Re: Bill Schlegel Videos
Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2021 3:59 pm
Paidion,
this is (first) a reply to your two posts to me on different days, and then to you, Commonsense, to your last post to me.
Paidion>>>Otherness, you wrote : I am simply using Special Revelation (Scripture) and General Revelation ( Natural Theology) as two witnesses to testify to the “accuracy” of the Trinitarian Formulation.<<<
Paidion>>>Just because you can speak of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, doesn't prove that God is a Trinity.<<<
This is self-evidently true, and I am certainly not doing this. My perspective has both the content and context that fills out my “speaking” of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Scripture and Nature speak with one voice in proclaiming the wonder that the world is made out of nothing by the W(w)ord of God. How is this so...well, the Trinity is at the heart of the answer.
Paidion>>>I, too, am a father. I have a son, and I have a spirit (or mind), but that doesn't imply that my son, my spirit, and myself as a father, make up a trinity.<<<
The concept “Trinity,” when associated with God, has a unique meaning. We cannot take created things and “analogize” them up high enough to reach the height, nor deep enough to reach the depth, where the Reality simply IS. No matter how many sixes are strung behind six it'll never make six become seven (.666...ad infinitum never gets you to seven). Right reasoning about this unique Reality starts with this Reality and descends to where we are as “created realities.” Because I see “the Trinity” revealed in Scripture, I can (have been enabled to) see this Reality revealed in Creation.
Paidion>>>1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. This verse clearly indicates that the Father is the one God, and that the Lord Jesus Christ (God's Son) is someone other that the one God.<<<
This verse, within even its immediate context (let alone the larger context of what the entirety of Scripture provides) does not delimit what the apostle is saying according to your reading of it.
Rather, the one God, Who truly is the Father of Creation, is known no other way but by His one, and only, Son (the Logos), the Lord Jesus Christ. This transcendent (mysterious) God, Who is always in Heaven, no one but His Son knows (Matthew 11:27). No other “god” is God, not even “the G(g)od” that the Jews (John 8:41) claimed as their father, and certainly none of the gods of the Gentiles. What we have the apostle saying here is that the “Transcendent One,” the true Father, is known only by the “Immanent One,” – He, alone, reveals Who God IS. Yes, He is “other” than the Father, the otherwise unknowable transcendent God, but He is One with Him in Nature, thus to see and know Him is to see and know the Father (the one true God).
otherness>>>We (thoughtful) trinitarians see the “entire preamble” of this Gospel as the foundation and fountain of our salvation because “the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God.” <<<
Paidion>>>You thoughtful trinitarians will need to be a bit more thoughtful.<<<
By this I simply meant those of us who have looked deeper than (mere) dogmas, doctrines, and creeds.
Paidion>>>Here is a word for word translation of the Greek. In English the word "logos" should be translated as "expression" rather than "word". Jesus is the expression of God.<<<
This is pretty much in keeping with what I have been saying : that even the Creation itself is the expressed thoughts (words) of God. The Logos, the SON, is the (eternal) expression of the Father Himself, and therefore the I AM that the SON is, is the same I AM Who is the Father. That this I AM can exist this way belongs to God alone, it is not a quality of (any species of) created being.
Paidion>>>But if you prefer to retain the Greek word "logos", it could be translated as follows: In the beginning was the logos and the logos was with the God and God was the logosThe first occurrence of "God" is preceded by the article (the). This indicates that it refers to the only true God (the Father). The second occurrence of "God" is NOT preceded by the article. That indicates that it is more like an adjective. "The logos was divine (or "God-like)" It should NOT be translated as "the logos WAS God", that is, that the logos was God the Father.<<<
Of course you know that there are many, many, many Greek scholars who read this differently than you do, and I'm sure you've been pointed to them many times. I'm not referring to the word order (as in the last phrase), but to the understanding of what is being communicated. But...even with the word order of your (possibly more precise) translation it doesn't change anything for a trinitarian because there is only one God Who is being spoken of. Being that “God was the Logos,” therefore “in the beginning was (God) the Logos, and the Logos was with the God.”
