Reason to believe (The learning version)

[Byblos]

If however you Byblos still cannot see what I see then please tell me the very first sentence from what I have just explained, and which you do not understand. I will then endeavour to keep explaining myself more clearly until you do. God willing, we can then move on to any other sentence here that you find incomprehensible until we see eye to eye.

There are some points that need to be clarified but they are buried deep in a lot of gibberish (yet again). Let me see if I can flush them out.

God alone has an infinite mind and therefore knows all things. He knows His first perception of Himself because He knows the beginning of all things. The infinite God is the beginning of all things. We on the other hand, do not have infinite minds and we must therefore be content to accept that for us, there is no conceivable beginning to the infinite God of reason, and having no conceivable beginning must mean this God is eternal. God will always be without a conceivable beginning to our finite minds because we will never have an infinite capacity to reason in infinite terms. We shall never comprehend the infinite past as the infinite mind of God does. Even so, we can still comprehend this, God is the beginning, He has an infinite mind and He knows all things including the beginning of all things.

In principle I don’t have anything to say about the above with the exception of this business of God knowing his first perception of Himself. Aside from the fact that it borders on Gnosticism (albeit deitific in nature), it makes absolutely no sense when one is referring to an eternal being. For such a being there is no notion of ‘first’, and there is no notion of ‘perception’. The first implies temporality, and the second implies acquired knowledge (a state of not knowing, followed by a state of knowing). You need to explain in greater detail what all that means oldman (other than supreme pontifications in an oh-so-green room that is, ).

Now then, if you can accept this then you should also be able to accept this:
“In the beginning was the Word”
The Son first existed only in the thoughts of God the Father.

How so? What does God’s Word do? Does the Word accomplish anything? What is the Word’s success rate in accomplishing His tasks?

“and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”
This Word of the Father became a facsimile of the Father, not a creation as such but another part of the Father, a new free thinking mind, but still with no conceivable beginning to our finite minds. This new mind became another person like the Father: The Father's Son.

Note the underlined. That’s where your theology completely falls apart. Facsimile is a copy of the original, now we have two gods, albeit one is an original, the other a mere copy. ‘became another person’ implies a beginning, which puts your round theology squarely in the corner of incoherence since an eternal being (albeit a facsimile) began to exist. Nonsensical.

“He was with God in the beginning. All things were made through Him,”
through the Father and the Son's pure and perfect love for each other they began creating everything whilst showing and giving that love to all who they created.

Whether you know it or not, it is becoming more and more clear that you’re a polytheist (again, note my emphasis above).

“without him nothing was made that has been made.” John 1:1-3.
It all adds up very nicely to me:

It may add up to you but it doesn't hold muster to the scrutiny of simple logic.

The Father and the Son's love is what governs creation, “God is love” as Scripture clearly proclaims and this God governs creation. This God would not exist without the Son, and the Son would not exist without the Father. Such is the Triune God of reason who has no conceivable beginning to our finite minds. It is this eternal God who created everything.

An eternal being with no beginning and no end would not exist if he lacked something (Son or Father); that makes sense only to you oldman. To say nothing of the absurd notion of God ‘existing, or not’ when, by definition, God IS existence. It is the equivalent of saying: 'existence may not exist if ...' .

In the meantime let us remember this, if “the Son” did not come from “the Father” before creation began, then He would not have led us to believe He was the Son of His Father. The first and second person of the Godhead would not have been revealed to us as being “Father” and “Son” if they were not in reality “Father” and “Son”. So therefore, let us not forget this either, no amount of convoluted philosophy from fallen man can alter God's written word, and God has not revealed Himself as “Father” and “Son” for nothing!

And once again, I suggest to you to look up the hypostatic union, having Jesus as fully God, and making him fully man.
Oldman, please, I implore you to put this nonsense where it belongs, in the closest waste basket. Ideas such as yours are nothing new and have been refuted time and time again. Believe in the true, one-and-only, Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. He’s the only one that saves.

