Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [biblicalapologetics] One God and the Trinity - Re-posted to correct "quo...

Expand Messages
  • tcmadd2@aol.com
    Isa, A few comments on your theology as stated in your essay: 1. Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for the Church of God and
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Isa,
       
      A few comments on your theology as stated in your essay:
       
      1. "Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for the Church of God and for humanity for our time and age."
       
      I am afraid that there is little if any of this that is "NEW".  Your ideas on the One God emanating the persons of the Trinity sounds much like the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus, a third century philosopher. The idea of the One emanating everything has come down to us in the Jewish Kabbalah.  Madonna believed this before you "deduced" it.
       
      2. Again, your stated beliefs that an unknowable One emanated the a group of sub-deities that we call the Trinity  sounds much like Modalistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/Patripassianism  This was taught by Noetus of Smyrna in the 2nd century, and later Sabellius.You can find this teaching today in the United Pentecostal Church. It has not generated the unity you hope for. They were kicked out of the Assemblies of God denomination because of these ideas.
       
      3. Your ideas on the "Christ Spirit" being "enfleshed" is about the same thing as the Dynamic Monarchiansim/Adoptionism advocated by Theodotus of Byzantium in the 2nd century and Paul of Samosata in the 4th century.  These ideas were all condemned by the church councils of the 4th-6th centuries.
       
      4. I don't know if you have heard from your parish priest or bishop yet about your document. Don't get your hopes up. In an earlier era you would have been contacted by the Inquisition. I don't say that to be funny or to ridicule you, Isa. It is true. 
       
      5. It seems to me that your earlier protestations about the legitimacy of the Papacy as the legitimate, true representatives of Christ are contradictory to your stated beliefs about God. The popes support classical Trinitarianism and reject Modalism.
       
      An outstanding effort...but no cigar.
       
      Tom Maddux
       
      In a message dated 3/30/2010 6:27:06 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, isalcordo@... writes:
      Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for the Church of God and for humanity for our time and age.
    • Isa
      Hi, Tom: Thank you for your comments. I truly appreciate them because, if your comments on those various philosophies and theologies you cited - and I defer to
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi, Tom:

        Thank you for your comments. I truly appreciate them because, if your comments on those various philosophies and theologies you cited - and I defer to on those issues you being an historian, they have forewarned me of what I expect to overcome to defend my thesis.

        Now, in response to your specific comments.

        You wrote:

        1. I am afraid that there is little if any of this that is "NEW". Your ideas on the One God emanating the persons of the Trinity sounds much like the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus, a third century philosopher. The idea of the One emanating everything has come down to us in the Jewish Kabbalah. Madonna believed this before you "deduced" it.

        My response:
        You missed the point here. The concept of "emanations" is probably as old as mankind and that is NOT what I am claiming to be NEW. Had the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus proposed precisely what I am proposing here to put the Doctrine "The Lord is one" of monotheism and the "Trinity" of Christianity within the realm of human reason rather than the Church's continuous declaration of "Mystery?" Had Madonna deduced my thesis "before I did"?


        2. Again, your stated beliefs that an unknowable One emanated the a group of sub-deities that we call the Trinity sounds much like Moralistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/Patripassianism This was taught by Noetus of Smyrna in the 2nd century, and later Sabellius.You can find this teaching today in the United Pentecostal Church. It has not generated the unity you hope for. They were kicked out of the Assemblies of God denomination because of these
        ideas.

        My response:
        In essence, modalism in the various forms you mentioned can be summarized as "The anti-Trinitarian belief that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are `modes' of God, but not true persons capable of interacting with one another."

        Please read the section of my paper again on the "Evolution of the Trinity." In there, it is clear that "the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit" are NOT modes of the One Infinite God but "separate and defined Persons of the ONE INFINITE AND PERSONAL GOD and ONE in essence as the One God and acting and interacting always as ONE in purpose and will as the One Infinite God purposes and wills! And the words they speak in their separate roles in creation and salvation are the very words of the One Infinite God.

        You wrote:
        3. Your ideas on the "Christ Spirit" being "enfleshed" is about the same thing as the Dynamic Monarchiansim/Adoptionism advocated by Theodotus of Byzantium in the 2nd century and Paul of Samosata in the 4th century. These ideas were all condemned by the church councils of the 4th-6th centuries.

        My response:
        The Biblical basis of my "enfleshing of the Christ Spirit" is Heb 10:5-7. "5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; 6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. 7 Then I said, `Here I am — it is written about me in the scroll — I have come to do your will, O God.'""

        If it is true as you claim that such a doctrine was condemned, then let them condemn Paul or the writer of Hebrews, or the whole book which the Church has accepted a canonical.

        OR, it could be that the various proponents you cited were "philosophizing" rather than basing their position solidly on the Bible.

