toldailytopic: Does the doctrine of Trinity matter? If so why?

[csuguy]

My last sentence to you was that you are naive and make simpleton mistakes like your answers to the "knowing God" question.
J.I. Packer, a respected scholar wrote a book of the same name. You should read it then get back to all of us. I already have.

If you are so wise, and this book which you read has the answers - then you should be able to make your case here and now. Either speak up or hold your peace.

Right out of the 'arian' handbook. Every JW and other oddball has said this nearly word for word. :doh:

It's out of scriptures actually, though you may rightly call them my handbook.

You certainly can't accuse me of it, so who is this indictment most likely to stick against? Use your empathetic brain for a couple of minutes. Yes you are about quoting other cults here but it is you doing the accusations. Stop for about 30 seconds here: We all came to our position the same way you did. We just happen to hold to the majority view for a reason. Of a million people who read the scripture, who is most likely right? Those who all came up with the same answer or the couple of hundred class flunkies who have different answers, even from that small sect?

:doh:

Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.​

No, you aren't. You are done. You were done before you even went to school in the first place. Tell me honestly, has your study changed your view on the nature of Christ?

Once again, you only show how little you know me - and how much you like to spread lies about me. Yes, my studies have changed my views tremendously. I started off a Trinitarian, for instance, and thought much as you all do - having been raised in the church and accepting what they taught. I debated JWs and questioned how they could call themselves Christians and oppose the 'obvious' doctrine of the Trinity. I also believed that possessing the correct doctrines was the key to salvation, since works supposedly weren't required of us. And I believed many other things which were false - following the teachings of church.

But then I started to study - to defend the Trinity no less - and that is when I started to see how wrong all these churches were, how far they had fallen. They twist the scriptures for their gain, such as with tithe - the inheritance of the levites. Nor do most of these churches do anything of value - I have even heard them preach AGAINST giving to the poor and needy. The love of God is not to be found therein.

This is a cultic anti-intellectual statement. We all came to this belief without indoctrination. You should know better than this by now. It is an inane accusation that has no research whatsoever behind it. Rather, it is your 'suspicion' and you promote it as if it were a varified fact. Every cult without actual truth does this. Come out from there.

Why would I know better - you haven't demonstrated any differently. You continually ignore my requests for you to defend your position, but instead resort to personal attacks and lies. You show no interest in the discussing the truth - but only in dictating it.

Here is your opportunity to show me that I am wrong: you can here and now discuss the facts with me and defend your positions. Or you can continue to deride me, talk of how naive I am, and continue to ignore my requests for you to defend your position.

Because you are a kid coming up with these false accusations and assessments. Tell me, honestly, who is really indoctrinated when you say things like this that have no proof of truth behind them other than a half-century of cultists making the accusation?

You are the indoctrinated ones, truly. My positions are based solely upon what I have researched. The scriptures, the writings of the Church Fathers, and Church History. These are not cultist sources - these are the same sources which you all proclaim attest to the Trinity. This only shows that you have not bothered to study these sources with any depth.

Awe, so my summation of you hasn't been too far off afterall, good to know, thanks. Not quite opposing your father, but... Thanks, again not too far off.

You can think as you will - your knowledge of me is as your knowledge of theology, fickle at best.

Different thread. Read Packer however. Jerry Bridges also has one titled "The Pursuit of God" which endeavers to answer a similar question.

:yawn: Ya your REAL knowledgeable Lon. Can't imagine why I have never learned anything from you. Oh, that's right, it's because even if you did have some form of valuable knowledge - you never bother to discuss your theology but prefer personal attacks.

Look back over this post: These are my indictments.

When you start to discuss theology meaningfully and lay off the personal attacks - then I might start to give your criticisms some weight.

 

[keypurr]

No surprise, he thinks just like you and is as contentious. That's an odd place to be, in my studied opinion. If I were this opinionated as a child, I'd have thought my parents were always wrong and thought I was 'Mr. Brilliant - God's gift to the world.' You go ahead and encourage that all you like. I find it nothing less than sinful lying to him to encourage such drivel. I can't respect any adult (not even one) that encourages this kind of willful disobedience. You probably would have given atta-boy's to Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. You are happy with lies and unorthodoxy, none of the rest of us are. To encourage such is endangering CS's soul and you will be held accountable Luke 17:2, Keypurr. Isaiah 5:20 too.
Take a correction from God for once in your pitiful life!

