It is called Monotheism.
J.
I feel like I am in a theology class sometimes…learning different names for doctrines.
So let’s see if I pass the test
Oneness is monotheism too, except they believe the Father became the son, or that Jesus played the roles of [f,s and h]. So one God that play many roles
The Trinity I thought was THE ESSENCE - Spirit that has shown itself as 3 persons, that can feel, and each having a mind. Those three persons seperate but equal, existing eternally in shared love.
So one God because one power, or One God because same mindset, or?
The phrase “God doesn’t have a brain because everything is a no-brainer to God” is a theological concept popularized by figures like Dallas Willard, which argues that God is a spirit and not bound by physical limitations, sequential thought, or the need to process information.
Key Aspects of This Perspective:
-
No Physical Limitations: Because God is spirit and omnipresent, God does not possess a physical brain or neural pathways, nor does God need them.
-
Transcendent Knowledge: Everything is considered a “no-brainer” to God because God is omniscient, meaning God already knows everything and does not need to pause, consider, or deliberate on decisions.
-
Unlike Human Thought: While humans are bound by time and sequential thinking (processing information step-by-step), God operates outside of these constraints.
-
Wisdom vs. Processing: This viewpoint distinguishes between having a “mind” (wisdom/consciousness) and having a “brain” (the physical organ required for human, time-bound thought).
This concept suggests that while humans need brains to function, God is entirely free of the “wiring” and predictable, slow behaviors associated with human cognitive processes.
I fully agree with him on this. Yup, amen.
1Co 2:12 Now R18we have received not R19the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God.
1Co 2:13 And we impart this R20in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, R21interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.N1
1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are R22folly to him, and R23he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
1Co 2:15 The R24spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.
1Co 2:16 R25“For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But R26we have the mind of Christ.
J.
1 Like
It is called Bible teaching
@Corlove13, how much of what you wrote in this post is grounded in the Bible itself, and how much of it is really based on reasoning that is outside the Scriptures?
John Calvin was right to make the rule, “Go as far as the Scriptures go, and then stop.”
The Trinity is indeed a mystery because God does not reveal anything more about his nature than the truth that he is ONE God consisting in three Persons who work together in creating all things and people, saving believers, and sanctifying them. And all three as the one God share equally in all the divine qualities.
Christian and biblical monotheism clearly believes the teaching of most of the Bible that God is one God in contrast to the many gods of non-Christians; whereas the Father sent Jesus to die for us who believe and sends the Spirit into believers’ lives.
Sinai covenant: who made it, how it was ratified
Core Hebrew terms
Covenant: berit (בְּרִית, fem. noun). Root sense: treaty/arrangement.
Cut a covenant: kārat bĕrît (כָּרַת בְּרִית). Idiom with kārat “cut” (Qal perfect or wayyiqtol) + berit. The sacrificial cutting explains the idiom.
Key passage: Exodus 24:3–8 MT
v. 3: wayyāḇōʾ môšeh… wayyĕsapēr (“Moses came… and recounted”)-Moses acts as mediator.
v. 4: wayyiḵtōḇ môšeh… (“Moses wrote all the words of Yahweh”).
v. 5: wayyišlaḥ… wayyaʿalû ʿōlōṯ… (“he sent… and they offered burnt offerings”)-animal blood is central.
v. 7: wayyiqqaḥ sēfer habbĕrît… wayyōʾmerû kol ’ăšer dibber YHWH naʿăśê wenîšmaʿ (“he took the book of the covenant… they said, ‘All that YHWH has spoken we will do and we will listen’”)-conditional, bilateral response.
v. 8: hinnēh dām habbĕrît… kārat YHWH ʿimmāḵem (“Behold the blood of the covenant that YHWH has cut with you”)-note subject: YHWH cuts the covenant; Moses applies blood.
LXX Exodus 24:8
idou to haima tēs diathēkēs hēs diethēto Kyrios pros hymas
diathēkē (διαθήκη, fem. noun) = covenant/testament.
diethēto (διέθετο, aorist middle indicative 3sg of διατίθημι) = “arranged/established” a covenant. Subject: Kyrios (YHWH). Middle voice highlights the subject’s initiative: “the Lord made/appointed [for Himself] a covenant.”
Pros hymas (“with you”) renders ʿimmāḵem.
Conclusion on Sinai
Morphologically and syntactically, both MT and LXX assign covenant-making agency to YHWH, with Moses as mediator-operator on earth.
The idiom “cut a covenant” (kārat bĕrît) and LXX’s diatithēmi pin the establishment on the Lord, not on Israel or on the incarnate Son’s earthly action. Israel’s “we will do” frames it as conditional and exposing (cf. Galatians 3:19–24).
B. New Covenant: who inaugurates it, when it begins…
Prophetic promise in Hebrew and LXX
Jeremiah 31:31–34 (MT 31:31–34; LXX 38:31–34): MT: hinnēh yāmîm bāʾîm… wĕkāratî ʿim bêt-yiśrāʾēl ûḇêt yĕhûdā bĕrît ḥădāšāh (“Behold, days are coming… and I will cut with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new covenant.”)
