On May 12, 4:37=A0am, roym...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On May 12, 5:49 pm, "Chuck Stamford" <shell__stamf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Carl" <sai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
>news:3048b31e-6a11-4c3e-8c18-46b8e59e8cc1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On May 12, 2:20 am, roym...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> > > On May 12, 3:29 pm, "Carl" <sai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > James Boyce originally wrote this over 100 years ago but his
points
> > > > concerning the Biblically-based doctrine of the Trinity remain
just =
as
> > > > valid
> > > > now as they did then. It's an interesting and educational look
into =
an
> > > > essential Biblical doctrine. I hope you will save this article and
r=
ead
> > > > it
> > > > carefully.
>
> > > > May God bless,
> > > > Carl
> > > > website --http://www.nettally.com/saints/
> > > > blog --http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
>
> > > When he says "... he [Christ] being indeed the manifestation in the
> > > world, of the divine Father ... " or "... He [Christ] is the
> > > manifestation of the Divine Being in this world ...", I take it that
> > > Boyce had modalistic tendencies.
>
> > Actually, no. He did not.
>
> I quoted directly from the piece presented.
>
>
>
>
>
> > If you care to, you can read biographical information on him at:
>
> >http://www.theopedia.com/James_Petigru_Boyce
>
> > Chuck:
>
> > Perhaps more im****tantly is the link at the bottom of the page to
which =
this
> > link points...
>
> >http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/toc.html
>
> > which itself leads to the online version of his "Abstract of
Systematic
> > Theology", the resource, I assume, you used for "Chapter XIV: The
Trinit=
y",
> > of that same work.
>
> > God bless
>
> > Chuck Stamford
>
> >http://www.founders.org/journal/fj19/article4.html
>
> >http://www.tlogical.net/biojboyce.htm
>
> Thanks, Chuck.
>
> In your last link he wrote "... The revelation to us, is not that of
> tritheism or three Gods; nor of triplicity, which is threefoldness,
> and would involve composition, and be contrary to the simplicity of
> God; nor of mere manifestation of one person in three forms". =A0Clearly
> he was far from modalism.
>
Glad it was clarified for you. If you have the time, read Dr. Boyce's
abstract. I found it to be quite informative. I understand that it's
required reading in many seminaries.
May God bless,
Carl
website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
|