Lon, your a highly educated man, but you are dumb. God is not God by a majority vote. The kingdom of God is not Democracy. God will judge the intent of a person heart. It is your traditional hangups that prevent you from seeing God. My parents were srtict Baptists. I disagreed with them also. But I know that they loved their God and their Lord. I will be held accountable soon, but it will NOT be by you, it will be by the son of my God.

See? The same thing makes me cry. I'd hate if my child perverted God's word.


Only if you are inept, stupid or retarded...

Or, I talk about things you do not know about.

Because you prefer the lie rather than the truth. Otherwise there is no foundation for this. In fact, you've told me I'm intelligent on a couple of occassions so you are sending mixed messages that cannot be true at this venture. You just don't like me picking on your prodigy, but that is not a good reason for your interjection in this conversation. Truth would be, but that's not what you are doing. You are simply sticking up for your boy and endangering both of your souls in the process. God will hold us all accountable, you can be assured. You will stand before your Maker (Jesus btw) just as I will.

I do not believe He will say "Well done faithful servant" to you for this.

See also below...

Your problem is your not smart in the right stuff...

You think one must be a trin to know God, Lon, it is just the other way around. Jesus taught that his father is God, not the RCC/Roman Emperor's God. You never see both sides of a coin when it comes to scriptures. The church tells you to jump and you do.

I will pray for you Lon. Hopefully someday your eyes will be open.

 

[csuguy]

I have not made it necessary for salvation, but the Deity of Christ is not negotiable since salvation is in no other name/person than Jesus/YHWH and a counterfeit, false, non-existent Christ is worthless.

Unless you are a relativist, Islam, JW, Mormon, Judaism, etc. are simply not salvific like biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity is. What makes the latter unique is that Jesus is God and He rose from the dead, denied by the other groups (Judaism being true as far as it goes, but insufficient in this era).

Your belief that one must accept Jesus as God can be no more substantiated than demanding that one accept God as a Trinity.

You think that if we don't agree on this that therefore we believe in different Christs - but you are only falling into that error which I pointed out to you in my last post. Knowing God, and knowing Christ, is not a matter of doctrine - not an intellectual exercise. It is a matter of what you do - how you live your life. THIS is how Christianity is truly unique, in how we are called to give our lives in service to others - forsaking those things which the world values.

 

[godrulz]

Your belief that one must accept Jesus as God can be no more substantiated than demanding that one accept God as a Trinity.

You think that if we don't agree on this that therefore we believe in different Christs - but you are only falling into that error which I pointed out to you in my last post. Knowing God, and knowing Christ, is not a matter of doctrine - not an intellectual exercise. It is a matter of what you do - how you live your life. THIS is how Christianity is truly unique, in how we are called to give our lives in service to others - forsaking those things which the world values.

You are talking behavioral issues common to many other religions that have diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive beliefs on God, etc. Atheists could fulfill your mandate.

The gospel, the power of God, is the way to abundant and eternal life, redemptive truth unique to Christianity. A false god, false christ, false gospel, etc. simply cannot save.

There is sufficient revelation to know the gospel and whether God is triune, solitary, modalistic, or polytheistic. There is sufficient revelation to know whether Christ is God (His claim) or a created being.

Your blindness shows that you have not received the real Jesus and do not accept His gospel (Rom. 1:16; I Cor. 1:18).

 

[csuguy]

You are talking behavioral issues common to many other religions that have diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive beliefs on God, etc. Atheists could fulfill your mandate.

Anyone has the potential to fulfill the requirements. They do not, however, because it does not correspond to the desires of this world. It is the narrow path not because it belongs to the intellectual elite, but because few are willing to devote themselves as servants to others - but rather seek wealth, fame, fortune and other worldly desires.

The gospel, the power of God, is the way to abundant and eternal life, redemptive truth unique to Christianity. A false god, false christ, false gospel, etc. simply cannot save.

All your beliefs mean nothing if not acted upon. It is in your actions that your faith lives or dies - not in your dogma. It is your actions which reveal whom or what your truly worship.

There is sufficient revelation to know the gospel and whether God is triune, solitary, modalistic, or polytheistic. There is sufficient revelation to know whether Christ is God (His claim) or a created being.

Again - even if we agree, for the sake of argument, that the above is an absolute and indisputable fact - it would still not establish that is required for salvation.

Your blindness shows that you have not received the real Jesus and do not accept His gospel (Rom. 1:16; I Cor. 1:18).

Your blindness shows in that you would equate man made doctrines with the Gospel. To the contrary, the gospel says that Jesus is God's Son - whom he sent.

