Search results

I understand your point, but if you read the OP carefully, it is obvious that Jesus is either the Father of not the one true God. I take it you are saying he is in fact the one true God. You've therefore made him the Father as per his own declaration in John 17:3 and Paul's declaration in 1 Cor...

I'm not 100% sure of what you are saying. The issue is Jesus is either the Father or is he not the true God.

I think you are saying there is a contradiction between the verses I quoted and the ones I quoted. At least that's what I got out of hour first statement, "This is all totally contradicted..." Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I also think you just want to let the contradiction stand and close the...

I trust you realize you have left scripture and are wandering around in tradition? I mean, there's nothing about an "essential nature" in the actual scriptures. The same with three distinct persons being "essentially" one. In fact, that is a good example of what I meant by "wiggling" and...

Let me get this right; the Godhead is opposite than a person, therefore God is not a person? He is the opposite of a person, i.e. a thing. You said it, not me. :) All you have to do is let go of tradition and you won't have to wiggle and squeeze the normal meaning of simple words, such as...

Talking to his Father (John 17:1), Jesus said, John 17:3, And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Jesus said his Father is the only true God and that agrees with what Paul wrote in Corinthians. 1 Cor 8:6, But to us [there...

Neither a nature nor a divine nature is an actual person, so God is till a "thing." Terrible situation!

So now God is no longer a person. He has become a thing, i.e. a "nature." :( Do you really want to say that? There must be something better. Perhaps it could it be that Yahweh is actually the one true God (john 17:3, 1 Cor 8:6) and Jesus is actually His son (too many verses to quote, but you...

Why? All we have to do is change the normal meaning of a few simple words! No problem. No need to make sense! :)

John 17:1-3, 1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is...

I never would have guessed that English is your second language! You are better than many native speakers. Here's the reply I gave in #234: "Now I know that the word Elohim in Gen 1:1 is called a "uni-plural" but that's man's invention and doesn't make it any less of an oxymoron so long as we...

Calling "uni-plural" an oxymoron is not something someone says when they have no answer. It is a perfectly valid answer. Let's look at the meaning of a few simple words: oxymoron n 1: conjoining contradictory terms (as in `deafening silence') Uni- U"ni- [L. unus one. See One.] A prefix...

Which is an oxymoron! :)

You are building a doctrine by yanking a few verses out of context! I don't think God unilaterally decides who He will have compassion on. By considering other parts of the scriptures you can see exactly who He decides to have mercy on, namely all who confess Jesus as Lord and Believes He...

Good point about three beings approaching polytheism. The Athenasian Creed solves it by first listing three Gods (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) and then blithely going on to say they are not three Gods but one God. Someone can call a pig a lap dog, but it's still a pig. I've seen that about God...

I understand. The Athenasian Creed is pretty interesting read. You can find a lot of info about it as well as a Latin and English version here: Athanasian Creed - Wikipedia. As far as I know, it contains the foundational doctrine of the Roman Catholic faith. Probably may Protestants also, but...

I suppose that could be said about God, but the Athenasian Creed names three Gods then says they are not three Gods, but one God. I don't think it's talking about hats. Actually, I don't know what it says, given it violates pretty much all rules of logic and grammar as well as radically changing...

If I'm not misunderstanding you, you are saying that God is a "being" and therefore is not "a" person. Assuming I have it right, wouldn't that make God a "thing" made up of three persons? If He is a real person, then that's what He is, a real person, singular, which is the normal definition of...

I guess there's a difference between being "a" father and "the father." But that does beg the question of who is God the Son of? If He is "a" son, he has to have a father. Your father is also somebody's son. Wouldn't that be his father, thereby making two distinct individuals? I don't see where...

If you can get what you can make a coherent story out of a son being his own father, then so be it. That's free will, a wonderful gift from God. Of course it does have consequences when we go against God, but He's a forgiving Father and understands our frames.