My position on the Trinity

[JonC]

It is obvious, I think, that you do not understand the Chalcedonian creed, the Athanasian creed, or the 1689 London Baptist Confession in regards to Christ.

The statements about the nature of Christ were initially (in the Chalcedonian Creed) addressing heresy. The point is that Christ is fully God and fully man, One Person. The Athanasian Creed was a statement of belief (again, affirming that Christ is completely God, completely man, One Person). And the 1689 Confession was based on the Athanasian Creed in regards to the Trinity.

The problem is you cannot fit this into an equation. That was kinda the point of the creeds and confessions. It affirms what is accepted, not what fits into human understanding.

I do not mind that you reject the two creeds and the 1689 Confession. That is no big deal to me.

But you have to stop lying about other people. That is a big deal. You can say that you do not understand the doctrine, but do not ascribe to people beliefs that they have rejected.

Those are not false accusations. For example, you have accused me of believing Christ is comprised of two persons. That was a willful lie on your part because I had told you several times that I believe Christ is One Person, Two Natures, Completely God, Completely Man. That is so clear any idiot could understand it. One person does not mean two persons. So your comments are willful lies against other members. There are no other options.

 

[1689Dave]

I do have my facts straight. The Chalcedonian Creed was written by the Catholic Church in 451. We do not know the exact date the Athanasian Creed was written but it is from the mid-sixth century (560-580). It is called the Quicunque Vult and was attributed to Athansias in the medieval Catholic Church. The Athanasian Creed forms the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity for most of the Christian church. It did for the Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, the Reformed Church, and for most of the Protestant Church. It was the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity for the Belgic Confession which in turn was used in the Synod of Dort to create what is known as "Calvinism" in regards to the "Five Points".

What you do not realize is that you reject the 1689 London Baptist Confession in regards to the nature of Christ (I'm sure you otherwise agree with the Confession). That is no big deal because we are Baptists (I do not hold the 1689 London Baptist Confession either).

How can it be genuine? Athanasius died in May 2, 373 AD You are using old information published at a late date by Catholics. And you trust this?

 

[1689Dave]

Those are not false accusations. For example, you have accused me of believing Christ is comprised of two persons. That was a willful lie on your part because I had told you several times that I believe Christ is One Person, Two Natures, Completely God, Completely Man. That is so clear any idiot could understand it. One person does not mean two persons. So your comments are willful lies against other members. There are no other options.

You began boasting Nestorianism and later backed off. It's all in the posts concerning this.

 

[Yeshua1]

You began boasting Nestorianism and later backed off. It's all in the posts concerning this.

Jon C has always just stated the orthodox view that Jesus is fully God and fully man, 2 natures in one person, how is that nestorainism?

 

[Yeshua1]

You began boasting Nestorianism and later backed off. It's all in the posts concerning this.

You seem to be into a sorta Oneness thing!

 

[JonC]

You began boasting Nestorianism and later backed off. It's all in the posts concerning this.

I have never, not even once, backed off my position.

I have always said that Christ is "One Person, Two natures (inseparable, without mixture), fully God, fully man).

You made false accusations about me and other members of this board that they were boasting Nestorianism because they expressed an orthodox view of the Trinity.

But when asked you always failed to provide evidence of your accusations....because none existed. You made up accusations and continued to make false claims against me and several other members just as you have made false accusations against @ThyWordIsTruth .

You have been dishonest throughout these several threads by repeatedly ascribing to members beliefs that they have denied. This is called "bearing false witness" in the Bible. It is called "lying" because you are aware that I never boasted Nestorianism and no member here has expressed Nestorianism.

 

[agedman]

You began boasting Nestorianism and later backed off. It's all in the posts concerning this.

Am I assuming that you do know that the basic difference between what I and @JonC hold and Nestorian thinking is found in the concept of the hypostatic union?

The Nestorian would contend that the two natures are held by will, not by hypostatic union.

Do you hold to a hypostatic union?

 

[Yeshua1]

Am I assuming that you do know that the basic difference between what I and @JonC hold and Nestorian thinking is found in the concept of the hypostatic union?

The Nestorian would contend that the two natures are held by will, not by hypostatic union.

Do you hold to a hypostatic union?

he stated that the human nature of Jesus was buried, so would that mean that he is now only God again?

 

[agedman]

he stated that the human nature of Jesus was buried, so would that mean that he is now only God again?

