Why Three Persons, not four?

[Mike_Dye]

Where did Jesus teach the Trinity and how do you define the Trinity?

Dan

The Catholic understanding of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit comes from Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels I could direct you to the specific passages but I believe I would serve you better by letting you find them on your own. That way you may come to understand the other aspects of our faith. God Bless You, Mike

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Dan Parker:

We know love is not a person. I wonder what Augustine was thinking. Do you think at this point he did not consider the holy spirit to be a person?

Are you confusing a mere mortal person with the person of the Godhead?

 

[AmbroseSJ]

The Catholic understanding of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit comes from Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels I could direct you to the specific passages but I believe I would serve you better by letting you find them on your own. That way you may come to understand the other aspects of our faith. God Bless You, Mike

Just to clarify this a bit; Jesus taught in parables, although he did give the Apostles specific detailed doctrine. However, the Gospels do not record all instances of His doctrinal teachings to the Apostles, and they say so. The Holy Catholic Church is God’s oracle and teacher. It has been thus since Apostolic times. Therefore the doctrine of the Trinity is taught by the Church, although this doctrine is reinforced within the Scriptures. However, one cannot just “read” the Scriptures and be taught about the Holy Trinity.

 

[Dan_Parker]

Are you confusing a mere mortal person with the person of the Godhead?

No

Dan

 

[Dan_Parker]

The Catholic understanding of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit comes from Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels I could direct you to the specific passages but I believe I would serve you better by letting you find them on your own. That way you may come to understand the other aspects of our faith. God Bless You, Mike

OK, I found what Jesus taught in the gospels. He said his Father was the only true God in John 17:3. That means the Father exhausts the category of only true God.

Dan

 

[FCEGM]

Dan:
I don’t think Athanasius thought this all the way through. Or perhaps because it was a very old tradition in the Church that this referred to Jesus he had to accept it.

So the great Athanasius didn’t think this all the way through. Sorry, Dan, but

Now, how can this be a reference to his becoming flesh when the creating of him happened before the earth was created? Just does not make sense.

It makes sense when one understands the foreseen Incarnation of the Son - His Flesh being created. Christ, the New Adam, is the “first born” of the new, redeemed, Creation and, as such, the Personification of Divine Wisdom (per Proverbs 8:22). Such statements do not refer to the Son’s eternal nature but (as in Proverbs 8) to the revelation that Christ’s Incarnation was always predestined and the very purpose of Creation itself.

 

[Dan_Parker]

So the great Athanasius didn’t think this all the way through. Sorry, Dan, but

It makes sense when one understands the foreseen Incarnation of the Son - His Flesh being created. Christ, the New Adam, is the “first born” of the new, redeemed, Creation and, as such, the Personification of Divine Wisdom (per Proverbs 8:22). Such statements do not refer to the Son’s eternal nature but (as in Proverbs 8) to the revelation that Christ’s Incarnation was always predestined and the very purpose of Creation itself.

That is not what the text says:
NJB Proverbs 8:22 'Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works. 23 From everlasting, I was firmly set, from the beginning, before the earth came into being. 24 The deep was not, when I was born, nor were the springs with their abounding waters. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I came to birth; 26 before he had made the earth, the countryside, and the first elements of the world. 27 When he fixed the heavens firm, I was there, when he drew a circle on the surface of the deep, 28 when he thickened the clouds above, when the sources of the deep began to swell, 29 when he assigned the sea its boundaries – and the waters will not encroach on the shore – when he traced the foundations of the earth, 30 I was beside the master craftsman, delighting him day after day, ever at play in his presence,

The text says that the Son was the first-fruits of what God fashioned and that this happened before the earth came into being. The text does not say that the Son was predestined to be created at a later date.

The deep was not when he was born. That cannot be in the 1st century. The mountains were there in the 1st century as well.