 

[keypurr]

You are talking behavioral issues common to many other religions that have diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive beliefs on God, etc. Atheists could fulfill your mandate.

The gospel, the power of God, is the way to abundant and eternal life, redemptive truth unique to Christianity. A false god, false christ, false gospel, etc. simply cannot save.

There is sufficient revelation to know the gospel and whether God is triune, solitary, modalistic, or polytheistic. There is sufficient revelation to know whether Christ is God (His claim) or a created being.

Your blindness shows that you have not received the real Jesus and do not accept His gospel (Rom. 1:16; I Cor. 1:18).

It is not csuguy that is blind, it is you friend. You seek the approval of men, not God.

 

[Lon]

If you are so wise, and this book which you read has the answers - then you should be able to make your case here and now. Either speak up or hold your peace.

Issue the challenge on your other thread with a link here then, otherwise you are diverting and derailing. You didn't even come with the same answer here as you did there. That's enough said.

It's out of scriptures actually, though you may rightly call them my handbook.

Show me from here:

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness...
...they became futile in their thoughts and their senseless hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings...

Rom 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, contrivers of all sorts of evil, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 senseless, covenant-breakers, heartless, ruthless.

Luke 17:2 It would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck and be thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.

Isa 5:20 Those who call evil good and good evil are as good as dead, who turn darkness into light and light into darkness, who turn bitter into sweet and sweet into bitter.

:doh:

Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
​

:doh:
You are drawing your line between you Unit-arians and the rest of us. I'm drawing mine between Christians and the word, as I believe that's how Jesus was using it, Himself. So yeah, just another example of how differently we understand God working and who is His...

Once again, you only show how little you know me - and how much you like to spread lies about me. Yes, my studies have changed my views tremendously. I started off a Trinitarian, for instance, and thought much as you all do - having been raised in the church and accepting what they taught. I debated JWs and questioned how they could call themselves Christians and oppose the 'obvious' doctrine of the Trinity. I also believed that possessing the correct doctrines was the key to salvation, since works supposedly weren't required of us. And I believed many other things which were false - following the teachings of church.

In other words, I was exactly right, because that all happened before you started school.

But then I started to study - to defend the Trinity no less - and that is when I started to see how wrong all these churches were, how far they had fallen. They twist the scriptures for their gain, such as with tithe - the inheritance of the levites. Nor do most of these churches do anything of value - I have even heard them preach AGAINST giving to the poor and needy. The love of God is not to be found therein.

Sorry, but you were and yet are incapable of this, to date. What is worse, you are using your present educational work to indoctrinate yourself. It is exactly as I said, no lie whatsover. I apparently can read and you more than apparently can't even read between your own writing!
It is plain as day.

Why would I know better - you haven't demonstrated any differently. You continually ignore my requests for you to defend your position, but instead resort to personal attacks and lies. You show no interest in the discussing the truth - but only in dictating it.

No. I don't call it a lie, I call you inept. I used to actually try before I had put you on iggy. You have fingers in both ears where you and I are concerned. The reason I've engaged you here is that it is an open topic. Unit-arians don't know who Jesus is. You do not know who He is.

Here is your opportunity to show me that I am wrong: you can here and now discuss the facts with me and defend your positions. Or you can continue to deride me, talk of how naive I am, and continue to ignore my requests for you to defend your position.

Er, I said we came to this belief without being indoctrinated. I have a thread dedicated to the scriptures on the triune view. Did you know that or are you being dishonest here?

You are the indoctrinated ones, truly. My positions are based solely upon what I have researched. The scriptures, the writings of the Church Fathers, and Church History. These are not cultist sources - these are the same sources which you all proclaim attest to the Trinity. This only shows that you have not bothered to study these sources with any depth.

ALL before you ever went to school. It seems to me, your education is being used by you, not to challenge what you believe, but to cement between those already set and stubborn bricks of obstinance.

You can think as you will - your knowledge of me is as your knowledge of theology, fickle at best.

Do you happen to know the definition of 'fickle?'

:yawn: Ya your REAL knowledgeable Lon. Can't imagine why I have never learned anything from you. Oh, that's right, it's because even if you did have some form of valuable knowledge - you never bother to discuss your theology but prefer personal attacks.

That thread started by Choleric, is now gone, but in it and several other threads, you already weren't listening. I tried to tell you Justyn Martry was no arian. You refused, even then, to listen. I can look up the quotes again, but that's when I put you on ignore. I had estimated then that you weren't open to dialogue. You still aren't. Justyn said Jesus was God.

