For the individual looking at the chocolate, he has a real, physical image of the chocolate to give him an image in his mind. In other words, he doesn't have to make up an image of the chocolate because he can see it physically. How is this the case with the trinity? "No man has seen God at any time." So how can we have a proper picture of something we've never seen? The answer is, you cannot. You can't even perceive it to begin with, much less formulate a mental image of it. God, who is invisible, made himself visible through the Word. The Word was God's sole image. The Word became flesh, therefore Jesus Christ is now, and forever will be, the sole image of God. God also made himself known through the activity of His Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not seen, but like Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3, it is felt. So, it is ONE God with ONE image and ONE Spirit and ONE name - Jesus. Case closed.
Hahaha! Your position is faith based! The presentation in the video is an intellectual theological exposition! Theologians are not necessarily people of faith! The discussion clearly separates the intrinsic nature of God (immanent Trinity) from the revelation of self through what HE has tangibly done through the ages (economic Trinity). It is through this latter that the useful overall explanation of the Trinity finds its substance! Thus, the tangible revelation presents the Father from whom the the Son is generated, made incarnate and proceeds to save mankind! Hence, proceeding from the Father, the Son cannot be of another substance. Thus the Father and the Son must be "homoousios" though distinct in personality! One sends and the other performs! The nature is therefore one and so is the intent! Subsequently, the combined activity of the Father and the Son reveal the third possibility that the Holy Spirit proceeds from BOTH to convince and to convict! However, the problem pops out when it appears as though the only way to explain God is by looking at what HE has done for Man. My problem is the homocentric interpretation of God! I find it hard to accept it when the implication is that the sole existence of God was to eventually save mankind from its sins!
@@tersooawen4249 “We walk by faith and not by sight.” “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” “Without faith it is impossible to please God…” We must all be people of faith, not just theology. You cannot worship something in spirit and truth if there is no image of the thing. Otherwise, you worship in imagination only. There are not three images of God, therefore your trinity can only be worshiped in imagination. As for the existence of God, it is not predicated on man’s existence. The Bible gives man the revelation that there is one God who created man in his image and desires to have fellowship with man, even going so far as to die for man’s sins. The Bible does not explore anything beyond that about God, but we do know there are manifold mysteries to God. In other words, there’s more to God than what human understanding can know.
To say that the doctrine of the trinity is an INVENTION is like saying that "the emperor has no clothes". It's ABSOLUTELY SURE that the doctrine of the trinity is FALSE for the simple reason that Jesus says and reiterates dozens of times, in all four gospels, in implicit and explicit manner, that He is ONLY WITH THE FATHER. According to the doctrine Jesus should ALWAYS confirm that He is in a CLOSE UNION with TWO other divine persons, but He NEVER says it! The evidence that the doctrine is FALSE is thus there AS BIG AS A MOUNTAIN, uttered by the CONCLUSIVE WITNESS: Jesus. Hence, the Holy Spirit CANNOT be a THIRD divine Person because there are only TWO divine Persons: the Father and the Son. In fact the "Holy Spirit" is the Father once again, this time in form of a spirit "God is a spirit" (Jn. 4:23,24).
But then, this position excludes the simultaneous omnipotence and omniscience nature of God. In that, in this position, the two thoughts proceeding from God only refers to just a particlar subject at a time! For example "Chocolate". But God focuses ALL subjects with an equal intensity at ALL times forever!! It would be reasonable to argue that both the son and the spirit are equally omnipotent and omniscient therefore equally perform eternally in the same manner on an overall scale. In that case, the salvation of makind from sin would just be one of the countless events merely caught up in the operative nature of the divine qualities of God, not as the demonstration of the love of specifically aimed at saving mankind from sin. It would just be a casual occurence in the mysterious event of God simply doing God! The delibrate element of God stepping out with grace towards man will become irrelevant! I would not agree with Thomas Quinas!
Yes--that would be a problem! Aquinas's way of avoiding it is to distinguish between the Immanent Trinity and the Economic Trinity: God's actions "ad extra" (toward creation) are always free and contingent (although they always align with the eternal Being of God in Godself). This means that what we see in redemption is the character of God, but it is not a necessary emanation of God; rather, it is God's free and gracious decision to be "for us." It is this distinction between "Immanent" and "Economic" that structures Part 1 of the Summa, as Aquinas certainly wants to avoid the problem you pose here. Thanks for the comment! ~kevin
![ประสบการณ์ จ้าง Developer ที่ผมจะไม่มีวันลืม [ภาค1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bzivN4KDg-k/mqdefault.jpg)
i have been watching your videos and it gave so many direction to think but first need to read the books you referred to. thank you very much
Thanks, Bouseux, for the encouragement. I wish you the best in your theological journey, wherever it may lead you! ~Kevin
Amen
You sat here just to describe the Logos as the Fathers Self. Not another Person….
