>And what I'm saying is that God's nature is given in the Trinity. It has God's nature because it is God, not because it is like God. It is because it is God that it has God's nature.
I'm not sure I understood your definition of "identical with".
>>15887333. >And what I'm saying is that God's nature is given in the Trinity.
Just read Genesis 18. Jesus is God, but not omniscient.
>Just read Genesis 18. Jesus is God, but not omniscient.
Trinicucks don't seem to realize their entire philosophy is just having it both ways because their theology is logically invalid.
We made in his image. Man is suppose to grow up and look up to our Father in Heaven.
3 part nature of man, made in God's image who is also in 3 parts.
Clarence Larkin is burning in hell.
>muh Body Soul and Spirit
There is the Flesh and the Spirit. That's 2.
It means, essentially, is.
But what do you associate the word "is" with, if not "identical to"?
God without omniscience?
>if not "identical to"?
Identical with
What's the difference?
Something that is identical to something implies that the something it is identical to is individual from it. This triangle is identical to this triangle, means that there is one triangle that is alike to another, co-existing triangle. This triangle is identical with this triangle, means that one triangle and another are one and the same.
There is no question that Jesus is God. The question is what makes the Son different from the Father. Genesis 18 shows the Son does not have omniscience.
I believe God is in the Father and the Son.
Now, Explain God praying to a part of Himself (the Son praying to the Father) and explain the Father being described as greater and the head of Christ.
>Now, Explain God praying to a part of Himself (the Son praying to the Father) and explain the Father being described as greater and the head of Christ
Christ is modeling discipleship for his own disciples, who participate in the same relationship he has to the father and become children of God through the Holy Spirit, the body of Christ.
It's very easy to explain if you avoid language like "Jesus is not God", or "Jesus is not the Most High". Jesus IS God. Jesus IS the Most High. But Jesus is the Son, and the Son is not the Father, as in Nature.
Then you ask "What attributes does the Son have? What attributes does the Father have?" Genesis 18 shows us that the Son is not Omniscient.
If the father is the sun, and Jesus is the moon, then what is the holy spirit? Is it the light? How do we know when the moon is full, and what do we do on that day?
Name 1 person that ever used the illustration that "Jesus is the moon".
Light can not be aware of itself.
Can a rock cry?
>Luke 19:40 KJV
>And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
So then is the light still a shadow to us?
Or maybe a reflection, like the light of the moon.
The Son is the image of the invisible.
Read Saint (yes, Saint) Tertullian.
bruuh tertullian had some wacky believes and i won't call him a saint for he broke with the church in his last days
>Terullian had wacky beliefs
This is a common shill line. You can't name one, despite the volumes of literature Tertullian left behind. Some Jesuit even said he examined Tertullian's beliefs and couldn't find one heresy.
idk man, haven't looked myself into his believes but well i know he seprated from the church to join the montanists, which are some sort of a misture of a strict monk and a pentecostal, just to later leave them and find his own sect, thats quite wacky for me, bro founded protestantism 1300 earlier lmao
>haven't looked into it myself
>he had wacky beliefs though
Can a photon be aware of itself. If it travels the speed of light, there is no clock, or time, or measurement. How can there be awareness without measure?
I am not sure if this is an esotericist LARP or theologian LARP anymore. Wtf is this?
Christians invented communism:
>Acts 4:32 During those days, the entire community of believers was deeply united in heart and soul to such an extent that they stopped claiming private ownership of their possessions. Instead, they held everything in common. 33 The apostles with great power gave their eyewitness reports of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Everyone was surrounded by an extraordinary grace. 34 Not a single person in the community was in need because those who had been affluent sold their houses or lands and brought the proceeds 35 to the emissaries[d] of the Lord. They then distributed the funds to individuals according to their needs. 36-37 One fellow, a Cyprian Levite named Joseph, earned a nickname because of his generosity in selling a field and bringing the money to the apostles in this way. From that time on, they called him Barnabas, which means “son of encouragement.”
>Acts2:44 There was an intense sense of togetherness among all who believed; they shared all their material possessions in trust. 45 They sold any possessions and goods that did not benefit the community and used the money to help everyone in need.
Here is how I understand the trinity, but I need to explain something first. Can God make a rock that he cannot ever move? If he could, the rock would need to adapt to the power of God and the rock could only do that if he had the same powers that God has, in other words the rock needs to be God himself. This situation becomes a redundancy. The same thing happens if God created another God, it would just himself, but this time in the case of Jesus he preserves his individuality. The hierarchy is not a pyramid, but a tree.