Dan

 

[Convert66]

Dan:
One must not press the Hebrew më`ôläm too hard, for even the NAB renders this as:
NAB Proverbs 8:22 (1 )"The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago; 23 From **of old **I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth.
This agrees with the Halot Hebrew Lexicon where for this verse it gives the gloss:
past, ancient times, prehistoric times, age (THAT 2:587-589): pl. cs. ôlämi Pr 823.
Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon says of the word in this verse:
Pr 8:23 from the beginnings of the earth;
In answer to your question I believe this to be a reference to God’s Son and so I agree with Catholics on that point.

Dan

Well, I’m not sure what else it could mean to say, “The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago; 23 From **of old **I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth” . . .than to say “prior to creation”, which is by definition Eternity (**prior to time itself). Also, it doesn’t say “made” but “begot”, which must reference the Father, because a Father begets a Son, he doesn’t make him. The Father and the Son are of One essence, because if they are solely alone then what sense does it make to distinguish them by “Father” or “Son”, since the Father is obviously NOT the Son, nor the Son the Father, but neither can the Father be a Father without the Son and vice versa.

If God is not Father for all Eternity, then there is some Perfection that He did not have until it obtained (your view that the Son is a creature), which means that He is not immutable, and therefore not God. He must have been Father from All Eternity in order to be Once for All Perfection in Every Aspect of Immutable Divinity. If God is Father, but not Eternally, He is not God, because He changes, which goes contrary to the Scriptures.

Jesus taught us what we could comprehend about God’s Essence, and He did so in many ways, but when He says to go therefore into all nations baptizing them in the Name (he doesn’t say names, as many, but name, as One) of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, He gives us the same single Name for One, yet distinguished by the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, which brings us back to God’s immutability; for If God is not Father for all eternity, then He added something to Himself; and if the Son is not the Son from all eternity then He can not be One Essence with the Father whom He depends upon for Sonship, and therefore not named by the “name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit” since He is a creature and not of the same essence as the Father. Likewise the Holy Spirit is distinguished by not being named the Father, nor the Son, but the Holy Spirit. But we know that the Spirit is called the Spirit of God, and Holy, and Spirit of Truth and Life but also the Son is the Truth and the Life, and He is called Holy prior to His birth and yet not identical with the Holy Spirit.

Jesus Himself taught us this Name—Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Matt.28:19

OK, I found what Jesus taught in the gospels. He said his Father was the only true God in John 17:3. That means the Father exhausts the category of only true God.

Dan

“Father” can not exhaust the category since a father is not a father without a child, and God must be “without shadow or turning” and immutable from Eternity or He is not God; therefore the Son must be eternal as well, which means He is not a creature, but of the same essence as the Father. If the Father is the only true God, then of necessity all other gods must be false. If Jesus is therefore a true as the Son of the Father He is of the same essence as the Father, as any son is of his own father’s essence.

It is too difficult to explain adequately, which to my mind makes it more likely to orignate with God than with men, for anything True of God can not be conceived by men, but only supposed or conjectured let alone explained unless it is revealed to them by God. If men could explain this perfectly it would be more likely to originate in human imagination. It is revealed by the Son, however, and our proper reaction to His revelation is faith and not doubt.

If Jesus/Word of God is not the Son eternally, then the Father is not Father eternally, which means He was lacking in perfection, since it is revealed to us that He is Father, Son and Holy Spirit and these three do the same things and are described having the same attributes of Creator, Life, Redeemer, Savior, Truth, etc., etc.

Yet, you say He is Father before there was a Son. Explain how this is that He can be Father Eternally before there is a Son?

All my best . . .

 

[Dan_Parker]

Convert66:

Yet, you say He is Father before there was a Son. Explain how this is that He can be Father Eternally before there is a Son?

All my best . . .

Dan:
I don’t believe I ever said that.

Dan

 

[Convert66]

Dan,

I don’t believe I ever said that.

Saying that the Son is created and a creature is denying that the Father is Father from all eternity, because He could not be the Father until the Son is begotten.

All my best . . .

