Essential Doctrines

[Sparkey]

BTW...it occurred to me here that we are actually having a pleasant discussion and debate....

We're just liable to ruin our reputations...going on like that!

 

[Alabaster]

BTW...it occurred to me here that we are actually having a pleasant discussion and debate....

We're just liable to ruin our reputations...going on like that!

 

[Who Says]

That is cute!

 

[savedbygrace57]

I believe particular atonement and unconditional election of grace are essential doctrines.

Those doctrines actually tell us who Christ died for when preaching that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures..

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Let me ask...how does the passage in 1 John 4 et.al. tie into John's gospel, chapter 1 verses 1 and 14?

More specifically verse 14 where the Apostle writes: And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. After declaring that the word was with God, and the word was God?

Great question Mc! It's a pleasure to be able to discuss things in an open and civil manner like this.

Now as for how I address the beginning of John's gospel, I start with the end where John states the purpose for writing his gospel.

"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the Son of God..."(John 20: 31).

This I believe, is the context that the book of John must be read in. It is a context that does not attempt to "deify" Jesus, but rather attempts to convince the audience that this Jesus was the Christ and Son of the Living God.
I believe that John in this passage is saying that the Logos (word) is the revealed will of God and that Jesus, God's Anointed One was the embodiment of that message (word) which itself was life.

I believe that 1 John 1:1-3 further clarifies this.

"What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life – and the life was manifested; andwe have seen, and bear witness and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us. What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also."

Jesus may not be the word or message spoken of in John, instead, what is likely is that Jesus is the personification of that message and is thus able to relate it (the message/word) to mankind.


John 1:1-18 (A Non Ecclesiastical NT)

In the beginning was the message,
And the message was directed toward God,
And "God" the message was.
The same one was directed toward God in the beginning.
Through it, all things were done.
And without it nothing was done.
What has been done in it was life.
And the life was the Light of humanity.
And the light shone in the darkness.
But the darkness did not understand it. ​

1:6 ​

​

It happened that a person whose name was John was sent from God. This one came as a witness, that he might testify about the Light, so that all might trust through him. He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. This was the Light, the True Light which enlightened everyone as it came into creation. In creation he was, and the creation happened through him, and yet the creation did not know him. He went into his own domain, and his own people didn't receive him. But to as many as did receive him, he gave them authority to become the children of God – to those who trust in his name, who were born not of blood, nor out of sexual desire, nor of a man's wishes, but from God. And the message was embodied and lived among us, and we observed its glory: glory like from a father's only son, full of favor and truth. John testified about him, crying out and saying, "This is the one about whom I said, 'The one who comes after me has become before me; because he is my superior.'" Because out of his

fullness, we all received favor on top of favor. For the Torah was given through Moses; the favor and the truth happened through Anointed Jesus. ​

1:18 ​

​

No one has ever seen God. God's unique one, the one who is at the Father's bosom, has related him. ​

This website does a more thorough job of explaining the beginning of John's gospel and I John.

In the beginning was the Word (J. Baixeras)

 

[Who Says]

Great question Mc! It's a pleasure to be able to discuss things in an open and civil manner like this.

Now as for how I address the beginning of John's gospel, I start with the end where John states the purpose for writing his gospel.

"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the Son of God..."(John 20: 31).

This I believe, is the context that the book of John must be read in. It is a context that does not attempt to "deify" Jesus, but rather attempts to convince the audience that this Jesus was the Christ and Son of the Living God.
I believe that John in this passage is saying that the Logos (word) is the revealed will of God and that Jesus, God's Anointed One was the embodiment of that message (word) which itself was life.

I believe that 1 John 1:1-3 further clarifies this.

"What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life – and the life was manifested; andwe have seen, and bear witness and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us. What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also."

Jesus may not be the word or message spoken of in John, instead, what is likely is that Jesus is the personification of that message and is thus able to relate it (the message/word) to mankind.


