Search results

A "graven image?" No human being is "graven" -- and not an "image" in the sense of Exodus 20:4 either. The verse is talking about things made with human hands, not with human genitals.

You do understand that sitting at the right hand of the Father is a figurative description, don't you? The Father has no hands.

Not saying that at all. I am only saying that perhaps the Devil misjudged Jesus's resolve.

Because the Devil mistakenly thought there was a chance at success?

Just who do you think are MY Protestant Fathers? I absolutely believe that 2000 tradition handed down from the original apostles is authoritative. I just don't see evidence of the original apostles weighing in on Mary's perpetual virginity one way or the other. Maybe you can educate me...

That's an easy one. It's a honorific position afforded to the risen Christ to demonstrate full restoration to the Godhead. (You might as well ask, "If the Trinity is three persons, how can it be One God" -- because that's the same question you are really posing here, albeit positionally rather...

I agree that we should consider the Shema in this discussion. The Shema first appears in Deuteronomy. In Genesis, Exodus and Leviticus, however, we don't see that type of declaration. We see instead plural references to "gods" -- Elohim -- suggesting that the ancient Israelites believed in...

Glad you find me amusing. (I am a Trinitarian, but believe that Scripture is equivocal on the subject. F2F is on the right side of that one. Check out my post "On Trinitarian LOgic" when you get a chance.)

Christian Debate Forum, "Exploring Trinitarian Logic."

Thanks. I have started a new thread on the subject.

Thank for responding. I don't see how "one" means "the unity of many in one." The meaning of "One" just does not carry that implication. Whether "God is one" is a numerical declaration or a substantive declaration, or both, either way it doesn't support your "meaning."

Slight correction: absence of reference to other children of Mary is not evidence of her virginity. One can have sex without having children. (I have one child. I've had sex with my wife a thousand times.)

That's exactly what I said. 1 is not 3 according to both Arius and Sabellius. Each promoted the law of identity.

For you Early Church Father fans out there, this view of the effect of Jesus's baptism was espoused by Melito of Sardis, On the nature of Christ: "For there is no need, to persons of intelligence, to attempt to prove, from the deeds of Christ subsequent to His baptism, that His soul and His...

Yes. I would add an exegesis of Paul’s use of pleroma – translated as “fullness” – twice in Colossians and twice in Ephesians. In Colossians, Paul attributes to Christ the fullness of God, Colossians 1:19 (“For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell”); Colossians 2:9 (“For in him...

Yes. Even non-Trinitarians agree with this much. My focus today is not on the Cross but on the Manger.

I don't think God's Word (you mean Scripture and nothing else here, right?) got it wrong. As I've said, I think Scripture is equivocal on the subject. Not incomplete (although it is -- but I digress), but equivocal. Big difference!

Done. I suspect it wont be popular, because it requires a lot of reading and thought, but we'll see.

We can express the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity (three “persons” in one God) as a set of propositions in this way: 1. There is only one God. 2. The Father is God. 3. The Son is God. 4. The Father is not the Son. 5. The Holy Spirit is God. 6. The Holy Spirit is not the Father. 7. The Holy...

Happy to talk about Logic with you, my friend. Are you interested in a deep dive with me here?