On May 22, 6:54 am, monkfish <monkfish@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> rogue wrote:
> > On May 21, 8:27 pm, monkfish <monkfish@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> rogue wrote:
> >> > On May 21, 7:02 am, monkfish <monkfish@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> rogue wrote:
> >> >> > On May 20, 11:56 am, "Carl" <sai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> >> In the following article, Dr. Francis Beckwith shows us the
> >> >> >> Biblical doctrine of the Holy Trinity.
>
> >> >> >> PART I: THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY, GOD, AND THE DEITY OF THE
> >> >> >> FATHER
>
> >> >> >> I. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity is part of every major
> >> >> >> creed in the history of Christendom. It can be defined in the
> >> >> >> following way: In the nature of the one God there are three
centers
> >> >> >> of consciousness, which we call persons, and these three are
equal.
> >> >> >> Though the term "trinity" is not found in the Bible, the
doctrine
> >> >> >> is nevertheless taught there. "Trinity" is merely the term
employed
> >> >> >> by theologians and church historians in order to describe the
> >> >> >> phenomena of God they find in the Bible.
>
> >> >> >> The doctrine of the Trinity is arrived at in much the same way
as a
> >> >> >> scientific theory. A scientific theory, for the most part, is a
> >> >> >> reasoned explanation of observed (or unobserved, in some cases)
> >> >> >> phenomena in the natural world. Analogously, the doctrine of
the
> >> >> >> Trinity is a reasoned explanation of what we observe to be the
> >> >> >> phenomena of God in the Bible. Church fathers, councils,
> >> >> >> denominations, etc. have been so overwhelmed with the evidence
for
> >> >> >> the trinity in the scripture that there has been a universal
> >> >> >> creedal acknowledgement in church history. The argument behind
the
> >> >> >> doctrine can be put this way:
>
> >> >> > JERRY
> >> >> > CHUCK! Hey, CHUCK! Pay attention to this, you may learn
something!
>
> >> >> >> Premise 1: The Bible teaches that there is only one God.
>
> >> >> >> Premise 2: The Bible teaches that there are three distinct
> >> >> >> personscalled God, known as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
>
> >> >> >> Conclusion: So, the three persons - Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit -
> >> >> >> are the one God.
>
> >> >> >> Let us take a look at how each premise is justified in the New
> >> >> >> Testament.
>
> >> >> > JERRY
> >> >> > See that? THAT is a proper syllogism at least in terms of
> >> >> > structure. Now, it could be argued in terms of content whether
or
> >> >> > not premise TWO is correct ("Holy Spirit" for example could be a
> >> >> > distinct personality or simply a quality of the one God or even
the
> >> >> > claim that the bible teaches that there are three distinct
persons
> >> >> > called God, which is open to debate and the way trinitarians
choose
> >> >> > to read into the text).
>
> >> >> > Those debates on the quality of premise two would affect the
outcome
> >> >> > of the validity of the conclusion.
>
> >> >> > However, I hope you and Carl both note that nowhere does it say
that
> >> >> > one must believe in the Trinity to be saved, since there are no
> >> >> > verses in the bible to sup****t that claim, as I've demonstrated
to
> >> >> > you before. ;-)
>
> >> >> What do you have to believe in to be saved?
>
> >> > Good question! Why don't you tell me, Mr. Christian? ;-)
>
> >> You sound so knowledgeable of the Bible.
> >> What does it say you have to believe in to be saved?
>
> >> --
> >> monkfish
>
> > JERRY
> > I am knowledgeable on the bible, but I don't play games. I've told
> > you my position. Do you wish to test it?
>
> My position is that even you can be saved
> by the grace of God.
>
> --
> monkfish
> * The followup-to header is set to alt.christnet.theology.
> ** alt.atheism is removed from the groups header.
JERRY
You didn't know? Most of the knowledgeable skeptics in Usenet are
former Xtians. We've read the bible and drunk the KoolAid. Then we
woke up and found it was all a lie. In fact, you will find that
nearly all of them know the bible better than the xtians who try to
debate them, as has been demonstrated in multiple debates and
discussions here, in alt.atheism, alt.bible and free.christians, to
name some of the few.
|
