UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> alternate view to Great Deception...2nd Thess.


12/17/10 10:27 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18047
inlikeflynn, I think Paul said it well..."great is the *mystery* of godliness, for God was manifest in the flesh".

So clearly, we have a very mysterious joining of God and man, and Paul's word is not "person" but "manifestation" of God.

As to the manifestation of God in Christ. I would not say obviously that Jesus was two different entities. I would lean on the same language used by early theologians and accepted today. 2 natures.

Fully God, authentically man. God experiencing His creation as an authentic human being.

But certainly the dual nature requires 2 wills as Jesus (as accepted by trinitarians) is God but still said, "not my will but your will be done...".

Concerning the prayer of Christ in the garden, clearly a complex and dynamic activity taking place.

A trinitarian is not free from scratching their collective heads.

1) One co-equal God prayes to another co-equal God? Praying is an activity of subordination. How does one maintain co-equality when one prays, implores, seeks, or asks another divine entity.

2) Why would God (Jesus is also fully God for trinitarians pray?

3) If both are divine you do have two entities (which seems to be an obstacle to viewing a strict monotheism around 2 natures).

Jesus praying was 1) done as an example (as is all things done by our Lord) 2) was a necessity of His being man (all flesh must come before the Lord (Spirit) in prayer 3) book of Hebrews says, He prayed "in the days of His flesh


I suppose if He was tempted "in likewise as all men, yet without sin" then He needed to do and provide for us the weapons to also not sin.

1) He knew and applied the word 2) He fasted and 3) He prayed.

All are things that He may not needed to have done as God. But all are things He may have done since He decided to redeem mankind as a kinsmen redeemer, in the agency of flesh.

God got to look at His creation through the eyes of Christ and in His Spirit, He didn't *need* to sleep, hunger, pray, etc but somehow, through this "mystery" of the incarnation, He allowed Himself to experience this and to live as a man.

Does that make sense?





12/17/10 11:33 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 425
the rooster - inlikeflynn, I think Paul said it well..."great is the *mystery* of godliness, for God was manifest in the flesh".

So clearly, we have a very mysterious joining of God and man, and Paul's word is not "person" but "manifestation" of God.

As to the manifestation of God in Christ. I would not say obviously that Jesus was two different entities. I would lean on the same language used by early theologians and accepted today. 2 natures.

Fully God, authentically man. God experiencing His creation as an authentic human being.

But certainly the dual nature requires 2 wills as Jesus (as accepted by trinitarians) is God but still said, "not my will but your will be done...".

Concerning the prayer of Christ in the garden, clearly a complex and dynamic activity taking place.

A trinitarian is not free from scratching their collective heads.

1) One co-equal God prayes to another co-equal God? Praying is an activity of subordination. How does one maintain co-equality when one prays, implores, seeks, or asks another divine entity.

2) Why would God (Jesus is also fully God for trinitarians pray?

3) If both are divine you do have two entities (which seems to be an obstacle to viewing a strict monotheism around 2 natures).

Jesus praying was 1) done as an example (as is all things done by our Lord) 2) was a necessity of His being man (all flesh must come before the Lord (Spirit) in prayer 3) book of Hebrews says, He prayed "in the days of His flesh


I suppose if He was tempted "in likewise as all men, yet without sin" then He needed to do and provide for us the weapons to also not sin.

1) He knew and applied the word 2) He fasted and 3) He prayed.

All are things that He may not needed to have done as God. But all are things He may have done since He decided to redeem mankind as a kinsmen redeemer, in the agency of flesh.

God got to look at His creation through the eyes of Christ and in His Spirit, He didn't *need* to sleep, hunger, pray, etc but somehow, through this "mystery" of the incarnation, He allowed Himself to experience this and to live as a man.

Does that make sense?