Verb: kāratî (1cs perfect) “I [YHWH] will cut/make.” Subject is explicitly YHWH. LXX: kai diathēsomai tō oikō Israēl… diathēkēn kainēn (“and I will make with the house of Israel a new covenant”)
diathēsomai (διαθήσομαι, fut. mid. ind. 1sg): “I will appoint/make” (middle again stresses divine initiative).
Note “not like the covenant” (loʾ kabbĕrît): discontinuity is structural, not a mere renewal.
Inauguration in Jesus’ words (Luke 22:20)
Touto to potērion hē kainē diathēkē en tō haimati mou (“This cup is the new covenant in My blood”).
Genitive “in My blood” marks the means/matrix of inauguration; Jesus self-identifies as the sacrificial basis. He doesn’t say “in your repentance” or “in your ongoing confessions.”
Legal force in Hebrews 9:16–17
hopou gar diathēkē, thanatou anankē pheresthai tou diathamenou (“where there is a covenant/testament, the death of the testator must be brought forward”).
diathamenou (διαθεμένου, aor. mid. ptc. gen. sg. masc. of διατίθημι): “the one who made the will.”
bebaiā epi nekrois (βεβαία ἐπὶ νεκροῖς): “it is valid upon deaths.”
Hence the New Covenant takes effect at death, the cross, not the incarnation.
Mediator/guarantor language in Hebrews
Hebrews 7:22: kreittonos diathēkēs engyos gegonen Iēsous (“Jesus has become the guarantor/surety of a better covenant”). engyos (ἔγγυος) = legal surety.
Hebrews 8:6: mesitēs (μεσίτης) “mediator.”
Hebrews 9:15: kai dia touto diathēkēs kainēs estin mesitēs (“for this reason He is mediator of a new covenant”).
Hebrews 10:10,14: en hōi thelēmati hēgiasmenoi… mia gar prosphora… teteleiōken eis to dienekes (“by one offering He has perfected forever”).
LXX echo in Hebrews’ citation of Jeremiah (Heb 8:8–12; 10:16–17)
Retains diathēsomai (future middle) with God as subject and contrasts “not according to the covenant” (ou kata tēn diathēkēn) made at the exodus (Heb 8:9).
Agency: God enacts; content: internalization by Spirit; basis: forgiveness remembered no more.
C. Christ and Sinai: presence vs. earthly agency…
As the eternal Logos, the Son shares the divine will that instituted Sinai (unity of the Godhead). But the text-level agency markers at Sinai remain “YHWH made/cut” through Moses with animal blood (Exod 24 MT; LXX).
In the incarnation, Jesus’ identified role is “born under the Law” to redeem (Galatians 4:4–5). He fulfills and ends the Law’s jurisdiction (Romans 10:4; Hebrews 7:12).
D. Synthesis with New Covenant grace…
The morphology and syntax consistently ascribe Sinai’s establishment to YHWH with bilateral conditions on Israel, functioning to expose sin (Galatians 3:19–24).
The New Covenant is ascribed to God as well (“I will make”), but it is enacted and guaranteed by the incarnate Son’s own blood (Luke 22:20), legally valid at His death (Hebrews 9:16–17), and produces once-for-all forgiveness and perfected standing (Hebrews 10:10,14).
Therefore, believers are not under Law but under grace; they died to the Law to belong to Christ (Romans 6:14; 7:4–6). The Spirit now leads, replacing the written code (Galatians 5:18; 2 Corinthians 3:6–11).
You agree @TheologyNerd ?
Sorry not going to entertain what you can read for yourself. If there is something I actually said, speak to it.
You told me that I was speculating in another thread- and I called u out being speculative…is this what this is all about?
So if you want to argue it won’t be with me!
If Calvin is your teacher, then definitely you should do what He says.
What Calvin Was Referring To:
- The Hidden Counsel of God (Divine Mysteries): Calvin frequently addressed people trying to understand why God does certain things (such as why He chooses some for salvation and not others). He argued that God’s secret will is incomprehensible and that “hidden mysteries” are for God alone.
- Predestination and Election: This is the most common context for this phrase. When discussing predestination, Calvin warned that trying to probe why God predestined some to destruction and others to salvation is an “inextricable labyrinth” and a sign of unhealthy curiosity.
- Preventing Human Speculation: Calvin warned against adding human opinions to scripture, which he believed was “shallow curiosity” or a desire to “penetrate the mystery of God”.
- The Limit of Human Reason: He taught that the human mind is feeble and must be assisted by the “spectacles” of Scripture to know God, rather than relying on human intellect alone.
Yep, I agree, don’t rely on the human intellect alone, something is “missing” and wonder what that might be?
J.
Most likely The Holy Spirit.
