»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
God and Jesus....
| Philosophy 101 |
|
God and Jesus.... |
|
|
WhtDove Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-22
Posts 9245Illinois 
|
are they ONE? If so, why do you come to that conclusion? Do you think they are seperate entities? If so, why? |
||
| © Copyright 2000 WhtDove - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
You know I can't stay away from this question but I'm afraid I am a little short on time for the moment. I'll try to get to the question tomorrow. In the meantime (as one of my more annoying professors used to say), what do you think?  Jim |
||
|
Erin Member Elite
since 2000-06-15
Posts 2527~Chicago~ |
The way that I was taught is that they were 2 different people. And even if they were 1 person why would they give them 2 different names. The way I was taught in school was that God was Jesus's father. Thats my opinion. I was raised catholic but I grew older not wanting to got to church. I went to a catholic grammer school, and my first year of H.S. then I transferred to a public school and they arent allowed to talk about God. And they taught it as if it were 2 different people. But who knows everybody will have a different answer. [This message has been edited by ERIN (edited 08-17-2000).] |
||
|
WhtDove Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-22
Posts 9245Illinois |
Erin I'm sure it generally is taught that way. He's always referred to as the "Son of God." But as for the different names, God has many different names. One person in general has many names they're known by also. It's a concept not any understand. I don't think anyone will actually come to completely understand that while here in the flesh anyhow. Let's put it this way...For instance I am one, but yet many. I am a daughter, a mother, a sister, a wife, a friend, but I am the same person. In 1John 5:7 it says: For there are three that bare record in Heaven, the Father, the Word (which is Jesus), and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one. In John 1:1 it says: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Jesus is the Living Word! |
||
|
JnR4eva Member
since 2000-08-07
Posts 377Bronx, NY |
wow what a topic...well i have been taught that they are one( i have been in catholic school all my life ecpet college)...but then we have religion books and the Bible that say God is the father of Jesus!!! it's so confusing to the mind. first off i have to say that this is a very subjective matter..it all depends on what the believer belives in, ..like i would love to try to take this as a logical statement and try to deduce a clear cut answer...BUT U CANT LOL this is religion we are talking about, a faith, not a premise..however i will try to tackle one point..its our language of language... now u have said that u are many in one...a mother, sister, aunt...and i am many in one as well and Jesus was many as well..but lets look into our language and see how we say things...it is without a doubt that we are many....but let us say that you are your own mother....is there a problem with that? of course there is... b/c your mother is *assumed* to be a separate entity independent from you ...u cannot be ur own mother and be urself..being an aunt and godmother all all but titles...and do u see why it is soo complex when we say Jesus was his own father? it's soo hard to comprehend b/c as humans we do not understand things like that b/c we have used our language to build a structure for that..so that we don't run into contradictions and problems like that... when we say we are our own parents its problematic for our language( but perhaps not for the mind)....i hope this has provided some insight it is rather complex but i am unsure...its hard to pick one cause we can be right and wrong.it just depends i guess....i hope this was insightful and made some sense..sorry about grammar but i would hate to re-correct all this lol have a good day (oh yea but i replied to ur reply in the brain madden topic of natural instincts) "my love is my motivation my love is my inspiration perception of this poem is your interpretation" -- me |
||
|
WhtDove Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-22
Posts 9245Illinois |
JnR4eva you're right. It is not logical at all for our minds to accept. It's hard for me to conceive. I don't understand it either. I've asked many questions on this very subject, and am still not satisfied. Don't think I ever will be until I come face to face with God. I know then I'll have complete understanding. Just a thought here though; we have a spirit, a soul and a body. Our spirit, being our thought process. Our soul, being our spiritual body, and of course we have our flesh body. Now our spiritual body can be seperated from the flesh body. Now seeing as God is Omnipotent and we are not, He can do things we can't. For He is everywhere even now. So if we can believe that, why can't we believe He served different offices at the same time? I think the one question that most would think are how can He be down here and praying to the "Father," if that is Him too. Would He be praying to himself? Jesus being on the right hand of God, the right hand symbolizing power. It's very complex, too complex I think for the human mind to understand. But we can still have fun discussing it. |