John 1:1-18 (A Non Ecclesiastical NT)

In the beginning was the message,
And the message was directed toward God,
And "God" the message was.
The same one was directed toward God in the beginning.
Through it, all things were done.
And without it nothing was done.
What has been done in it was life.
And the life was the Light of humanity.
And the light shone in the darkness.
But the darkness did not understand it. ​

1:6

It happened that a person whose name was John was sent from God. This one came as a witness, that he might testify about the Light, so that all might trust through him. He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. This was the Light, the True Light which enlightened everyone as it came into creation. In creation he was, and the creation happened through him, and yet the creation did not know him. He went into his own domain, and his own people didn't receive him. But to as many as did receive him, he gave them authority to become the children of God – to those who trust in his name, who were born not of blood, nor out of sexual desire, nor of a man's wishes, but from God. And the message was embodied and lived among us, and we observed its glory: glory like from a father's only son, full of favor and truth. John testified about him, crying out and saying, "This is the one about whom I said, 'The one who comes after me has become before me; because he is my superior.'" Because out of his ​

fullness, we all received favor on top of favor. For the Torah was given through Moses; the favor and the truth happened through Anointed Jesus. ​

1:18 ​

No one has ever seen God. God's unique one, the one who is at the Father's bosom, has related him. ​

This website does a more thorough job of explaining the beginning of John's gospel and I John.​

In the beginning was the Word (J. Baixeras)

He was the perfect example of what we lost in Adam's corruption of sin, which was this:​

1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.​

Here is how Paul says it was lost:​

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.​

That is why I keep saying many are doing to the example of Christ what the Pharisees did to the Law of God, making it so far above everyone with their traditions. The Son was not some aloof example given us of God but one we are capable of emulating.

And as God the Father is completely in the Son by the spirit of the Son's love, loyalty, and obedience to the Father, so can we be one in them that God be "all in all".

"God's will be done" completely.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

And as God the Father is completely in the Son by the spirit of the Son's love, loyalty, and obedience to the Father, so can we be one in them that God be "all in all".

"God's will be done" completely.

What is your take on 1 Cor 15:28?

 

[Who Says]

What is your take on 1 Cor 15:28?

I just posted here in a way that touches on this: 11:13 PM #455

But I will give you much more detail to this specifically:

I believe Christ was the original Son of God before all creation and that all creation was made in him and through him by his Father's fondness in him from the get-go.

In other words Jesus was uniquely an only Son and all of God's other son's are actually grandsons.

We get confused thinking that Jesus was first called a Son in the flesh but that is because the inferences which make it seem that way mean that he was the first human God ever said that to. And that be so even though Adam before he sinned was a son of God in the flesh because God never told him that. And that is all it is saying is that Jesus is the first human ever told that.

But there is more here than meets the eye. And that is that Paul is actually talking there at 1 Cor 15:28 of the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of God becoming one.

Now, at that point many throw up blinders and protest, "OH, NO!" They just do not understand that Christ's kingdom was set up for the special purpose to bring all things back to God and that is why Daniel 2:44-45 shows Christ's kingdom as though a stone cut out of the side of the mountain which represents God's main heavenly kingdom.

So all we are seeing there at 1 Cor 15:28 is that stone reinserting itself back into the main mountain of God that the Father takes priority over all and in all of their government.

 

[Elijah674]

In the short time that I've been here, I've seen denial of the Divinity of Christ, the Trinity, etc., from those who claim the title "Christian".

So then, the question is: "Are there essential doctrines that one must adhere to in order to be a Christian, and if so, what are they?"

Curious as to what folks think.

I think we are taught to never rock the boat from the cradle on! ;) Yet never were any saved without conditions! And never has there been other than a remnant who obeyed the Godheads conditions. From start to finish. Never was there a way to obey without Christ's Grace! Phil. 4:13 + 2 Cor. 12:9

And the CHURCH saved? These are the 'Remnant of Matt. 10:5-6' who verse 15 finds the most violent offenders! (Luke 12:47-48) The problem with us'ins is that as long as one does not use caps, or rock the boat, or is 'nice'y' (new word) & pay tithe, + keep the Sabbath (sun or whatever) & go to church, & on & on! then we call them being Christ/like! Yet, God says that they are the ones that are even by far the worse in the execution of hell's judgement. (those of Matt. 10:15)

But, make NO MISTAKE, that includes [ALL] the ones of Rev. 17:1-5 + Rev. 3:16 [TRASH/HEAP] as Inspiration states.

