Argument against the Doctrine of the Trinity. (And keep it clean, please.)

[Josheb]

If man was made lower than the angels, then angels must be first.

The word "lower" is not a measure of sequence. Furthermore, that "lower" attribute has context because angels are ministering spirits sent to those who will inherit salvation. They minister to us, not the other way around. Furthermore, we will judge angels, not the other way around. When it comes to the hierarchy of significance the angels are lower than the saints. Consider the entirety of the passage in which the verse you've referenced occurred. The author is writing about the dissemination of the gospel and states,

Hebrews 2:7
5For it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. 6It has been testified somewhere,

“What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him? 7You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor, 8putting everything in subjection under his feet.”​

Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. 9But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

The word was subjected to man, not the angels.
Man was made lower than the angels and crowned with glory and honor (not the angels).
The lowerness with which man and the son of man was made is temporary; it is only "for a little while".
Everything is subordinate to the son of man.

Therefore, Post 180 proves to be an excellent example of what I said: you use scripture selectively, don't consider all that whole scripture says and, as a result, don't grasp much of what scripture states about Jesus correctly.

While God created, the heavenly choir sang for joy.

Yep. The heavenly host rejoiced. The verses referenced do not say they existed prior to creation. Neither can the verses you have not cited be interpreted in contradiction to those I have already provided. You sed the word "while", indicating the angels' rejoice occurred in the midst of God creating, not that they existed before creation.

The next time you want to make claims about scripture cite or quote the verse. Otherwise, it looks like you're inventing scripture to fit your already-existing belief.

I find it very reasonable to believe angels were before the world began.

Confirmation bias. It is not reasonable. Post 176 provides scriptures that explicitly state all of the heavenly host was created. Whatever verse you select has to be rendered according to those statements. The difference between us here is that I have provided explicit statements from scripture = verses that do not need or want additional interpretation. You, alternatively, are providing inferences, interpretations of what is stated, interpretations of what is stated based on your pre-existing belief angels existed prior to creation when the verses quoted in Post 176 explicitly state the exact opposite.

Explicit statement versus inference

Be as critical of your sources as you are of my posts.

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—
7while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels shouted for joy?

The answer to that question is, "Nowhere." That "you" did not exist when God marked off the dimensions of the earth's foundation. The angels were created prior to humans and the forming of the earth, but they were still created. Sometimes scripture refers to the heavenly host as "lights." That would place their creation on the fourth day of creation. Humans were made on the sixth. In other words, angels were made before humans were made, but they are still created creatures. They did not exist before creation.

So, once again, here is another example of scripture being used selectively, the whole of scripture not being consulted, resulting in a misguided understanding of who and what is Jesus, the Person who was foreknown before the foundation of the world, the Person who, as the logos of God was with God in the beginning as God. He was made lower than the angels for a while and yet every knee - including those of the angels bows to him and him alone to his Father's glory. Jesus was there in the beginning. Angels were not. The angels are created creatures, and their existence did not occur until the fourth day.

Be as critical of the people telling you Jesus is a created creature just as much as you are critical of my posts. Be an equal opportunity critic.

 

[Paul]

The word "lower" is not a measure of sequence. Furthermore, that "lower" attribute has context because angels are ministering spirits sent to those who will inherit salvation. They minister to us, not the other way around. Furthermore, we will judge angels, not the other way around. When it comes to the hierarchy of significance the angels are lower than the saints. Consider the entirety of the passage in which the verse you've referenced occurred. The author is writing about the dissemination of the gospel and states,

Hebrews 2:7
5For it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. 6It has been testified somewhere,

“What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him? 7You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor, 8putting everything in subjection under his feet.”​

Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. 9But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

The word was subjected to man, not the angels.
Man was made lower than the angels and crowned with glory and honor (not the angels).
The lowerness with which man and the son of man was made is temporary; it is only "for a little while".
Everything is subordinate to the son of man.