||
|
JnR4eva Member
since 2000-08-07
Posts 377Bronx, NY |
I indeed I enjoyed this discussion  . Personally my belief is that they are one..but I really dont have hardcore evidence as to why other than my faith "my love is my motivation my love is my inspiration perception of this poem is your interpretation" -- me |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Actually, this question has been debated quite actively for nearly two thousand years. I can interpret your question in several different ways and every one opens new questions … here are two: 1. If the Father is God, and Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, how can God be one? 2. If Jesus is God, how can He also be a man? I do think it is important to note that there are some real problems with one of the texts mentioned (I John 5:7). The verse is omitted from the oldest and best manuscripts currently available and there is strong evidence suggesting that the verse was an addition by some overzealous post-Nicene Christians. This is not to say that other texts do not support Trinitarian doctrine, but rather that I John 5:7 is a poor verse on which to build a beachhead. Without getting into a textual analysis in defense of the tri-unity of God, I offer instead, at this time, an analogy: Theoretical physicists note that subatomic entities are found to have both wave properties (W), particle properties (P) and quantum properties (h). Even though these characteristics are often incompatible (particles don't diffract, waves do, for example), physicist "explain" or "model" an electron as PWh in order to give the proper weight to all of the relevant data. Theologians are doing much the same thing with the doctrine of the Trinity. Theologians are not asking you to understand how something can be a singular and plural simultaneously ... they are offering an "explanation" or a "model" that gives proper weight to all of the relevant data (in the case of the Christian theologian, that relevant data being the Old and New Testament Canons). In other words, God is God … why should we have a problem with the illogical notion that God can be both One Being and a plurality of Persons? In addition, I believe it is important to buffer any discussion of Jesus’ supposed deity with a reminder that the Christian Scriptures attest just as emphatically to Jesus’ true humanity (the early Church in Alexandria, Egypt fell into this trap and the school of Antioch, Syria fell into the opposite trap). Anybody sleeping yet? More later, if you’re interested. Jim |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
I have too little time, and even less insight, but I do want to add a few comments. First, Jim, you build a strong argument, but I think it would be stronger yet if you left quantum effects out of the equation. Quantum mechanics doesn't, in any way I know, contradict particle physics (at least any more than it contradicts common sense). But you are most assuredly right about the dichotomy between waves and particles. The electromagnetic spectrum can exhibit the properties of either, and science can only explain what we experience by allowing it to be both. It's a modern-day paradox with no apparent answers. But it works. It remains to be seen, however, whether our current mathematical explanations are a "model" of reality or simply an incomplete answer. Nor do I personally think the Trinity is merely a "model" of God. I take the concept very literally and, as you suggested, Jim, have no problem with the seemingly illogical notion that God can be both One Being and a plurality of Beings. That notion is a walk in the park compared to quantum physics or even relativity. And I have to believe there is a single deity, not just because the Old Testament says so, but also because I've too often seen the results of group creation. The Universe is too perfect to have been created by a committee. Finally, in my mind, Jesus MUST have been a Man, in every possible sense of the word, else His sacrifice - and the entire New Testament - is virtually meaningless. I see ample evidence in the Bible that many times Jesus faced the same fears and uncertainties as the rest of us. Which only serves to make His life and teachings more profound. Through faith and the aid of His third persona, He surmounted his very human fears and uncertainties. And, to me, the promise is evident . . . So can we. |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Ron: I don't disagree with you and I don't deny the reality of the Trinity ... but I do think the doctrine of the Trinity serves as as a model or a restatement of what is assumed to be true by the writers of the New Testament documents (but never spelled out in the way it was explored at the Nicene Council). God's triune nature is to be understood literally ... the doctrine of the Trinity is the product of a church council that (correctly, in my estimation) reached their destination through a systematic interpretation of the relevant texts. But there is always the outside chance that I am wrong.  And I think we agree on the equal importance to Christian orthodoxy of the recognition of Jesus' full diety AND full humanity (another seeming paradox that the light particle/wave analogy could justifiably serve). As much as they seem to be in contradiction, in my opinion, you cannot have one without the other. Jim |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
