�
Charles Locke wrote:
> Hi DaveH,
>
> �� To answer your question about "substance"...I assume you are referring to
> the statement in the Nicene Creed regarding "...being of one substance with
> the Father..."? I do not think that "same substance" refers to the physical
> nature or attributes of the Godhead, but to the "divine" substance or nature
> of God.� The statement identifies the unique divine nature of God, and is
> shared by all three elements ("persons") of the Godhead.
DAVEH:� I don't understand.� So just what is "divine substance"???� To me, substance
implies something physical.� Can you give me a feel for what substance is if it is not
physical?
> >You ask, "Why can not there be 3 persons in the Godhead?".
>
> There ARE three "persons", but not individual separate beings, because that
> is polytheism, and the scripture states that there is only one God.
DAVEH:� As I said before, the context of what the Bible says about this reflects the
Lord trying to get the Israelites to follow Him and not other gods.
> Even the
> BoM states that the "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God" in several
> places,
DAVEH:� The context of such passages reflect the nature of the Godhead.
> and the concept of the Trinity was taught in the early days of the
> LDS.
DAVEH:� Do you suppose it was because of the early LDS people's Protestant upbringing?
> The polytheistic aspect to LDS theology came about later, and the
> statement "one in purpose, etc" was used from that point on to change the
> original connotation of "one".
DAVEH:� What do you think the original connotation of "one" is?� If we read Jn
17:20-22........
"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through
their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that
they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.� And
the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are
one:� I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the
world may know that thou loved them, as thou hast loved me."
........Now in light of the above words of Jesus, Perry, how would you define the
connotation of "one" if you don't like the LDS concept that it is "one in purpose"???
> You ask, "Why does the T-Doctrine is try to ignore that there are 3
> individuals in the Godhead?"
>
> Because that is polytheism, regardless of how many of those gods are
> worshipped.
DAVEH:� I disagree.� The Israelites were aware of other gods, but were instructed to
worship just one.� Being aware of others did not make them polytheistic.� Worshipping
others would qualify them for that though.
> >You say, "If the answer is that there is 'only one God', it seems to me
> >that it is obvious that there were "gods many" and Israel had trouble
> >sticking with the one important to them, so they were commanded to only
> >worship one God."
>
> Since there is only one God, then all of Israel's other gods were false
> gods. False gods are things that are worshipped that are not truly God. Like
> a golden calf, or an idol, or a graven image. To say that men are
DAVEH:� The words of Jesus.........
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"� Jn 10:34
> or become
> gods is blasphemous,
DAVEH:� Yes, that is what the Jews thought when Jesus quoted Ps 82:6.......
"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."
> at best, and exhibits the prideful nature of mankind at
> it's darkest.
DAVEH:� I respectfully disagree.
> Wanting to be God is what caused Satan's fall, and the fall of
> Adam and Eve, and this blasphemous myth is actually being perpetuated today
> in several modern religions. In fact, it is the basic underpinning of
> humanism...that there is no higher power than man...that man is god of his
> universe. Man is not "of the substance of the Father". As an old traditional
> Christian, Smoseph Jith, once said, "As man is, God never was; as God is,
> man will never become." We are the CREATURES, not the CREATOR.
DAVEH:� When a father creates a son, does he want that son to remain a child forever?�
Is there not an expectation that that child will grow and mature into a father
himself?� Is that not the basis of God's creations?
> >You say, "It doesn't seem like a paradox to me, nor do I recall ever
> >hearing any LDS folks thinking of it as a paradox."
>
> It is only a paradox until a resolution is found. LDS resolve the paradox by
> introducing polytheism,
DAVEH:� I respectfully disagree.� We recognize what is not only logical, but what the
Bible proclaims.
> while traditional Christians choose the mystery of
> the Trinity to resolve it.
DAVEH:� I fail to understand how a "mystery" resolves it.� It merely clouds the issue,
does it not?� If one substitutes truth with mystery, I would think it reflects faulty
doctrine.� Does not the prophets of the NT suggest that "mystery" is for those who
aren't believers.� For those who believe in the Lord, the fog (mystery) should clear
from their eyes when the truth is revealed.� At least that's the way I see it, Perry.�
Can you explain why Protestants want to hide behind a mystery when truth should
dispel such paradoxes?
