27% of Evangelical Christians rarely or never attend Church services

[quasi101]

No. If God Is the son and the father and the spirit (trinitarian) how can the son also be seated at the father's right hand (in the Trinity)?

Edit - that seams to separate them no?

only if you're a heretic

 

[NoBacon's Aborted Child]

my life and fruits

 

[NoBacon]

No. If God Is the son and the father and the spirit (trinitarian) how can the son also be seated at the father's right hand (in the Trinity)?

Edit - that seams to separate them no?

Are you a modalist or something?

 

[Turry Precision ™®©]

Lutherans are also heretics but this is a good video

 

[chocolatehellhole]

Are you a modalist or something?

Coulda been a fawkin Modalist

 

[Farmer Brown]

Are you a modalist or something?

I am simply asking for the biblical support that the father and the son are both wholly God.

 

[Turry Precision ™®©]

I am simply asking for the biblical support that the father and the son are both wholly God.

Jesus forgave sins. That power is reserved only for the Most High.

 

[NoBacon]

I am simply asking for the biblical support that the father and the son are both wholly God.

I mean, Jesus says so, and doesn’t correct Thomas when he declares him his Lord and God after the resurrection.

I’m not sure what else you’d want.

 

[quasi101]

I mean, Jesus says so, and doesn’t correct Thomas when he declares him his Lord and God after the resurrection.

I’m not sure what else you’d want.

the counting method used to individuate the three entities that

• isn't one of the 4 heretical views
• isn't the is of predication
• isn't the is of identity

....and go

 

[bumbum8]

No one regularly posting on this board is truly religious.

That said, the Bible calls you to fellowship. This place don't count.

Also, I go to church because I live in the South, it's a nice time for some reading, and fat church ladies make excellent food.

 

[quasi101]

I am simply asking for the biblical support that the father and the son are both wholly God.

you're not going to find what you're looking for as far as I can tell from what i've read... which is why i'm a non-cognitivist when it comes to the LPT (logical problem of the trinity).

 

[Farmer Brown]

the counting method used to individuate the three entities that

• isn't one of the 4 heretical views
• isn't the is of predication
• isn't the is of identity

....and go

"It depends on what your definition of is, is " I don't know of other "is's?" I don't understand your philosophical logic, man!

 

[Farmer Brown]

you're not going to find what you're looking for as far as I can tell from what i've read... which is why i'm a non-cognitivist when it comes to the LPT (logical problem of the trinity).

My conclusion was it was somehow outside the bounds of logic. It required a leap of faith.

But I see you say ethics itself is outside language or logic?

 

[guest]

if you're a unitarian

unitarians are like the most "halal" Christcucks

 

[NoBacon]

you're not going to find what you're looking for as far as I can tell from what i've read... which is why i'm a non-cognitivist when it comes to the LPT (logical problem of the trinity).

I’ve never struggled with it, it’s always made sense to me. The Son of man is the Father incarnate. It’s pretty explicit about this, no?

 

[Farmer Brown]

Jesus forgave sins. That power is reserved only for the Most High.

Did he? He said "you are forgiven." Not "I forgive you ". He also said no one goes to the father except through me. And he said, "father, forgive them."

Edit- I e., he forgave in the name of the Father, no? I don't know. I'll drop it

 

[Farmer Brown]

I’ve never struggled with it, it’s always made sense to me. The Son of man is the Father incarnate. It’s pretty explicit about this, no?

No

 

[quasi101]

"It depends on what your definition of is, is " I don't know of other "is's?" I don't understand your philosophical logic, man!

i think its from wittgenstein whos basically impossible to read. I've only read other people's analysis of him.

Tractatus

www2.lawrence.edu

3.323 In everyday language it very frequently happens that the same word has different modes of signification--and so belongs to different symbols--or that two words that have different modes of signification are employed in propositions in what is superficially the same way. Thus the word 'is' figures as the copula, as a sign for identity, and as an expression for existence; 'exist' figures as an intransitive verb like 'go', and 'identical' as an adjective; we speak of something, but also of something's happening. (In the proposition, 'Green is green'--where the first word is the proper name of a person and the last an adjective--these words do not merely have different meanings: they are different symbols.)

-----

My conclusion was it was somehow outside the bounds of logic. It required a leap of faith.

Yes, i've seen that apologetic. When you get to the technical answer from an apologist basically there's a "spiritual" counting method. Or, as you said some people believe that the 3 laws of classic logic are established through gods nature, but god isn't bound by them and has also, a type of "spiritual logic" .

But I see you say ethics itself is outside language or logic?

I was speaking in the general non cognitivist sense, not the strict definition regarding morality. When I say i'm a non cognitivst about the trinity, i mean that I don't believe the words have any meaning or are incoherent. Which is the same thing as the apologist might say just in different words. When they say that god uses a spiritual counting method, to me that's incoherent, but to them its faith.

Or i'm just a retard.

Regarding ethics or mortality. I can't make sense of what a stance independent morals would even mean. I probably lean more towards emotivism only because its coherent to me. But i don't have a strong stance about it.

or i'm just a retard.

 

[quasi101]

I’ve never struggled with it, it’s always made sense to me. The Son of man is the Father incarnate. It’s pretty explicit about this, no?

when you get to the actual logic it breaks down. This isn't a refutation or defeater, but I can't make sense of it. It gets technical but think about it this way. By all usages of the words we have and the logic we use there would be three gods by any logical counting method.

If jesus is the son of man, and the father is not the son of man that's two gods not one.

 

[chocolatehellhole]

i think its from wittgenstein whos basically impossible to read. I've only read other people's analysis of him.

Tractatus

www2.lawrence.edu

-----



Yes, i've seen that apologetic. When you get to the technical answer from an apologist basically there's a "spiritual" counting method. Or, as you said some people believe that the 3 laws of classic logic are established through gods nature, but god isn't bound by them and has also, a type of "spiritual logic" .



I was speaking in the general non cognitivist sense, not the strict definition regarding morality. When I say i'm a non cognitivst about the trinity, i mean that I don't believe the words have any meaning or are incoherent. Which is the same thing as the apologist might say just in different words. When they say that god uses a spiritual counting method, to me that's incoherent, but to them its faith.

Or i'm just a retard.

Regarding ethics or mortality. I can't make sense of what a stance independent morals would even mean. I probably lean more towards emotivism only because its coherent to me. But i don't have a strong stance about it.

or i'm just a retard.