Trinity

[Hoghead1]

Oh, that part was clear. We showed how it bottomed out in substance metaphysics, remember?

What I remember that that you showed my you had little comprehension of substance metaphysics and relational metaphysics as well.

 

[Hoghead1]

No I'm not kidding you and you're avoiding the issues I presented. It's not my problem that you don't understand the language of love that God uses in Hosea. The consequences of sin were always in front of Israel and when God through his mercy and love decided not to instigate his edict it doesn't mean he changed his mind, it means they changed and he responded accordingly. Repentance has always been a factor and God's dealing with mankind and as such when mankind repents of his sin God's rule that says 'the soul that sinneth shall die', is changed.
Those are all pre-determined rules and edicts that are from God and they're always dependent on what man does. Those rules and the edicts had never changed under the old Covenant. You say you accept Mal 3:6, but then continue to assert that God does change. Now I'm not sure how you justify that because if you accept that the Bible says " I the Lord do NOT change", my equivocate or vacillate back and forth?
I regret every time one of my children make a lifestyle choice that is an obvious mistake but I don't stop loving them. I regret because I know better, I know that there is something better in the future if they make the right choice, just as God does. That feeling comes out of knowledge, love, and mourning.
You also completely ignored the scripture I gave you from Numbers. Apparently you also don't accept and believe what James 1:17 says?
I've told you that there is no synthesis for God, the Bible teaches immutable truths.
It would appear based on your assertions and statements so far, that your doctoral supervision and candidature management did you a great disservice. I for one won't make the same mistakes they did.

Look, casting aspersion on my education or doctoral committee or anything like that is totally uncalled for here. If you can't be respectful, you shouldn't be here. Also, you have done a very good job of avoiding the issues I have presented here. I already explained to you about Malachi 3:5-7. Apparently, you forgot about the "return" part. Apparently, you missed Hosea 11:8, which, as I already informed you, says "a change of heart moves me." Right there, in plain print, the Bible attributes change to God. According to Hosea 11, yes, God did initially think of carrying out his edict, then decided not to. Now that is definitely a change of mind and heart.

 

[StanJ]

Look, casting aspersion on my education or doctoral committee or anything like that is totally uncalled for here. If you can't be respectful, you shouldn't be here. Also, you have done a very good job of avoiding the issues I have presented here. I already explained to you about Malachi 3:5-7. Apparently, you forgot about the "return" part. Apparently, you missed Hosea 11:8, which, as I already informed you, says "a change of heart moves me." Right there, in plain print, the Bible attributes change to God. According to Hosea 11, yes, God did initially think of carrying out his edict, then decided not to. Now that is definitely a change of mind and heart.

Look, expecting me or anyone else to accept your word just because you purport to have a doctorate doesn't fly here either. So if you want to have a discussion stop with the condescending remarks because you think you know more than everyone else here.
You actually think that even though God says he doesn't change he still changes? I prefer straightforward answers rather than double talk. Malachi 3:6 says God doesn't change. So you think in the very next verse he's going to contradict what he already said? Exactly how is that proper biblical hermeneutics? I didn't forget the return part, I dealt with it. You're the one that refused to recognize what I said or even deal with it. That's not a change of heart that is God speaking to his all just nature. Again you don't even acknowledge the verses that I put down like Numbers 23 and continuously fall back on stuff that has already been dealt with. Yes a change of heart for God doesn't move him to do what he already promised to do. It's not him changing his heart, it's the people changing their heart. The conditions of the old Covenant are set out ahead of time and the Jews knew them.
When you start acknowledging the black and white that you're given then maybe we'll make some progress but at this point all you do is ignore the black and white that you're showing that says God does not change and equivocate about the language that he expresses in other areas.
If getting a doctorate makes you that blind to the actual black and white of scripture, then I'm sad to say you wasted all that effort.
Everything God has ever done and said was predicated on his plans before they wanted creation which is something that you don't seem to get. God is Not reactionary he is proactive and the scripture so that all the time. He has always had a provision for everything because everything was decided before he ever created this world and universe. Another thing you don't seem to understand about the nature of God despite your claims.

