The Gospel Versus "God's Economy"

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Oh for sure, again, I'm not disputing that God went through a process or that there was a process. I'm just trying to come up with other things that go through a process to show that no one would typically describe those similar things as "[noun] is processed" either.

Going through a process doesn't mean you've been processed. There is a whole process you have to go through to buy and sell a house, but no one "is processed" because of it. But that's a little external to the human being, and a caterpillar is the only thing I could think of (without spending more time on it) where the creature itself goes through a process and becomes something different.

I understand that you are focusing on the term.... I was responding to ZNPs definition that process implies an external agent working on something... using that definition it describes incarnation perfectly. Prenatal development is a process and is so described.

Yet, I don’t agree with your statement that “going through a process doesn’t mean you’ve been processed”. Of course you have! Going through a divorce means you are divorced. Going through bankruptcy means you end up bankrupt. Going through training means you are trained.

However, your argument is a fallacy. If your objection is that we don’t call caterpillars processed then I would argue we are not talking about a bug.... something we can observe, understand, and express easily with common terms. Rather, we are describing God, and not just God the Creator, but the Triune God who has essence and activity. We are attempting to describe a difference between what God is and what He does without confounding the two. I’m glad you are not in the camp of those who disregard the divine revelation showing God went through a process. I’m glad you have clarity about what Brother Lee actually taught and not carelessly leveling false charges of the heresy of modalism.. However, your objection is the use of an expression to describe something profound. It’s not a term that is normally used to describe the economical Trinity... an accepted theological term. Yet, no one I know says “ this morning I was talking to the economical Trinity and...” .

Therefore, yours is a non- sequitor argument... you find fault when the term (processed) is used to describe Gods doings and your argument, by comparison, has to do with everyday language used to describe a bug. There are many disciplines that use expressions that we don’t use in our everyday speak. That is why I said to use incarnation in this instance... no need for an analogy,

Drake