Originally Posted by Anthony
Yes, No problem, I believe in line with the philadelphia of 1646 which reads as this:

In this divine and infinite Being, there is the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided; all infinite, without any beginning, therefore but one God, Who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties.

This is my belief..Now if you want to doubt my belief in the Trinity, fine..thats on you..
1. I am not familiar with a document named, "Philadelphia of 1646". I am familiar with the "Philadelphia Confession" of 1742 which is nearly identical to the "Baptist London Confession" of 1689. The only confession that I am aware of from 1646 is the "Westminster Confession". So, what is this "Philadelphia of 1646" that you allegedly quoted from?

2. Just for fun, let's assume that you got the date wrong and you meant to type 1742 for the "Philadelphia Confession". Now, here's what that document states in regard to the Trinity, which you will plainly see is at variance with what you have stated you believe re: "only begotten" but in total agreement with the Nicene Creed:

Quote
Chapter 2 "Of God and of the Holy Trinity"
Section 3


In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word (or Son), and Holy Spirit,27 of one substance, power and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided;28 the Father is of none neither begotten nor proceeding, the Son is eternally begotten of the Father,29 the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son,30 all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar, relative properties, and personal relations which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on Him.

27. 1Jn 5:7; Mt 28:19; 2Cor 13:14.
28. Ex 3:14; Jn 14:11; 1Cor 8:6.
29. Jn 1:14,18.
30. Jn 15:26; Gal 4:6.
Now, since you claim to hold the definition of God as quoted from this "Philadelphia of 1646", which you also claim to be your definition of Trinity, then yes, I have to say that I doubt your belief in the Trinity is biblical for it is surely not. The quote you provided is not only incomplete but in error.

In His grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]