 

[Hoghead1]

Look, expecting me or anyone else to accept your word just because you purport to have a doctorate doesn't fly here either. So if you want to have a discussion stop with the condescending remarks because you think you know more than everyone else here.
You actually think that even though God says he doesn't change he still changes? I prefer straightforward answers rather than double talk. Malachi 3:6 says God doesn't change. So you think in the very next verse he's going to contradict what he already said? Exactly how is that proper biblical hermeneutics? I didn't forget the return part, I dealt with it. You're the one that refused to recognize what I said or even deal with it. That's not a change of heart that is God speaking to his all just nature. Again you don't even acknowledge the verses that I put down like Numbers 23 and continuously fall back on stuff that has already been dealt with. Yes a change of heart for God doesn't move him to do what he already promised to do. It's not him changing his heart, it's the people changing their heart. The conditions of the old Covenant are set out ahead of time and the Jews knew them.
When you start acknowledging the black and white that you're given then maybe we'll make some progress but at this point all you do is ignore the black and white that you're showing that says God does not change and equivocate about the language that he expresses in other areas.
If getting a doctorate makes you that blind to the actual black and white of scripture, then I'm sad to say you wasted all that effort.
Everything God has ever done and said was predicated on his plans before they wanted creation which is something that you don't seem to get. God is Not reactionary he is proactive and the scripture so that all the time. He has always had a provision for everything because everything was decided before he ever created this world and universe. Another thing you don't seem to understand about the nature of God despite your claims.

Look, to start with, you are turning this into an inappropriate personal attack on me. You are in no position to sit in judgment on doctoral programs or people with doctorates. To be honest about it, you are way out of your league here. I may appear condescending to some laity, true. But that is their problem. The fact of the matter is, I do know the Bible and theology better than many laity. There shouldn't be any doubt or question about that. What you appear upset about is that I seriously challenged some assumptions you on your own thought up about Scripture, which do not hold any water. If you were smart, you would have thanked me for helping you overcome some deficient in your thinking. Next, I gave you very solid evidence that the Bible does assume God can and does change. I carefully explained to you that it views God as a synthesis both of consistency and change. God may be described as immutable or mutable, depending upon which aspects of God we are talking about. Again I say you apparently read only the first line of Malachi 3:5-7 and that's it. You forgot all about the "return" part, which definitely marks a change in God. Also, Hosea 11:8 reports God as saying, "A change of heart moves me." So don't tell me God doesn't change according to the Bible. Also, I presented you Gen. 6:6. In Gen. one, God thought creation was good and was pleased; but by Gen. 6, God has become very disappointed in it and regrets he had created it. Now that's a big change of heart taking place. So you can be most inappropriate and attack my education all you want, that won't alter the fact the Bible does attribute change to God, whether your say so or not.

 

[Cappadocious]

What I remember that that you showed my you had little comprehension of substance metaphysics and relational metaphysics as well.

I remember you insisted that all substances lack essential relational properties because Descartes says so, or something to that effect?

Yeah, no.

 

[StanJ]

Look, to start with, you are turning this into an inappropriate personal attack on me. You are in no position to sit in judgment on doctoral programs or people with doctorates. To be honest about it, you are way out of your league here. I may appear condescending to some laity, true. But that is their problem. The fact of the matter is, I do know the Bible and theology better than many laity. There shouldn't be any doubt or question about that. What you appear upset about is that I seriously challenged some assumptions you on your own thought up about Scripture, which do not hold any water. If you were smart, you would have thanked me for helping you overcome some deficient in your thinking. Next, I gave you very solid evidence that the Bible does assume God can and does change. I carefully explained to you that it views God as a synthesis both of consistency and change. God may be described as immutable or mutable, depending upon which aspects of God we are talking about. Again I say you apparently read only the first line of Malachi 3:5-7 and that's it. You forgot all about the "return" part, which definitely marks a change in God. Also, Hosea 11:8 reports God as saying, "A change of heart moves me." So don't tell me God doesn't change according to the Bible. Also, I presented you Gen. 6:6. In Gen. one, God thought creation was good and was pleased; but by Gen. 6, God has become very disappointed in it and regrets he had created it. Now that's a big change of heart taking place. So you can be most inappropriate and attack my education all you want, that won't alter the fact the Bible does attribute change to God, whether your say so or not.

