15.
DA said:
Show me the words "in tune with the Father" or "like seeing the father," in either passage? If the plain sense, of scripture makes good sense, it is nonsense to look for any other sense. If the scripture, as written, doesn't fit your assumptions/presuppositions, "Let's twist again like we did last summer."
[size=-1]The plain sense of these scriptures doesn't make sense. Jesus is the Father is the plain sense of these scriptures and that makes no sense. No one is thier own father. So one has to look for a nonliteral interpetation. [/size]
That is your problem, not mine, the scriptures make perfect sense to me, without corrupting, twisting and changing the meaning, trying to force it to fit a false doctrine. If Jesus had intended for us to look for a non-literal interpretation, he would have told us.
[size=-1]In response to the first part of your question I would ask you to show me where in the scripture it says "If the plain sense, of scripture makes good sense, it is nonsense to look for any other sense."[/size]
It is a RULE of interpretation and I would look for it in the same place I find other rules of grammar and interpretation, such, as
i, before e except after c and when pronounced a as in neighbor or sleigh. OTOH you were actually changing the meaning of the written word, I wasnt. BIG difference, which you apparently cant comprehend. Jesus said,
he that hath seen me hath seen the Father, You twist it to say, "
in tune with the Father" or "
like seeing the father."
Jesus also said,
. . .but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. John 15:24. When did anyone see both Jesus and his father? The verb
seen is used only one time. Is this single verb literal when it refers to Jesus, but figurative when it refers to the father?
DA said:
This is so absurd that it doesn't even deserve a response. You couldn't parse a Greek verb if a gun was pointed at your head but you have the gall to criticize a renowned Greek scholar because an exegesis of scriptures, based on sound linguistic, exegetical principles, contradicts your, by rote, assumptions and presuppositions.
[size=-1]Don't need to know greek to recognize contradictions, illogic, and nonsensical statements in english.[/size]
You need something, you cant even recognize the difference between the words
person and
being when shown the dictionary definition and when it is explained, by Dr. White. You cant recognize a subject change in a simple sentence in English. You claim to have gone to college, then you should know how professors teach and write, and should have no trouble understanding what Dr. White wrote.