 

[Dan_Parker]

Dan:
One must not press the Hebrew më`ôläm too hard, for even the NAB renders this as:

NAB Proverbs 8:22 (1 )"The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago; 23 From of old I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth

.

This agrees with the Halot Hebrew Lexicon where for this verse it gives the gloss:

past, ancient times, prehistoric times, age (THAT 2:587-589): pl. cs. ôlämi Pr 823.

Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon says of the word in this verse:

Pr 8:23 from the beginnings of the earth;

In answer to your question I believe this to be a reference to God’s Son and so I agree with Catholics on that point.

Well, I’m not sure what else it could mean to say, “The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago; 23 From **of old **I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth” . . .than to say “prior to creation”, which is by definition Eternity (**prior to time itself).

Dan:
That is philosophy not scripture. Can you prove that time was created? There is certainly no Scripture that says this.

In addition if you look at the Hebrew lexicons I provided which are above, it is the beginnings of the earth they consider to be what is in view. that is why the NRSV renders this as – NRS Proverbs 8:23 Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth.

Convert66:
Also, it doesn’t say “made” but “begot”, which must reference the Father, because a Father begets a Son, he doesn’t make him. The Father and the Son are of One essence, because if they are solely alone then what sense does it make to distinguish them by “Father” or “Son”, since the Father is obviously NOT the Son, nor the Son the Father, but neither can the Father be a Father without the Son and vice versa.

Dan:
I quoted the Catholic NJB which uses create. The Greek Septuagint which all the Early Church Fathers quoted used KTIZW (create in Greek) and that is the word they also used when quoting it. I am sorry, but you are stuck with “create.”

Convert66:
If God is not Father for all Eternity, then there is some Perfection that He did not have until it obtained (your view that the Son is a creature), which means that He is not immutable, and therefore not God. He must have been Father from All Eternity in order to be Once for All Perfection in Every Aspect of Immutable Divinity. If God is Father, but not Eternally, He is not God, because He changes, which goes contrary to the Scriptures.

Dan:
That sounds like Catholic Philosophy. Give me Scripture. That is all I am interested in discussing. After all this group is for discussing Sacred Scripture, not Philosophy.

Dan

 

[Convert66]

Convert66;5640657:

Well, I’m not sure what else it could mean to say, "The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago; 23 From **of old **

I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth" . . .than to say “prior to creation”, which is by definition Eternity (**prior to time itself).

Dan:
That is philosophy not scripture. Can you prove that time was created? There is certainly no Scripture that says this.

In addition if you look at the Hebrew lexicons I provided which are above . . .

Convert66**How many ages ago? As for time being created, if you reject Big Bang cosmology (or just reject it in the Sacred Scripture forum) then how about Genesis 1:1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth . . .

This indicates that God was prior to the “beginning” of the heavens and the earth does it not? God exists Eternally (theology 101), which is prior to time. And logically, before the beginning there is no time, because the beginning is the first moment.

“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1:3.

You have already agreed that the subject of Proverbs 8 is the Word of God/Son of God, and the text you cite says that the Word (Wisdom) created all things.

If Jesus is the Word and the Son, and the Word and the Son created all things, then the Word and the Son had to be prior to “things” and thus not a “thing” Himself, that is, not a created thing as angels and men.

Jesus says to His disciples to go into all nations teaching them whatsoever things He had taught them and baptizing in the name (not nameS) of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

If the Father is Eternal, He is necessarily a Father eternally, and He can only be a Father in Relation to the Son. This establishes the Eternal nature of the Son because Father and Son can only exist in relation. Without the Son there is no Father. Without a Father there is no Son. This isn’t philosophy. It’s common sense.

“For the life was manifested, and we have seen [it], and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us.” (1John 1:2)

Who was manifested unto us above? That eternal life, which was with the Father was manifested unto us. This is Christ Jesus. . .Eternal Life “with” the Father . . .This tells us that Eternal life is with the Father and manifested in the Son, Christ Jesus. As we have seen a Son is not the Father and a Father is not the Son, and they are only Father and Son in relation to one another. If the Son has Eternal Life, then He is necessarily Eternal.