[oldman]

If however you Byblos still cannot see what I see then please tell me the very first sentence from what I have just explained, and which you do not understand. I will then endeavour to keep explaining myself more clearly until you do. God willing, we can then move on to any other sentence here that you find incomprehensible until we see eye to eye.

There are some points that need to be clarified but they are buried deep in a lot of gibberish (yet again). Let me see if I can flush them out.

God alone has an infinite mind and therefore knows all things. He knows His first perception of Himself because He knows the beginning of all things. The infinite God is the beginning of all things. We on the other hand, do not have infinite minds and we must therefore be content to accept that for us, there is no conceivable beginning to the infinite God of reason, and having no conceivable beginning must mean this God is eternal. God will always be without a conceivable beginning to our finite minds because we will never have an infinite capacity to reason in infinite terms. We shall never comprehend the infinite past as the infinite mind of God does. Even so, we can still comprehend this, God is the beginning, He has an infinite mind and He knows all things including the beginning of all things.

In principle I don’t have anything to say about the above with the exception of this business of God knowing his first perception of Himself. Aside from the fact that it borders on Gnosticism (albeit deitific in nature), it makes absolutely no sense when one is referring to an eternal being.

You are saying then that the infinite God of reason does not have a first perception of Himself because there is no first perception of Himself.

Fair enough, I can't really argue with that.


What I would like to ask you though before I do leave is this, do you also consider this to be a work of evil?..

The highest form of love is never self-centered but is a love that gives and sacrifices for the sake of others and remains faithful to love unto death. Only this love can be trusted to speak the truth, for only this love will have no reason to deceive and offend any of us. Such is the essence and character of the Holy Spirit, revealed to us in full through the finished work of the Father's Son.

Through the Father and His Son comes their endless joy in their pure and perfect caring, sharing and giving to each other all that they are and all that they care to create. This Spirit of free and pure eternal love naturally embraces all knowledge and wisdom and would mean nothing without being the heart or the innermost ruling character of a person. This Spirit, this God, will live and rule only in those of us who will value Him above all others.

[Byblos]

If however you Byblos still cannot see what I see then please tell me the very first sentence from what I have just explained, and which you do not understand. I will then endeavour to keep explaining myself more clearly until you do. God willing, we can then move on to any other sentence here that you find incomprehensible until we see eye to eye.

There are some points that need to be clarified but they are buried deep in a lot of gibberish (yet again). Let me see if I can flush them out.

God alone has an infinite mind and therefore knows all things. He knows His first perception of Himself because He knows the beginning of all things. The infinite God is the beginning of all things. We on the other hand, do not have infinite minds and we must therefore be content to accept that for us, there is no conceivable beginning to the infinite God of reason, and having no conceivable beginning must mean this God is eternal. God will always be without a conceivable beginning to our finite minds because we will never have an infinite capacity to reason in infinite terms. We shall never comprehend the infinite past as the infinite mind of God does. Even so, we can still comprehend this, God is the beginning, He has an infinite mind and He knows all things including the beginning of all things.

In principle I don’t have anything to say about the above with the exception of this business of God knowing his first perception of Himself. Aside from the fact that it borders on Gnosticism (albeit deitific in nature), it makes absolutely no sense when one is referring to an eternal being.

You are saying then that the infinite God of reason does not have a first perception of Himself because there is no first perception of Himself.

Fair enough, I can't really argue with that.


What I would like to ask you though before I do leave is this, do you also consider this to be a work of evil?..

The highest form of love is never self-centered but is a love that gives and sacrifices for the sake of others and remains faithful to love unto death. Only this love can be trusted to speak the truth, for only this love will have no reason to deceive and offend any of us. Such is the essence and character of the Holy Spirit, revealed to us in full through the finished work of the Father's Son.

