4 edits
I'm not trying to show the trinity to be error.
That is a good and handy excuse in the face of your utter failure to do so.
Ie. "Oh, I am not TRYING to show your trinity teaching to be in error."
Let me know when you stop then your empty charges of error and begin to demonstrate the error the way an honest critic would.
1 edit
I'm demonstrating quite effectively that you are too scared to give unequivocal answers about your beliefs.
Right. Your failure to control me is a sign of my being .... SCARED.
Right.
I answer several times as I see fit, honestly and fairly.
But that's a sign of me being scarred.
Who are you, Lon Chaney ?
MUoooo ha ha !! .... A theological Vincent Price perhaps ?
4 edits
Not to waste the whole day, I recommend a good and fair debate on the Trinity.
On one side a Jewish Messianic Christain scholar and a Christian scholar.
On the other side a Jewish (Christian) scholar and a Unitarian scholar.
Now it can't hurt you to watch. Both sides do a good job to represent their positions.
So instead of watching Dive and me debate for the umpteenth time. how about considering this one ?
It is worth the time to watch IMO.
James White, Ron Brown vs Sir Anthony Buzzard, Joseph Good
Trinitarians vs. Unitarians debate
1/2
2/2
No, but it might be an important doctrine that will help you understand the multi-faced nature of God.
Suppose my definition of "reject the doctrine of the trinity" includes not believing that Jesus is Lord ?
Suppose like, say, ThinkOfOne, I don't believe a trinity doctrine because I don't believe Jesus is God incarnate ?
Does your answer hold for that case too ?
@sonship saidIf divegeester doesn't come with an anti-Trinity doctrine that you believe is better than what you believe and an anti- torturer God ideology that you believe is more morally coherent than the doctrine that you believe, could it have a negative impact on his "salvation" ~ according to your own understanding?
Let me know when you stop then your empty charges of error and begin to demonstrate the error the way an honest critic would.
4 edits
The response by Ghost of a Duke is simple, honest and unequivocal. Why can't you respond like that?
He gave an answer. I have also, many times.
Now I took his answer and presented him with a particular case. He has not YET responded as far as I can see.
The answer he gave can be examined more closely. Just as any Yes or No period answer I presented would probably been have been immediately more closely scrutinized by you and for sure by FMF. (FMF does so just for sport).
Ie.
"Well if a simple NO is your answer, then what about ....?"
Or
"Well if a simple YES is your answer, then what about ...?"
Now maybe for the last few years you may not have taken a Binary answer and futher scrutinized it. But others like FMF surely would.
Not only that, but I myself would preemptively QUALIFIED response so that it could not be easily either misunderstood or twisted.
If it makes you feel good you continue to pat yourself on the back. And I will be interested to see how Ghost WOULD answer the closer examination of his answer.
If rejecting the trinity doctrine meant rejecting the incarnation of God as a man in Jesus Christ, what would he say then ?
You see your concept of "not accepting" or "not believing" a trinity doctrine is vague, general, ambiguous. And I think it is PURPOSELY vague. One statement of the definition of the trinity I do not know of. Many presentations of it have been given. More important to the believer, I would say, is not creedal formulas formerly set forth but the statements of the Bible itself.
No church creed supersedes the words of Scripture themselves.
I tend to reduce the concept down to believing that the Father is God and the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. And that the pronouns of "We" and "Us" and "Their" are sometimes applied to God of Whom we are definitely told He is only one.
Did you watch the debate ?
1 edit
If divegeester doesn't come with an anti-Trinity doctrine that you believe is better than what you believe and an anti- torturer God ideology that you believe is more morally coherent than the doctrine that you believe, could it have a negative impact on his "salvation" ~ according to your own understanding?
If I engage you and examine with you some of your pre-suppositions I am sure you will slink away with an apathetic attitude -
Ie.
"I really don't care."
"It doesn't concern me anyway."
"I do not have a dog in this fight."
This reminds me of Asop's Fable about the fox who couldn't reach the grapes to taste high in the tree and finally says "Well, they probably were sour anyway."
Expend the energy and time to examine your comments?
Na, not just to hear you say "Well, it means nothing to me one way or the other ANYWAY, Why I'm an Atheist."
I've been through your Argument By Apathy enough times already.