LOOK! Are you doing is going in circles and saying the same thing. I have a right call a spade a spade. I have a right to defend the Bible against false teaching. I have a right to take you to task for your condescension. You know who gives me that right?
The FACT is in the Bible clearly states that God does not change in many many passages. Another FACT is that even though God has given man anthropomorphic revelation through His written word, in your case it wasn't low enough.

 

[Hoghead1]

LOOK! Are you doing is going in circles and saying the same thing. I have a right call a spade a spade. I have a right to defend the Bible against false teaching. I have a right to take you to task for your condescension. You know who gives me that right?
The FACT is in the Bible clearly states that God does not change in many many passages. Another FACT is that even though God has given man anthropomorphic revelation through His written word, in your case it wasn't low enough.

Again, you are turning your posts into personal attacks upon me, which is totally inappropriate in a discussion group. You have no right to defend the Bible against false teaching because you are not clergy and you are not expert enough on the Bible. Also, you are seriously overlooking many biblical passages that claim otherwise about God than you do. I'm going to listen to what the Bible has to say, not what some uneducated lay person has on his mind. In Hosea 11:8, God clearly states, "A change of heart moves me." So while you deny God can change, God says otherwise in plain language right in that passage.

 

[Hoghead1]

I remember you insisted that all substances lack essential relational properties because Descartes says so, or something to that effect?

Yeah, no.

Or something l to that effect? I pointed out Aristotle said so, stating "A substance cannot be present in a subject." Later philosophers such as Descartes simply picked up this ball and ran with it.

 

[Blade]

Does the bible teach the trinity? Many seem to deny the trinity since the word is not found

We.. thats me too.. we keep thinking about a GOD.. that word right there puts GOD in box. Rev.. the 7 spirits of God. Joshua?.. saw a angel with His sword drawn. Ask are you for us or them.. He says no. Joshua falls down and worships this angel? This Host of Gods army says.. take off your shoes for here you stand is holy. We all know NO angel is to be worshiped. Another time God sends His angel? With some one.. says.. a..dont make Him mad.. or he might not forgive you. Again.. this is not what any angel can do. Make man in our image.. yeah...not talking to the Angels or plants or what not.

Please.. we have a book that we KNOW everything that was done and said is NOT in it. Then to be on this planet (man I am talking about) what 6000+... and we KNOW this GOD? We know there is 1 no 3.. we just cant talk to Him or ask Him. God..one.. Yeshua (Jesus) left.. became 100% man.. rose.. seated at the right hand of God. Rev .. Jesus tells you who HE IS..two.. the sweet sweet Holy Spirit of God.. three? Seven spirits of God? Man I love Him.. I want to be like Him.. I believe Jesus is the only way to Him. I get lost on some of the silliest of things.. and this one? Just HAHA makes it worse. Hes everywhere.. in everything.. is everything.. really? How many? Just one? Does He is there a limit to Him in some way? Head explodes.. hehe

 

[Radagast]

To be honest about it, you are way out of your league here. I may appear condescending to some laity, true. But that is their problem.

Using language like that comes across as both ignorant and arrogant, unfortunately. "Trust me, I have (unverifiable) credentials" is the weakest argument there is.

If you were smart, you would have thanked me for helping you overcome some deficient in your thinking.

Wow! Maybe you're just having fun with us in this thread? Surely nobody would say that seriously?

And possibly you mean "deficiency in your thinking"?

 

[Hoghead1]

Using language like that comes across as both ignorant and arrogant, unfortunately. "Trust me, I have (unverifiable) credentials" is the weakest argument there is.



Wow! Maybe you're just having fun with us in this thread? Surely nobody would say that seriously?

And possibly you mean "deficiency in your thinking"?

Yes, but I do have verifiable credentials. No, I didn't say you should just trust me. I simply pointed out where I am coming from, as someone was unduly attacking higher education. I pointed out the biblical basis for my claims. If you are going to read my posts, then read them thoroughly.