Therefore, Post 180 proves to be an excellent example of what I said: you use scripture selectively, don't consider all that whole scripture says and, as a result, don't grasp much of what scripture states about Jesus correctly.

Yep. The heavenly host rejoiced. The verses referenced do not say they existed prior to creation. Neither can the verses you have not cited be interpreted in contradiction to those I have already provided. You sed the word "while", indicating the angels' rejoice occurred in the midst of God creating, not that they existed before creation.

The next time you want to make claims about scripture cite or quote the verse. Otherwise, it looks like you're inventing scripture to fit your already-existing belief.

Confirmation bias. It is not reasonable. Post 176 provides scriptures that explicitly state all of the heavenly host was created. Whatever verse you select has to be rendered according to those statements. The difference between us here is that I have provided explicit statements from scripture = verses that do not need or want additional interpretation. You, alternatively, are providing inferences, interpretations of what is stated, interpretations of what is stated based on your pre-existing belief angels existed prior to creation when the verses quoted in Post 176 explicitly state the exact opposite.

Explicit statement versus inference

Be as critical of your sources as you are of my posts.

The answer to that question is, "Nowhere." That "you" did not exist when God marked off the dimensions of the earth's foundation. The angels were created prior to humans and the forming of the earth, but they were still created. Sometimes scripture refers to the heavenly host as "lights." That would place their creation on the fourth day of creation. Humans were made on the sixth. In other words, angels were made before humans were made, but they are still created creatures. They did not exist before creation.

So, once again, here is another example of scripture being used selectively, the whole of scripture not being consulted, resulting in a misguided understanding of who and what is Jesus, the Person who was foreknown before the foundation of the world, the Person who, as the logos of God was with God in the beginning as God. He was made lower than the angels for a while and yet every knee - including those of the angels bows to him and him alone to his Father's glory. Jesus was there in the beginning. Angels were not. The angels are created creatures, and their existence did not occur until the fourth day.

Be as critical of the people telling you Jesus is a created creature just as much as you are critical of my posts. Be an equal opportunity critic.

It's clear to me God was asking Job where were you, (at this point in time)

“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels shouted for joy?

Jesus stated the same for Him as us in regard to a having a God and Father. Its literal. He is a first begotten child of the Father as God formed His spirit just as He formed ours
Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’

What makes Jesus unique in addition to having the preeminence is that His God was pleased to live in Him in all His fullness. A son who is the imprint of the Fathers very being and one in Deity with the Father. But it is Father and Son.

If I wanted to start to understand the truth I would start with what I know is true. That is the head of the body of Christ calls His Father the only true God and I would know that what you state about Him is not a possible answer.

But as I see it doesn't matter what I state so why continue? Your teacher is the doctrine of the trinity.

 

[Josheb]

It's clear to me God was asking Job where were you, (at this point in time)

What is clear to you and what scripture states are two completely different things. The appeal to your own understanding is logically fallacious. You have been provided with verses read exactly as written that state the heavenly host were created. They are created creatures, not uncreated creature that existed prior to creation being created.

If I wanted to start to understand the truth I would start with what I know is true.

No, understanding truth begins with what scripture explicitly states and bowing one's knowledge and understanding to it.

That is the head of the body of Christ calls His Father the only true God...

Within the context of Jesus as the Redeemer. Those labels are New Testament labels describing the soteriological mission of God in His redemption of humanity from sin. Prior to that Jesus is described as God, the LORD's Lord, and all the many labels assigned God throughout the OT. All those labels are used to describe Jesus. If you claimed to be the I Am you'd be considered an idiot. Or a heretic.