Now, what are the forum ones saying about this above?? There was NO NEED TO SAY THAT!!! That IS NOT CHRIST/LIKE!

OK: God Himself says that these ones above are the WORST, not me. And they will soon be blotted out of ETERNITY if found in this class of ones. Obad. 1:16

Plus: Eze. 9's last message is that of WARNING these ones in His [HEARING] & [BEGAN AT MY SANCTUARY]. And who are the [[[ONLY]]] Saved ones? You go read it!

And Isa.58:1's INSPIRATION FROM THE HOLY GHOST of CRY ALOUD! SPARE NOT!, LIFT UP THY VOICE LIKE A TRUMPET! Are you kidding me?? These boards are so full of 'pew warming stuff' that most would not even read or listen to Gods Chosen!

And: 'shew my people their transgression, and the house .. their sins' ??????????

--Elijah

 

[mcgyver]

Just a quick note, guys (and gals )

It'll be Monday before I can get back to this thread...didn't want anyone to think that I was ignoring them. ;)

 

[mcgyver]

Great question Mc! It's a pleasure to be able to discuss things in an open and civil manner like this.

Now as for how I address the beginning of John's gospel, I start with the end where John states the purpose for writing his gospel.

"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the Son of God..."(John 20: 31).

This I believe, is the context that the book of John must be read in. It is a context that does not attempt to "deify" Jesus, but rather attempts to convince the audience that this Jesus was the Christ and Son of the Living God.
I believe that John in this passage is saying that the Logos (word) is the revealed will of God and that Jesus, God's Anointed One was the embodiment of that message (word) which itself was life.

I believe that 1 John 1:1-3 further clarifies this.

"What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life – and the life was manifested; andwe have seen, and bear witness and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us. What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also."

Jesus may not be the word or message spoken of in John, instead, what is likely is that Jesus is the personification of that message and is thus able to relate it (the message/word) to mankind.


John 1:1-18 (A Non Ecclesiastical NT)

In the beginning was the message,
And the message was directed toward God,
And "God" the message was.
The same one was directed toward God in the beginning.
Through it, all things were done.
And without it nothing was done.
What has been done in it was life.
And the life was the Light of humanity.
And the light shone in the darkness.
But the darkness did not understand it. ​

1:6 ​

It happened that a person whose name was John was sent from God. This one came as a witness, that he might testify about the Light, so that all might trust through him. He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. This was the Light, the True Light which enlightened everyone as it came into creation. In creation he was, and the creation happened through him, and yet the creation did not know him. He went into his own domain, and his own people didn't receive him. But to as many as did receive him, he gave them authority to become the children of God – to those who trust in his name, who were born not of blood, nor out of sexual desire, nor of a man's wishes, but from God. And the message was embodied and lived among us, and we observed its glory: glory like from a father's only son, full of favor and truth. John testified about him, crying out and saying, "This is the one about whom I said, 'The one who comes after me has become before me; because he is my superior.'" Because out of his

fullness, we all received favor on top of favor. For the Torah was given through Moses; the favor and the truth happened through Anointed Jesus. ​

1:18 ​

No one has ever seen God. God's unique one, the one who is at the Father's bosom, has related him. ​

This website does a more thorough job of explaining the beginning of John's gospel and I John.

In the beginning was the Word (J. Baixeras)

Thanks for the link...interesting for sure....but I'm afraid the author has completely missed the synonymous meaning of "logos", and therefore is operating out of a faulty paradigm.

The synonymous and well attested/accepted meaning of logos has always meant: The mind/reason of God since Heraclitus first used the term to describe that which caused change to be orderly and not dissolve into utter chaos, circa 500 BC.

Never has it been synonymous in its usage as "message" or "divine principle" as the author asserts.