What is Life eternal?

" And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3)

So we see that the only true God is the Father and this is Eternal life,(as in 1 John) and the Son (as also in 1 John) is the One sent from the Father manifested unto us (1 John) with Eternal Life. This distinguishes between the Father and the Son, while these two verses grant Eternal life to Both the Father and the Son. One God.

“And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17:5).

The Father, who is Eternal, glorifying the Son with His own Self with the glory the Son had with the Father before the world was. Only God has glory, He will not give it unto another, and yet, here He is granting it to the Son like it was before the world was, that is, before the beginning prior to time . . .eternally.

Convert66:
Also, it doesn’t say “made” but “begot”, which must reference the Father, because a Father begets a Son, he doesn’t make him. The Father and the Son are of One essence, because if they are solely alone then what sense does it make to distinguish them by “Father” or “Son”, since the Father is obviously NOT the Son, nor the Son the Father, but neither can the Father be a Father without the Son and vice versa.

Dan:
I quoted the Catholic NJB which uses create. The Greek Septuagint which all the Early Church Fathers quoted used KTIZW (create in Greek) and that is the word they also used when quoting it. I am sorry, but you are stuck with “create.”

Convert66**So are you, Dan." And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:" Eph. 3:9.

This means Jesus Christ is not a created thing.

“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” Rev. 4:11.

"And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: " Rev. 10:5,6.

Jesus created all things. He that created all things is worthy, Lord and he that lives for ever and ever, which is Eternally.

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Col. 1:15-17.

This is yet another reference to Jesus Christ as the image of the invisible God, the creator of ALL things, and “before” all things. He is Eternally the Son with the Eternal Father.

Convert66:
If God is not Father for all Eternity, then there is some Perfection that He did not have until it obtained (your view that the Son is a creature), which means that He is not immutable, and therefore not God. He must have been Father from All Eternity in order to be Once for All Perfection in Every Aspect of Immutable Divinity. If God is Father, but not Eternally, He is not God, because He changes, which goes contrary to the Scriptures.

Dan:
That sounds like Catholic Philosophy. Give me Scripture. That is all I am interested in discussing. After all this group is for discussing Sacred Scripture, not Philosophy.

Dan

There’s your Scriptures. You want more?

All my best . . .

 

[Benadam]

I wonder what Augustine was thinking. Do you think at this point he did not consider the holy spirit to be a person?

 

[Dan_Parker]

Convert66:
Well, I’m not sure what else it could mean to say, “The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago; 23 From of old I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth” . . .than to say “prior to creation”, which is by definition Eternity (prior to time itself).
**
Dan:
That is philosophy not scripture. Can you prove that time was created? There is certainly no Scripture that says this.

In addition if you look at the Hebrew lexicons I provided which are above . . .

Convert66**How many ages ago? As for time being created, if you reject Big Bang cosmology (or just reject it in the Sacred Scripture forum) then how about Genesis 1:1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth . . .

Dan:
What I question is whether or not time is a “thing”. Time could as easily be an abstraction. What if the past is history, the present is fact and the future is a probability? Even the big bang does not state with certainty that time is a thing, it depends on the theorist. In addition I would interpret the book of Job as teaching that the angels were present when the physical universe was created.

Convert66:
This indicates that God was prior to the “beginning” of the heavens and the earth does it not? God exists Eternally (theology 101), which is prior to time. And logically, before the beginning there is no time, because the beginning is the first moment.

Dan:
Just because this universe had a beginning that does not mean it was the first thing created.

Convert66:
“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1:3.

You have already agreed that the subject of Proverbs 8 is the Word of God/Son of God, and the text you cite says that the Word (Wisdom) created all things.

If Jesus is the Word and the Son, and the Word and the Son created all things, then the Word and the Son had to be prior to “things” and thus not a “thing” Himself, that is, not a created thing as angels and men.