 

[StanJ]

Again, you are turning your posts into personal attacks upon me, which is totally inappropriate in a discussion group. You have no right to defend the Bible against false teaching because you are not clergy and you are not expert enough on the Bible. Also, you are seriously overlooking many biblical passages that claim otherwise about God than you do. I'm going to listen to what the Bible has to say, not what some uneducated lay person has on his mind. In Hosea 11:8, God clearly states, "A change of heart moves me." So while you deny God can change, God says otherwise in plain language right in that passage.

And here in a nutshell is your problem. You think you know more than others, and others know you think that and treat you accordingly. Given when you're shown to be wrong you won't admit it and continually quote the same thing over and over again. They are not personal attacks they are questions about your so-called credentials and how doubtful they are. Then when you actually post something of substance that illustrates what you say you have knowledge in, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If you can't properly communicate with those who you call the laity, then you can't possibly teach anybody anything. A change of heart moves God but that doesn't mean that God changes, which is a very basic concept of which you don't seem to get.
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Hebrews 6:17
Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath.

 

[Radagast]

Yes, but I do have verifiable credentials.

You may have credentials, but there is no way for us to verify that. And making a big thing of "having credentials" does nothing for your credibility.

You have launched an attack on a fairly central point of theology (the immutability of God). Smarter men than you and I have studied this point quite often over the past 2,000 years or so, and the Bible is really quite explicit on it, as StanJ has pointed out. You've presented nothing that stands up under scrutiny here, let alone anything that would overturn the theological consensus of history.

"The Immutability of God is a necessary concomitant of His aseity. It is that perfection of God by which He is devoid of all change, not only in His Being, but also in His perfections, and in His purposes and promises. In virtue of this attribute He is exalted above all becoming, and is free from all accession or diminution and from all growth or decay in His Being or perfections. His knowledge and plans, His moral principles and volitions remain forever the same. Even reason teaches us that no change is possible in God, since a change is either for better or for worse. But in God, as the absolute Perfection, improvement and deterioration are both equally impossible. This immutability of God is clearly taught in such passages of Scripture as Exodus 3:14; Psalms 102:26-28; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 48:12; Malachi 3:6; Romans 1:23; Hebrews 1:11-12; James 1:17. At the same time there are many passages of Scripture which seem to ascribe change to God. Did not He who dwelleth in eternity pass on to the creation of the world, become incarnate in Christ, and in the Holy Spirit take up His abode in the Church? Is He not represented as revealing and hiding Himself, as coming and going, as repenting and changing His intention, and as dealing differently with man before and after conversion? Cf. Exodus 32:10-14; Jonah 3:10; Proverbs 11:20; Proverbs 12:22; Psalms 18:26-27. The objection here implied is based to a certain extent on misunderstanding. The divine immutability should not be understood as implying immobility, as if there were no movement in God. It is even customary in theology to speak of God as actus purus, a God who is always in action. The Bible teaches us that God enters into manifold relations with man and, as it were, lives their life with them. There is change round about Him, change in the relations of men to Him, but there is no change in His Being, His attributes, His purpose, His motives of action, or His promises. The purpose to create was eternal with Him, and there was no change in Him when this purpose was realized by a single eternal act of His will. The incarnation brought no change in the Being or perfections of God, nor in His purpose, for it was His eternal good pleasure to send the Son of His love into the world. And if Scripture speaks of His repenting, changing His intention, and altering His relation to sinners when they repent, we should remember that this is only an anthropopathic way of speaking. In reality the change is not in God, but in man and in man’s relations to God. It is important to maintain the immutability of God over against the Pelagian and Arminian doctrine that God is subject to change, not indeed in His Being, but in His knowledge and will, so that His decisions are to a great extent dependent on the actions of man; over against the pantheistic notion that God is an eternal becoming rather than an absolute Being, and that the unconscious Absolute is gradually developing into conscious personality in man; and over against the present tendency of some to speak of a finite, struggling, and gradually growing God." -- L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology

 

[Hammster]

ADMIN HAT ON


I really don't want to close this, but if the personal attacks do not stop, that's exactly what will happen. Stay on topic.


ADMIN HAT OFF

 

[Cappadocious]

Or something l to that effect? I pointed out Aristotle said so, stating "A substance cannot be present in a subject."