We can see this in ancient Greek writings:

Plutarch in his Thrice Greatest Hermes Vol. 1 writes:

For Isis is the feminine [principle] of Nature and that which is capable of receiving the whole of genesis; in virtue of which she has been called “Nurse” and “All-receiving” by Plato, and, by the multitude, “She of ten-thousand names,” through her being transformed by Reason (Logos) and receiving all forms and ideas...

And again he writes: For we think that by one Common Reason (Logos) these Gods have been ordained over every domain of good; and every fair and good thing possible for nature owes its origin to their means...

Aristotle divided the art of persuasion into 3 categories: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos (persuading by the use of reason).

From F. E. Peter’s Greek Philosophical Terms (New York University Press, 1967): Logos. The Greek term for "reason" for "giving an account" (Plato)


Point that I'm making is that the synonymous meaning of logos is "reason", which in Greek thought can not be divorced from the mind...from the mind proceeds reason.


Simply history there.


A non "eccesiastical" form of John 1:1 therefore would be: In the beginning was the mind/reason of God, and the mind/reason [of God] was with God, and the mind/reason [of God] was God.


Any other attempted translation is to throw out Greek culture and language from Circa 500 BC through the present day.


Anyhow...see ya Monday (Lord willing and the creek don't rise!) Have a good Sunday!


[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[Sparkey]

A non "eccesiastical" form of John 1:1 therefore would be: In the beginning was the mind/reason of God, and the mind/reason [of God] was with God, and the mind/reason [of God] was God.


Any other attempted translation is to throw out Greek culture and language from Circa 500 BC through the present day.


Anyhow...see ya Monday (Lord willing and the creek don't rise!) Have a good Sunday!

We can agree that the logos was made flesh and dwelt among us (vs. 14).

That which is called the "mind/reason" or that which is called the Logos, came in flesh, born of the virgin, suffered on the cross and was the only begotten son of God upon whom all depend.

"John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

[John testified of Him, the Logos]"... And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God." - John 1:15, 33-34 KJV

 

[Who Says]

We can agree that the logos was made flesh and dwelt among us (vs. 14).

That which is called the "mind/reason" or that which is called the Logos, came in flesh, born of the virgin, suffered on the cross and was the only begotten son of God upon whom all depend.

"John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

[John testified of Him, the Logos]"... And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God." - John 1:15, 33-34 KJV

Precisely. The first hint that there is a certain something lacking with McGyver's reasoning (though I commend his reasoning as sound to the extent that it goes) is found in a couple of very simple statements Paul made:

1 Corinthians 2:16 "For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ."

Philippians 2:5 "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:"

Peter also attests the same:

1 Peter 4:1 "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;"

 

[Elijah674]

Precisely. The first hint that there is a certain something lacking with McGyver's reasoning (though I commend his reasoning as sound to the extent that it goes) is found in a couple of very simple statements Paul made:

1 Corinthians 2:16 "For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ."

Philippians 2:5 "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:"

Peter also attests the same:

1 Peter 4:1 "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;"

--Elijah here:
Well friend (as in Judas, for now) if that mind is in you at present, 'i' would cease being a vegaterian & eat my conputor! Some of you guys posting's (JW stuff) are surely OFF the Spiritual wall, (WAY OFF!)

Here is another guy from another site posting under Elder E. & a woman Pentacostal agreeing with his post. (only) Yet, how can we even do that???? The guy teaches that the ones in HELL will even 'repent' & be let out! Here is the post (Mac..) with their ESSENTIAL DOCTRINES NOT coming from Psalms 77:13 of [GOD'S WAY]

[FONT=Verdana,arial]ElderEarl wrote: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,arial][FONT=Verdana,arial]Elijah674 wrote: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,arial][FONT=Verdana,arial]renee829369 wrote: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,arial]ON THIS Earl, I agree with you completely.[/FONT]

You agree that the garbage can of Rev. 17:1-5 ones are anything documented as VIRGIN Candelsticks of Rev. 1-3 chapters??

