ECT Our triune God

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Only one of the three is everlasting with a beginning, and that is the Logos incarnate in His humanity... Not God the Father, not God the Son, and not God the Holy Spirit...

God SAID "Let there be Light, and there was Light..."

I tell ya, PPS, I did not even get that this was what you meant by Rhema - Such is the off-putting of your multisyllability... So you want for us to somehow ACCOUNT for this Rhema of God???

I tell you that we simply accept it at face value, and recognize that it is but the most descriptive term in the human language to give us God's revealed account... The LXX does not use rhema for this, btw, but eipen instead, at least in early Genesis... So God Spoke His Word, the Logos, in the Spirit that moved upon the Face of the Deep, and creation was created by its Creator, and from this, you want to develop a system of thought and concepts that smoothly articulate all the permutations of all these words giving us a full and complete account of God and creation?

I tell you, my Brother, the words, and the concepts which they name, and the processes of mentation that bring them to bear upon fallen creation, are themselves fallen and incapable of apprehending the reality to which these words refer in this account by God to Moses of the Creation of creation... To try to rope them into a logically consistent account is as futile as chasing the square root of 2 to its finite conclusion... It is vanity of intellect...

If you wish to say that the voice of God speaking is the Logos of God, then you can do so, but WHEN you do so, you have to understand that you have not yet met Mr. Schnartz, and so you still know NOTHING about either God, or His Voice, or the Words of His Voice, or their Meaning, or their Power... You simply don't know Schnartz... You just have a pile of created words in fallen concepts about a fallen cosmos used to describe as best they can an event not imaginable and ineffable...

Enough for now...

Arsenios

Y'know.... I'm tempted to just drive up for a visit or at least Skype for a couple of hours with a whiteboard at this point. At least you might understand what I'm saying without caricature.

What I'm speaking of is NOT intellectual, but is intuitive with confirming exegesis and lexicography and grammar to back up the revelatory understanding from theosis and noesis.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Why are you agreeing now? Did you not go against me for this before?

I doubt you mean it like it is actually applied, but the central point is that the Holy Spirit is not a separate "person" of three.

I do still come against the rest of your Modalistic view, but this basic statement is accurate.

Oneness proponents like yourself are not completely wrong, but few of you guys can ever see where you're wrong.

I read your debate with AMR; and even though I'm not a conventional Trinitarian, it was hard to watch with your ridiculous posts and stubborn obliviousness to truth.

But your statement above was correct if appropriately applied.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Thank-you PPS - Normal language is not so hard, yes?

Not for hypostaric union and perichoresis, no. For Theology Proper and its minutiae, yes.

Now in YOUR terms, where God is ONE Hypostasis, do you not have to say that IF Christ is God, and WE are Hypostatically joined with Christ, THEN we are of necessity joined Hypostatically with the Father and with the Holy Spirit?

No. They're qualitatively distinct.

In Orthodox terms, on the other hand, our Hypostatic union with Christ as members of His Body does NOT join us Hypostatically with the Father and the Holy Spirit... Because they are NOT the SAME Hypostases as Christ...

Right. Except there aren't three hypostases.:juggle:

I have not done much with the term perichoresis, understanding it simply as the unity of the three Divine Hypostases underlying the same Ousia... Whether joined or separated makes little sense to ask... We are speaking of God, and the categories of interpenetration of these Hypostases are so well beyond our pay grade as to eliminate intelligent discussion... I should think it is infinitely beyond the Hypostatic union of Christ with man, and that what we have with Christ is but a pale Image of what the Three have with each Other in Their Unity...

Arsenios

Well... As I've said... God didn't stutter or stammer when He spoke to express Himself by His Logos having proceeded forth as the Son co-inherent with His set-apart (Holy) Spirit.

So I don't consider it a mystery to intuit the depths or truth by my nous that is renewed. And the closed mouth to begin musterion CAN (and MUST) be opened, but only to speak the very Rhema of God.

The only true mystery should ultimately be knowing God's ineffable and unapproachable transcendent ousia. Everything else has been revealed by the economy from His energies.

He has told us if we will but hear and hearken.

 

[God's Truth]

I doubt you mean it like it is actually applied, but the central point is that the Holy Spirit is not a separate "person" of three.

I have always said that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not separate.

I do still come against the rest of your Modalistic view, but this basic statement is accurate.

As I have told you before, but you refuse to retain, I am no more a modalist than a trinitarian. Modalists do not believe the three exist at the same. I do not believe like that. Why try to put a label on me anyway? I can prove all my beliefs with scripture.