This one of his attempts to get a grip on substance (but not nearly his only attempt) does not entail that substances cannot have essential relational properties.

 

[Hoghead1]

And here in a nutshell is your problem. You think you know more than others, and others know you think that and treat you accordingly. Given when you're shown to be wrong you won't admit it and continually quote the same thing over and over again. They are not personal attacks they are questions about your so-called credentials and how doubtful they are. Then when you actually post something of substance that illustrates what you say you have knowledge in, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If you can't properly communicate with those who you call the laity, then you can't possibly teach anybody anything. A change of heart moves God but that doesn't mean that God changes, which is a very basic concept of which you don't seem to get.
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Hebrews 6:17
Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath.

Again, you are posting largely a personal attack o n me, which is totally uncalled for in this forum. Yes, a change of heart definitely does mean a change in God. God has moved from feeling such-and -such a way to feeling very differently. That is an internal change. When you or I go from maybe feeling blue to feeling happy, that is a change in us. As I explained earlier, biblical passages stressing the immutability of God refer to God's fixity of purpose. And it is precisely because of that fixity, that God changes. God always seeks a good earth. At the beginning it was, and so God was pleased. But when it became corrupted, God became disgruntled and regretted creating. So God is a synthesis of both consistency and change.

 

[farout]

Does the bible teach the trinity? Many seem to deny the trinity since the word is not found

Lets see the Bible says there is the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, Three distinct beings and yet one. NO ONE oon Earth can explain it, yet we see it. I except The Trinity by faith.

 

[Hoghead1]

You may have credentials, but there is no way for us to verify that. And making a big thing of "having credentials" does nothing for your credibility.

You have launched an attack on a fairly central point of theology (the immutability of God). Smarter men than you and I have studied this point quite often over the past 2,000 years or so, and the Bible is really quite explicit on it, as StanJ has pointed out. You've presented nothing that stands up under scrutiny here, let alone anything that would overturn the theological consensus of history.

"The Immutability of God is a necessary concomitant of His aseity. It is that perfection of God by which He is devoid of all change, not only in His Being, but also in His perfections, and in His purposes and promises. In virtue of this attribute He is exalted above all becoming, and is free from all accession or diminution and from all growth or decay in His Being or perfections. His knowledge and plans, His moral principles and volitions remain forever the same. Even reason teaches us that no change is possible in God, since a change is either for better or for worse. But in God, as the absolute Perfection, improvement and deterioration are both equally impossible. This immutability of God is clearly taught in such passages of Scripture as Exodus 3:14; Psalms 102:26-28; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 48:12; Malachi 3:6; Romans 1:23; Hebrews 1:11-12; James 1:17. At the same time there are many passages of Scripture which seem to ascribe change to God. Did not He who dwelleth in eternity pass on to the creation of the world, become incarnate in Christ, and in the Holy Spirit take up His abode in the Church? Is He not represented as revealing and hiding Himself, as coming and going, as repenting and changing His intention, and as dealing differently with man before and after conversion? Cf. Exodus 32:10-14; Jonah 3:10; Proverbs 11:20; Proverbs 12:22; Psalms 18:26-27. The objection here implied is based to a certain extent on misunderstanding. The divine immutability should not be understood as implying immobility, as if there were no movement in God. It is even customary in theology to speak of God as actus purus, a God who is always in action. The Bible teaches us that God enters into manifold relations with man and, as it were, lives their life with them. There is change round about Him, change in the relations of men to Him, but there is no change in His Being, His attributes, His purpose, His motives of action, or His promises. The purpose to create was eternal with Him, and there was no change in Him when this purpose was realized by a single eternal act of His will. The incarnation brought no change in the Being or perfections of God, nor in His purpose, for it was His eternal good pleasure to send the Son of His love into the world. And if Scripture speaks of His repenting, changing His intention, and altering His relation to sinners when they repent, we should remember that this is only an anthropopathic way of speaking. In reality the change is not in God, but in man and in man’s relations to God. It is important to maintain the immutability of God over against the Pelagian and Arminian doctrine that God is subject to change, not indeed in His Being, but in His knowledge and will, so that His decisions are to a great extent dependent on the actions of man; over against the pantheistic notion that God is an eternal becoming rather than an absolute Being, and that the unconscious Absolute is gradually developing into conscious personality in man; and over against the present tendency of some to speak of a finite, struggling, and gradually growing God." -- L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology

