It is almost a sickness that insists on presenting Christ as The Word TO THE EXCLUSION OF Son. A heretical teaching that has been embraced by a very studied individual.
Jd
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 10:27:33 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Christ
Thanks for your response Perry which lets me know that you at least know what I am
saying. IMO it would be so much easier to talk to ppl about God without the 2,000+ years
of tradition we are having to wade through.
If you study the Masoretic text or a Jewish translation it is possible to find the names of
God in the OT and see who is speaking. The preincarnate Christ is all over scripture but
never referred to as "eternal son". I know a pastor who gets Jewish ppl saved all the time
by ministering to them this way. They can accept the Godhead but they can not accept
Trinity because ironically they believe from what they have heard that these are three
separate persons.
To answer your question. I would demonstrate the Godhead this way:
God the Father has the thought
God the Word speaks it into existence
God the Spirit carries it out
So you see the Godhead as one working in harmony, like a symphony; which in fact is how
the body of Christ should be working and will when it all comes together in Him. jt
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 07:16:42 -0700 "Charles Perry Locke" <cpl2602@hotmail.com> writes:
> 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"
> ><cpl2602@hotmail.com> 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 G odhead 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"
> > > <wmtaylor@plains.net>
> > > >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] l.innglory.org
> > > >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.
>
>
> 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"
> ><cpl2602@hotmail.com> 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 G odhead 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"
> > > <wmtaylor@plains.net>
> > > >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] l.innglory.org
> > > >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.
>
>
