John 8:58

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Then, robbie, let's agree to disagree for the moment and revisit any and all remaining differences
following my presentation of the John 8:58 commentary. Okay?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
wow talk about regurgitating old waffle, you are parroting the very same criticism that Pliny reiterated to Trajan that the Christians were targeting the weak and vulnerable. Its was a piece of nonsense then and its a piece of codswallop now.

Originally posted by sonship
Distinct but not separate is usually how I have learned to put it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
why are you pagans making my thread a place for your idolatry? Either stick to the text at hand or ill be forced to whip you out of here like the Christ whipped the corrupt money changers from the temple of his father.

Originally posted by divegeester
Like a man with 3 heads?

Originally posted by divegeester
Like a man with 3 heads?

Originally posted by sonship
A wall of text is one forum extreme.
A sparsely worded chit chat like idiocy is the other.

Originally posted by divegeester
Not really, I'm trying to understand how your three gods fit into one by being distinct and yet not separate. A man with three heads sprung to mind, it is no more grotesque than how you propagate the idea of the godhead.

The coworking of the three of the divine Trinity based on Their coinherence (or mutual indwelling) is a particularly strong emphasis in the teaching of the distinguished Scottish reformed theologian Thomas F. Torrance, from whose books the following selections are excerpted:

It was, of course, not the Godhead or the Being of God as such who became incarnate, but the Son of God, not the Father or the Spirit, who came among us, certainly from the Being of the Father and as completely homoousios with him, yet because in him the fullness of the Godhead dwells, the whole undivided Trinity must be recognised as participating in the incarnate Life and Work of Christ. Thomas F. Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God: One Being Three Persons (London: T&T Clark, 1996), p. 108

Since God’s Being and Activity completely interpenetrate each other, we must think of his Being and his Activity not separately but as one Being-in-Activity and one Activity-in-Being. In other words, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit always act together in every divine operation whether in creation or redemption, yet in such a way that the distinctive activities of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, are always maintained, in accordance with the propriety and otherness of their Persons as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This may be called the ‘perichoretic coactivity of the Holy Trinity’.

…The primary distinction was made there, of course, for it was the Son or Word of God who became incarnate, was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and rose again from the grave, and not the Father or the Holy Spirit, although the whole life and activity of Jesus from his birth to his death and resurrection did not take place apart from the presence and coactivity of the Father and the Spirit. Ibid., pp. 197-198

Originally posted by sonship
Like the theological concept of coinherience.

Originally posted by sonship
...certainly from the Being of the Father and as completely homoousios with him...

Originally posted by sonship
This may be called the ‘perichoretic coactivity of the Holy Trinity’.

Sorry sonship, I know you mean well but gobbledygook like that is classic "babylon" imo.

Originally posted by divegeester
Not really, I'm trying to understand how your three gods fit into one by being distinct and yet not separate. A man with three heads sprung to mind, it is no more grotesque than how you propagate the idea of the godhead.

Originally posted by sonship
Please respond in kind and not with vague obscurities.

Originally posted by sonship
With whom do you meet? Are you one of the Oneness Pentecostals?