When you start to discuss theology meaningfully and lay off the personal attacks - then I might start to give your criticisms some weight.

That'd be a nice change of pace to look forward to....

 

[csuguy]

Issue the challenge on your other thread with a link here then, otherwise you are diverting and derailing. You didn't even come with the same answer here as you did there. That's enough said.

I challenged you there multiple times - you refused to discuss the matter then just as you have been in this thread. I don't see a reason to dig up that thread now, which got way off course - but if you so desire I will start a new thread wherein you can present what you believe it means to know God, and why the definition I am using is inadequate?

And I did revise my position slightly - so that it was more inline with the definition in Jeremiah. It is to be expected that one who actively studies theology should change and refine their positions.

Show me from here:

Show you what from there? That your thoughts are futile and darkened?

:doh:
You are drawing your line between you Unit-arians and the rest of us. I'm drawing mine between Christians and the word, as I believe that's how Jesus was using it, Himself. So yeah, just another example of how differently we understand God working and who is His...

Actually it is the other way around. Did I ever once say that rejecting the Trinity is necessary for salvation? That only those who believe as I do will be saved? Wrong. It is you who draws such baseless distinctions - saying that one must accept the Trinity to be saved. I believe the lies surrounding the Trinity are dangerous, but I do not believe that accepting the Trinity will endanger anyone's salvation. As I told godrulz - knowing God is not about what doctrines you subscribe too, it is about what you do. Your faith lives or dies based upon your actions.

In other words, I was exactly right, because that all happened before you started school.

Incorrect - it started whilst I was in high school and continued throughout my college career. Escaping the indoctrination of the Trinity is not something done overnight - I went back and forth for a long time on the issue. It is what inspired me to read through the Church Fathers for myself. For I figured that just because the Trinity was confusing and apparently contradictory - my lack of understanding does not necessitate that it is false. Rather - I was fully willing to pick up the orthodox torch again if I found that Christianity has always been Trinitarian from the beginning as everyone claimed. And it took me several years to read through the Ante-Nicene Fathers Series, something I completed in my last semester of college.

Sorry, but you were and yet are incapable of this, to date. What is worse, you are using your present educational work to indoctrinate yourself. It is exactly as I said, no lie whatsover. I apparently can read and you more than apparently can't even read between your own writing!
It is plain as day.

Incapable of what? You speak non-sense - because my views are based upon my studies they are necessarily not indoctrinated, but founded upon research. Nothing is as you have said - but keep trying to dictate the truth if it makes you feel secure.

No. I don't call it a lie, I call you inept. I used to actually try before I had put you on iggy. You have fingers in both ears where you and I are concerned. The reason I've engaged you here is that it is an open topic. Unit-arians don't know who Jesus is. You do not know who He is.

More personal attacks and lies. You have never engaged me in discussion - but have only ever tried to dictate to me what I should believe. You expect me and others to just what you say - foolishness.

Er, I said we came to this belief without being indoctrinated. I have a thread dedicated to the scriptures on the triune view. Did you know that or are you being dishonest here?

You made a thread on scriptures you think support your view point and so you think that proof that you are not indoctrinated? :ha:

When you actually start discussing the issues and show me that you can adequately defend your position and that you have considered what others present - then you will have demonstrated that you are not indoctrinated. All your behavior to this point, however, speaks otherwise.

ALL before you ever went to school. It seems to me, your education is being used by you, not to challenge what you believe, but to cement between those already set and stubborn bricks of obstinance.

Incorrect - see above where I addressed this same lie.

That thread started by Choleric, is now gone, but in it and several other threads, you already weren't listening. I tried to tell you Justyn Martry was no arian. You refused, even then, to listen. I can look up the quotes again, but that's when I put you on ignore. I had estimated then that you weren't open to dialogue. You still aren't. Justyn said Jesus was God.

You once again show how little you've studied are how unwilling you are to seek the truth. For as I told you in the past, and as anyone can look up for themselves, Justin Martyr did not believe that Jesus was God Almighty. To the contrary, he says that Jesus is a second, lower god, distinct in number from the one true God. This is indisputable fact - and the fact that you try to dispute what is explicitly written by him only goes to show how indoctrinated you are. Of course I am not going to adopt such a foolish position from you.

That'd be a nice change of pace to look forward to....

I look forward to the day when you start actually discussing the issues rather than spread lies and deride me for not accepting your word as Gospel.