--Elijah [/FONT]

([/FONT]that is from E.E.)

Ren, do you see see what I mean?? ---Elijah

PS: Surely you do not believe that the Lampstand in 'Gods Way' of Psalms 77:13 in the Holy Place with Seven GOLDEN Candlesticks & the CENTER OF THE SEVEN Representing the EVERLASTING GOSPEL OF THE MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE were ever any of the ABOMINATION OF THE EARTH FALSE CHURCH'S???

And we are not saying that there are not Real Christians there! John 10:16 + Rev. 18:4 But why on earth would Christ NEED to call them out if He were [IN] them???? See Josh. 7:12's last part of the verse!

And not only that but who REPLACED CHRIST when His Real ex/Virgin [HOUSE] BECAME DESOLATE OF HIM?? (Matt. 23:38, Isa. 5:3-7, John 12:42-43, Rev. 3:9!

And that [was not THESE] OF REV. 17:1-5's doctrinal garbage can's of... 'repenting in hell' or OSAS, or sun worship of satan's stuff!! Dan. 7:25

 

[Who Says]

--Elijah here:
Well friend (as in Judas, for now) if that mind is in you at present, 'i' would cease being a vegaterian & eat my conputor! Some of you guys posting's (JW stuff) are surely OFF the Spiritual wall, (WAY OFF!)

There was more than one Judas, so I will assume you meant the good ones.

I get the same pushing away by JWs that you are giving me claiming I basically am a JW so maybe you can understand why I say I have become like the Son while he was in the flesh not having a place to lay down his head to call his own?

All of you reject me; JWs and all of you. But I can't deny the Holy Spirit that teaches me just because nobody likes what he has taught me.

Where were any of you guys when I needed someone to teach me? You were not there. You just kept finding fault with me and shoving me aside. God is the only one that has been faithful toward me; He and his spirit team of teachers. But the flesh has done nothing but hate me.

I therefore do not believe the flesh. And you cannot fairly fault me for seeing the flesh as all a lie.

Here is another guy from another site posting under Elder E. & a woman Pentacostal agreeing with his post. (only) Yet, how can we even do that???? The guy teaches that the ones in HELL will even 'repent' & be let out! Here is the post (Mac..) with their ESSENTIAL DOCTRINES NOT coming from Psalms 77:13 of [GOD'S WAY]

[FONT=Verdana,arial]ElderEarl wrote: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,arial][FONT=Verdana,arial]Elijah674 wrote: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,arial][FONT=Verdana,arial]renee829369 wrote: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,arial]ON THIS Earl, I agree with you completely.[/FONT]

You agree that the garbage can of Rev. 17:1-5 ones are anything documented as VIRGIN Candelsticks of Rev. 1-3 chapters??

--Elijah [/FONT]

([/FONT]that is from E.E.)

Ren, do you see see what I mean?? ---Elijah

PS: Surely you do not believe that the Lampstand in 'Gods Way' of Psalms 77:13 in the Holy Place with Seven GOLDEN Candlesticks & the CENTER OF THE SEVEN Representing the EVERLASTING GOSPEL OF THE MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE were ever any of the ABOMINATION OF THE EARTH FALSE CHURCH'S???

And we are not saying that there are not Real Christians there! John 10:16 + Rev. 18:4 But why on earth would Christ NEED to call them out if He were [IN] them???? See Josh. 7:12's last part of the verse!

And not only that but who REPLACED CHRIST when His Real ex/Virgin [HOUSE] BECAME DESOLATE OF HIM?? (Matt. 23:38, Isa. 5:3-7, John 12:42-43, Rev. 3:9!

And that [was not THESE] OF REV. 17:1-5's doctrinal garbage can's of... 'repenting in hell' or OSAS, or sun worship of satan's stuff!! Dan. 7:25

I am a simple person taught simply by the Holy Spirit in the company of angels. I see the presence of the lamp stands as proof that the flesh that call themselves "the church" have no excuse for not knowing what they do.