It's funny that you mentioned the verse about it being a mystery. I was thinking that very thing last night.
And yes, there is plenty for trinitarians to scratch their heads about. The way I see it, both positions have aspects that make a lot of sense, but also ones that are troublesome. It truly is a mystery, one that won't be solved in this life.
12/18/10 3:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18048
inlikeflynn...I appreciate your thoughtful insight.
12/20/10 11:18 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 427
the rooster - inlikeflynn...I appreciate your thoughtful insight.


Same here. I really enjoy the discussions on this forum. We have such a diversity of perspectives. It really forces me to think about what I believe and why.

Back to the previous discussion: One of the ideas I find compelling about the trinity is one that Ridge has brought up a few times, which is that the essence of God's being is love, and love is a communal/relational thing. I have a hard time making sense of that if God was "alone" before creation. That kind of frames the argument for me. That being said, I have to concede that "3 but 1" is hard to make sense of as well.
12/20/10 12:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12/20/10 12:31 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6460
the rooster - Robert, you said that Jesus didn't say that He was the Father. Here you go:

Jhn 14:7 ¶ If YE HAD KNOWNME, ye should have known MY FATHER also: and from henceforth YE KNOW HIM, and HAVE *SEEN* HIM.

Jhn 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, SHOW US THE FATHER, and it sufficeth us.

Jhn 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have *I* been so long time with you, and yet hast thou NOT KNOWN ME, Philip? he that hath SEEN ME HATH SEEN THE FATHER; and how sayest thou [then], Show us the Father?

Jhn 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and THE FATHER IS *IN ME*? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father THAT DWELLETH IN ME, in me, he doeth the works.

Jhn 14:11 Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.



As i study this part, i am directed to John 14:20 "At that day ye shall know that i am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

I see this as Jesus pointing out that the power of God is in us all, we are all inter-connected.

Father and son dwell inside me and i dwell inside them. as shown just a couple of verses down when Jesus answers Judas.."If a man love me, he will keep my words;and my Father will love him,and
we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."
here again Jesus clearly speaks of two, not one.









ME: Robert, Jesus is talking about the Father and Phillip asks to see the Father and it will satisfy them (the apostles). Note what Jesus says...HE is like, "Phillip, have you been with me so long and you don't know me?!?!?" Now how is that tied to what Phillip just asked?

Then JESUS SAYS, He that hast seen me, hast seen the Father!!! And then he says, "how then can you say, "show us the father".

Think about it. These Jews wanted to see the invisible Jehovah, the God of Moses, the Holy, All High Creator. And Jesus is indignant. He's like, "c'mon Phillip...seriously...you've been with me this long and you are going to ask me that?!!?"

Why? Because Jesus said, brother, you seen me, you've seen the Father...It was almost like it was a stupid question. Then He explains how.

Phillip, The Father is IN ME. In Him in a different way then us Robert.

or,not in a different way, in  the same way.

That's why Messiah is called the "Branch" of Jesse (son) but also the Root of David (His sustenance, His begginnings).

or because Jesus was the god in the garden who recreated man into his own image, who walked with man and taught us, Fathers original creation being what we call cavemen, was recreated in the garden to be the brothers and sisters of the Son.


  
12/20/10 5:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HELWIG
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/28/03
Posts: 56015
or because Jesus was the god in the garden who recreated man into his own image, who walked with man and taught us, Fathers original creation being what we call cavemen, was recreated in the garden to be the brothers and sisters of the Son."

Uh oh! SHIT JUST GOT REAL!

Real heretical, that is.........
12/21/10 6:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6461
 no...opinionated ..yea...........heretical..no
12/21/10 4:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6462
 JN 17:21
"That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee,that they also may be one in us".....

here again he speaks of two seperate individuals, and includes that we can be one with them, which shows me that we are all inter-connected.....over and over again....He speaks of two seperate entities...Why?
12/24/10 12:48 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18052
inlikeflynn: Back to the previous discussion: One of the ideas I find compelling about the trinity is one that Ridge has brought up a few times, which is that the essence of God's being is love, and love is a communal/relational thing. I have a hard time making sense of that if God was "alone" before creation. That kind of frames the argument for me. That being said, I have to concede that "3 but 1" is hard to make sense of as well.

me: well, I don't think one has to affirm God lacked the attribute of Divine Love prior to creation. God exists out of time and I believe that He saw the start and finish and existed before time, in time and after the end of time. So for Him, His attribute of love (or justice, or purity, etc.) pre existed all things and was not reliant on other things. He is self sufficient in all His attributes although it took evil to show His Holiness, or other beings to show His love.

