Taking a look at the Statement of Faith

[MisterE]

Oh, whew! You had me worried for a moment, but please reprove me if I ever seem sarcastic.

Regarding Jesus' natures, I agree that He is God in the human dimension/incarnate, and I agree that Jesus did not have two natures as if he were two people. I explain the doctrine of the Trinity as follows:

The OT Shema (DT 6:4) teaches that God is one, and the NT also affirms that there is one God (EPH 4:6, 1TM 2:5). However, the NT teaches that God relates to believers in three ways simultaneously: as the Father, as the Son and as the Holy Spirit (1 x 1 x 1=1).

I would not agree with this at all. This is an ancient belief that was ultimately deemed heresy. In case i am misunderstanding what you are saying here, the heresy I see is Modalism. You are saying that there is one numerical Being, who is God, and that God manifests himself in three different modes but it is the same Being in the three different modes. So, you have one Being called God, and he manifests himself in three different ways.

I say there are three Beings, each One is coequal in all respects. For example, The Father loves you with a love that would be described as perfect and infinite in degree. The Son also loves you in a perfect and infinite way. So, for example there is no measurable difference in the love these two Beings possess. They are identical, but they are each part of the Godhead/Trinity.

GJohn 17 Christ prays to the Father that the people who are saved will be 'one.' Because each Member has identical attributes with the Other two. (See below where I explain Dt 6.4)

When Jesus says that I and my Father are one, note that the word 'one' is not in the same gender as "I" and
"the Father." Remember because all three Members of the Godhead are equal in their Being.

Muslims see Allah as one numerical God, which means in eternity past Allah was not a relational being. The Godhead of Christianity had fellowship in eternity past.

The shema you cited uses the word 'one' is the same word as Adam and Eve as 'one' flesh. Make sure you distinguish between one (numerically) in essence and one (three in one accord) in Unity.

Sorry, I am rambling.

The Father/Parenthood of God is indicated in Jesus’ model prayer (MT 6:9), throughout the Gospel of John (3:35, 5:17-18, etc.), and in the epistles of Paul (RM 4:11, 8:15, PHP 2:11). God the Father and Christ’s Sonship are discussed in Hebrews 1:1-4. The Son of God also is mentioned by John (JN 1:14, 3:16, etc.) and by Paul (RM 1:4, GL 2:20, 1THS 1:10). The Holy Spirit is mentioned in three successive chapters in John (JN 14:26, 15:26, 16:13), frequently in the book of Acts (ACTS 1:5, 2:4, 9:17, 13:2, 19:2), and in many of Paul’s letters (RM 8:4-26, 1CR 6:19, EPH 4:30) as well as in some of the other epistles (2PT 1:21, JUDE 20).

It might be helpful to discern which aspect of the triune God is the subject of various biblical statements. These divine aspects or “persons” may be distinguished by role: God the Father as creator or initiator (GN 1:1), God the Son as Messiah or mediator (1TM 2:5), and God the Spirit as indweller (RM 5:5). For example, 1 John 4:7 says love comes from (is initiated by) God (the Father), Galatians 5:22 says that love is a fruit of the (indwelling) Spirit, and Ephesians 3:18 speaks of the (mediating) love of Christ (RM 5:8, EPH 2:18).

One subtle issue I see with Christians is they say, "God is one, but three in being."
I would consider this as a better option, or some form of it:
Godhead is one in essence, AND three in being. WHen you include the "but" you muddy the waters.
God the Father is not the Creator, that role belongs to the Son.

We can denote these distinctions by the use of three prepositions: God the Father is over all creation (EPH 4:6), God the Son is Immanuel or with humanity (MT 1:23), and the Holy Spirit is within all believers (EPH 1:13). A single passage that comes closest to indicating this distinction is Ephesians 3:14-19, in which Paul prays to the Father that through His Spirit of love Christ would dwell in believers’ hearts (also see 1CR 8:6).

When the Bible uses masculine words for God, it should be understood that only God the Son is human and had a sexual orientation while on earth. GN 1:26-27 states that both male and female were created in God’s image, referring not to androgyny but to personality, and Jesus said (in MT 22:30 & 19:11-12) that there is no marriage and thus no need for sexuality in heaven.