> >You quote scripture: "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty, he
> >judgeth among the gods."� PS 82:1,
> and you say, "And of course even Jesus quoted Psalms 82:6........I have
> said, Ye are gods; and all of the children of the most High."
>
> Men who sat in judgement of other men regarding the laws of God were called
> "gods" in the KJV,
DAVEH:� Specifically, where?
> and this does not imply that they were or would become
> divine. In fact, if you read a little further in Psalms 82, the truth is
> revealed in verse 7: "But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the
> princes." Why? Because they WERE men.
DAVEH:� Jesus died too, but that did not detract from his divinity, as much as many
wanted it to.
> You probably have a Strong's
> concordance. Check out the hebrew word translated as "gods" in those
> passages
DAVEH:� Using YOUNG'S ANALYTICAL CONCORDANCE TO THE BIBLE, I looked at the usage of
"gods" in PS 82:6.� The root (if that is the correct way of saying it) word was
Elohim.� In Jesus' quote found in Jn 10:34, the root word is theos, or an object of
worship.� That doesn't sound like "magistrates" or "judges".
> and you will see that is also means "magistrates" and "judges".� Jesus was quoting
>it as though it were meant to mean a devine God.� If it were not so, then there would
>have been no reason for his detractors to find his comments blasphemest.� If he had
> said he was the Son of a judge or Son of a magistrate, who would have been
>bothered?� But he decisively explained that he was the SON OF GOD, and it was NOT
>contrary to their Scriptures that proclaimed "Ye are gods".
��� If Jesus can remind his enemies that their own Scriptures proclaim they "are
gods", then why would you decry me for pointing out the same thing???
> >You say, "In fact, the 3 Gods do not 'exhibit the exclusive attributes of
> >God'. Regarding the T-Doctrine's comment about "same substance", is it not
> >obvious that Jesus has a resurrected body of flesh and bones, and the Holy
> >Spirit is just that....a spirit being?� I have suggested that our Heavenly
> >Father also has a physical body, but apparently Protestants believe
> >otherwise.� How do you see it, Perry?
>
> I covered "substance" above. However, God the Father is a Spirit (John
> 4:24).
DAVEH:�� Which does not mean that his spirit is not housed in a physical framework.�
Otherwise, the rest of the passage........
"God is a Spirit; and they that worship him MUST worship him in SPIRIT and TRUTH."
.......would not make sense.� Note that whatever "spirit" means at the beginning of
the verse, it seemingly means the same at the end.� So Perry, IF the first spirit
means that God is ONLY a spirit, without a physical body.......then it implies that you
MUST worship him in the same way....spirit only, without a physical body.� I assume
when you worship God, your physical body is still attached to your spiritual nature?
> And, the attributes to which I refer are, again, not the physical
> attributes of the Godhead, but the spiritual attributes.
DAVEH:�� Do you mean to say that God lacks a physical nature/stature/characteristics?
> Why do you think
> the Jews threatened to stone Jesus in John 10:33? They wanted to stone Jesus
> because "but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest
> thyself God."
> The Jews realized that he equated himself with God.
DAVEH:� Do you suppose they were angered even more when Jesus pointed out that their
Scriptures allowed such!?!?!?!?!?
> Jesus did
> not rebuke them, because he WAS equating himself to God, because he IS God.
> Plus, a man making himself out to be God is blasphemy, as was demonstrated
> by the response of the Jews.
DAVEH:� Then I would liken the response of some TTers to be in the same vein.� Do you
suppose Jesus would answer these Protestant doctrines in the same way?
��� Now Perry, let me repeat something I posted before.� (For those who are new to TT,
you may have missed this.).......
"The command BE YE PERFECT is not idealistic gas.� Nor is it a command to do the
impossible.� He is going to make us into creatures
that can obey that command.� He said (in the Bible) that we were "gods" and He is
going to make good His words.� If we let Him-----for
we can prevent Him, if we choose----He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into
a god or goddess, dazzling radiant, immortal
creature, pulsating, all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we
cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which
reflects back to God perfectly.....His own boundless power and delight and goodness.�
The process will be long and in parts very painful;
but that is what we are in for.� Nothing less.� He meant what He said."
.........Does that sound like LDS theology speaking, Perry? It's not.� That is from CS
Lewis.
�
> Perry
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
�
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who
wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be
subscribed.