John 5:9-23
9...Now it was a Sabbath on that day. 10So the Jews were saying to the man who was cured, “It is a Sabbath, and it is not permissible for you to carry your pallet.” 11But he answered them, “He who made me well was the one who said to me, ‘Pick up your pallet and walk.’” 12They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Pick it up and walk’?” 13But the man who was healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped away while there was a crowd in that place. 14Afterward, Jesus *found him in the temple and said to him, “Behold, you have become well; do not sin anymore, so that nothing worse happens to you.” 15The man went away, and informed the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well. 16For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on a Sabbath. 17But he answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I myself am working.” 18For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because he not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

19Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, unless it is something he sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in the same way. 20For the Father loves the Son and shows him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show him greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son also gives life to whom he wishes. 22For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, 23so that all will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

If Jesus was making himself equal with God and he was not God's equal, then he was a heretic, and no one is saved from sin by Jesus. If, alternatively, Jesus was, in fact, making himself equal with God because he is, in fact, equal with God, then he ought to be honored as such: equal with God. Did you read that part about Jesus being the judge of all? That means every Old Testament mention of God as Judge is actually a reference to Jesus. This happens throughout the New Testament: a label thought to exist solely as an attribute of the one almighty God is an attribute of Jesus'. The New Testament repeatedly assigns divine attribute to Jesus.

You do understand it is logically impossible to have two Gods, yes?
.

and I would know that what you state about Him is not a possible answer.

When measured by scripture the posts prove that is not the case.

But as I see it doesn't matter what I state so why continue? Your teacher is the doctrine of the trinity.

My teacher is scripture. That is what I have used and all I have used. Not once have I appealed to any extra-biblical source.


Let's review. Based on the posts' actual content.....

1. You use scripture selectively and a) do not interpret any of it in light of the whole and won't answer questions about this when asked.
2. You do not have an explanation for how God could possibly ontologically be love while existing in the pre-creation void other than to say angels are not created in contradiction to scripture.
3. You do not have an explanation for the repeated comparisons made by scripture between God and Jesus that would normally mean Jesus is an apostate heretic that cannot save anyone if the comparisons are not correct.
4. When asked about any of this the end response is walking away idolizing one's own understanding over scripture in ad hominem and straw man.

Those are the facts in evidence so far. Call me Trinitarian all you like but the fact is Jesus is either explicitly stated to be God or labeled with the divine attributes of God and whatever you want to call it, that makes him God.

 

[Paul]

What is clear to you and what scripture states are two completely different things. The appeal to your own understanding is logically fallacious. You have been provided with verses read exactly as written that state the heavenly host were created. They are created creatures, not uncreated creature that existed prior to creation being created.

No, understanding truth begins with what scripture explicitly states and bowing one's knowledge and understanding to it.

Within the context of Jesus as the Redeemer. Those labels are New Testament labels describing the soteriological mission of God in His redemption of humanity from sin. Prior to that Jesus is described as God, the LORD's Lord, and all the many labels assigned God throughout the OT. All those labels are used to describe Jesus. If you claimed to be the I Am you'd be considered an idiot. Or a heretic.

John 5:9-23
9...Now it was a Sabbath on that day. 10So the Jews were saying to the man who was cured, “It is a Sabbath, and it is not permissible for you to carry your pallet.” 11But he answered them, “He who made me well was the one who said to me, ‘Pick up your pallet and walk.’” 12They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Pick it up and walk’?” 13But the man who was healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped away while there was a crowd in that place. 14Afterward, Jesus *found him in the temple and said to him, “Behold, you have become well; do not sin anymore, so that nothing worse happens to you.” 15The man went away, and informed the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well. 16For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on a Sabbath. 17But he answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I myself am working.” 18For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because he not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

19Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, unless it is something he sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in the same way. 20For the Father loves the Son and shows him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show him greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son also gives life to whom he wishes. 22For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, 23so that all will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

If Jesus was making himself equal with God and he was not God's equal, then he was a heretic, and no one is saved from sin by Jesus. If, alternatively, Jesus was, in fact, making himself equal with God because he is, in fact, equal with God, then he ought to be honored as such: equal with God. Did you read that part about Jesus being the judge of all? That means every Old Testament mention of God as Judge is actually a reference to Jesus. This happens throughout the New Testament: a label thought to exist solely as an attribute of the one almighty God is an attribute of Jesus'. The New Testament repeatedly assigns divine attribute to Jesus.