 

[csuguy]

Lon, I created a thread for us to discuss what it means to know God: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87792

 

[Lon]

I did revise my position slightly [emphasis]

Show you what from there? That your thoughts are futile and darkened?

That your doctrine came from scripture. I thought that was more than obvious. I'm sorry you are so obtuse to plain meaning of anything you read, apparently, the scriptures notwithstanding.

Actually it is the other way around. Did I ever once say that rejecting the Trinity is necessary for salvation? That only those who believe as I do will be saved? Wrong. It is you who draws such baseless distinctions - saying that one must accept the Trinity to be saved. I believe the lies surrounding the Trinity are dangerous, but I do not believe that accepting the Trinity will endanger anyone's salvation. As I told godrulz - knowing God is not about what doctrines you subscribe too, it is about what you do. Your faith lives or dies based upon your actions.

Again, it is you, who only slightly have changed from before you could have said you knew better (before you went to college), against the rest of Christianity, but no, you are being wishy washy now. You said 'narrow' in our conversation as if those were the unitarians, so quit flip-flopping for your own convenience. But then again, you had a hard time figuring out what I was saying above so I don't expect much out of you and am pleasantly shocked you seem to be able to complete college classes.

Incorrect - it started whilst I was in high school...

No surprise. I expect such things from contentious children. Not everybody, just those who think too highly of themselves for no apparent reason.

...and continued throughout my college career.

"Continued?" Again, absolutely no surprise. I guess I had hoped you'd run into a good prof but no, no surprise.

Escaping the indoctrination of the Trinity is not something done overnight

Seems like an impertinent disposition, so "not overnight" is a bit of a surprise to my assessment. Okay, I'm teasing but still, you ignored me at a time when I was really trying with you. It didn't seem like you struggled much at that time to me. I was disappointed with your lack of consideration of 'facts.' Go read that Ex-JW thread. You seemed fairly flippant and loose with facts. Too ****-sure when you were obviously wrong, etc. That's when I put you on iggy the first time. I don't value what I assessed was blatant dishonesty and purposeful indoctrination of what you 'wanted' to believe. That's really my hang-up with you in a nutshell. That and the audacity to try and teach that stuff afterwards when you didn't seem to be dealing with the facts in an honest fashion. So, even here, where you said the 'church fathers' didn't believe that way, yet I'd showed you back then where you were wrong, you yet purport this stuff as if it is credible or hasn't been academically contested.

- I went back and forth for a long time on the issue. It is what inspired me to read through the Church Fathers for myself.

Yet didn't read them when I posted quotes, but ignored them.

For I figured that just because the Trinity was confusing and apparently contradictory - my lack of understanding does not necessitate that it is false. Rather - I was fully willing to pick up the orthodox torch again if I found that Christianity has always been Trinitarian from the beginning as everyone claimed. And it took me several years to read through the Ante-Nicene Fathers Series, something I completed in my last semester of college.

To me and others, it looks very much like you read them selectively. Even when I showed you on a couple of points where you were wrong, it didn't slow you down a whit.

Incapable of what? You speak non-sense - because my views are based upon my studies they are necessarily not indoctrinated, but founded upon research. Nothing is as you have said - but keep trying to dictate the truth if it makes you feel secure.

Sorry. When you say "no" then agree with everything I've written, this doesn't work. At least not for me. It might work with others.

More personal attacks and lies. You have never engaged me in discussion - but have only ever tried to dictate to me what I should believe. You expect me and others to just what you say - foolishness.

Go back to this thread and read again. I enter on page 4...

You made a thread on scriptures you think support your view point and so you think that proof that you are not indoctrinated? :ha:

:think: Indoctrinated or relying on my own inability....

That's a toughy! :think:

I believe I'd go with someone smarter than I am, but that's because I know when I'm incapable.... This isn't it, but I know when I am.

Justin Martyr did not believe that Jesus was God Almighty. To the contrary, he says that Jesus is a second, lower god, distinct in number from the one true God. This is indisputable fact - and the fact that you try to dispute what is explicitly written by him only goes to show how indoctrinated you are. Of course I am not going to adopt such a foolish position from you.

It is only you, csguy-somebody-or-other that thinks so. Justyn said "who was God." Maybe you are being honest and are just stupid. Maybe you are being dishonest and lying. Maybe you are lying to yourself simply because it is what csguy-somebody-or-other wants to delude himself into believing because it makes him feel 'special' or something. I don't know the answer. Yes, I try to look for how to make that assessment. It is definitely one of these. It is easier for you to think it's just me, but no, it is just you.