But to say that Jesus (who is also called God) had to pre-exist in order to have communal love just smacks of multiple divine beings (gods) to me.
12/24/10 12:51 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18053
Robert, I believe that the Lord sometimes spoke about the Father as a separate entity for several reasons: 1) people could not comprehend the Immutable, Invisible, All Powerful God would come as a man 2) the people would seek to kill Him or make Him a king 3) He used this language to teach them about God in a way that they could relate to and 4) He was authentically human and despite being God He chose to live as man (pray, eat, sleep, etc.) so He felt a sense of duality not of beings but of nature. He sometimes referred to Him and the Father in regards to the work of the self same Spirit.

To have God's Spirit in us and the Spirit of Christ is not to have 2 Spirits in us, but one.
12/28/10 12:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6489
i can understand that he could come as a man to live as a man, but he being just one entity i cannot.

when Jesus said that if he goes, he will send the comforter to help us, i take it as he is speaking about a seperate entity, that the way i take it, he already knew, and would be a seperate entity from himself or Father, do you see the Holy Spirit this way?
12/28/10 10:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18054
Hi Robert. Distinct? Yes. But that distinction is a distinction in now God will now engage with man. No longer through the High Priest in the temple, separated by the veil, or through jesus in flesh, limited (self imposed limitation) but now God will dwell in men.

Jesus said He would send the Comforter but in that same chapter says, "I will not leave you *comfortless* I will come to you."

The word for comfortless is the greek word "orphanos" (orphans). I will not leave you "fatherless" or "orphans".

So, yes, the Holy Spirit is distinct, but a distinct office and way or mode in which the same God is interacting with His creation :-)
12/28/10 10:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18055
Hi Robert. Distinct? Yes. But that distinction is a distinction in now God will now engage with man. No longer through the High Priest in the temple, separated by the veil, or through jesus in flesh, limited (self imposed limitation) but now God will dwell in men.

Jesus said He would send the Comforter but in that same chapter says, "I will not leave you *comfortless* I will come to you."

The word for comfortless is the greek word "orphanos" (orphans). I will not leave you "fatherless" or "orphans".

So, yes, the Holy Spirit is distinct, but a distinct office and way or mode in which the same God is interacting with His creation :-)
12/28/10 10:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18056
ooops, sorry for the double post.
1/12/11 10:10 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
5pointer
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/22/04
Posts: 2582
ATTENTION rooster - oops, sorry for the caps there. u sir have just blown me away. i have always argued that Jesus was God the Son, a seperate person in the Godhead, seperate from the Father (still God) I dialogue with jws all the time and u have me confused as ever : )

good stuff regardless
1/21/11 4:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6716
the rooster - Hi Robert. Distinct? Yes. But that distinction is a distinction in now God will now engage with man. No longer through the High Priest in the temple, separated by the veil, or through jesus in flesh, limited (self imposed limitation) but now God will dwell in men.

Jesus said He would send the Comforter but in that same chapter says, "I will not leave you *comfortless* I will come to you."

The word for comfortless is the greek word "orphanos" (orphans). I will not leave you "fatherless" or "orphans".

So, yes, the Holy Spirit is distinct, but a distinct office and way or mode in which the same God is interacting with His creation :-)
So why didn't he just say that, instead of something that would need deciphering, why would he lead people to believe he was praying to God, if he was God, that would be an outright lie that he was doing.

Why not just say I am God?
 