Because Jesus had a divine soul, I would say he did not have a sexual orientation (this word is loaded with implications.)

Regarding intelligence, Jesus indicated in a few places that he was not omniscient was incarnate, but I am not comfortable viewing Jesus as having a soul, because that does seem too separate.

Jesus volunteeringly (is that a word?) gave up the use of some of his divine attributes, and by so doing, he remained 100% God, he just functioned as a human most of the time. Remember he saw Nathaniel by the use of his divine attributes but at that moment, he was not functioning as God the Son.

What do you think of my explanation of the Trinity?

see above comments

 

[Groovy]

It happens. That's why I checked.


Ok, well the problem there is that the Greek uses the word "soul" when Peter is quoting a psalm from David about the Lord Jesus Christ.

25 For David says concerning Him: 'I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken. 26 Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope. 27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. (Acts 2)

The Greek here is ψυχή, which literally translated means "psyche" or persona, and that's what the passage Peter quoted from in the LXX used as well. So you would have to argue that it meant simply "life" here, but even on the rare occasions where the word could be defined that way, I think it's a rather dubious translation IMO.


No more prophecy then? Or dreams and visions? I ask because I am a firm believer that Joel 2:28-31 has not been entirely fulfilled yet, and that it is beginning to increasingly be fulfilled now in our time, as we move ever closer to the eventual return of the Lord Jesus Christ.

We should realize that interpreting the NT in light of the OT is problematic, because the OT revelation was more primitive, and "soul" per the OT can mean merely "being" or living body, not a person's spirit that exists independent of the body after death--as you noted.

However, I have no problem with believing that if God can be incarnate, then He can be a soul. In either case, verse 31 makes it clear that Peter was speaking of the resurrection of Messiah preventing his body from being decayed rather than of him having a soul.

Regarding future-telling and visions, what is there left to tell or see other than the Second Coming,
although far be it from me to tell God what He can do. My understanding is that until we die our concern
should be becoming morally mature as has already been revealed. What is your concern?

 

[MisterE]

Hidden in Him said:
No more prophecy then? Or dreams and visions? I ask because I am a firm believer that Joel 2:28-31 has not been entirely fulfilled yet, and that it is beginning to increasingly be fulfilled now in our time, as we move ever closer to the eventual return of the Lord Jesus Christ.

This was spoken to the nation of Israel and made during the Jewish Dispensation. These events take place during the Tribulation which is during the Jewish Dispensation. The Tribulation starts after the Church Age ends.

 

[MisterE]

The Greek more or less says, "Yet not the will of me but of you be done."

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/22.htm

Besides, the first half of the verse--"“Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me"--rather makes it unlikely that the second half "is an expression of their unity." It would make no sense of unity, as the Son would already be in agreement with the Father, making the statement meaningless. It really only makes sense if Christ had a full human nature, with his own will.

We also have:

Mat 26:39 And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” (ESV)


But, as I clearly pointed out, Paul contrasts being in the "form of a servant" with being "in the form of God." They both must be saying the same thing about a different form. If "in the from of God" is speaking about his full nature as God, and it is, then it necessarily follows that being "in the form of a servant" speaks of his full nature as a man.

We can't say that being "in the form of servant" means that he was "only . . . in the FORM of a servant," as though he is somehow less than fully human, without also then having to say that being "in the form of God" means is somehow less than fully God. It actually makes Paul's main point vague and meaningless.


There is nothing to suggest that "he took on the form of a servant by subtraction (from deity)." What it does clearly say is that he "emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men." That is a paradoxical emptying by addition, by adding human nature, which is naturally going to put limits on his glory.

Interestingly, Jesus still claimed, of all things, omnipresence (Matt. 18:20).


He was both fully God and fully man. If he wasn't fully human, then his temptations are meaningless--"God cannot be tempted with evil" (James 1:13, ESV).


As one of my profs once said, "Asking if Jesus could have sinned is the wrong question and it will lead to heresy. The question is: Did he feel the full force of sin?" The answer to that is, yes. And it can only be so if he was truly human.