Oneness proponents like yourself are not completely wrong, but few of you guys can ever see where you're wrong.

I think you described yourself. You definitely do not see where you are wrong.

I read your debate with AMR; and even though I'm not a conventional Trinitarian, it was hard to watch with your ridiculous posts and stubborn obliviousness to truth.

Your judgment of me means very little to me. Your insults to me have nothing to do with God's Truth.

As for AMR, he believes that The Father, Son, and Spirit are separate; yet you seem to be afraid to insult the trinitarians here as you lash out at me.

But your statement above was correct if appropriately applied.

What other possible way would there be to apply it?

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Thank you.


Okay. If you have time, backtrack a bit and let me know where I you believe I lost you.

I'm thinking only a phone call or Skype could clarify at this point without an encyclopedic series of posts so verbose we'd all be drowning in semantics.

 

[God's Truth]

Not for hypostaric union and perichoresis, no. For Theology Proper and its minutiae, yes.



No. They're qualitatively distinct.



Right. Except there aren't three hypostases.:juggle:



Well... As I've said... God didn't stutter or stammer when He spoke to express Himself by His Logos having proceeded forth as the Son co-inherent with His set-apart (Holy) Spirit.

So I don't consider it a mystery to intuit the depths or truth by my nous that is renewed. And the closed mouth to begin musterion CAN (and MUST) be opened, but only to speak the very Rhema of God.

The only true mystery should ultimately be knowing God's ineffable and unapproachable transcendent ousia. Everything else has been revealed by the economy from His energies.

He has told us if we will but hear and hearken.

You have said that the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are not separate, but then you contradict yourself by saying they are distinct.

Distinct means separate.

 

[God's Truth]

I'm thinking only a phone call or Skype could clarify at this point without an encyclopedic series of posts so verbose we'd all be drowning in semantics.

Why don't you just try to speak words that the English Bible uses.

Maybe you could find a way to do that?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I'm thinking only a phone call or Skype could clarify at this point without an encyclopedic series of posts so verbose we'd all be drowning in semantics.

It might or might not help the Cain against Able mentality goin' on in here.

Good luck.

Aside from chastening them Corinthians,that ole Clement dude spoke some unfeigned beautiful truths in his epistle, hunh?

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

The Marriage of the Lamb is NOT sexual...

Ummm... I know. Duh. Somehow you should've understood the analogy... which I've desisted from because some were offended.

Nor is the union of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in one Ousia...

Duh. Two fer two, Bruddah. Yay.

Marriage is but the best descriptive of what actually takes place... It is a type, but it is not IT... Just as the baptism of the Jews in the Red Sea was but a type of the Baptism of Christ...

Indeed.

The intimacy of the union is WAY beyond puny sexual relations in ANY marriage... It is an intimacy of one's very being as it is conjoined with God in an ineffable manner and raised...

Agreed, as long as you're not interposing perichoresis and hypostatic union again.

An intimacy that brings Philip to the Ethopian eunuch, catechizes him, baptizes him, and disappears from him...

Yep. That's hypostatic union with the Son and perichoresis for all Believers in Christ and among Father/Son/Holy Spirit.

It has nothing to do with sex...

I'm aware. You still missed the point, but it's long gone.

That is why Paul speaks of the Marriage of the Lamb as MYSTERY...

Again... Revealed. You Easterns need to finally open your mouths and speak according to God's Rhema. The hushed lips thing is for the NWO secret society occultists and the like. We believe, therefore we speak.

The hidden mysteries have been revealed. Just make sure it's God's Rhema.

And the Faith of Christ as a Mystery...

Same. Revealed. No more pursed lips.

It is not a logically systematized structure of fallen human thought...

Right. Intuited by partaking of God's divine nature by being ontologically translated into Christ. Renewed in the spirit of our mind.

Like yours and mine...

Arsenios

The renewed nous and its noema and phronema are intuitive and not "fallen".

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

You have said that the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are not separate, but then you contradict yourself by saying they are distinct.

Distinct means separate.

You have no idea what I've said. And it's difficult enough conversing with rational humans without trying to do that with a stubborn usurping woman.

Observe Nang for an example of how to conduct yourself.

Why don't you just try to speak words that the English Bible uses.

Maybe you could find a way to do that?

Why would I use English when many Greek words are irreducible and the English language is one of the reasons for such splintered understandings of the inspired text?

Maybe you could find a way to utilize some of the bazillion language tools now available to anyone, and then you might realize how little you know from English.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

It might or might not help the Cain against Able mentality goin' on in here.

Good luck.

