Worshipping The Son

[Matthias]

You mentioned Sproul earlier. You're referencing everyone you can think of to distract from the needed conversation.

I’ve learned through conversation that trinitarian theologians and scholars are your hot button. The doctrine of the Trinity came from them.

Sproul doesn't speak for anyone.

He doesn’t any more. He’s dead.

All men face God as individuals. I can assure you, when I face God, I'm not going to tell His that I believed something because Sproul told me so.

You will be telling it to the man whom God (not the Triune God) has appointed to judge the world.

 

[Matthias]

You're being ridiculous. Talk to someone else.

Interesting. That’s precisely what I’ve been thinking about you.

So much for your talk about stopping me from controlling the narrative.

 

[civic]

So you’ve disagreed with the theologian who was in favor of it and the theologian who was opposed to it.

Origen’s “helpful suggestion” is a boondoggle.



Not in Jewish monotheism.

I disagree with Clarke who denies the the Eternal Son/Father. My position is there was no beginning whereas in his position there was a beginning. The Son come forth from the Father we both reject. But his mistake is throwing the baby out with the bath water. My view is there was never a time when the Father was not the Father and the Son not the Son. So that’s why I reject the eternal generation of the Son which is a different reason than Clarke. But I disagree with both of them regarding this doctrine for different reasons.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I gave you my rank.



1. I make a distinction between deity and divinity.

2. I told you that you were asking a question which you already knew the answer to. You just proved it.

madding

1. behaving in a wild and crazy way, especially in a way that makes people…

dictionary.cambridge.org

Cambridge? You Brits.... there are multiple definitions. I was appealing to the "senseless" one.

 

[Matthias]

I disagree with Clarke who denies the the Eternal Son/Father. My position is there was no beginning whereas in his position there was a beginning. The Son come forth from the Father we both reject. But his mistake is throwing the baby out with the bath water. My view is there was never a time when the Father was not the Father and the Son not the Son. So that’s why I reject the eternal generation of the Son which is a different reason than Clarke. But I disagree with both of them regarding this doctrine for different reasons.

I think we’ve all agreed that it is nonsense. I had one more thing to add about it but I think I may let it go. It was an absolutely bizarre statement statement made by Dr. Kenneth Wuest. Maybe you’ll know it just by my mentioning it in passing.

 

[Matthias]

Cambridge? You Brits.... there are multiple definitions. I was appealing to the "senseless" one.

You just can’t help yourself. No self control.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I disagree with Clarke who denies the the Eternal Son/Father. My position is there was no beginning whereas in his position there was a beginning. The Son come forth from the Father we both reject. But his mistake is throwing the baby out with the bath water. My view is there was never a time when the Father was not the Father and the Son not the Son. So that’s why I reject the eternal generation of the Son which is a different reason than Clarke. But I disagree with both of them regarding this doctrine for different reasons.

Why is he appealing to Jewish monotheism as if it is authority? He seeks to establish his narrative as authority without any appeal to actual authority.

 

[civic]

I think we’ve all agreed that it is nonsense. I had one more thing to add about it but I think I may let it go. It was an absolutely bizarre statement statement made by Dr. Kenneth Wuest. Maybe you’ll know it just by my mentioning it in passing.

No go ahead and mention it I have his word studies in the Greek NT.

 

[Matthias]

@civic can you divest the Greek word ousia from your theology?

 

[civic]

Why is he appealing to Jewish monotheism as if it is authority? He seeks to establish his narrative as authority without any appeal to actual authority.

It’s his authority like ours is trinitarian is what my take is.

 

[praise_yeshua]

You just can’t help yourself. No self control.

There is a difference between maddening and madding.

 

[Matthias]

No go ahead and mention it I have his word studies in the Greek NT.

I’ll look it up and post it for you.

 

[Matthias]

There is a difference between maddening and madding.

You know more than the Cambridge Dictionary too!

 

[praise_yeshua]

It’s his authority like ours is trinitarian is what my take is.

Such a childish appeal.... nothing more than a waste of time. Isn't it understood that such stands in contrast?

When people start appealing to the obvious, then they are doing nothing more than wasting time.

 

[civic]

@civic can you divest the Greek word ousia from your theology?

Are we going down the hypostasis rabbit trail lol

 

[praise_yeshua]

You know more than the Cambridge Dictionary too!

No. You don't know context. Context dictated the definition. It never gave any indication of being angry.

 

[civic]

I think we can have a good discussion if we stay focused on scripture and not secondary sources.

 

[Diserner]

I might gently point out to some who constantly want to make an "almost" God category and call this and that divine and deity and god, of things in fact created, that there is no such thing as "a little bit God," it is truly a binary all or nothing attribute.

Were something called god in Scripture that was not in fact capital G god, this does not in any way, shape, or form, ever mean that they are allowed to somehow share divine attributes here and there like we are passing out candies.

The same kind of logic applies to "worship," as not all respect is the same kind of respect, giving King David all power and glory and honor and majesty and saying all things were created by King David and made for King David, is not the same thing as bowing to King David.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I’ll look it up and post it for you.

See.... you enjoy listen to yourself talk.... right?

 

[Diserner]

See.... you enjoy listen to yourself talk.... right?

Let's not make it personal and try to speak in love, brother.

Covers a multitude of sins I've heard.