Yes, you only claim so and have not proven that to be the case.


Yes, I have his also excellent book, The Forgotten Trinity.


I don't think that would be the case. That would require two persons; he is one person with two natures. That is one of the mysteries of the faith--it's what the Bible shows--and we must be very careful to no overstep and try and explain something the Bible doesn't fully explain.


Many people haven't been taught critical thinking or good theology.


I don't think I did. Maybe I should.

What is the difference between person and nature? You said Jesus was one person with two natures.

 

[Groovy]

I would not agree with this at all. This is an ancient belief that was ultimately deemed heresy. In case i am misunderstanding what you are saying here, the heresy I see is Modalism. You are saying that there is one numerical Being, who is God, and that God manifests himself in three different modes but it is the same Being in the three different modes. So, you have one Being called God, and he manifests himself in three different ways.

I say there are three Beings, each One is coequal in all respects. For example, The Father loves you with a love that would be described as perfect and infinite in degree. The Son also loves you in a perfect and infinite way. So, for example there is no measurable difference in the love these two Beings possess. They are identical, but they are each part of the Godhead/Trinity.
GJohn 17 Christ prays to the Father that the people who are saved will be 'one.' Because each Member has identical attributes with the Other two. (See below where I explain Dt 6.4)
When Jesus says that I and my Father are one, note that the word 'one' is not in the same gender as "I" and
"the Father." Remember because all three Members of the Godhead are equal in their Being.

Muslims see Allah as one numerical God, which means in eternity past Allah was not a relational being. The Godhead of Christianity had fellowship in eternity past.
The shema you cited uses the word 'one' is the same word as Adam and Eve as 'one' flesh. Make sure you distinguish between one (numerically) in essence and one (three in one accord) in Unity.
Sorry, I am rambling.
One subtle issue I see with Christians is they say, "God is one, but three in being."
I would consider this as a better option, or some form of it:
Godhead is one in essence, AND three in being. WHen you include the "but" you muddy the waters.
God the Father is not the Creator, that role belongs to the Son.
Because Jesus had a divine soul, I would say he did not have a sexual orientation (this word is loaded with implications.)
Jesus volunteeringly (is that a word?) gave up the use of some of his divine attributes, and by so doing, he remained 100% God, he just functioned as a human most of the time. Remember he saw Nathaniel by the use of his divine attributes but at that moment, he was not functioning as God the Son.
see above comments

Yes, Mr.E, you misunderstand me, because I did not use "modes" once, but instead I used the Scriptural terms Father, Son and Holy Spirit as being three ways the one God relates to humanity, but I have no problem also saying that God's "three Beings" relate to humanity "in Unity".
I also like saying God is both one and three, no but.

But, Scripture says many times that God is Creator without mentioning the Son in that regard/role.
Also, there is nothing sinful about being male, but apparently Jesus had the gift of celibacy.
Remember that Jesus was tempted in every way like other humans.

Hasta la manana.

 

[Hidden In Him]

In either case, verse 31 makes it clear that Peter was speaking of the resurrection of Messiah preventing his body from being decayed rather than of him having a soul.

The second half of the verse, yes, but not the first. "27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." If the two are synonymous phrases it becomes redundant. But the reference in the first is to Hades. The body (or being) does not go down to Hades, only the soul does.

Regarding future-telling and visions, what is there left to tell or see other than the Second Coming,
although far be it from me to tell God what He can do. My understanding is that until we die our concern
should be becoming morally mature as has already been revealed. What is your concern?

That is one concern, yes, and an important one. But another is our witness, and in New Testament times the word was confirmed with signs and wonders following, and the church moved in the gifts. I think it makes our witness more convincing when we can manifest the supernatural gifts of God, because it confirms the words we are speaking are not merely our own but divinely uttered. Some think this is not necessary and I understand that. but I am of the opinion that God has not changed, including the way He does things in regard to the testimony of Christ, so I think the gifts are still for today.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Hidden in Him said:
No more prophecy then? Or dreams and visions? I ask because I am a firm believer that Joel 2:28-31 has not been entirely fulfilled yet, and that it is beginning to increasingly be fulfilled now in our time, as we move ever closer to the eventual return of the Lord Jesus Christ.