You do understand it is logically impossible to have two Gods, yes?
.

When measured by scripture the posts prove that is not the case.

My teacher is scripture. That is what I have used and all I have used. Not once have I appealed to any extra-biblical source.


Let's review. Based on the posts' actual content.....

1. You use scripture selectively and a) do not interpret any of it in light of the whole and won't answer questions about this when asked.
2. You do not have an explanation for how God could possibly ontologically be love while existing in the pre-creation void other than to say angels are not created in contradiction to scripture.
3. You do not have an explanation for the repeated comparisons made by scripture between God and Jesus that would normally mean Jesus is an apostate heretic that cannot save anyone if the comparisons are not correct.
4. When asked about any of this the end response is walking away idolizing one's own understanding over scripture in ad hominem and straw man.

Those are the facts in evidence so far. Call me Trinitarian all you like but the fact is Jesus is either explicitly stated to be God or labeled with the divine attributes of God and whatever you want to call it, that makes him God.

I don't agree with your opinions.

Just out of curiosity I googled searched about angels singing while God laid the foundations of the earth. The answers were all yes.

This was Billy Grahams answer: Apparently, He also can see what is clearly stated in the text.

Yes, the Bible tells us that the angels were witnesses to the creation of the world, which indicates they were created long before that great event. God asked Job, “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation … and all the angels shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4,7).

The Father is the ONLY true God. He alone is unbegotten. The/His Son is begotten. His Firstborn, In the Son lives all the fullness of the only true God, God our Father. They are one. About that Son -He is the image of His Father and the imprint of the Fathers very being for in Him lives the fullness. A Son in the form of God.

The Son is called God and His God has given Him a name above every name except the one who gave Him that name. He is also anointed as God's Christ.

That's one God our Father and one Christ our Lord.

The throne of God and the lamb forever.

 

[Josheb]

I don't agree with your opinions.

They are not my opinions. They are the word of God.

God's word explicitly states the heavenly host was created. I did not add a single word of interpretation to those verses. You, on the other hand have openly and just as explicitly stated your views are based on how you read scripture, your preferred interpretation, your personal opinion. So let's be honest and forthcoming and not misrepresent the facts in evidence. I'm relying on scripture exactly as written and you're relying on personal opinion.

Just out of curiosity I googled searched about angels singing while God laid the foundations of the earth. The answers were all yes.

That is not the question to be answered. Take 30 seconds and Google, "Are angels created by God?" and "Did God create the heavenly host?" and then come back and post the results.

Then remember the reason this is relevant is because you were asked to explain how God could be love (or just) in a void where He existed all alone, a single, solitary, love Person without any relationships until He created them. That and that alone is the point of inquiry currently being discussed with you. Your answer, your explanation, so far, is that angels pre-existed creation, but scripture explicitly states otherwise. Angels are created creatures. They sang God's praises while he created the foundations of the earth but they too were themselves created creatures. They did NOT exist prior to creation.

And you are, therefore, left still having to explain how God can be inherently, ontologically relational with experiential knowledge of those attributes if He existed all by Himself in the pre-creation void with no one to love.

Genesis 1:31-2:1
God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Thus, the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.

John 1:3
All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.

Colossians 1:16
For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.

The word "all" means all. Angels are created creatures. They did not exist prior to God creating creation. I, unlike you, have not added a single pixel to any of these verses. I have not added any interpretation whatsoever and most definitely, demonstrably have not added my personal opinions.

Therefore, the onus is still on you to explain how a single, lone, solitary, lonesome God could be love.

 

[Paul]

They are not my opinions. They are the word of God.

God's word explicitly states the heavenly host was created. I did not add a single word of interpretation to those verses. You, on the other hand have openly and just as explicitly stated your views are based on how you read scripture, your preferred interpretation, your personal opinion. So let's be honest and forthcoming and not misrepresent the facts in evidence. I'm relying on scripture exactly as written and you're relying on personal opinion.