But humanity does not stop at the human body for that humans have spirits and souls too. Jesus may have that, but a wider Godspirit in which his human spirit resides. Otherwise how may he be the same Jesus of the trinity who was on earth while he is in heaven too? He must have a humanspirit to be that in heaven. I just don't think any human, nor any animal, is void of having its own nature and spirit. If you are born into nature and manhood, you grow a spirit of those too. And having a human spirit would be spiritual explanation of how, if there is such a God he may yet be this "human part" of himself in Heaven. Therefore, It seems the trinity must have a passage for two different spirits, that of a man's to God, and that of the of a God's to Man. But if that is the case it is a Quaternity. The Father The Son and two Spirits, in one. [This message has been edited by Essorant (01-31-2004 12:49 PM).] |
||
Michelle_loves_Mike
since 2003-12-20
Posts 1189Pennsylvania |
I'd have to say seperate,,,or, insane,,,,,example,,,, when John baptised him,,,,,when he came up from the water,,,,,, 1. he was in the water 2. holy spirit came down, as a dove, and landed on his shoulder 3. god said, from above, this is my son, in whom I am proud So, either they are seperate,,,or he sits in water, and on his own shoulder, while at the same time talking to himself Michelle I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike |
||
|
ESP Member Elite
since 2000-01-25
Posts 2556Floating gently on a cloud.... |
Lol @ Michelle's comment!!! "Time has told me not to ask for more, one day our ocean will find its shore" ~Nick Drake |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: You're assuming it's necessarily and either-or question. Is light a particle or a wave? As Jim pointed out over three years ago, light is both. That seems to be a contradiction to us, but our lack of understanding doesn't make it less true. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
If Jesus was only a body for the "Father", a vessel to convey the "Father" to men, then a body was the extent of the son, and the "son" (flesh-vessel) is only now whatever earthen elements that make up human bodies become after centuries of years. That is what Jesus may only be if he did not have his own spirit and his own soul; he was merely an instrument, and nothing more. It becomes more clear to me how it is an excess of men's fondness in the way they wish things to only be. Something that I am not trying say I'm exempt completly from. But I don't think I have read, even in the most imaginitive mythological moments of literature, of any Gods that had to live up to such high expectations as this Man of our very history. I'm not saying I am on the right path, but I'm more and more turned off by this "all or nothing" idea. Men don't wish to believe that Jesus was less or something else than all "father" in flesh, but saying that the son was only the father in flesh seems to makes the son no more than that house God stayed in when he was on earth. [This message has been edited by Essorant (01-31-2004 02:57 PM).] |
||
|
Michelle_loves_Mike
since 2003-12-20
Posts 1189Pennsylvania |
Ron,,,the question posted was to my thoughts on either or,,,so I answered such....nothing more, nothing less,,,as always, I'm a firm believer in all having the freedom of beliefs.I just gave mine,,,,take care Michelle I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike |
||
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
The way I got around explaining this to my son, who had difficulty with the concept of three in one, was this: The United States Government has THREE parts, yet it is only ONE government. None of the three parts are the same, and they do not hold the same purpose, yet they are indeed part of the ONE government. The explaination might be a bit simplistic, however my 8 year old son understood it, and it served its purpose. But now the animal is in pain... |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"The United States Government has THREE parts, yet it is only ONE government. None of the three parts are the same, and they do not hold the same purpose, yet they are indeed part of the ONE government." But is your President the only presence in your government and the parts and people thereof? |
||
|
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