Aside from chastening them Corinthians,that ole Clement dude spoke some unfeigned beautiful truths in his epistle, hunh?

I'm fairly fond of Clement mahself.

 

[TFTn5280]

Distinct means separate.

Or perhaps it signifies union. (I'm gonna duck back in my hole before I get my head shot off [a prairie dog analogy])

 

[Arsenios]

this would be EQUIVALENT to

Type and Fulfillment...

A.

 

[Arsenios]

We are going to be stuck on the 'sexuality' descriptor here.

Forget the sexual side of it - The Marriage of the Lamb uses marriage as the Mystery... And in doing so, it has meaning, but the meaning is practical, for it describes the quality of our very personal relationship with Christ should we ever become mature in the Faith of Christ... The Psalmist writes describing it:

"But as for me, I am poor and needy
O Lord
Come unto mine aid..."

We are to be utterly at his disposal in all things...
Paul wrote of it some when he described those called to be Apostles... The PRIMARY relationship one has in this endeavor is with Christ/God, "For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God"... And its corollary is love of neighbor as SELF... Because God loves one's neighbor just as He loves you... And in Christ, that union becomes utterly personal, in that the hypostases/persons are capable, in that maturity, of acting one within the other for the sake of the other...

But back to the marriage, our espousal is to be very high maintenance in our relationship with Christ... It is the walk of Saints...

I sure did not mean to re-drag up old issues to get stuck on...

Forgive me...

Arsenios

 

[God's Truth]

You have no idea what I've said. And it's difficult enough conversing with rational humans without trying to do that with a stubborn usurping woman.

Observe Nang for an example of how to conduct yourself.

Your insults mean nothing about me,and everything about you.

Why would I use English when many Greek words are irreducible and the English language is one of the reasons for such splintered understandings of the inspired text?

If you understood God and Jesus you would know that learning another language is not the way Jesus reveals himself to us.

If you are so intelligent, figure out a way to explain your beliefs with words the Bible uses.

Maybe you could find a way to utilize some of the bazillion language tools now available to anyone, and then you might realize how little you know from English.

You just do not know how ridiculous you sound. I think that you have witnessed yourself being caught in your craftiness, but you think that no one will notice...or you hope that they don't. You try to cover it up with all your Greek. You do not fool everyone.

 

[God's Truth]

Or perhaps it signifies union.

I definitely see what you mean. However, the Bible tells us repeatedly that there is no distinctness about God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit...the three are the same. Jesus says his works are the Father's works. Jesus says that he only says what the Father says. Jesus says he only does what the Father does. Jesus says when you see him, you have seen the Father.

See, it is not like a marriage. A marriage or even a family is about separate and distinct persons becoming one family; or as a husband and wife scenario, the husband and wife are two separate persons that become one...that cannot be how the Bible reveals God the Father and Jesus to us. What husband only ever says and does what his wife says? What wife only ever says and does only what her husband says. What wife only ever does what her husband does?

There are three, but the three are One and the same.

(I'm gonna duck back in my hole before I get my head shot off [a prairie dog analogy])

I know what you mean with that too. You might have PPS calling you a Jezebel reprobate woman who usurps authority...as he has told me. lol

 

[God's Truth]

The Bible says that God is Spirit. The Bible says that Jesus is Spirit. The Bible says that the Holy Spirit is Spirit...

The Bible says that there is only One Spirit.

Do you see it now?

Since the Bible speaks of three...but says the three are Spirit, and that there is only One Spirit...there can be no other way except to say the three are the One and Same.

We have God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit being called Spirit. We have the Bible saying there is only One Spirit.

We then know that there is God shown to us in three ways...as God the Father invisible in heaven, who lives in unapproachable light. The Son is God the Father with a physical body that glorious body was given up and had taken on a flesh body on earth; then given back the same glorious body he had with God before the beginning of the world, after he ascended back the Father. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God that goes forth and given without limit.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Or perhaps it signifies union. (I'm gonna duck back in my hole before I get my head shot off [a prairie dog analogy])

At least you understand the Holy Spirit IS the perichoretic for the Father and Son, so no blazing gunfire at brave cranial-showing vermin are necessary from me.

But Jesus was made (poieo) singular ANARTHROUS sin for us who knew no sin (again singular anarthrous).

All mankind is not ontologically IN Christ with no sin natures, merely awaiting some nominal mind-change as "repentance". Yet we don't have dual natures, because we're hypostatically translated into Christ and partaking of God's divine nature through the human/divine nature of Him in whom we live and move and have our being.