5:43 bookmark
Social trinitarian cry at the end
For the individual looking at the chocolate, he has a real, physical image of the chocolate to give him an image in his mind. In other words, he doesn't have to make up an image of the chocolate because he can see it physically. How is this the case with the trinity? "No man has seen God at any time." So how can we have a proper picture of something we've never seen? The answer is, you cannot. You can't even perceive it to begin with, much less formulate a mental image of it.
God, who is invisible, made himself visible through the Word. The Word was God's sole image. The Word became flesh, therefore Jesus Christ is now, and forever will be, the sole image of God. God also made himself known through the activity of His Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not seen, but like Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3, it is felt. So, it is ONE God with ONE image and ONE Spirit and ONE name - Jesus. Case closed.
Hahaha! Your position is faith based! The presentation in the video is an intellectual theological exposition! Theologians are not necessarily people of faith! The discussion clearly separates the intrinsic nature of God (immanent Trinity) from the revelation of self through what HE has tangibly done through the ages (economic Trinity). It is through this latter that the useful overall explanation of the Trinity finds its substance! Thus, the tangible revelation presents the Father from whom the the Son is generated, made incarnate and proceeds to save mankind! Hence, proceeding from the Father, the Son cannot be of another substance. Thus the Father and the Son must be "homoousios" though distinct in personality! One sends and the other performs! The nature is therefore one and so is the intent! Subsequently, the combined activity of the Father and the Son reveal the third possibility that the Holy Spirit proceeds from BOTH to convince and to convict! However, the problem pops out when it appears as though the only way to explain God is by looking at what HE has done for Man. My problem is the homocentric interpretation of God! I find it hard to accept it when the implication is that the sole existence of God was to eventually save mankind from its sins!
@@tersooawen4249 “We walk by faith and not by sight.”
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
“Without faith it is impossible to please God…”
We must all be people of faith, not just theology.
You cannot worship something in spirit and truth if there is no image of the thing. Otherwise, you worship in imagination only. There are not three images of God, therefore your trinity can only be worshiped in imagination.
As for the existence of God, it is not predicated on man’s existence. The Bible gives man the revelation that there is one God who created man in his image and desires to have fellowship with man, even going so far as to die for man’s sins. The Bible does not explore anything beyond that about God, but we do know there are manifold mysteries to God. In other words, there’s more to God than what human understanding can know.
To say that the doctrine of the trinity is an INVENTION is like saying that "the emperor has no clothes". It's ABSOLUTELY SURE that the doctrine of the trinity is FALSE for the simple reason that Jesus says and reiterates dozens of times, in all four gospels, in implicit and explicit manner, that He is ONLY WITH THE FATHER. According to the doctrine Jesus should ALWAYS confirm that He is in a CLOSE UNION with TWO other divine persons, but He NEVER says it! The evidence that the doctrine is FALSE is thus there AS BIG AS A MOUNTAIN, uttered by the CONCLUSIVE WITNESS: Jesus. Hence, the Holy Spirit CANNOT be a THIRD divine Person because there are only TWO divine Persons: the Father and the Son. In fact the "Holy Spirit" is the Father once again, this time in form of a spirit "God is a spirit" (Jn. 4:23,24).
But then, this position excludes the simultaneous omnipotence and omniscience nature of God. In that, in this position, the two thoughts proceeding from God only refers to just a particlar subject at a time! For example "Chocolate". But God focuses ALL subjects with an equal intensity at ALL times forever!! It would be reasonable to argue that both the son and the spirit are equally omnipotent and omniscient therefore equally perform eternally in the same manner on an overall scale. In that case, the salvation of makind from sin would just be one of the countless events merely caught up in the operative nature of the divine qualities of God, not as the demonstration of the love of specifically aimed at saving mankind from sin. It would just be a casual occurence in the mysterious event of God simply doing God! The delibrate element of God stepping out with grace towards man will become irrelevant! I would not agree with Thomas Quinas!
Yes--that would be a problem! Aquinas's way of avoiding it is to distinguish between the Immanent Trinity and the Economic Trinity: God's actions "ad extra" (toward creation) are always free and contingent (although they always align with the eternal Being of God in Godself). This means that what we see in redemption is the character of God, but it is not a necessary emanation of God; rather, it is God's free and gracious decision to be "for us." It is this distinction between "Immanent" and "Economic" that structures Part 1 of the Summa, as Aquinas certainly wants to avoid the problem you pose here. Thanks for the comment! ~kevin