1/21/11 4:53 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6717
 Also why tell Mary not to touch him for he had not acsended to the Father yet?
1/21/11 4:55 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
87 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6718
 also why would he say that Father loved himas in the person he was(Jesus), before the foundation of the world, if he was Father?
1/23/11 1:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3597
 What I want to know is, in rooster's version of the Gospel are all the Trinitarians going to hell; and in the Trinitarian's version of the Gospel, is rooster going to Hell?

What beliefs are fundamental to one's eternal salvation?

I've read and heard some say that belief in the Trinity, the doctrine of eternal torment, baptism, speaking in tongues, works, etc are all necessary to salvation.

What say you?
1/23/11 2:29 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18125
Hi guys, sorry hadn't checked this for a while. Will try to get back with you on theses.

5 pointer, thank you! I believe that our view of the godhead is much closer to Jewish monotheism then Hellenized trinitarian doctrine.

Robert, I believe that Jesus taught progressive revelation. Just as the nature of God unfolded progressively in the OT (through the various Jehovahistic compound names). I don't believe that Jesus was willing to just flat out walk around, saying, "I'm God, I'm YH manifest in the flesh, etc." to anyone and everyone. as it was, the very notion that He might be the messiah caused some to hate him, some to think He was crazy and some to be ready to storm Rome and make Him king.

But to those He deemed, He told them that He was worthy to be praised (which is only reserved for YH), He was the I AM (the name YH said for Moses to call Him by), He said to Phillip that, "if you've seen me you've seen the Father, I and the Father are ONE". Etc.

His apostles understod this by saying He was God in flesh, He was called Yhshua because He (YH) would "save *His*people from their sins", He was the "expressed image of the invisiblel God. He was called the mind of God, the hand of God, and the bosom of God in flesh.

For those who have ears...let them hear. To those who have eyes, let them see.

He was loved before the foundation of the world in that He resided in God's mind (logos) as His (God's) arm of salvation. God loved the notion that He would come and redeem His people. Before people were created, before the foundation of the world. Before time, He saw it all...creation, fallen man, redemption, salvation, the bride, and the end of time. All made through Him and by Him and He loved it!
1/23/11 2:32 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18126
Grakman -  What I want to know is, in rooster's version of the Gospel are all the Trinitarians going to hell; and in the Trinitarian's version of the Gospel, is rooster going to Hell?

What beliefs are fundamental to one's eternal salvation?

I've read and heard some say that belief in the Trinity, the doctrine of eternal torment, baptism, speaking in tongues, works, etc are all necessary to salvation.

What say you?


Grak, good question. I used to just say, "they are lost". But I believe that salvation and who is saved is in the Lord's hand. He will have "mercy on whom He will have mercy, compassion on whom He will have compassion".

I have met trinitarians that expressed a oneness view even though they called it trinitarian.

Ultimatey, I do believe that we must believe, "that I AM or ye shall all die in your sins". I believe that the notion of knowing who He is, is fundamental. But I believe this for me.

For me, knowing the gospel (death, burial and resurrection) I am compelled to *obey* (or apply that gospel) by dying, being buried and being filled with His resurrection power (the new birth, or being born again), and that is life or death, salvation issue for me.
1/23/11 5:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3601
 I'm glad you have it down rooster. But what about the rest of us who may not be 'sure?' Scary thing to bet eternity on when there are 1,000's of different opinions out there, all of whom say they 'know' the true Gospel.
1/25/11 1:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 18133
Yep. That's why I believe what I found and pass it on. That's what I'm commissioned to do. I'm not commissioned to judge, I have no authority or power to do so. I'm called to love, pass on the gospel, live it out, and pray.

If someone is confued by the 1,000 of different opionions (as I was) God can bring revelation. If someone decides that this message is wrong or not for them, my personal opinions don't really matter do they?
1/26/11 6:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3612
 Lots of people believe that God has brought them a revelation. Oddly enough, it is not the same as what was revealed to you. ;)
1/26/11 7:05 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 470
Grakman -  Lots of people believe that God has brought them a revelation. Oddly enough, it is not the same as what was revealed to you. ;)


That's one of the drawbacks of Sola Scriptura and having no interpretive authority.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.