        You wrote:

        4. I don't know if you have heard from your parish priest or bishop yet about your document. Don't get your hopes up. In an earlier era you would have been contacted by the Inquisition. I don't say that to be funny or to ridicule you, Isa. It is true.

        My response:
        I understand, Tom. The Church did condemn theologians who disagreed with Church doctrines. But I believe I can stand my ground. And that you are one of those that I should be thanking. But I have gone farther than giving one bishop a copy. I have referred my paper to the whole "Bishop Conference of the Philippines" through Rob's website, this website. It is time that the Churches stop hiding behind claims of "MYSTERY." It does not speak well of the brilliant minds in the various churches.


        You wrote:

        5. It seems to me that your earlier protestations about the legitimacy the Papacy as the legitimate, true representatives of Christ are contradictory to your stated beliefs about God. The popes support classical Trinitarianism and reject Modalism.

        My response:
        The thesis I am presenting to the group and to all Christian churches is NOT Modalism. It is Orthodoxy. It is to bring LIGHT through REASONS to the centuries-old claim of MYSTERY which is really nothing but an acceptance of IGNORANCE. Now, the LIGHT is on! And I really hope so!

        You wrote:

        An outstanding effort...but no cigar.

        My response:
        Thank you, Tom. I appreciate that you appreciate the research efforts that went into writing of this paper.

        May God bless us all.

        Isa
        In Service to the Lay People of GodHi, Tom:

        ------------------- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, tcmadd2@... wrote:
        >
        > Isa,
        >
        > A few comments on your theology as stated in your essay:
        >
        > 1. "Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for
        > the Church of God and for humanity for our time and age."
        >
        > I am afraid that there is little if any of this that is "NEW". Your ideas
        > on the One God emanating the persons of the Trinity sounds much like the
        > Neo-Platonism of Plotinus, a third century philosopher. The idea of the One
        > emanating everything has come down to us in the Jewish Kabbalah. Madonna
        > believed this before you "deduced" it.
        >
        > 2. Again, your stated beliefs that an unknowable One emanated the a group
        > of sub-deities that we call the Trinity sounds much like Modalistic
        > Monarchianism/Sabellianism/Patripassianism This was taught by Noetus of Smyrna
        > in the 2nd century, and later Sabellius.You can find this teaching today in
        > the United Pentecostal Church. It has not generated the unity you hope for.
        > They were kicked out of the Assemblies of God denomination because of these
        > ideas.
        >
        > 3. Your ideas on the "Christ Spirit" being "enfleshed" is about the same
        > thing as the Dynamic Monarchiansim/Adoptionism advocated by Theodotus of
        > Byzantium in the 2nd century and Paul of Samosata in the 4th century. These
        > ideas were all condemned by the church councils of the 4th-6th centuries.
        >
        > 4. I don't know if you have heard from your parish priest or bishop yet
        > about your document. Don't get your hopes up. In an earlier era you would have
        > been contacted by the Inquisition. I don't say that to be funny or to
        > ridicule you, Isa. It is true.
        >
        > 5. It seems to me that your earlier protestations about the legitimacy of
        > the Papacy as the legitimate, true representatives of Christ are
        > contradictory to your stated beliefs about God. The popes support classical
        > Trinitarianism and reject Modalism.
        >
        > An outstanding effort...but no cigar.
        >
        > Tom Maddux
        >
        >
        > In a message dated 3/30/2010 6:27:06 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
        > isalcordo@... writes:
        >
        > Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for the
        > Church of God and for humanity for our time and age.
        >
      • Isa
        Hi, Tom: Thank you for your comments. I truly appreciate them because, if your comments on those various philosophies and theologies you cited - and I defer to
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi, Tom:

          Thank you for your comments. I truly appreciate them because, if your comments on those various philosophies and theologies you cited - and I defer to you on those issues you being an historian - are correct, they have forewarned me of what I expect to overcome to defend my thesis.

          Now, in response to your specific comments.

          You wrote:

          1. I am afraid that there is little if any of this that is "NEW". Your ideas on the One God emanating the persons of the Trinity sounds much like the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus, a third century philosopher. The idea of the One emanating everything has come down to us in the Jewish Kabbalah. Madonna believed this before you "deduced" it.

          My response:
          You missed the point here. The concept of "emanations" is probably as old as mankind and that is NOT what I am claiming to be NEW. Had the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus proposed precisely what I am proposing here to put the Doctrine "The Lord is one" of monotheism and the "Trinity" of Christianity within the realm of human reason rather than the Church's continuous declaration of "Mystery?" Had Madonna deduced my thesis "before I did"?


          2. Again, your stated beliefs that an unknowable One emanated the a group of sub-deities that we call the Trinity sounds much like Moralistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/Patripassianism This was taught by Noetus of Smyrna in the 2nd century, and later Sabellius.You can find this teaching today in the United Pentecostal Church. It has not generated the unity you hope for. They were kicked out of the Assemblies of God denomination because of these
          ideas.