That is not the question to be answered. Take 30 seconds and Google, "Are angels created by God?" and "Did God create the heavenly host?" and then come back and post the results.

Then remember the reason this is relevant is because you were asked to explain how God could be love (or just) in a void where He existed all alone, a single, solitary, love Person without any relationships until He created them. That and that alone is the point of inquiry currently being discussed with you. Your answer, your explanation, so far, is that angels pre-existed creation, but scripture explicitly states otherwise. Angels are created creatures. They sang God's praises while he created the foundations of the earth but they too were themselves created creatures. They did NOT exist prior to creation.

And you are, therefore, left still having to explain how God can be inherently, ontologically relational with experiential knowledge of those attributes if He existed all by Himself in the pre-creation void with no one to love.

Genesis 1:31-2:1
God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Thus, the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.

John 1:3
All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.

Colossians 1:16
For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.

The word "all" means all. Angels are created creatures. They did not exist prior to God creating creation. I, unlike you, have not added a single pixel to any of these verses. I have not added any interpretation whatsoever and most definitely, demonstrably have not added my personal opinions.

Therefore, the onus is still on you to explain how a single, lone, solitary, lonesome God could be love.

I believe the angels were created, but they were witnesses as God laid the foundations of the world. Hence they were before the world began.

 

[Josheb]

I believe the angels were created, but they were witnesses as God laid the foundations of the world. Hence they were before the world began.

Yes, the world, not all the rest of creation.

Now that you have acknowledged angels are, in fact, created creatures, and did not, therefore exist prior to creation being created, how do you answer the original inquiry?


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


There are no relationships by which that might exist prior to creation. How do you, therefore, explain the inherent relational ontology of God? Do you understand that when scripture says God is love, or God is just that scripture is necessarily implying some sort of relationship existed prior to His creating creation? What existed prior to creation? God, and God alone. The question is,

Is God a single, solitary, lone, lonesome Being prior to creation as the non-Trinitarian viewpoints necessarily assert, or is God inherently relational and therefore never single, solitary, lone, or lonesome as scripture asserts (regardless of whatever label might be attached to that condition)?


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


That is all that is asked you, for now. Just so you know, I do not mind if the answer is "I do not know," or "I do not know how to answer that particular question or explain how God can be love in the pre-existing void." At least that is honest and forthcoming. I will work with whatever the answer may be as long as the answer has some integrity with the whole of scripture.


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?

.

 

[Paul]

Yes, the world, not all the rest of creation.

Now that you have acknowledged angels are, in fact, created creatures, and did not, therefore exist prior to creation being created, how do you answer the original inquiry?


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


There are no relationships by which that might exist prior to creation. How do you, therefore, explain the inherent relational ontology of God? Do you understand that when scripture says God is love, or God is just that scripture is necessarily implying some sort of relationship existed prior to His creating creation? What existed prior to creation? God, and God alone. The question is,

Is God a single, solitary, lone, lonesome Being prior to creation as the non-Trinitarian viewpoints necessarily assert, or is God inherently relational and therefore never single, solitary, lone, or lonesome as scripture asserts (regardless of whatever label might be attached to that condition)?


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


That is all that is asked you, for now. Just so you know, I do not mind if the answer is "I do not know," or "I do not know how to answer that particular question or explain how God can be love in the pre-existing void." At least that is honest and forthcoming. I will work with whatever the answer may be as long as the answer has some integrity with the whole of scripture.


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?

.

You objected to me stating the angels were before the world began. Clearly God formed their spirits at some point in history before that point in time. There is nothing in genesis stating when.

Now you're adding more of your opinion about God and love. How did God come to exist at all? We don't know as He kept that to Himself. I only know He is unbegotten.
It's clear to me Gods character and being have never changed no matter any condition He is in. He is stated as Love. Alone with others has no bearing on His being or heart. With others He can show the love that comes out of His heart but that in no way disproves He wasn't love beforehand. He hasn't changed at all.