Research into the works of John Calvin reveals a complex tension between his stated commitment to biblical exegesis and his reputation for deductive, almost speculative, theological reasoning—particularly regarding divine sovereignty, predestination, and the “eternal decree”. While Calvin insisted on practical knowledge of God and opposed “empty speculation” that floats in the brain, critics often argue that his systematic treatment of theology—specifically in the Institutes of the Christian Religion —moves beyond revealed scripture into philosophical determinism
He’s your teacher alright.
Do you have a link on this @Corlove13 ? I don’t think so. This is AI generated.
J.
Yep, I “call you out” Where did I say you don’t have the Ruach HaKodesh?
Post and number please.
J.
You said it and I dont know why I reply …to nonsense
Because im going to strive to love you…Because in my heart I dont really think you say certain things on purpose to hurt unless u felt attacked. Im trying to bring things people say to the surface when they do it…
Anyway I apologize…for replying…
1 Like
I never feel “attacked” but appreciate the love.
Post and number and the link on what you wrote on Calvin, much oblidged. See #50, I said it was AI generated, prove me wrong please.
I searched for the exact sentence you quoted, and there is no webpage that contains that wording verbatim. A direct phrase search returned no indexed source containing that text. That strongly indicates one of the following:
Your paragraph was AI-generated or paraphrased from multiple academic discussions rather than copied from a single article.
It is a synthetic summary of common scholarly critiques of Calvin rather than a quotation.
It may have been rewritten from several sources, so the wording no longer matches any one publication.
However, the ideas in the paragraph do exist in scholarship, especially discussions about the tension between Calvin’s claim to strict biblical exegesis and accusations that his doctrine of predestination becomes logically deductive.
For example, discussions about Calvin insisting theology should not go beyond Scripture appear in studies like:
John Calvin the Theologian (Benjamin B. Warfield)
**Warfield explains that Calvin rejected speculative theology and insisted theology must remain grounded in Scripture rather than philosophical speculation.**Contrary what you were saying.
Scholarly works on Calvin’s exegetical method also discuss his commitment to the literal sense of Scripture and grammatical-historical interpretation, which shaped the tension later debated by critics.
So the concept is real in academic literature, but the exact paragraph you posted is not traceable as a verbatim quotation from a published article or book.
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.toc.html....from the horse proverbial mouth.
J.
That idea has some truth to it, @Corlove13, but it has some speculation mixed in too. In other words, since we have been made in the image and likeness of God, whatever that means exactly, and since Jesus is both all-God and all-human, in some sense he has reasoning powers that are far-superior to ours. In addition, our thought processes have been tainted with sin and therefore defective.
The Gospel of John merely presents the threeness of God, while the rest of the Scriptures emphasize his oneness. However, the Bible does stress both the essential oneness and the distinct threeness without going further. It seems to me that Dallas Willard has gone beyond the Bible in some of his description. For example, I point to his assertion that God “does not need to pause, consider, or deliberate on decisions.” That assumption goes beyond the Bible’s descriptions, though God’s thoughts and ways beyond ours.
Isa 55:1 “Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
Isa 55:2 Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread, and your labor for that which does not satisfy? Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good, and delight yourselves in rich food….Isa 55:6 “Seek the LORD while he may be found; call upon him while he is near;
Isa 55:7 let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.
Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.
Thus, since humans never would have concocted with their reasoning the truth about God’s grace in verses 1 and 2, the Bible has to have been inspired by him. The writers would have never invented that truth.
What I think AI does is puts information inputed on the net together and summarizes.
To each His own.
I agree with you and Calvin, @Corlove13, on this issue. Monotheism simply says that God is one God, not more than one God. Trinitarianism agrees with monotheism, but it says that the one God consists of three Entities or Persons: the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. How does that compare with your post to which I responded?
Not sure which one…the one where you asked a question that sounded like it wasn’t going to build up or encourage, that I said I wasn’t entertaining. 
I figured you could read what was written to get your own answer. If I say I want to “try something on” and then tested by the word…I don’t see that as argumentative toward the faith…more looking for truth…
My point was you used Calvin’s statement but He does the same thing He speaks against.
First, @Corlove13, who wrote the words in italics? Second, please refer to specific quotes from Calvin in context instead of some unnamed writer. Third, whose “research” are they referring to, and how did they arrive at this conclusion?
The Bible does not prohibit intellectual curiosity but warns against speculation that distorts, adds to, or detracts from the core Gospel message. Scripture encourages focusing on revealed truths rather than “foolish controversies,” as undue speculation can lead to false doctrine, division, and rebellion.
Key perspectives on speculation in the Bible:
- Elevating Speculation to Truth: A major concern is taking human ideas, philosophies, or theories (such as regarding the atonement or end times) and treating
- The Problem with Prophecy: The New Testament strongly discourages setting dates for Jesus’ return, which is a common form of speculative prophecy.
- Focus on Revelation: Believers are advised to focus on what is clearly revealed in Scripture, leaving “secret things” to God, as discussed on YouTube.
- Distraction from Growth: Speculation about unrevealed details—such as Jesus’ childhood—is seen as an unprofitable waste of time.