          My response:
          In essence, modalism in the various forms you mentioned can be summarized as "The anti-Trinitarian belief that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are `modes' of God, but not true persons capable of interacting with one another."

          Please read the section of my paper again on the "Evolution of the Trinity." In there, it is clear that "the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit" are NOT modes of the One Infinite God but "separate and defined Persons of the ONE INFINITE AND PERSONAL GOD and ONE in essence as the One God and acting and interacting always as ONE in purpose and will as the One Infinite God purposes and wills! And the words they speak in their separate roles in creation and salvation are the very words of the One Infinite God.

          You wrote:
          3. Your ideas on the "Christ Spirit" being "enfleshed" is about the same thing as the Dynamic Monarchiansim/Adoptionism advocated by Theodotus of Byzantium in the 2nd century and Paul of Samosata in the 4th century. These ideas were all condemned by the church councils of the 4th-6th centuries.

          My response:
          The Biblical basis of my "enfleshing of the Christ Spirit" is Heb 10:5-7. "5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; 6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. 7 Then I said, `Here I am — it is written about me in the scroll — I have come to do your will, O God.'""

          If it is true as you claim that such a doctrine was condemned, then let them condemn Paul or the writer of Hebrews, or the whole book which the Church has accepted as canonical.

          OR, it could be that the various proponents you cited were "philosophizing" rather than basing their position solidly on the Bible.

          You wrote:
          4. I don't know if you have heard from your parish priest or bishop yet about your document. Don't get your hopes up. In an earlier era you would have been contacted by the Inquisition. I don't say that to be funny or to ridicule you, Isa. It is true.

          My response:
          I understand, Tom. The Church did condemn theologians who disagreed with Church doctrines. But I believe I can stand my ground. And that you are one of those that I should be thanking. But I have gone farther than giving one bishop a copy. I have referred my paper to the whole "Bishop Conference of the Philippines" through Rob's website, this website. It is time that the Churches stop hiding behind claims of "MYSTERY." It does not speak well of the brilliant minds in the various churches.


          You wrote:
          5. It seems to me that your earlier protestations about the legitimacy the Papacy as the legitimate, true representatives of Christ are contradictory to your stated beliefs about God. The popes support classical Trinitarianism and reject Modalism.

          My response:
          The thesis I am presenting to the group and to all Christian churches is NOT Modalism. It is Orthodoxy. It is to bring LIGHT through REASONS to the centuries-old claim of MYSTERY which is really nothing but an acceptance of IGNORANCE. Now, the LIGHT is on! And I really hope so!

          You wrote:

          An outstanding effort...but no cigar.

          My response:
          Thank you, Tom. I appreciate that you appreciate the research efforts that went into writing this paper.

          May God bless us all.

          Isa
          In Service to the Lay People of God

          ------------

          --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, tcmadd2@... wrote:
          >
          > Isa,
          >
          > A few comments on your theology as stated in your essay:
          >
          > 1. "Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for
          > the Church of God and for humanity for our time and age."
          >
          > I am afraid that there is little if any of this that is "NEW". Your ideas
          > on the One God emanating the persons of the Trinity sounds much like the
          > Neo-Platonism of Plotinus, a third century philosopher. The idea of the One
          > emanating everything has come down to us in the Jewish Kabbalah. Madonna
          > believed this before you "deduced" it.
          >
          > 2. Again, your stated beliefs that an unknowable One emanated the a group
          > of sub-deities that we call the Trinity sounds much like Modalistic
          > Monarchianism/Sabellianism/Patripassianism This was taught by Noetus of Smyrna
          > in the 2nd century, and later Sabellius.You can find this teaching today in
          > the United Pentecostal Church. It has not generated the unity you hope for.
          > They were kicked out of the Assemblies of God denomination because of these
          > ideas.
          >
          > 3. Your ideas on the "Christ Spirit" being "enfleshed" is about the same
          > thing as the Dynamic Monarchiansim/Adoptionism advocated by Theodotus of
          > Byzantium in the 2nd century and Paul of Samosata in the 4th century. These
          > ideas were all condemned by the church councils of the 4th-6th centuries.
          >
          > 4. I don't know if you have heard from your parish priest or bishop yet
          > about your document. Don't get your hopes up. In an earlier era you would have
          > been contacted by the Inquisition. I don't say that to be funny or to
          > ridicule you, Isa. It is true.
          >
          > 5. It seems to me that your earlier protestations about the legitimacy of
          > the Papacy as the legitimate, true representatives of Christ are
          > contradictory to your stated beliefs about God. The popes support classical
          > Trinitarianism and reject Modalism.
          >
          > An outstanding effort...but no cigar.
          >
          > Tom Maddux
          >
          >
          > In a message dated 3/30/2010 6:27:06 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
          > isalcordo@... writes:
          >
          > Reason, which is a gift of God, has led me to this NEW revelation for the
          > Church of God and for humanity for our time and age.
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.