Why are you erecting straw men? You are going to have a field full.
1 Like
Isaiah 55:8-9 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
nor are your ways my ways, says the Lord.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.
1 Like
You miss the point, yet again. Naming the attributes does not put limitations on them, does it. Calling it a jet engine a jet engine does not limit it.
Thank you for making my point. He has thoughts, so do we.
I am sure you think you elevate yourself with the imagining that you can define the Almighty God in your terms.
Your having thoughts and His having thoughts does not give you the ability to define God.
You would like to.
But it is a false hope and a futile endeavor.
He is far greater than we are.
Another straw man. Good grief. Naming attributes does not limit them.
God is my Father and acts interventionally in my life. Am I to deny that he is my Father because you think that ‘defines’ him and limits him somehow? Hoo boy.
Fathers are persons, last time I checked.
1 Like
If you want to deny that your position defines God in ways far past what is revealed in scripture, then you are free to revel in your denial.
As for me, I recognize that God is more than the definitions that I can state or embrace.
Yes, so far past what is revealed in scripture.
And you exalt yourself in your humble boast.
Where in the Bible do you find “consubstantial” and “hypostases?”
Where in the Bible are the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit called “persons?” Why do you want to make them people, not God?
You’re getting too hung up on the terminology. As a number of historians explain, the terminology was developed later to explain concepts already present in the NT.
4 Likes
Kind of like naming principles in algebra. 
The distributive property preexisted its name.
1 Like
That doesn’t make them people (except that Jesus is a human), but they are persons. Jesus addressed God as “Father” and instructed us to do the same.
3 Likes
Christy normally takes me to task for believing the Bible too literally. IN this case I agree with her that the Trinity is real, and one can see at least part of it in 2 Cor…3: 17-18
Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.
2nd Cor 3:17-18
The trinity is real, and this says the Lord is the Spirit. ‘is’ is a word indicating identity… You can say, Glenn is a geophysicist, and that is a form of equivalency defining who I am. But you can’t say of me: Glenn is Christy. That would make no sense. But this verse does equate two beings, the Lord and the Spirit as identical. In this particular context, I do believe that ‘the Lord’ refers to Jesus, not God the father. So at least we have an actual Biblical statement of the equivalency of the HS and Jesus.
Now Christy, you can tell me how I am too literal. And the other side can now deny the clear meaning of the passage.
That they are also individual beings can be seen in 2nd Cor 13:14:
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. 2 Co 13:14).
There it lists traits of Jesus, God and the HS. Grace, love and fellowship. To me, this all adds up to a biblical case for the Trinity. I won’t respond. This isn’t my area of interest.
1 Like
You think the concepts of hypostases and consubstantial are presented in the New Testament?
They are persons but not people?
People have human bodies, the Triune God does not, except for Jesus who humbled himself as a man.
Answering for him, yes, he does. Because the reality of the Trinity exists in scripture, those concepts/attributes are necessarily implied. (Correct me if I’m wrong, @ManiacalVesalius. 
)
I don’t even know what those words mean dude. Let me put it in a simple way. I think the New Testament authors have a triadic understanding of God. That is, the identity of God is made up of the identity of the Father, Son, and Spirit.
1 Like
Bart Ehrman (How Jesus Became God) seems to imply that early Christians promoted the divinity of Christ in “competition” with surrounding cultic claims. Christians postured their Messiah as “more divine” than:
- Hercules & Alexander the great, “demi-gods” fathered by Zeus
- the Caesars, “sons of god” as adopted sons of the previous, deified, Caesar
- Enoch, Elijah, Romulus, “men exalted to heaven”
This competition of claims conceivably colors our conception of Christ
Where in the Bible is the term “omniscient” ?
Where in the Bible is the term “Bible” ?
The Bible does not include every single word in human languages, and some of the “extra” human words are still apt descriptions of its contents ?
1 Like
think that is still too strong of a statement
“God” most naturally refers to The Person of The God The Father
Only The Father is “The” God (in Person), even if His essential nature of being somehow “extends” into the Word & Spirit
think we need two distinct words, one for the Person of The God The Father Himself (“The God”, “God”), and another for His more extensive essential nature of being (“God”, “Godhead”) ?
There is one God, the Father (1 Cor 8:6), even if His Godhead “extends” into His Word & Spirit (Col 1:19, 2:9-10)