Chalk this up to complete idiocy on my part, however, I don't understand the question... please elaborate. But now the animal is in pain... |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Isn't the trinity this: Father (God) Son/Jesus (God) Spirit (God) If the Son, Jesus the Savior, of History, is only God and God's Spirit in flesh, then what is left of him after flesh? Does the trinity become only two in heaven--Father and Spirit? How does Jesus exist, if he has no soul and presence of his own that is not the Father's and Holy Spirit? Was the Son only a body and frame for Father and Holy Spirit? I may have totally mistaken biblical information. Please forgive me if I have. I am mostly just confused about these things. [This message has been edited by Essorant (02-01-2004 02:30 AM).] |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Ess, Christ still does exist in bodily form. He ascended above in His resurrection body, the first to do so. |
||
|
berengar Member
since 2004-01-02
Posts 86 |
Don't worry, it's perfectly normal to be confused by this issue! To wit, is Jesus man, God or hybrid? In the first centuries of the Christian Era, the Church was torn between various groupings who asserted one thing or the other, and the Nicene Creed was the result of an attempted formulation that tried to steer a middle course (ie: Jesus has both a divine and a human nature). Unfortunately, both the monophysites in the east (who denied Jesus' human nature) and the Arians in the west (who denied the divine aspect) did not accept this, and it gave a cheap propaganda value to the Islamic Conquest - "forget all these theological wranglings, there is only one God, He has no sons and Mohammad is his prophet!" The Holy Texts can be interpreted ambiguously by some scholars - was Jesus always divine, or did He only receive the blessing of His spirit at John's baptism? For me, however, the Nicene creed was the most inspired road to take. For at the heart of the Christian story is the beautiful idea of a God who became human in order to rescue humanity. If Jesus was purely God, we as humans could not identify with Him and the suffering that both humbles and glorifies Him is rendered meaningless. If He is just a man, however, how could He redeem humanity, as he would share the flaws and weaknesses that encumbers us all? So, when asked whether God and Jesus are one and the same, one has to say "yes and no", but then be able to explain why. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Denise, I understand it is disputed on some sides he rose only as spirit, and others he rose with his body too. I respect both: couldn't he have risen as both? Whatever body he is though in Heaven (spiritual; or spiritual and physical) does he have a humanspirit still, so that he is not only God's "Body" and God's Holy Spirit (two parts - duality--instead of three)? Some people treat the spirit and soul as completly inside the body--I'm not trying to do that. Being God may be both inside being Jesus while being outside at the same time being other things I believe. But is there humanspirit at all or is it only God and God's Spirit? Berenger, But if God was Human and God, and is Human and God in trinity, why shouldn't he have a Humanspirit and Holyspirit? But that is four entities --a quaternity--isn't it? lol Thank you for your explanation though. It will take some time for me to be (feel?) clear about these. [This message has been edited by Essorant (02-01-2004 08:25 AM).] |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Don't give yourself a brain hemorrhage trying to figure it out, Ess! Our finite minds can only go so far!  |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
I guess it simply must take three divine Dependants of the male sex to match the great independence of one Mother Nature; if He weren't three, She would probably have the best of Divinity for sure. |
||
|
berengar Member
since 2004-01-02
Posts 86 |
Essorant, It's already complicated, why make it impossibly so? Instead of multiplying natures, maybe we should try to apply Occam's razor and seek the most elegant solution (insert smiley). Yes, we must remember the triune nature of God (including the Holy Spirit, which 'descended on Jesus like a dove' at Jesus' baptism), but one of the benefits of the Holy Spirit - according to Scripture - is that it illuminates rather than hinders understanding. To say that Jesus rose as spirit and person may be true, but it misses the point; the fact that the resurrection was physical defines its reality to us, and as humans we can share in the resurrection. Keep grinning. |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