The real problem here for non-trinitarians is that there is only One I AM Who is GOD. In Isaiah He makes it perfectly clear that I AM (GOD) knows no other, has not formed any other, G(g)od (I AM). As a matter of fact, the root of sin is the rebellion of a “created i am” by arrogating to itself the status of I AM. This is the source of satan, and he successfully infected humanity with his sin. God made the being, but the being made itself satan. (by desiring to be “as God”).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Commonsense,
otherness>>>He does this in His existence as Trinity : in this Creative State He is making REAL the reality of OTHER.<<<
commonsense>>>Otherness, So how did God create animals? Does He go by the same formula? If so, then from what you're saying, God must first be that "other" cat to make real the reality of the other. I don't think the Bible is trying to explain Quantum Theory, or how God created everything.<<<
No...this misses, and misrepresents, the concept I am communicating. “Otherness” (the spiritual ground of object / object existence) is a quality that derives its ontology from God's triune State of Being. Since God is Other (within) Himself, (now)...the reality of “other” is as real as He IS. I know how difficult this is to “get,” because we are so locked into a naturalistic, materialistic, physically oriented, (carnal?) mindset. But this world all around us is first (and really) a spiritual construct in that it is made out of nothing -- simply with words spoken by God. It is no more substantial (per se) than our dreams, except for this one reason – IT IS GOD DOING IT. Humanity is plumbing the depths of the nature of created reality (Quantum Theory), and finding out that (something like) Genesis 1 is happening.
Otherness wrote: >>>The Father is Other than the Son, and the Son is Other than the Father.<<<
commonsense>>>I agree. God is not the Son, and the Son is not God.<<<
Well...saying you agree, and then changing what I said to what I didn't say is...hmm, not very agreeable of you. But that's okay, we're just getting to know each other.
commonsense>>>The son of God is defined as this: " All ( human beings) who are led by the Spirit are sons of God."<<<
Okay, again. That is certainly part of the definition of the term, but it's way down the list of meanings from Who (and What) the Logos is. It is this understanding (of the Logos) that needs to be grasped first, then the “less” important applications of the term will settle into their rightful places.
In the love of the brotherhood....
this is (first) a reply to your two posts to me on different days, and then to you, Commonsense, to your last post to me.
Paidion>>>Otherness, you wrote : I am simply using Special Revelation (Scripture) and General Revelation ( Natural Theology) as two witnesses to testify to the “accuracy” of the Trinitarian Formulation.<<<
Paidion>>>Just because you can speak of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, doesn't prove that God is a Trinity.<<<
This is self-evidently true, and I am certainly not doing this. My perspective has both the content and context that fills out my “speaking” of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Scripture and Nature speak with one voice in proclaiming the wonder that the world is made out of nothing by the W(w)ord of God. How is this so...well, the Trinity is at the heart of the answer.
Paidion>>>I, too, am a father. I have a son, and I have a spirit (or mind), but that doesn't imply that my son, my spirit, and myself as a father, make up a trinity.<<<
The concept “Trinity,” when associated with God, has a unique meaning. We cannot take created things and “analogize” them up high enough to reach the height, nor deep enough to reach the depth, where the Reality simply IS. No matter how many sixes are strung behind six it'll never make six become seven (.666...ad infinitum never gets you to seven). Right reasoning about this unique Reality starts with this Reality and descends to where we are as “created realities.” Because I see “the Trinity” revealed in Scripture, I can (have been enabled to) see this Reality revealed in Creation.
Paidion>>>1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. This verse clearly indicates that the Father is the one God, and that the Lord Jesus Christ (God's Son) is someone other that the one God.<<<
This verse, within even its immediate context (let alone the larger context of what the entirety of Scripture provides) does not delimit what the apostle is saying according to your reading of it.