This was spoken to the nation of Israel and made during the Jewish Dispensation. These events take place during the Tribulation which is during the Jewish Dispensation. The Tribulation starts after the Church Age ends.

When you can MisterE, please quote me rather than cite me. I almost didn’t see this post, whereas if you quote me it will show up as an alert.

If I may, what makes you think the Gentile church would not be included in this prophecy?

 

[Free]

What is the difference between person and nature? You said Jesus was one person with two natures.

Nature tells us what a thing is. Only God has the nature of God; it’s those attributes and such that make God God. Human nature belongs only to humans; it’s those things that make us human.

Person speaks to personality and individuality. We are each persons with a human nature.

 

[Groovy]

The second half of the verse, yes, but not the first. "27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." If the two are synonymous phrases it becomes redundant. But the reference in the first is to Hades. The body (or being) does not go down to Hades, only the soul does.


That is one concern, yes, and an important one. But another is our witness, and in New Testament times the word was confirmed with signs and wonders following, and the church moved in the gifts. I think it makes our witness more convincing when we can manifest the supernatural gifts of God, because it confirms the words we are speaking are not merely our own but divinely uttered. Some think this is not necessary and I understand that. but I am of the opinion that God has not changed, including the way He does things in regard to the testimony of Christ, so I think the gifts are still for today.

The second half of the verse, yes, but not the first. "27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." If the two are synonymous phrases it becomes redundant. But the reference in the first is to Hades. The body (or being) does not go down to Hades, only the soul does.


That is one concern, yes, and an important one. But another is our witness, and in New Testament times the word was confirmed with signs and wonders following, and the church moved in the gifts. I think it makes our witness more convincing when we can manifest the supernatural gifts of God, because it confirms the words we are speaking are not merely our own but divinely uttered. Some think this is not necessary and I understand that. but I am of the opinion that God has not changed, including the way He does things in regard to the testimony of Christ, so I think the gifts are still for today.

Well, again, "soul" per the OT means "being" or living body, so your understanding is more NT.

Regarding the NT concern: Becoming mature or more loving is the way believers witness according to Paul's teaching in the epistles. "Sings and wonders" occurred at Pentecost in order to convince those who witnessed them that the Holy Spirit indwelt believers so that the church would grow strong enough to endure. Yes, it would still make our witness more convincing today, but beware of conjuring up false miracles in a futile attempt to prove your faith vice 2Corinthinans 5:7. The Pentecostals I know have the same problems as Baptists, which shows that not only are the miracle gifts not necessary, they are not normative or the normal way God operates following the apostolic era.

God's nature does not change, but His revelation did and a person's understanding or of the way He does things in regard to the testimony of Christ does, so you may think the miracle gifts are still for today, but the evidence for that view is hidden for most who are in Him. What evidence have you experienced?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Yes, it would still make our witness more convincing today, but beware of conjuring up false miracles in a futile attempt to prove your faith

No, I'm not concerned with conjuring anything. I'm simply talking about operating in gifts. Most occurring today are not on par with some of the great miracles of the Bible, but they can have an Impact nonetheless when they are strong enough.

God's nature does not change, but His revelation did and a person's understanding or of the way He does things in regard to the testimony of Christ does, so you may think the miracle gifts are still for today, but the evidence for that view is hidden for most who are in Him. What evidence have you experienced?

I interpret dreams and visions. Some public ones I could link you to and a ton in private, but here is a recent one if you are curious. Granted, we're getting a little far afield from the OP, but I suppose in a way it goes to point if we are talking about reviewing the entire Statement of Faith. I think it should include mention of our position on the gifts, but we'll see.

Thread 'Death'

May 29, 2025

This was a very strange dream last night 5/29/2025

In this dream there was a 40-50 year old father with seven children. It looked like they lived in the middle of the desert with a huge rock canyon it looked like. A mountain with a flat top. In the beginning of the dream, the kids were playing around these huge fossils uncovered in the dirt. One was a dinosaur fossil I would say of a t-rex. The other fossil was of a giant about the size of the T-Rex fossil. It reminded me of the giants that the Israelites were afraid of in the promise land. There was a younger boy around fourteen/fifteen...