 

[Josheb]

You objected to me stating the angels were before the world began. Clearly God formed their spirits at some point in history before that point in time. There is nothing in genesis stating when.

Now you're adding more of your opinion about God and love. How did God come to exist at all? We don't know as He kept that to Himself. I only know He is unbegotten. It's clear to me Gods character and being have never changed no matter any condition He is in. He is stated as Love. Alone with others has no bearing on His being or heart. With others He can show the love that comes out of His heart but that in no way disproves He wasn't love beforehand. He hasn't changed at all.

Focus.

One question and only one question is asked. It was asked many, many posts ago and an answer has still not yet been provided.

How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


God's character has never changed, but the question is not about his "character." It's about his ontology; the nature of who and what is God. God claims to be love, not just loving. God claims to ontologically be love, not merely to have a loving character. Love, not just loving. That fact proves to be a problem for the non-Trin viewpoints because they have no means for explaining how God can actually be love. They have no way of explaining how a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God can be love prior to His creating creation. They have no means for explaining how his character can be immutable (unchanging).

But maybe, just maybe, you are different from every other non-Trin who has ever lived. Maybe you have an answer to the question asked.


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


And remember: I will accept "I do not know" as an answer and I will not personally criticize you as long as that is sincerely, honestly the answer. Otherwise, the question has been avoided long enough, and it is now time to post an actual answer to the specific question asked. I've got to go and probably won't be back for several hours. Take your time. Think about the question. Try to critically examine your own answer so as to anticipate and preemptively address any possible dissent anyone might have. Do your best to provide an impeccable answer to the specific question asked. Take more than today to do so, if you like. The posts aren't going anywhere .


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?

.

 

[Paul]

Focus.

One question and only one question is asked. It was asked many, many posts ago and an answer has still not yet been provided.

How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


God's character has never changed, but the question is not about his "character." It's about his ontology; the nature of who and what is God. God claims to be love, not just loving. God claims to ontologically be love, not merely to have a loving character. Love, not just loving. That fact proves to be a problem for the non-Trin viewpoints because they have no means for explaining how God can actually be love. They have no way of explaining how a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God can be love prior to His creating creation. They have no means for explaining how his character can be immutable (unchanging).

But maybe, just maybe, you are different from every other non-Trin who has ever lived. Maybe you have an answer to the question asked.


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God existing in the void prior to creation be love?


And remember: I will accept "I do not know" as an answer and I will not personally criticize you as long as that is sincerely, honestly the answer. Otherwise, the question has been avoided long enough, and it is now time to post an actual answer to the specific question asked.

Didn't I just answer that? Are you suggesting apart from others there could be darkness in God?
God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

 

[Josheb]

Didn't I just answer that?

No, you did not.

What you said was, "Clearly God formed their spirits at some point in history before that point in time," but that statement is self-contradictory. History is time. Time is a created part of creation.

Are you suggesting apart from others there could be darkness in God?

Not at all.

God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

Yep. Completely irrelevant to the question asked.

You seem to have some difficulty understanding what constitutes creation and how time and history fit.

• God is the Creator.
• Prior to God, the Creator, creating...... the heavens and the earth did not exist. God, the Creator, existed but creation did not.
• NOTHING in creation existed prior to Genesis 1:31.
• Time is simply a measure of cause and effect. God is the Cause of creation being created. If we were to put a hypothetical stopwatch on what happened between God speaking and the first phenomenon of creation existing that would be the very first measure of time. That would be the beginning of history, the beginning of the beginning, the beginning of the ages.
• God does not live in time. God lives in eternity. God is extra-temporal. God exists outside of, or external to creation. God is age-less; He exists apart from any age. He exists before creation. He can come and go in and out of the creation He created but He is not in any way, shape, or form, bound by the limits of time and space, or what is otherwise known as creation.
• Angels exist in time and space. They exist in the heavens, and the heavens are a part of creation. It was a mistake to assume angels existed prior to God creating creation. Several verses in scripture explicitly state the heavenly host (which includes angels) were created. The are created creatures, not pre-existent non-creatures. An uncreated creature is an oxymoron. You've since then acknowledge angels are created but time and history are still being confused with pre-creation. They do not exist prior to God creating creation. They are creation.