"In the beginning... and the Word was with God..." Everytime I read that opening passage, I wonder just where was the Holy Spirit in the beginning? I count two separate entities, not three. God the Father - Yahweh - God the Son - Jesus God the Holy Spirit - No name? And which part of the Godhead impregnated Mary? The bible states the Holy Spirit did, but Jesus must not know that fact, for He calls God the Father, father on numerous occasions, instead of calling God the Holy Spirit, father. This issue must matter, for if it does not, then Jesus could of sired Himself and called Himself, father... Common Sense 101 "If this grand panorama before me is what you call God...then God is not dead." |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Opeth: Once again you demonstrate your ability to ignore the context of a passage you cite. Who is the subject of John 1? Furthermore, John identifies the "Word" with Jesus and the portion of John 1:1 you've left out is '... and the Word was God.'" There is no question that John regarded the "Word" as being equal with God. Is there a "bi-unity" in the Godhead then instead of a tri-unity? Have you read John Chapter 7? Chapter 14? Chapter 15? Clearly when the Apostle John intended to address the subject of the Holy Spirit, he does so (and assigns personal attributes to the Holy Spirit, by the way). Furthermore, if the Person of the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father to be the creative force that caused Mary to conceive, what does that do to you "common sense 101" explanation? Out of time now, but hopefully later I can offer more. Jim [This message has been edited by jbouder (02-03-2004 11:27 AM).] |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
Your too funny, Jim. I am not taking anything out of context. That particular gospel opening deals with the nature of Jesus and God and how they are both one, yet two separate entities. I am questioning, why is not the Holy Spirit mentioned here? If there was a 3rd person of the "godhead" wouldn't it make sense that the HS would be included? Say... "In the beginning was the Word... and the Word was with both God and the Holy Spirit..." About the siring of Christ... who sired Christ? If it were the HS, then Christ should call the HS his father. Simple, really. And what is the HS name? The son is named Jesus. The Father is named Yahweh or Jehovah, but I'd be darned if there was a name for the HS. Yes, I know the HS is referred to as "comforter" etc, so was Jesus called the "messiah," but no name was ever given. Maybe, just maybe, the Holy Spirit of God is how God (the Father and Christ) gets things done? The HS is an extension, not a separate entity, but an extension of both the Word(Logos, Christ) and Jehovah.. and the rest of the God Family is to come later. |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Opeth: Part of the exercise of interpreting any literature is being aware of what is written before and/or after it. Context - The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage and determines its meaning. Your reply suggests to me that you didn't read the chapters I mentioned and, therefore, failed to place John's opening words into their proper context. John's purpose in writing the first portion of his Gospel was not to establish the doctrine of the Trinity, but rather to introduce us to the eternal "Word," incarnate in the Person of Jesus Christ. When John is ready to write about the Person of the Holy Spirit, he does so. If you had read the chapters I mentioned above, you will see that the Apostle John did not neglect to mention the Holy Spirit (in considerable detail) in his Gospel: quote: Why would an impersonal force or extension be called a Counselor? How could a mere extension "speak" or "declare"? This passage also indicates that this "Spirit of truth" is distinct from both the Father, from whom the Spirit proceeds, and the Son, by whom the Spirit is sent. This alone renders your "extension" argument untenable, unless you are suggesting that the Apostle John was mistaken. But then the burden would be yours to prove John's mistake. Regarding the names issue, what was "YHWH's" name before he revealed it? Since the tetranomicon in the Hebrew didn't include vowels, how can we know that God's name, as He revealed it, isn't Yohwoh or Yuhwuh? What was Jesus's name before He was born? Given the revealed nature of the Holy Spirit (i.e., His purpose is to "bear witness to [Jesus]" as the verse above suggests), theologians have often described The Holy Spirit as the "shy sovereign." The Father isn't accessible except by way of the Son, and the Holy Spirit bears witness to the Son, rather than to Himself. Christology isn't at the center of orthodox Christian theology by some accident, or by the whim of "mainstream Christianity, but by design, as it is borne out quite clearly in the New Testament writings. Jim |
||
|
muslimah New Member
since 2004-01-12
Posts 8 |
as salaam alaikum, As I've said in a past post, I'm muslim so my personal view is that Jesus was a prophet, and not the son of God or in any way a part of God. However, I have never understood the Christian way of thinking...(please do not take offense to these questions, they are purely out of my curiosity) If Jesus is God's son, does that not mean God has an equal (in order to create Jesus)? Does that not also mean that Jesus is on the same level as God? ...Doesn't this mean that Christians believe in more than one God? How is that monotheism? If Jesus is not considered an equal to God...than by worshipping him, (CHRISTianity..) do you not worship another than God? Is this not idolatry? Please explain, I have always thought it an interesting topic... Also, how do Jews regard Jesus? Salaam, muslimah |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