Dan:
You are quoting this verse with a punctuation that is not found in the latest critical editions of our Greek such as NA27 and UBS4. If you like we can discuss this, but it is a large subject all by itself.

Convert66:
Jesus says to His disciples to go into all nations teaching them whatsoever things He had taught them and baptizing in the name (not nameS) of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

If the Father is Eternal, He is necessarily a Father eternally, and He can only be a Father in Relation to the Son. This establishes the Eternal nature of the Son because Father and Son can only exist in relation. Without the Son there is no Father. Without a Father there is no Son. This isn’t philosophy. It’s common sense.

Dan:
I don’t think that makes any sense at all. The person of God is eternal, not all of his relationships. Speaking of the nation of Israel the NJB says:
Isaiah 54:5 For your Creator is your husband, Yahweh Sabaoth is his name, the Holy One of Israel is your redeemer, he is called God of the whole world.

Was Yahweh always a husband? Your logic makes Israel also eternal.

Dan:
Your arguments are getting very convoluted. My argument that the one God and only God is the Father is quite simple. Bible writers establish that basic concept and at the same time frequently identify the Father as that one God in more than one passage. That is true biblical monotheism.

Dan

 

[Convert66]

Dan,

What I question is whether or not time is a “thing”. Time could as easily be an abstraction. What if the past is history, the present is fact and the future is a probability? Even the big bang does not state with certainty that time is a thing, it depends on the theorist. In addition I would interpret the book of Job as teaching that the angels were present when the physical universe was created.

Are those “theorists” quoting Scriptures, as you asked, or are they just philosophizing? I agree that angels were created before the universe, but regardless of what time is, precisely, it began to exist with the creation of the material universe. This is the plain reading of Genesis 1:1.

Just because this universe had a beginning that does not mean it was the first thing created.

I’ve never disputed this, and I guess I do not see how the creation of St. Michael brings time into existence as well. Time exists in the universe, not prior to it.

You are quoting this verse with a punctuation that is not found in the latest critical editions of our Greek such as NA27 and UBS4. If you like we can discuss this, but it is a large subject all by itself.

And? Are there not sufficient Scriptures to convince you that Jesus the Son/Word created all things? I listed many, why single this one out and ignore the rest?

I don’t think that makes any sense at all.

I am not surprised.

The person of God is eternal, not all of his relationships.

If God is Eternal, and God is a Father, he is necessarily an Eternal Father. Otherwise He is the God of process theology or open theism. Read again 1 John 1:2 Eternal life is “with” the Father and “manifested unto us”. This is Christ Jesus, is it not? If so, then Jesus the Son/Word has Eternal Life, which means, necessarily that his life is eternal like the Father who also has Eternal Life. If not, what does “eternal life” mean?

Speaking of the nation of Israel the NJB says:
Isaiah 54:5 For your Creator is your husband, Yahweh Sabaoth is his name, the Holy One of Israel is your redeemer, he is called God of the whole world.
Was Yahweh always a husband? Your logic makes Israel also eternal.

My logic doesn’t make Israel eternal unless you can find about twenty Scriptural references to Israel creating ALL things. Also, you should read the book of Isaiah and the Psalms to see that Jesus IS the Holy One of Israel, since the Holy One of Israel created Israel and is it’s Maker. Jesus created ALL things, including Israel.

Your arguments are getting very convoluted. My argument that the one God and only God is the Father is quite simple. Bible writers establish that basic concept and at the same time frequently identify the Father as that one God in more than one passage. That is true biblical monotheism.

How can a Father be an Eternal Father when there is no equally Eternal Son for Him to be the Father of? This necessarily means there was a time before He was Father (a father needing a son to actually be a Father), which makes Him not eternal, and therefore not God.

I have identified Jesus as the Creator of all things in more than one passage. He is also the Holy One of Israel (IS. 43:15) In fact, read all of Isaiah 43 with a mind to remember that the NT identifies Jesus as the Creator of all things, the Redeemer, the Savior, and after that explain why Jesus Himself identifies the name (again, not nameS) of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit as the name by which we are to teach Him to the nations and be baptized into this name (not nameS).

