The Attributes Of the Trinity

christ_undivided said:
Good to see you've given it some thought.
Do you believe that John 4:24 is speaking specifically of the Son? Has Jesus Christ always been the express image of God?
Click to expand...
Jesus was speaking about the Father.
No, to your second question.

John 4: 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But the hour is coming and is now here when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Just to be clear I came into this thread to see what Chalcedon was going on about. The same reason I went into the Romans 1 thread. The thread on the Queen, to see what the Brits had to say. I did not enter any of these threads to see what you had to say. Sorry to be blunt but I didn't know what type of poster you are.
 
Caroljeen said:
Jesus was speaking about the Father.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Then why apply it to the Son?

Caroljeen said:
No, to your second question.
Click to expand...

This is where you are wrong and you've also created a logical problem with the Incarnation. If Jesus became the express image of God's "person" in the Incarnation, then He could have never externally been the express image of God. Which destroys any concept of the Eternal Son. Whether you believe He had a material body or not.

Chalcedon knows this. Either he has changed his position or he's being "coe" with the teaching.

Caroljeen said:
Just to be clear I came into this thread to see what Chalcedon was going on about..
Click to expand...

Okay. I've known him for years. We have discussed the Trinity many many times.
 
christ_undivided said:
That is our beginnings not the beginning of God. The arrogance of man to believe he is the center of the Universe amazes me.
Why don't you explain how you believe the Transfiguration was an immaterial manifestation of Divinity.
Click to expand...
In Gen 1:1 there was nothing but God.

hope this helps !!!
 
Chalcedon said:
In Gen 1:1 there was nothing but God.

hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...
Okay. That is what we are talking about. You are making too many assumptions. You assume God's existence is immaterial. Why are you avoiding the Transfiguration and Theophany appears in the OT? I'm tired of your deflecting.
 
christ_undivided said:
Okay. That is what we are talking about. You are making too many assumptions. You assume God's existence is immaterial. Why are you avoiding the Transfiguration and Theophany appears in the OT? I'm tired of your deflecting.
Click to expand...
You are deflecting . We are taking about Gods nature and attributes before creation . Please try and stay on topic .

hope this helps !!!
 
Chalcedon said:
You are deflecting . We are taking about Gods nature and attributes before creation . Please try and stay on topic .

hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...
So when Jesus was Transfigured His appearance was the material body from the Incarnation? I thought you had enough understanding to put two and two together but apparently you don't.

The Transfiguration expressed the Eternal material construct of THE Eternal Son.

The various manifestations of God in the OT in material form predate the Incarnation.

You have God Himself visible in the Son. No man has seen the Father.

You know these facts. You're deflecting.

The language of Genesis 1:1 does not demand the immaterial view of the Eternal Son. Such is an empty opinion.
 
christ_undivided said:
So when Jesus was Transfigured His appearance was the material body from the Incarnation? I thought you had enough understanding to put two and two together but apparently you don't.

The Transfiguration expressed the Eternal material construct of THE Eternal Son.

The various manifestations of God in the OT in material form predate the Incarnation.

You have God Himself visible in the Son. No man has seen the Father.

You know these facts. You're deflecting.

The language of Genesis 1:1 does not demand the immaterial view of the Eternal Son. Such is an empty opinion.
Click to expand...
Gen 1:1 and prior not after . Calvinists cannot discuss this because their god collapses. So they deflect , dodge, conflate, equivocate , use conjecture etc ….

hope this helps !!!
 
Chalcedon said:
Gen 1:1 and prior not after . Calvinists cannot discuss this because their god collapses. So they deflect , dodge, conflate, equivocate , use conjecture etc ….

hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...
He said, not discussing "this," as he blamed Calvinists while deflecting, dodging, conflating, equivocating and conjecturing. ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top