The belief claims an eternal equality among the holy members, yet after the sources of creativity and spirituality are taken up by the Father and the Spirit, that doesn't seem to leave anything much more for the son to be than a living picture frame of the Father and Holy Spirit. That is what I have trouble with. Is that what we are supposed to be too? [This message has been edited by Essorant (02-03-2004 10:20 PM).] |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
With all due respect, Jim, your reply in no way, shape or form provided any factual or common sensical information regarding the trinity issue as it does not answer the questions that mainstream christianity cannot answer. I am sure that if the godhead of the bible was indeed a trinity, that the HS inspired words of God would be crystal clear as to that fact. You talk about taking things out of context - sorry, Jim, but I did not. Why? Because nothing in the bible establishes a doctrine of the trinity. And I did read what you wanted me to and those passages mean not a thing to establish a trinity - that idea is based on what has been repeatedly taught to you and is quite firmly established in your mind - saying that a "counselor" is to come does not make a godhead. And again, what is this counselor's name? The messiah to come had a name? To me, it is crystal clear in the opening of John that the nature of God is being discussed. Maybe not to you and to others who hold to doctrines of men so vehemently, but to me it couldn't be simpler. And once again, who was Jesus' father, the HS or God the Father or himself? |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Opeth: Isn't the "doctrine" of common sense a doctrine of men? Seriously, what I hold to "vehemently" are sound principles of interpretation - I'm not suggesting that I always interpret passages correctly, but I think that a careful hermeneutic serves both to minimize the chances of committing an error and to make my argument more convincing than yours. If you want to label this my holding to "doctrines of men," then I take no offense to it, especially when I don't believe you've demonstrated that your "doctrines" are more likely to be trustworthy.I think what I've been able to establish thus far is (1) that the New Testament writings regard Jesus as God and (2) that the Holy Spirit has personal attributes that rule out the possibility of Him being an impersonal force, as you tried to argue earlier. Because of time constraints, I devoted the majority of my reply toward refuting your assertion that the Holy Spirit is an impersonal extension of the Father and the Son. That said, I think establishing that the Bible does ascribe personal attributes to the Holy Spirit IS an important factual brick in the wall of evidence supporting the full diety of the Holy Spirit. Until you offer a more convincing rebuttal, I think I did so effectively. Again, because of time constraints, I cannot give the subject of the Trinity the attention it deserves. But why don't you start the discussion by answering this question: Who is capable of being blasphemed? Muslimah: I want to do a little background reading before answering your post, but I will respond. Jim |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
"Isn't the "doctrine" of common sense a doctrine of men?" ~ Nope. Since Satan is "the author of confusion" and the opposite of confusion is clear understanding/organization and since common sense follows suit to clear understanding... I would say that God would be common sensical and not nonsensical. Here is the problem with the trinity doctrine (of men). 1. It is similiar to ancient Egyptian religion, and extends into the immortal soul doctrine (or vice versa). 2. No where in the bible can the term trinity be found. You may find that to be not important, but concerning the nature of God, it makes sense that this would be clearly explained. 3. The Holy Spirit does not have a name, as does both the Father and the Son do. 4. Well theologically educated monks found it necessary to add verses to the bible to support the doctrine (an embarassment to mainstream christianity even to this day). 5. In Genesis, it reads "the Spirit of God moved..." If the nature of God is ever clearly outlined in the bible - here it is. The Spirit of God moved... Not a separate entity, but the Spirit of God - an extension of God = Yahweh. 6. In numerous passages, when Paul is greeting people in the NT, he never mentions the HS as a separate entity, but only God the father and the Son. 7. Who impregnated Mary with Jesus? The Bible states that the HS impregnated Mary, but Jesus calls Yahweh is Father. Therefore, it makes sense and is certainly not confusing to conclude that the Spirit of God which pregnated Mary is that same Spirit of God which moved across the waters in Genesis - not a separate Egyptian-religion-influenced-doctrine, separate trinity entity. 8. So, is it a separate entity HS or Christ whom lives in a Christian's heart? If it is both, it is getting rather crowded in there, don't you think? ~ Certainly the HS was noted as being a "Counselor" etc, but that is because it is a special occasion for God to share His Spirit with His created peoples. He imparts His Spirit, the Spirit of God, to those whome he calls. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