I don’t know.

 

[1689Dave]

Jon C has always just stated the orthodox view that Jesus is fully God and fully man, 2 natures in one person, how is that nestorainism?

He challenged this originally. I was saying this and he attacked me trying to push Nestorianism instead. How twisted can this get?

 

[1689Dave]

Am I assuming that you do know that the basic difference between what I and @JonC hold and Nestorian thinking is found in the concept of the hypostatic union?

The Nestorian would contend that the two natures are held by will, not by hypostatic union.

Do you hold to a hypostatic union?

Define it so I don't walk into a trap.

 

[1689Dave]

I have never, not even once, backed off my position.

I have always said that Christ is "One Person, Two natures (inseparable, without mixture), fully God, fully man).

You made false accusations about me and other members of this board that they were boasting Nestorianism because they expressed an orthodox view of the Trinity.

But when asked you always failed to provide evidence of your accusations....because none existed. You made up accusations and continued to make false claims against me and several other members just as you have made false accusations against @ThyWordIsTruth .

You have been dishonest throughout these several threads by repeatedly ascribing to members beliefs that they have denied. This is called "bearing false witness" in the Bible. It is called "lying" because you are aware that I never boasted Nestorianism and no member here has expressed Nestorianism.

Why did you attack my position if we believed the same?

 

[1689Dave]

You seem to be into a sorta Oneness thing!

You want to smear me suggesting this or that but lack the manhood to be forthright.

 

[agedman]

Define it so I don't walk into a trap.

Define what?

 

[1689Dave]

he stated that the human nature of Jesus was buried, so would that mean that he is now only God again?

Let me speak for myself and drop your self-biased interpretations.

 

[JonC]

Why did you attack my position if we believed the same?

We do not believe the same per your comments. I stated that Christ is "One Person, Two Natures (inseparable, without mixture), completely God, completely man". I used the language of the creeds in regards to the orthodox definition of the Trinity intentionally (on purpose).

You stated that the creeds (my reference) was Nestorianism. That is where I started questioning your belief. The reason I questioned your belief is that it means Calvinism, Orthodox Christianity, the 1689 London Baptist Confession, the Belgic Confession, etc. is Nestorianism when it clearly is not.

 

[JonC]

How can it be genuine? Athanasius died in May 2, 373 AD You are using old information published at a late date by Catholics. And you trust this?

You are very confused.

The medieval Catholic Church attributed the Athanasian creed to Athanasius. Prior to that it was the expression of Christian orthodoxy known as the Quicunque Vult (from Quicumque vult salvus esse). It was written in Latin in the mid 6th century AD.

You are taking a very Roman Catholic position not only here but on other issues as well (you use Catholic doctrine as your authority, you rely on Roman Catholic tradition). Were you previously Roman Catholic by chance?

 

[1689Dave]

You are very confused.

The medieval Catholic Church attributed the Athanasian creed to Athanasius. Prior to that it was the expression of Christian orthodoxy known as the Quicunque Vult (from Quicumque vult salvus esse). It was written in Latin in the mid 6th century AD.

You are taking a very Roman Catholic position not only here but on other issues as well (you use Catholic doctrine as your authority, you rely on Roman Catholic tradition). Were you previously Roman Catholic by chance?

Opinion proves nothing. You changed horses in midstream.

 

[1689Dave]

We do not believe the same per your comments. I stated that Christ is "One Person, Two Natures (inseparable, without mixture), completely God, completely man". I used the language of the creeds in regards to the orthodox definition of the Trinity intentionally (on purpose).

You stated that the creeds (my reference) was Nestorianism. That is where I started questioning your belief. The reason I questioned your belief is that it means Calvinism, Orthodox Christianity, the 1689 London Baptist Confession, the Belgic Confession, etc. is Nestorianism when it clearly is not.

You attacked the symbol of Chalcedon through my post.

 

[JonC]

You attacked the symbol of Chalcedon through my post.

Prove it. Provide a quote where I attacked the "symbol of Chalcedon" in any of these threads.

OR, as YOU say...."be called a liar".

That said, I do not care if anyone does "attack" any of the creeds. I'm a Baptist and not beholden to Catholic doctrine or counsels.

Personally I believe the creed is a good description of biblical doctrine (which is why I know you are lying). But I don't care if anyone attacks the creed (as long as they remain within orthodox doctrine).