CalvinsBulldog wrote:Shermana wrote: 1. I have never ever heard even a Trinitarian say that the Father is not "a god". What is a "person" exactly?
I would suggest you spend more time with Trinitarians. The only people with which I have
ever debated this terminology are Jehovah's Witnesses who, of course, believe in three gods with the Father having supremacy, however, the Jehovah's Witnesses are not a Trinitarian denomination and do not claim to be.
"Person" is a theological concept unique to Christianity. There are numerous disagreements as to what properly constitutes a person, but one common definition is "
individual substance of a rational nature, possessing intellect and will". If you have "
never ever" encountered this term in your interactions with Trinitarians, it would suggest to me they were not very knowledgeable.
2. There is no such thing as "The Godhead", even though things like Strong's help perpetuate this myth, the word means "godhood", it in no way has any sort of "beingness" as a noun. It is like the word "Deity" and "Divinity" but in the Qualitative sense. (i.e. This sentence uses both forms of "Deity", the Qualitative which "Godhead" would be is first: The Pharoah achieved Deity/godhood after his death and was then considered a deity.) The word is a Qualitative noun, and the modern use of "Godhead" as an object/being as opposed to a QUALITY (Divin-itude) is a sneaky misuse of the word Trinitarians love to abuse. Strong's definition of this word gives a hint of its Theological bias to placate its readerhood. The NLT REALLY shows its bias by totally changing the word to "God".
And those same "sneaky Trinitiarians" use the word
Deity in the place of
Godhead in other modern translations of the Bible. Observe:
"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Col 2:9, KJV, 1611)
"For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" (ibid., NIV, 1984)
"For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (ibid, ESV, 2001)
"..because all the essence of deity inhabits him in bodily form" (ibid., ISV, 2008)
And behold! In the more recent translations, the word is not even capitalised. So much for masterful Trinitarian deception.
I do not quite understand your point. You argue that
Godhead is not a very good translation of
theion,
theotetos, and
theiotes. But that is not news to Christians who are conversant with the history and the translation issues of their sacred text.
You seem to be running dangerously close to the sorts of arguments given by Jehovah's Witness translators responsible for the
New World Translation of the Bible, for their eisegetical method of translating this passage.
You completely missed the point on use of the word "Deity", they are using it in the non-Qualitative context to disguise it as if it is a direct being rather than a Quality. The word means "Godhood" and "Deity" in the sense of Quality. Why did they even Capitalize it in the first place? Why not use the word "Divinity" instead if claering up confusion was the issue? Why does the NLT use "God"? There is clear evidence of this word being used historically to deliberately promote a false interpretation. Do you even understand what I brought up the issue for? There is no such thing as THE Godhead, it doesn't exist, it's not a thing. It's a Quality. If they use the word "deity", then it's fine, as long as one understands it doesn't mean "God" like how the NLT deliberately distorts it to.
I find it funny you think I've never run across the word "person" before in Trinitarian debates. If you admit Jesus had his own mind and will, then that means he was his own separate being with his own soul, thus he is not some part of the Father's mind or will, but his own being.
I like how you admit that there is no direct solid answer on what a "person" is. Exactly, just for more shady wordplay.
PS, as I've mentioned many times on many threads, there are in fact many "gods" and God the Father rules over all of them, this is called "Henotheism" rather than "Polytheism" (which the Trinity clearly is). Psalm 136:2 God is called "Elohei Ha-Elohim" which means "God of the gods". Psalm 82:1 many translations use "Heavenly beings" instead of "gods" because they are scared about the idea of using the word "gods" for angels. (Yes, angels are called "gods").
Why do you suppose Jesus says "Ye are gods" in John 10:34? Was he changing the context? Why does the Witch Endor claim to "see a god" when she summons Samuel's soul? How would she know what a "god" is?
Out of curiosity, are you aware that Calvin helped have his buddy Servetus burned to the stake when he started doubting the Trinity? What do you think of that, a just punishment by ol' Calvin?
PS You can accuse me of being "Dangerously close" To the JW interpretations because I am and proud of it, even though i"m not JW. If you have a problem with such interpretations, there are many threads on the issue. See my "70 non-Trinitarian interpretations of John 1:1 thread on the Theology board".
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 557#398557
Yes I firmly believe that the correct grammatical translation for John 1:1 (as well as 10:33) is "And a god was the word" and "You a mere man make yourself to be a god". If you have a problem with this on Theological grounds, I'll be happy to explain. If you have a problem on Grammatical grounds, see the above thread.