Jesus wasn't made singular articular hamartia, which is what we must individually repent of unto salvation. Everyone has the sin condition in their members and natures, and must be translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son to be dead to that sin.

Nobody has ontology in Christ except those who have believed, and that faith immediately brings the changed condition of the heart and mind that is reprentance.

Access to AT-ONE-MENT for all because Christ was made anarthrous hamartia as the quality, character, and activity OF the sin nature (physis) that is in the hypostasis. Application of atonement is only for those who are individually, particularly, and peculiarly in Christ by putting Him on (His prosopon).

No forensics. No labels. No "identity". Pure hypostatic ontology for those who repent in faith, whereby they then have access into the grace wherein they stand.

No Universal Atonement. Unlimited availability and access. Still no ontology unless/until there is individual faith-based repentance that is neither self-initiated nor merely acknowledgement and assent.

All the convolutions of Universal Atonement are to avoid the dual nature fallacies and issues of the silliness of "sufficient for all, efficient for the Elect", which "wastes" the blood of Christ as much as Calvinists claim Arminianism does.

Not one unbeliever is IN Christ ontologically, and no sin natures were eradicated by the Passion event. Believers have been resurrected unto life in Christ, leaving their prosopon and physis in the tomb with sin in them. Sin isn't a "something", BTW. It's a missing share or part. Our lack is dead. Unbelievers' lack is not dead.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Your insults mean nothing about me,and everything about you.

It wasn't insults. It was valid observation as fact. You're a usurping woman defying scripture with the manner in which you approach men.

If you understood God and Jesus you would know that learning another language is not the way Jesus reveals himself to us.

I don't think ANYONE needs to necessarily learn the Biblical languages. But everyone should utilize a lexicon and spend time knowing what Greek terms mean in English instead of being ignorant and naive while spouting silliness they don't and CAN'T know is wrong.

You're not equipped to even address the minutiae of Theology Proper. And that's a fact of truth, not an insult.

If you are so intelligent, figure out a way to explain your beliefs with words the Bible uses.

I do. It's just from the original inspired text instead of shallow English concepts and words. And it's not intelligence, it's applied spiritual intuitive knowledge. You can't even know the difference with your puffed-up gnosis knowledge as you float by at high altitude.

You just do not know how ridiculous you sound. I think that you have witnessed yourself being caught in your craftiness, but you think that no one will notice...or you hope that they don't. You try to cover it up with all your Greek. You do not full everyone.

LOL. And you're barely literate, and struggling with puffed-up knowledge aimed at others who aren't. It's partly your own sub-conscious inadequacy blostered by fear and pride. You truly think you're right in your false belief system. It's common, and maddening to those who aren't your peers as juveniles.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

At least you understand the Holy Spirit IS the perichoretic for the Father and Son, so no blazing gunfire at brave cranial-showing vermin are necessary from me.

But Jesus was made (poieo) singular ANARTHROUS sin for us who knew no sin (again singular anarthrous).

All mankind is not ontologically IN Christ with no sin natures, merely awaiting some nominal mind-change as "repentance". Yet we don't have dual natures, because we're hypostatically translated into Christ and partaking of God's divine nature through the human/divine nature of Him in whom we live and move and have our being.

Jesus wasn't made singular articular hamartia, which is what we must individually repent of unto salvation. Everyone has the sin condition in their members and natures, and must be translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son to be dead to that sin.

Nobody has ontology in Christ except those who have believed, and that faith immediately brings the changed condition of the heart and mind that is reprentance.

Access to AT-ONE-MENT for all because Christ was made anarthrous hamartia as the quality, character, and activity OF the sin nature (physis) that is in the hypostasis. Application of atonement is only for those who are individually, particularly, and peculiarly in Christ by putting Him on (His prosopon).

No forensics. No labels. No "identity". Pure hypostatic ontology for those who repent in faith, whereby they then have access into the grace wherein they stand.

No Universal Atonement. Unlimited availability and access. Still no ontology unless/until there is individual faith-based repentance that is neither self-initiated nor merely acknowledgement and assent.

All the convolutions of Universal Atonement are to avoid the dual nature fallacies and issues of the silliness of "sufficient for all, efficient for the Elect", which "wastes" the blood of Christ as much as Calvinists claim Arminianism does.

Not one unbeliever is IN Christ ontologically, and no sin natures were eradicated by the Passion event. Believers have been resurrected unto life in Christ, leaving their prosopon and physis in the tomb with sin in them. Sin isn't a "something", BTW. It's a missing share or part. Our lack is dead. Unbelievers' lack is not dead.

Could you explain what you're trying to say, in the English language?