So the question still remains unanswered. Given the fact God exists prior to everything in creation because He is the Uncaused Cause of all that exists, whether visible or invisible.....


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God who existed in the void prior to creation be love?


God forming spirits would be during his creating creation. The questions is asking about before He created creation. Before God created creation there were no angles. There were no humans. There were no creatures. Who then did God love? Who was there to be loved by God? Who was there to love God back? What experience of love could God possibly have if there was no one to love and no one to love God back?

The non-trin has to answer those questions with, "No one. There was no one for God to love before He created Jesus, the angels and humans."

That is a problem. Why is that a problem? Because God claims to be love. He does not claim to be merely loving, but to ontologically be love. Love is His nature, and inherent and inextricable attribute of his being. He be love. How can He be love if there's no one to love?

The answer is He cannot be love in those conditions of solitude. He can have a loving longing, a loving emotion, a loving will, a loving attribute, but not a an inherent nature of love because love is inherently, unavoidably, inextricably relational. The problem is there is no relationship before God creates relationship. This has always been a problem within the lone God conceptualization of God. Dualists and Trinitarians do not have that problem.

You do.

But rather than come right out and say that and confront you with the contradiction, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and asking you to answer the question asked, the exact same question that has been confounding modalists, onenesses, and other non-Trins since the inception of the debate. The conditions of creation do not exist before creation was created. The conditions of creationare not relevant to the question asked.

How can a single,
solitary, lone, lonesome God
who existed in the void prior to creation
be love?​

.

 

[Paul]

No, you did not.

What you said was, "Clearly God formed their spirits at some point in history before that point in time," but that statement is self-contradictory. History is time. Time is a created part of creation.

Not at all.

Yep. Completely irrelevant to the question asked.

You seem to have some difficulty understanding what constitutes creation and how time and history fit.

• God is the Creator.
• Prior to God, the Creator, creating...... the heavens and the earth did not exist. God, the Creator, existed but creation did not.
• NOTHING in creation existed prior to Genesis 1:31.
• Time is simply a measure of cause and effect. God is the Cause of creation being created. If we were to put a hypothetical stopwatch on what happened between God speaking and the first phenomenon of creation existing that would be the very first measure of time. That would be the beginning of history, the beginning of the beginning, the beginning of the ages.
• God does not live in time. God lives in eternity. God is extra-temporal. God exists outside of, or external to creation. God is age-less; He exists apart from any age. He exists before creation. He can come and go in and out of the creation He created but He is not in any way, shape, or form, bound by the limits of time and space, or what is otherwise known as creation.
• Angels exist in time and space. They exist in the heavens, and the heavens are a part of creation. It was a mistake to assume angels existed prior to God creating creation. Several verses in scripture explicitly state the heavenly host (which includes angels) were created. The are created creatures, not pre-existent non-creatures. An uncreated creature is an oxymoron. You've since then acknowledge angels are created but time and history are still being confused with pre-creation. They do not exist prior to God creating creation. They are creation.

So the question still remains unanswered. Given the fact God exists prior to everything in creation because He is the Uncaused Cause of all that exists, whether visible or invisible.....


How can a single, solitary, lone, lonesome God who existed in the void prior to creation be love?


God forming spirits would be during his creating creation. The questions is asking about before He created creation. Before God created creation there were no angles. There were no humans. There were no creatures. Who then did God love? Who was there to be loved by God? Who was there to love God back? What experience of love could God possibly have if there was no one to love and no one to love God back?

The non-trin has to answer those questions with, "No one. There was no one for God to love before He created Jesus, the angels and humans."

That is a problem. Why is that a problem? Because God claims to be love. He does not claim to be merely loving, but to ontologically be love. Love is His nature, and inherent and inextricable attribute of his being. He be love. How can He be love if there's no one to love?