All my best . . .

 

[Dan_Parker]

Dan:
]What I question is whether or not time is a “thing”. Time could as easily be an abstraction. What if the past is history, the present is fact and the future is a probability? Even the big bang does not state with certainty that time is a thing, it depends on the theorist. In addition I would interpret the book of Job as teaching that the angels were present when the physical universe was created.

Convert66:
Are those “theorists” quoting Scriptures, as you asked, or are they just philosophizing? I agree that angels were created before the universe, but regardless of what time is, precisely, it began to exist with the creation of the material universe. This is the plain reading of Genesis 1:1.

** Dan:**
Since you agree angels were created before the universe, then if the Son is eternal on that same basis, why are they not eternal as well?

As for the plain reading of Genesis 1, it says nothing about time at all. You are still assuming time is a thing that was created and not an abstraction.

Convert66:
Time exists in the universe, not prior to it.

Dan:
You don’t really know this for sure. If time is a thing and God created it in the physical universe, how do you know that it does not have a counterpart in the spirit realm that was created with it? It is really an argument from silence.

Dan

 

[Dan_Parker]

Dan:
You are quoting this verse with a punctuation that is not found in the latest critical editions of our Greek such as NA27 and UBS4. If you like we can discuss this, but it is a large subject all by itself.

Convert66:
And? Are there not sufficient Scriptures to convince you that Jesus the Son/Word created all things? I listed many, why single this one out and ignore the rest?

Dan:
First of all, the word create is not used in John 1. Jesus himself said:
DRA John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son: and he hath given all things into his hand.

The Son did not bring anything into existence in the sense of Creation Ex Nihilo. All things were given into his hand by his Father.

Dan

 

[Dan_Parker]

Convert66:
My logic doesn’t make Israel eternal unless you can find about twenty Scriptural references to Israel creating ALL things. Also, you should read the book of Isaiah and the Psalms to see that Jesus IS the Holy One of Israel, since the Holy One of Israel created Israel and is it’s Maker. Jesus created ALL things, including Israel.

Dan:
You are mixing your arguments. You should abandon the one about the Father needing to be Eternally a Father because he himself is Eternal. How about this: The title of a relationship for God (ie Father but not Husband) indicates an eternal relationship only if it can be proven by other verses that the other party is also eternal?

As for the Son creating all things, see my previous post which points out that the word create is not in that verse and that Jesus says that his Father gave all things to him, not that he created them.

DRA John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son: and he hath given all things into his hand.

Dan

 

[FCEGM]

That is not what the text says:
NJB Proverbs 8:22 'Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works. 23 From everlasting, I was firmly set, from the beginning, before the earth came into being. 24 The deep was not, when I was born, nor were the springs with their abounding waters. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I came to birth; 26 before he had made the earth, the countryside, and the first elements of the world. 27 When he fixed the heavens firm, I was there, when he drew a circle on the surface of the deep, 28 when he thickened the clouds above, when the sources of the deep began to swell, 29 when he assigned the sea its boundaries – and the waters will not encroach on the shore – when he traced the foundations of the earth, 30 I was beside the master craftsman, delighting him day after day, ever at play in his presence,

The text says that the Son was the first-fruits of what God fashioned and that this happened before the earth came into being. The text does not say that the Son was predestined to be created at a later date.

The deep was not when he was born. That cannot be in the 1st century. The mountains were there in the 1st century as well.

Dan, does God foreknow what He will accomplish? Of course; and that is why the Fathers can see this, with their sensus fidelium, as a reflection of the Incarnation. Further, wisdom literature is poetic in nature and to take it exactly literally is a mistake. We can see both Proverbs 3 and 8 present the personification of wisdom and that wisdom is presented in 3 as a woman; it further shows that Wisdom is God Himself: that it is “by His knowledge” that “the depths break open, and the clouds drop down dew.”