Yes, you could verify I'm a theologian. If we go to private mail, I can send you articles,etc., I wrote. I'm just not real secure revealing my name online here, as is true of most people here. Anyhow, you are going way off track here and turning this into a personal issue with me. That's a no-no in a theological discussion forum. I'm not the subject of discussion.
I am well aware of Berkoff. He represents classical theism or the traditional Christian model of God, the picture of God as wholly immutable, void of body parts, passions, compassion, wholly immutable. But that is not the only Christian model of God today. I am a process theologian, process being a major movement in contemporary Christian thought. In process, we view God as a synthesis of both consistency and change.
The immediate issue id the Bible. As I already pointed out, there are biblical passages that stress the immutability of God. However, that is not the whole story. There are also other passages that do attribute change to God, e.g., Hosea 11:8, Gen. 6:6. There is no doubt about that. So it is incorrect to say the Bible presents a wholly immutable God.

 

[Radagast]

Again, you are posting largely a personal attack o n me, which is totally uncalled for in this forum.

Let's all avoid being personal, shall we?

Yes, a change of heart definitely does mean a change in God.

Well, no.

"The Immutability of God is a necessary concomitant of His aseity. It is that perfection of God by which He is devoid of all change, not only in His Being, but also in His perfections, and in His purposes and promises. In virtue of this attribute He is exalted above all becoming, and is free from all accession or diminution and from all growth or decay in His Being or perfections. His knowledge and plans, His moral principles and volitions remain forever the same. Even reason teaches us that no change is possible in God, since a change is either for better or for worse. But in God, as the absolute Perfection, improvement and deterioration are both equally impossible. This immutability of God is clearly taught in such passages of Scripture as Exodus 3:14; Psalms 102:26-28; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 48:12; Malachi 3:6; Romans 1:23; Hebrews 1:11-12; James 1:17. At the same time there are many passages of Scripture which seem to ascribe change to God. Did not He who dwelleth in eternity pass on to the creation of the world, become incarnate in Christ, and in the Holy Spirit take up His abode in the Church? Is He not represented as revealing and hiding Himself, as coming and going, as repenting and changing His intention, and as dealing differently with man before and after conversion? Cf. Exodus 32:10-14; Jonah 3:10; Proverbs 11:20;Proverbs 12:22; Psalms 18:26-27. The objection here implied is based to a certain extent on misunderstanding. The divine immutability should not be understood as implying immobility, as if there were no movement in God. It is even customary in theology to speak of God as actus purus, a God who is always in action. The Bible teaches us that God enters into manifold relations with man and, as it were, lives their life with them. There is change round about Him, change in the relations of men to Him, but there is no change in His Being, His attributes, His purpose, His motives of action, or His promises. The purpose to create was eternal with Him, and there was no change in Him when this purpose was realized by a single eternal act of His will. The incarnation brought no change in the Being or perfections of God, nor in His purpose, for it was His eternal good pleasure to send the Son of His love into the world. And if Scripture speaks of His repenting, changing His intention, and altering His relation to sinners when they repent, we should remember that this is only an anthropopathic way of speaking. In reality the change is not in God, but in man and in man’s relations to God. It is important to maintain the immutability of God over against the Pelagian and Arminian doctrine that God is subject to change, not indeed in His Being, but in His knowledge and will, so that His decisions are to a great extent dependent on the actions of man; over against the pantheistic notion that God is an eternal becoming rather than an absolute Being, and that the unconscious Absolute is gradually developing into conscious personality in man; and over against the present tendency of some to speak of a finite, struggling, and gradually growing God." -- L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology

 

[Hoghead1]

Lets see the Bible says there is the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, Three distinct beings and yet one. NO ONE oon Earth can explain it, yet we see it. I except The Trinity by faith.

Baloney. It was people on earth who thought up the Trinity. If it seems paradoxical, that is not at all due to the mystery of God; that is largely due to muddled thinking on the part of the fathers.