1. Completely irrelevant. 2. Mostly irrelevant. Try explaining quantum mechanics, which is eminently important, to a three-year-old and then tell me how much sense it makes. You really think you could understand the nature of God? 3. Mostly irrelevant. None of my children had names until a name was needed, because we all knew who "the baby" meant. Wait for the Third Testament. 4. Completely irrelevant. 5. This is your only relevant point, but is still a matter of interpretation. I certainly read the passage quite differently. 6. Completely irrelevant. 7. Mostly irrelevant. I call God the Father, too, but doubt that brings into question my conception. 8. Crowded? Or just full? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
salaam alaikum: quote: I wanted to let you know that I will try to answer some of your questions ... only the full answers to these will take some considerable time (I am also weaving in and out of work and other responsibilities). As a Christian, I would very much like to have some peaceful dialogue with you, since I am interested in learning more about Islam. Stephen. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"And once again, who was Jesus' father, the HS or God the Father or himself? " Nothing may contradict what is eternally established, Opeth. The Father is Jesus' Father, whether or not one of God's three hearts put him into flesh. Though I don't see how only one might. Supposedly God's three hearts have to will selfsame and equally, so that seems to suggest all threedom put son in flesh, that he might be as a living tome of the whole tree, not just one branch. But are we allowed to believe Jesus has a spirit of his own very self, or is he supposed to be only Father and Holy Spirit's "microcosm"? That is where I am troubled. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
quote: Essorant, I think we have to believe that. Or how else could Jesus pray, "I pray that this cup pass from me. Yet not my will, but thine be done". He became a man in the fullest sense of the word, not merely God pretending to be a man. This was the human spirit, in love and submission relating to the Divine Spirit. Stephen. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"He became a man in the fullest sense of the word, not merely God pretending to be a man. " How was he still the same God then? And you suggested he doesn't evolve, if he becomes a man isn't that a change, a difference, in what he is? |
||
|
Tais Member
since 2004-01-28
Posts 92Ontario, Canada |
I view the Holy Trinity as was said: "God made man similar to Him" (not that wording though, I used my own words in that sentence). Therefore, we are also three: body, spirit and mind. Jesus came in the body form ("the words of The Father made flesh") The Holy Spirit is the spirit. And God (Our Father) is the mind, the creator. Observation: 'mind' has several other words to describe what the makes us what we are and makes us do what we do, the 'commander' of the body, and the spirit would be the result of the mind. Tais |
||
|
berengar Member
since 2004-01-02
Posts 86 |
Zindell (author of the sci fi masterpieces 'Neverness', 'The Broken God' etc) made a good attempt at formulating how a divine being could be incarnated as a human (in a completely different context, of course). Nevertheless, well done. |
||
LoveBug
Moderator
Member Elite
since 2000-01-08
Posts 4697 |
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this verse.. John 14:8-9 8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? There are also four other points I want to make... 1. The reason Christ was sentenced to die is because He made Himself out to be God... so either Jesus was lying or Jesus is God. Jesus rose from the dead, I think thats good proof of what's true... 2. Go through your Bible.. people try to fall and worship prophets and even angels of the Lord.. but these prophets and angels tell them to praise GOD only! But we see that Jesus allows people to worship Him. Again, either He is totally wrong and sinning or He is GOD! 3. We know that only God can forgive sins. They even said that to Jesus. Jesus, in turn, showed His power by healing a lame man. Again, either He was wrong or He is God. Seeing as He healed this man, He was obviously right. 4. Go back to the Old Testiment books of Moses. Over and over again in these books we see: "The Lord is our God.. THE LORD IS ONE!" We know that Jesus told us that He came to fufill the law and not to destroy it... so either He actually did come to destroy the law or Jesus is God... We are made of many different components. We are spirit and flesh and mind.. if we, being human, can be so complex and still be one being, why is it so hard for us to see Jesus, our God, in that way?? Oh, make me Thine forever |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
