Did the principle of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

Yahchristian

Well-known member
God the Father is the principle of Divinity

TRINITARIANS...

1) What is YOUR definition of the word “principle” in YOUR statement “God the Father is the principle of Divinity”?

And then tell us (using YOUR definition of “principle”)...

2) Did the principle of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

I say Yes, and I would use definition 2 for “principle” as “primary source”.

So I believe the primary source of Divinity was manifest in the flesh as Jesus.
 
Last edited:

aeg4971

Active member
TRINITARIANS...

1) What is YOUR definition of the word “principle” in YOUR statement “God the Father is the principle of Divinity”?

And then tell us (using YOUR definition of “principle”)...

2) Did the principle of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

I say Yes, and I would use definition 2 for “principle” as “primary source”.

So I believe the primary source of Divinity was manifest in the flesh as Jesus.

You do yourself a disserve with these fallacious lines of questioning on account of every person by Himself is a principle . Of course the First principle/ God the Father is communicated to the only begotten Son and Word of God ,having been temporally manifested in the flesh in the one person of our Lord Jesus Christ.,.

Note the Latin doctors did not like this word source as the Greek fathers did, because it gives to the idea of corporal and created conditions ,whereas this word principle can be taken in a wider sense wherefore then omitting the human connotations that oozes from your questions of straw. You see Presentist the First person/principle is manifested by emitting the Second person hypostasis.

3. Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his hypostasis, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high
:

.........Alan
 
Last edited:

Yahchristian

Well-known member
this word principle can be taken in a wider sense wherefore then omitting the human connotations that oozes from your questions of straw.

I did not ask what is NOT your definition. I asked...

1) What IS your definition of the word “principle” in YOUR statement “God the Father is the principle of Divinity”?

Please fill in the blank...

“Principle” is defined as “____________________”.
 
Last edited:

Yahchristian

Well-known member
Of course the First principle/ God the Father is communicated to the only begotten Son and Word of God ,having been temporally manifested in the flesh in the one person of our Lord Jesus Christ.,.

My question was...

2) Did the principle of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

It is a Yes or No question and I think you are saying Yes.

Could you please confirm that by saying Yes or No.
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
2) Did the principle of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?
NO. A Divine Person manifested in the flesh as Jesus Christ.

Just to clarify your Trinitarian view, you believe...

The word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV refers to “a divine Person” but NOT to “the principle of Divinity”.

Correct?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
 
Last edited:

johnny guitar

Well-known member
Just to clarify your Trinitarian view, you believe...

The word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV refers to “a divine Person” but NOT to “the principle of Divinity”.

Correct?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Correct. A Person was manifested, NOT a principle.
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
Correct. A Person was manifested, NOT a principle.

I did not say "a principle". I said "the principle of Divinity", which means "the primary source of Divinity".

So just to clarify your Trinitarian view, you believe...

The word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV refers to “a divine Person” but NOT to “the primary source of Divinity”.

Correct?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
 

johnny guitar

Well-known member
I did not say "a principle". I said "the principle of Divinity", which means "the primary source of Divinity".

So just to clarify your Trinitarian view, you believe...

The word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV refers to “a divine Person” but NOT to “the primary source of Divinity”.

Correct?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
A Person was manifested NOT a primary source.
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
A Person was manifested NOT a primary source.

That is one difference between my view and your Trinitarian view...

I believe the word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 DOES refer to “the primary source of Divinity”.

Whereas Trinitarians believe the word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 does NOT refer to “the primary source of Divinity”.

Here are the definitions...
primary: of chief importance; principal
source: a place, person, or thing from which something comes or can be obtained
divinity: the state or quality of being divine

How about the rest of you...

Does the word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 refer to “the primary source of Divinity”?
 

johnny guitar

Well-known member
That is one difference between my view and your Trinitarian view...

I believe the word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 DOES refer to “the primary source of Divinity”.

Whereas Trinitarians believe the word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 does NOT refer to “the primary source of Divinity”.

Here are the definitions...
primary: of chief importance; principal
source: a place, person, or thing from which something comes or can be obtained
divinity: the state or quality of being divine

How about the rest of you...

Does the word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16 refer to “the primary source of Divinity”?
God in this passage refers to The Son, A Person.
 

aeg4971

Active member
I did not ask what is NOT your definition. I asked...

1) What IS your definition of the word “principle” in YOUR statement “God the Father is the principle of Divinity”?

Please fill in the blank...

“Principle” is defined as “____________________”.

Since I can't imprint my intellection to ease your straw, the basic dictionary should suffice.

Principle.
3.
a fundamental source or basis of something.




Hence the Father is in the Son or the First person extends hypostasis to another. Therefore First person/principle is manifested by reason of the Second person/Son.

Doesn't matter what my definition is of this word principle ,when I have on numerous occasions ;given you the 4th century definition of this word person as applied to God contrasted in the plural, yet you insist on 20th century English only humanistic interpretations no matter. what we say. Otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to post your own disclaimer of belief. As if does not of itself and by itself signify a plurality of the supposita.

