Here is what a trinitarian wrote on the carm Board which is nonsense because we are not talking about a father and son relationship between homo sapiens:
Someone Named Cassius: "No, this has nothing to do with 'traits' (whatever you mean by that). The parallel has to do with ontology. Human fathers and sons do not have different ontologies - at all. Both are ontologically homo sapiens. In the same sense, the Son of God and God the Father are both ontologically 'God'. Whatever distinction arises between the Father and the Son comes from exactly that - the fact that one is Father and one is Son, and thus they cannot be identical as it relates to Person".
mlculwell: The person above is assuming the: "son of God" means pre-existent God person with the father. God to them would be/ is the father and the son and would be that God thereby being his own daddy.
3 comments:
Manny, scholarship has stated that the early Church fathers, until the time of Tertullian and Hippolytus, did not see the Father-Son as parental relationships. Yet, suddenly, when a distinction was needed, the Father suddenly took on human attributes and became a parent.
I would hope you are not somehow thinking that I am advocating such nonsense? I am trying to show the absurdity of contemporary trinitarain thought.
Their "parental relationship" is in name only. But if God(f,S,HS) is the father of the human son Jesus then that seems to me Jesus would be his own daddy and that would either make four persons or a hybrid New species.
Actually, Manny, on this I agree with you and was offering support. Once you REdefine the Father in a parental light, it is easy then to do so with the Son and start the path down to Trinitarianism
Post a Comment