• Sister
• Replies: 19
• Forum: Dreams & Interpretation

 

[Groovy]

No, I'm not concerned with conjuring anything. I'm simply talking about operating in gifts. Most occurring today are not on par with some of the great miracles of the Bible, but they can have an Impact nonetheless when they are strong enough.


I interpret dreams and visions. Some public ones I could link you to and a ton in private, but here is a recent one if you are curious. Granted, we're getting a little far afield from the OP, but I suppose in a way it goes to point if we are talking about reviewing the entire Statement of Faith. I think it should include mention of our position on the gifts, but we'll see.

Thread 'Death'

May 29, 2025

This was a very strange dream last night 5/29/2025

In this dream there was a 40-50 year old father with seven children. It looked like they lived in the middle of the desert with a huge rock canyon it looked like. A mountain with a flat top. In the beginning of the dream, the kids were playing around these huge fossils uncovered in the dirt. One was a dinosaur fossil I would say of a t-rex. The other fossil was of a giant about the size of the T-Rex fossil. It reminded me of the giants that the Israelites were afraid of in the promise land. There was a younger boy around fourteen/fifteen...

• Sister
• Replies: 19
• Forum: Dreams & Interpretation

Glad to hear you are not conjuring, because I know that I have been tempted to want to prove my faith, but the closest I have come to doing that is an insight that I call the Propensity Principle (in Lesson 1 on our website).

A statement of faith might include one's view of gifts, but a kerygmatic creed need be concerned only with the gift or reception/indwelling of the Holy Spirit manifested by love, as in #5:

[[Then God’s Holy Spirit will establish a saving relationship with all who truly accept/love Him (Rev. 3:20) that will eventually achieve heaven after Christ returns at God’s resurrection of all saved souls when everyone cooperates fully with His will (John 14:6, 17&26, Rom. 8:6-17, Gal. 6:7-9, Eph. 1:13-14, Heb. 10:36, 12:1, Jam. 1:2-4).]]

 

[MisterE]

Nature tells us what a thing is. Only God has the nature of God; it’s those attributes and such that make God God. Human nature belongs only to humans; it’s those things that make us human.

Person speaks to personality and individuality. We are each persons with a human nature.

What I am trying to find out is what are the components of human nature. Does it include conscience, will, and emotions?

 

[Free]

What I am trying to find out is what are the components of human nature. Does it include conscience, will, and emotions?

Yes, of course.

 

[MisterE]

When you can MisterE, please quote me rather than cite me. I almost didn’t see this post, whereas if you quote me it will show up as an alert.

If I may, what makes you think the Gentile church would not be included in this prophecy?

Sorry for not quoting you, my bad. There are two elect groups, the Church and Israel. See Rom chapters 9-11 where Paul explains that the elect group of Israel has been removed from the tree and the Church has been graphed in. You can't have two elect groups in the same dispensation. That is why the Jews were removed from the tree and the church graphed in. The main reason of course is that the Jews rejected Christ as the Messiah.

The prophet Daniel gave a prophecy of the time remaining until the Jewish dispensation would end, 490 years to be exact. Since 483 years have been completed, there are 7 years to go until the Jewish dispensation is concluded. That remaining 7 years are called the Tribulation or the remaining 7 years of the Jewish dispensation.

The exclusivity of the elect groups are the basis of Dispensational Theology. This is a foundational doctrine that needs to be mastered before discussing subsequent doctrines. I could tell you were a little confused about the two elect peoples and the doctrine of election (which has nothing to do with salvation). For example, the nation of Israel was an elect group, but not all Jews were saved. Unbelieving Jews were part of the elect nation. Most new believers of the Church today still think that election means salvation. The clearest way to see this is to first read the entire OT and you will not find one reference to election meaning salvation.

 

[Groovy]

What I am trying to find out is what are the components of human nature. Does it include conscience, will, and emotions?

Yes, in addition to the animal instinct for survival, avoidance of pain and procreation.