......Alan
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
1) What is YOUR definition of the word “principle” in YOUR statement “God the Father is the principle of Divinity”?
Principle.
3.
a fundamental source or basis of something.

Thank you for answering the first question. Now can you answer the second Yes/No question...

2) Did the fundamental source or basis of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

1 Timothy 3:16... And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

I say Yes.
 

aeg4971

Active member
My question was...

2) Did the principle of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

It is a Yes or No question and I think you are saying Yes.

Could you please confirm that by saying Yes or No.

I answer that to assert principle by itself is quite abstract as this word Deity , less we add something concrete as when we say "Deity and God" , or "Paternity and Father". Hence in the concrete the Father is manifested by sending the Logos/Son made in the likeness of sinful flesh. We call Him our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. It then follows the person of the Father is manifested in the person of the Son, however be your misuse of words and terms.

The way you supposed this question you might as well just asked," Did the Father become the flesh son as Jesus". Therefore my answer is NO. Nevertheless formally to the way you did word the question. I answer Yes to divine act and essence which is determined by way of sending the person of the Son. Trying to get around a distinction in the supposita of which it is spoken only leads you right back around to one person of the Father and another of the Son.

....... Alan
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
The way you supposed this question you might as well just asked," Did the Father become the flesh son as Jesus".

But that is NOT my question.

I am specifically asking...


Did the fundamental source or basis of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

Are you able to answer the question or not.
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
Amen his new age ideas are being manifest with his divine principle unbiblical concept.

I do not normally use the term “divine principle”. It is a TRINITARIAN term. I just use it to have TRINITARIANS clarify what they mean by THEIR term.

So are you referring to these statements by your fellow TRINITARIAN?

“God the Father is the principle of Divinity.”

“Of course the First principle/ God the Father is communicated to the only begotten Son and Word of God.”

“The First person/principle is manifested by emitting the Second person hypostasis.“
 

civic

Well-known member
I do not normally use the term “divine principle”. It is a TRINITARIAN term. I just use it to have TRINITARIANS clarify what they mean by THEIR term.

So are you referring to these statements by your fellow TRINITARIAN?

“God the Father is the principle of Divinity.”

“Of course the First principle/ God the Father is communicated to the only begotten Son and Word of God.”

“The First person/principle is manifested by emitting the Second person hypostasis.“
I'll stick with the bible and its inspired words.

next...................................
 

aeg4971

Active member
I do not normally use the term “divine principle”. It is a TRINITARIAN term. I just use it to have TRINITARIANS clarify what they mean by THEIR term.

So are you referring to these statements by your fellow TRINITARIAN?

“God the Father is the principle of Divinity.”

“Of course the First principle/ God the Father is communicated to the only begotten Son and Word of God.”

“The First person/principle is manifested by emitting the Second person hypostasis.“
On the contrary divine principle is not a term of itself . It clearly is something you coined . When it is said God the Father is the principle of Divinity signifies First efficient cause who He Himself is without cause . Many of you need this word primary and this word" Source", By all means use the word source before you go makin up divine principle and what not.

St Thomas elucidates for an 8th graders understanding when He speaks of God supreme simplicity," God is GREAT without quality and GOOD without quantity".

Presentist the Biblical Scriptural and theological fact of God self revelation is that by Interior Word contained therein the distinction between the Father and Son is relative and likewise substantial. That is to say purely," the subsisting relation between God begotten/ The Son in oppositio to God begetting/ The Father ". It follows principle from principle for the Son is God in God. Or as it is written in the Creed," Light from Light God from God etc".

It follows in scholastic theological summation and so as not to be Repugnant to the SHEMA , In Divinity itself God the Father is principle without principle and the Son is principle from principle. If you stop overthinking how much straw you can suppose , you would realize this word principle is signified to REMOVE the corporal and created conditions in this word or term primary source.

This is on account of in verities of the divine; whatsoever is the source of God the Father self subsistence likewise so also is it that same source of the one and only begotten and consubstantial Son/Word Himself proceeding self subsistence .


......... Alan
 
Last edited:

aeg4971

Active member
But that is NOT my question.

I am specifically asking...


Did the fundamental source or basis of Divinity manifest in the flesh as Jesus?

Are you able to answer the question or not.
For real????? You are really going to pretend like after I stated above, I did not immediate answer the question by Yes or No. In fact Presentist it is one of the very few times I actually gave you and yes or no answer . And I did so according to its proper mode of signification. Here it is again.

The way you supposed this question you might as well just asked," Did the Father become the flesh son as Jesus". Therefore my answer is NO. Nevertheless formally to the way you did word the question. I answer Yes to divine act and essence which is determined by way of sending the person of the Son. Trying to get around a distinction in the supposita of which it is spoken only leads you right back around to one person of the Father and another of the Son.

....... Alan
 
Top