The answer is He cannot be love in those conditions of solitude. He can have a loving longing, a loving emotion, a loving will, a loving attribute, but not a an inherent nature of love because love is inherently, unavoidably, inextricably relational. The problem is there is no relationship before God creates relationship. This has always been a problem within the lone God conceptualization of God. Dualists and Trinitarians do not have that problem.

You do.

But rather than come right out and say that and confront you with the contradiction, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and asking you to answer the question asked, the exact same question that has been confounding modalists, onenesses, and other non-Trins since the inception of the debate. The conditions of creation do not exist before creation was created. The conditions of creationare not relevant to the question asked.

How can a single,
solitary, lone, lonesome God
who existed in the void prior to creation
be love?​

.

Thank for your opinion. God is light and in Him is NO darkness. You suggest if God is alone He can't be light which suggests some darkness.
Light with no darkness is pure righteousness. Good; Love same thing
God is good; God is love.
Jesus-"why do you call me good only god is good"
You can't know that.

God would be the same alone as He never changes. I know that because Jesus is His firstborn and He became a Father with His birth.

 

[Josheb]

Thank for your opinion.

It is not opinion and every time that false gratitude is posted it reads disingenuous and false.

God is light and in Him is NO darkness. You suggest if God is alone He can't be light which suggests some darkness.
Light with no darkness is pure righteousness. Good; Love same thing
God is good; God is love.
Jesus-"why do you call me good only god is good"
You can't know that.

God would be the same alone as He never changes. I know that because Jesus is His firstborn and He became a Father with His birth.

Still not an answer to the question asked. I will waste no more time discussing the matter with you because of this obfuscation. The record shows you were asked a legitimate, valid, op-relevant question and proved unable to answer it.

I, therefore, reject the position asserted because it is a viewpoint unable to address at least three very fundamental aspects of Theology. No Theology with that kind of inadequacy should be believed, especially not over any viewpoint with greater scriptural consistency and greater explanatory efficiency.

 

[Paul]

It is not opinion and every time that false gratitude is posted it reads disingenuous and false.

Still not an answer to the question asked. I will waste no more time discussing the matter with you because of this obfuscation. The record shows you were asked a legitimate, valid, op-relevant question and proved unable to answer it.

I, therefore, reject the position asserted because it is a viewpoint unable to address at least three very fundamental aspects of Theology. No Theology with that kind of inadequacy should be believed, especially not over any viewpoint with greater scriptural consistency and greater explanatory efficiency.

No you are wasting my time with your opinions that have no foundation in scripture.

If God was alone He would be light with no darkness in Him.
To suggest otherwise is a false premise.

 

[Paul]

It is not opinion and every time that false gratitude is posted it reads disingenuous and false.

Still not an answer to the question asked. I will waste no more time discussing the matter with you because of this obfuscation. The record shows you were asked a legitimate, valid, op-relevant question and proved unable to answer it.

I, therefore, reject the position asserted because it is a viewpoint unable to address at least three very fundamental aspects of Theology. No Theology with that kind of inadequacy should be believed, especially not over any viewpoint with greater scriptural consistency and greater explanatory efficiency.

Love in itself is motivation to create others. First of all "you" "your" opinion states how can God love if He is alone has no foundation in scripture to state He was different if He was alone. God doesn't change. You can't possibly know what you ask as fact. It's not fact. It's your opinion. I reject your premise.

 

[JesusFan]

Thank for your opinion. God is light and in Him is NO darkness. You suggest if God is alone He can't be light which suggests some darkness.
Light with no darkness is pure righteousness. Good; Love same thing
God is good; God is love.
Jesus-"why do you call me good only god is good"
You can't know that.

God would be the same alone as He never changes. I know that because Jesus is His firstborn and He became a Father with His birth.

What was Jesus before he was physically born?

 

[Paul]

What was Jesus before he was physically born?

see #184
But in sinply terms Jesus is a living being. What did you think He was? Did you mean "who" rather than what?