I look forward to the day when you start actually discussing the issues rather than spread lies and deride me for not accepting your word as Gospel.

Right, like Justyn Marytr saying Jesus was God.
You already kissed that link away so I am doubtful of your sincerity here. You have not been sincere in my understanding of the word to date. I'm just not seeing it, so you go ahead and think I'm lying when I say these assessments out loud....

 

[csuguy]

I tire of the false accusations and derision. I don't see much point in continuing with this present thread so I will leave it here. However, I hope you will do as you said and join the thread I prepared so that you may finally present your case for what it means to know God, and demonstrate why my understanding is insufficient. Hopefully you will be able to lay aside the personal attacks for a single thread so that we can have a good discussion for once.

 

[Paulos]

Justin Martyr did not believe that Jesus was God Almighty. To the contrary, he says that Jesus is a second, lower god, distinct in number from the one true God. This is indisputable fact

Ignatius of Antioch wrote:

"There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord...We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts."​

Source: The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

 

[Paulos]

Justin Martyr did not believe that Jesus was God Almighty. To the contrary, he says that Jesus is a second, lower god, distinct in number from the one true God. This is indisputable fact

According to Michael J. Partyka:

Justin writes that “God begat before all creatures a Beginning, who was a certain rational power proceeding from Himself, which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with Him” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chap. 61, 62). This squares precisely with the Nicene Creed, which declares God the Son to be “begotten, not made.” Justin explains further that “this power is indivisible and inseparable from the Father” (Ibid, Chap. 128), and that the Son was “begotten from the Father, by His power and will, but not by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided” (Ibid), which means that the Son is begotten from the very same essence which the Father himself possesses – not dividing the Godhead into parts, but rather allowing each divine person a full sharing in the Godhead – which is exactly what the doctrine of the Trinity maintains.​

 

[csuguy]

According to Michael J. Partyka:

Justin writes that “God begat before all creatures a Beginning, who was a certain rational power proceeding from Himself, which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with Him” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chap. 61, 62). This squares precisely with the Nicene Creed, which declares God the Son to be “begotten, not made.” Justin explains further that “this power is indivisible and inseparable from the Father” (Ibid, Chap. 128), and that the Son was “begotten from the Father, by His power and will, but not by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided” (Ibid), which means that the Son is begotten from the very same essence which the Father himself possesses – not dividing the Godhead into parts, but rather allowing each divine person a full sharing in the Godhead – which is exactly what the doctrine of the Trinity maintains.​

If you think he, or anyone else prior to Origen, teaches what the Nicene Creed does it only shows that you haven't studied the Church Fathers yourself. Please go read Justin's works for yourself, then we can properly discuss such things.

If you studied Justin, you would find that he argues that Jesus was born of God like fire from fire. Thus, while he didn't reduce the Father's essence, neither is he sharing one undivided substance with God. Rather, he is "numerically distinct" (as Justin says) like one torch lit by the first. Really, it is silly to try to dismiss Justin's own words on the matter - who identifies him as a second lesser god.

 

[csuguy]

Ignatius of Antioch wrote:

"There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord...We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts."​

Source: The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

You have to be careful with Ignatius for there are several false letters in his name which appear later in history, supporting the Trinity and other matters. However, even accepting the above quote as a true statement of Ignatius - it neither establishes the Trinity nor says anything of Justin's beliefs.

 

[Nang]

If you think he, or anyone else prior to Origen, teaches what the Nicene Creed does it only shows that you haven't studied the Church Fathers yourself. Please go read Justin's works for yourself, then we can properly discuss such things.

If you studied Justin, you would find that he argues that Jesus was born of God like fire from fire. Thus, while he didn't reduce the Father's essence, neither is he sharing one undivided substance with God. Rather, he is "numerically distinct" (as Justin says) like one torch lit by the first. Really, it is silly to try to dismiss Justin's own words on the matter - who identifies him as a second lesser god.

Studying the proper language as used by the church fathers can avoid much error.

Please read my post today regarding Drake Shelton (another anti-Trinitarian) who also posts anti-trinitarian tripe on TOL.

Hopefully, you are not one of his disciples.

???

 

[csuguy]

Studying the proper language as used by the church fathers can avoid much error.

Please read my post today regarding Drake Shelton (another anti-Trinitarian) who also posts anti-trinitarian tripe on TOL.

Hopefully, you are not one of his disciples.

???

Studying the works of those you are trying to talk about avoids even more confusion.