It is a great error to see in this personification of an attribute of God (His Wisdom) an indication of Christ being a creature (even if deemed the first and the highest). To read it in this way is a denial that God Himself Is Wisdom (precisely because Christ IS God, the great Byzantine basilica of Hagia Sophia presents Christ as Holy Wisdom).

From your own literature which tries to support the JW belief that the Holy Spirit is not a Person:

“However, it is not unusual in the Scriptures for something that is not actually a person to be personalized or personified. Wisdom is personified in the book of Proverbs (1:20-33; 8:1-36); and feminine pronominal forms are used of it in the original Hebrew, as also in many English translations. (KJ, RS, JP, AT) Wisdom is also personified at Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:35, where it is depicted as having both ‘works’ and ‘children.’ The apostle Paul personalized sin and death and also undeserved kindness as ‘kings.’ (Ro 5:14, 17, 21; 6:12) He speaks of sin as ‘receiving an inducement,’ working out covetousness,' seducing,’ and `killing.’ (Ro 7:8-11) Yet it is obvious that Paul did not mean that sin was actually a person.” Insight on the Scriptures, 2:1019,

And yet here you are saying precisely that Proverbs is referring to specific person who is not the Person of God.

 

[Dan_Parker]

NJB Proverbs 8:22:

 '**Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works**. 23 From everlasting, I was firmly set, from the beginning, before the earth came into being. 24 The deep was not, when I was born, nor were the springs with their abounding waters. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I came to birth; 26 before he had made the earth, the countryside, and the first elements of the world. 27 When he fixed the heavens firm, I was there, when he drew a circle on the surface of the deep, 28 when he thickened the clouds above, when the sources of the deep began to swell, 29 when he assigned the sea its boundaries -- and the waters will not encroach on the shore -- when he traced the foundations of the earth, 30 I was beside the master craftsman, delighting him day after day, ever at play in his presence,

Dan, does God foreknow what He will accomplish? Of course; and that is why the Fathers can see this, with their sensus fidelium, as a reflection of the Incarnation. Further, wisdom literature is poetic in nature and to take it exactly literally is a mistake. We can see both Proverbs 3 and 8 present the personification of wisdom and that wisdom is presented in 3 as a woman; it further shows that Wisdom is God Himself: that it is “by His knowledge” that “the depths break open, and the clouds drop down dew.”

Dan:
I said this before but it has not been answered. The text above does not speak of the foreknowledge of God. It is the first person account of Wisdom speaking of its own creation before the earth was made. It is not a first hand account of Wisdom saying that it was foretold a long time ago that it would be created.

It is a great error to see in this personification of an attribute of God (His Wisdom) an indication of Christ being a creature (even if deemed the first and the highest). To read it in this way is a denial that God Himself Is Wisdom (precisely because Christ IS God, the great Byzantine basilica of Hagia Sophia presents Christ as Holy Wisdom).

Dan:
The explanation you are giving is that this is the incarnation of the Son being foretold a long time in advance. That is how Athanasius got around the creation of the Son. I though all Trinitarians believed that the fleshly body of the Son of man was part of the created order just like your body and my body.

From your own literature which tries to support the JW belief that the Holy Spirit is not a Person:

“However, it is not unusual in the Scriptures for something that is not actually a person to be personalized or personified. Wisdom is personified in the book of Proverbs (1:20-33; 8:1-36); and feminine pronominal forms are used of it in the original Hebrew, as also in many English translations. (KJ, RS, JP, AT) Wisdom is also personified at Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:35, where it is depicted as having both ‘works’ and ‘children.’ The apostle Paul personalized sin and death and also undeserved kindness as ‘kings.’ (Ro 5:14, 17, 21; 6:12) He speaks of sin as ‘receiving an inducement,’ working out covetousness,' seducing,’ and `killing.’ (Ro 7:8-11) Yet it is obvious that Paul did not mean that sin was actually a person.” Insight on the Scriptures, 2:1019,