Judy,
I can see your point. But, when talking to mormons using the word Trinity
seems to make the difference between what I believe and what they believe
stand out. If I use Godhead, they think I am agreeing with their
polytheistic view, and that leads to confusion and oblique conversations. It
is a pain to have to break a conversation every few sentences and define
words for them.
BTW, since you disagree with Nicea, how would you describe the biblical
concept of Godhead to someone who did not understand it?
Perry
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Christ
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:52:10 -0400
How sad, but then Satan will pervert truth every chance he gets.
No I like Godhead and believe it exemplifies the spiritual nature of God.
To me Trinity
with the procession that comes out of Nicea is more akin to three
separate ppl (gods) than the
word Paul uses in the book of Romans. jt
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 06:48:42 -0700 "Charles Perry Locke"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Judy,
>
> From your previous posts I believe that you said you prefer the
> use of
> the word Godhead to Trinity since Trinity is not found in the Bible.
>
> However, the mormons also use the word godhead to mean three
> separate and
> distinct gods. Don't you think the term Trinity encompasses a real
> aspect of
> the Godhead that the term Godhead itself does not encompass? I
> assume when
> you say Godhead you are including all of the characteristics
> attributed to
> the conecpt of Trinity. Am I wrong?
>
> Perry
>
> >From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [email protected]
> >To: [email protected]
> >CC: [email protected]
> >Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of
> Christ
> >Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:00:34 -0400
> >
> >The problem at Nicea is the same problem today - which is that the
> word
> >itself is unscriptural; it had no
> >precedent then and has none today - that is, if we are using the
> same
> >scripture. jt
> >
> >On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 06:45:43 -0600 "Bill Taylor"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >writes:
> >JT > This word "homoousion" or substance in the Nicean creed
> states
> >that the son is one substance ...
> >
> >The word homo means "same" and the word ousia is an ontological
> term; it
> >speaks to "being" and "existence."All the to-be verbs go back to
> this
> >root: is, are, am, etc. When Jesus refers to himself as the I AM,
> this
> >word is at its root. When God said "I am who I am" this is the idea
> at
> >its root; hence there are two witnesses to this claim. This is not
> a
> >"new" word, Judy. It's new to you. If the word "substance" trips
> you up,
> >think of it like this: It means "of the same being."
> >
> >Bill
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Judy Taylor
> >To: [email protected]
> >Cc: [email protected]
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 4:54 AM
> >Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of
> Christ
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 02:10:26 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > It does not appear that we are talking about just the eternal
> Sonship of
> >Christ -- but something that is bigger and even more important.
> Judy,
> >please be careful, here, that in your zeal to disagree with me that
> you
> >are not misrepresenting your own beliefs.
> >
> >jt: I agree with the statement above JD
> >My belief is that our disagreement most likely goes all the way
> back to
> >the council of Nicea in May 325AD where they eventually agreed to
> >redefine God using a Greek word that is totally unscriptural - For
> this
> >reason they had problems getting complete agreement - but the
> "Berean"
> >bishops finally caved.
> >
> >This word "homoousion" or substance in the Nicean creed states that
> the
> >son is one substance with the Father and the Spirit is the same
> substance
> >also from where they get the procession. Since God is a Spirit
> this
> >makes no sense at all; what is it supposed to mean? Maybe DavidM
> would
> >be better able to explain it with his background in biology but it
> makes
> >no sense to me at all.
> >
> >Apparently they were so fearful of Arius at Nicea that they ran
> with it -
> >proceeding from there to what they call "the procession" and the
> myriad
> >of other unscriptural religious dogma that has today reached it's
> apex in
> >the present day rcc babylonian system. jt
>
>
> ----------
> "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.
>
>
----------
"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.