Rather, the one God, Who truly is the Father of Creation, is known no other way but by His one, and only, Son (the Logos), the Lord Jesus Christ. This transcendent (mysterious) God, Who is always in Heaven, no one but His Son knows (Matthew 11:27). No other “god” is God, not even “the G(g)od” that the Jews (John 8:41) claimed as their father, and certainly none of the gods of the Gentiles. What we have the apostle saying here is that the “Transcendent One,” the true Father, is known only by the “Immanent One,” – He, alone, reveals Who God IS. Yes, He is “other” than the Father, the otherwise unknowable transcendent God, but He is One with Him in Nature, thus to see and know Him is to see and know the Father (the one true God).
otherness>>>We (thoughtful) trinitarians see the “entire preamble” of this Gospel as the foundation and fountain of our salvation because “the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God.” <<<
Paidion>>>You thoughtful trinitarians will need to be a bit more thoughtful.<<<
By this I simply meant those of us who have looked deeper than (mere) dogmas, doctrines, and creeds.
Paidion>>>Here is a word for word translation of the Greek. In English the word "logos" should be translated as "expression" rather than "word". Jesus is the expression of God.<<<
This is pretty much in keeping with what I have been saying : that even the Creation itself is the expressed thoughts (words) of God. The Logos, the SON, is the (eternal) expression of the Father Himself, and therefore the I AM that the SON is, is the same I AM Who is the Father. That this I AM can exist this way belongs to God alone, it is not a quality of (any species of) created being.
Paidion>>>But if you prefer to retain the Greek word "logos", it could be translated as follows: In the beginning was the logos and the logos was with the God and God was the logosThe first occurrence of "God" is preceded by the article (the). This indicates that it refers to the only true God (the Father). The second occurrence of "God" is NOT preceded by the article. That indicates that it is more like an adjective. "The logos was divine (or "God-like)" It should NOT be translated as "the logos WAS God", that is, that the logos was God the Father.<<<
Of course you know that there are many, many, many Greek scholars who read this differently than you do, and I'm sure you've been pointed to them many times. I'm not referring to the word order (as in the last phrase), but to the understanding of what is being communicated. But...even with the word order of your (possibly more precise) translation it doesn't change anything for a trinitarian because there is only one God Who is being spoken of. Being that “God was the Logos,” therefore “in the beginning was (God) the Logos, and the Logos was with the God.”
The real problem here for non-trinitarians is that there is only One I AM Who is GOD. In Isaiah He makes it perfectly clear that I AM (GOD) knows no other, has not formed any other, G(g)od (I AM). As a matter of fact, the root of sin is the rebellion of a “created i am” by arrogating to itself the status of I AM. This is the source of satan, and he successfully infected humanity with his sin. God made the being, but the being made itself satan. (by desiring to be “as God”).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Commonsense,
otherness>>>He does this in His existence as Trinity : in this Creative State He is making REAL the reality of OTHER.<<<
commonsense>>>Otherness, So how did God create animals? Does He go by the same formula? If so, then from what you're saying, God must first be that "other" cat to make real the reality of the other. I don't think the Bible is trying to explain Quantum Theory, or how God created everything.<<<
No...this misses, and misrepresents, the concept I am communicating. “Otherness” (the spiritual ground of object / object existence) is a quality that derives its ontology from God's triune State of Being. Since God is Other (within) Himself, (now)...the reality of “other” is as real as He IS. I know how difficult this is to “get,” because we are so locked into a naturalistic, materialistic, physically oriented, (carnal?) mindset. But this world all around us is first (and really) a spiritual construct in that it is made out of nothing -- simply with words spoken by God. It is no more substantial (per se) than our dreams, except for this one reason – IT IS GOD DOING IT. Humanity is plumbing the depths of the nature of created reality (Quantum Theory), and finding out that (something like) Genesis 1 is happening.
Otherness wrote: >>>The Father is Other than the Son, and the Son is Other than the Father.<<<
commonsense>>>I agree. God is not the Son, and the Son is not God.<<<
Well...saying you agree, and then changing what I said to what I didn't say is...hmm, not very agreeable of you. But that's okay, we're just getting to know each other.
commonsense>>>The son of God is defined as this: " All ( human beings) who are led by the Spirit are sons of God."<<<
Okay, again. That is certainly part of the definition of the term, but it's way down the list of meanings from Who (and What) the Logos is. It is this understanding (of the Logos) that needs to be grasped first, then the “less” important applications of the term will settle into their rightful places.
In the love of the brotherhood....