Through the Father and His Son comes their endless joy in their pure and perfect caring, sharing and giving to each other all that they are and all that they care to create. This Spirit of free and pure eternal love naturally embraces all knowledge and wisdom and would mean nothing without being the heart or the innermost ruling character of a person. This Spirit, this God, will live and rule only in those of us who will value Him above all others.

And once again, I agree with everything you've stated. It's only when we get down to the semantics that our diametrically opposed positions become stark. We believe in one Triune God in 3 distinct persons, one of whom was incarnated into fully man while remaining fully God. You believe in a Jesus that is a distinct god from the Father. If I've misunderstood your theology then do us all a favor and once and for all explain where your theology exactly diverges (or not) from ours.

[Byblos]

I take it I didn't misunderstand your theology then?

[oldman]

If however you Byblos still cannot see what I see then please tell me the very first sentence from what I have just explained, and which you do not understand. I will then endeavour to keep explaining myself more clearly until you do. God willing, we can then move on to any other sentence here that you find incomprehensible until we see eye to eye.

There are some points that need to be clarified but they are buried deep in a lot of gibberish (yet again). Let me see if I can flush them out.

God alone has an infinite mind and therefore knows all things. He knows His first perception of Himself because He knows the beginning of all things. The infinite God is the beginning of all things. We on the other hand, do not have infinite minds and we must therefore be content to accept that for us, there is no conceivable beginning to the infinite God of reason, and having no conceivable beginning must mean this God is eternal. God will always be without a conceivable beginning to our finite minds because we will never have an infinite capacity to reason in infinite terms. We shall never comprehend the infinite past as the infinite mind of God does. Even so, we can still comprehend this, God is the beginning, He has an infinite mind and He knows all things including the beginning of all things.

In principle I don’t have anything to say about the above with the exception of this business of God knowing his first perception of Himself. Aside from the fact that it borders on Gnosticism (albeit deitific in nature), it makes absolutely no sense when one is referring to an eternal being.

You are saying then that the infinite God of reason does not have a first perception of Himself because there is no first perception of Himself.

Fair enough, I can't really argue with that.


What I would like to ask you though before I do leave is this, do you also consider this to be a work of evil?..

The highest form of love is never self-centered but is a love that gives and sacrifices for the sake of others and remains faithful to love unto death. Only this love can be trusted to speak the truth, for only this love will have no reason to deceive and offend any of us. Such is the essence and character of the Holy Spirit, revealed to us in full through the finished work of the Father's Son.

Through the Father and His Son comes their endless joy in their pure and perfect caring, sharing and giving to each other all that they are and all that they care to create. This Spirit of free and pure eternal love naturally embraces all knowledge and wisdom and would mean nothing without being the heart or the innermost ruling character of a person. This Spirit, this God, will live and rule only in those of us who will value Him above all others.

And once again, I agree with everything you've stated. It's only when we get down to the semantics that our diametrically opposed positions become stark. We believe in one Triune God in 3 distinct persons, one of whom was incarnated into fully man while remaining fully God. You believe in a Jesus that is a distinct god from the Father. If I've misunderstood your theology then do us all a favor and once and for all explain where your theology exactly diverges (or not) from ours.

I believe in a Jesus that is the Son of His Father, two different persons united as one God through the only proven Spirit of truth.

I also believe that once we start denying the Son came from the Father before creation began then we finish up denying the meaning of the words “Father” and “Son” in the Trinity. That then means we can easily deny the Father and Son relationship that produces the bond of perfect love that only a perfect Father and Son can give to each other. ...and indeed to all who they create.

I am not denying that Jesus was/is fully God and fully man, as the “hypostatic union” leads us to believe, it is just that as far as I am aware it doesn't answer my question, if the Son did not come from the Father before creation began, why has the first and second person of the Trinity been revealed to us as “Father” and “Son”?

[RickD]

Oldman,

You've brought up some great points that I think we need to discuss. I've created a new thread here, to discuss the doctrine of The Eternal Sonship of Christ.

I hope we can all gain a better understanding.