Mark:
“#163- not really sure what you want me to say about this one?

172- same again as above????

Now it is asked why do i distinguish- my response: simply because the bible does. The Son is NEVER said to send the Father, adn it is heretical to think the Father was crucified on the cross. Likewise the Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son not vice verse. So i am simply showing scripture. According the Amos Love’s interpretation, it must then mean that the Father, Son and Spirit were all crucified! Is this what people really want to believe?”

Kay’s response to Mark’s comment: #163:

Mark:“If one cannot come to terms with the differences in subsistence, a modalistic Trinity is the result, which is condemnable- because the Son is really no different from the Father.”
Kay:
“Mark,
I don’t think it is that egals cannot come to terms with differences in subsistence – it is the inferences that comps/hierarchialists make from them that are the main sticking point.”

This is THE point, Mark. Please “work it out”, “deal with it”, “engage” this point!!

“According the Amos Love’s interpretation, it must then mean that the Father, Son and Spirit were all crucified! Is this what people really want to believe?”

This logic of yours DOES NOT follow!! And so, again, please “work this out” and respoond. ;P