Certainly the lamp stands are holy. Certainly the lamp stands are not part of hell. But the flesh they faithfully witnessed to and try to help hear, that flesh is hell bound.

Where I principly differ from your view is that I see the flesh church as only gathered at the foot of the mountain with much yet to do to make it to the road that is in the mountain leading to its top.

To me it seems you see the flesh church as having already conquered. But I say that they first must learn it is not even about the flesh.

 

[Drew]

This I believe, is the context that the book of John must be read in. It is a context that does not attempt to "deify" Jesus, but rather attempts to convince the audience that this Jesus was the Christ and Son of the Living God.

You may well be right - I have not looked at John specifically with the question "Is John saying that Jesus is God" in mind.

But let's be clear: even if John does not intend to deal with this question, this odes not mean that John does not believe in the divinity of Jesus. As I have argued in a number of threads, and no one has engaged the argument to show how it is wrong, the gospel of Luke strongly makes the case for the divinity of Jesus.

Perhaps you would agree, and perhaps you are not even directly addressing the matter of Jesus' divinity. Fair enough. However, all should understand that absence of a "Jesus is divine" argument in John is not an argument against the divinity of Jesus.

​

 

[Who Says]

You may well be right - I have not looked at John specifically with the question "Is John saying that Jesus is God" in mind.

But let's be clear: even if John does not intend to deal with this question, this odes not mean that John does not believe in the divinity of Jesus. As I have argued in a number of threads, and no one has engaged the argument to show how it is wrong, the gospel of Luke strongly makes the case for the divinity of Jesus.

Perhaps you would agree, and perhaps you are not even directly addressing the matter of Jesus' divinity. Fair enough. However, all should understand that absence of a "Jesus is divine" argument in John is not an argument against the divinity of Jesus.

That is good sound reasoning.

I would add only that we must redefine our understanding of what divinity means.

I say that anything God touches he imparts his divinity to it. All that He has made through his definitely divine Son speaks by virtue of that divinity not in the words of the thing made but in the words of its designer and maker.

Here is that divinity speaking: Psalms 19:1-3 "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard."

 

[Drew]

I would add only that we must redefine our understanding of what divinity means.

I say that anything God touches he imparts his divinity to it. All that He has made through his definitely divine Son speaks by virtue of that divinity not in the words of the thing made but in the words of its designer and maker.

Here is that divinity speaking: Psalms 19:1-3 "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard."

As I suspect you know, I do not entirely agree with your position here. There is indeed a sense in which you and I (people) are divine, but we are only "divine" in the sense that we have the Spirit of the Living God "in us". But, and this is critical to underscore - we are still 'damaged, fallen human beings' in the process of being redeemed.

Jesus is not divine in this sense. As I suggest is clear from the Scriptures, not least the argument that no "non-Trinitarians" are willing to touch (e.g. posts 85 and 86 from the "Trinitarian" thread), Jesus is the full embodiment of Israel's God. God promised that He (God) would personally return to His people. Jesus acts and says things that show that He (Jesus) considers Himself to be the fulfiller of those prophecies. This makes Jesus God - a clear implication that I politely suggest that you, and others, continue to evade.

So unless you and I consider ourselves to take on the role of God, we are certainly not in the same "category" as is Jesus.

 

[Who Says]

As I suspect you know, I do not entirely agree with your position here. There is indeed a sense in which you and I (people) are divine, but we are only "divine" in the sense that we have the Spirit of the Living God "in us". But, and this is critical to underscore - we are still 'damaged, fallen human beings' in the process of being redeemed.

Jesus is not divine in this sense. As I suggest is clear from the Scriptures, not least the argument that no "non-Trinitarians" are willing to touch (e.g. posts 85 and 86 from the "Trinitarian" thread), Jesus is the full embodiment of Israel's God. God promised that He (God) would personally return to His people. Jesus acts and says things that show that He (Jesus) considers Himself to be the fulfiller of those prophecies. This makes Jesus God - a clear implication that I politely suggest that you, and others, continue to evade.

So unless you and I consider ourselves to take on the role of God, we are certainly not in the same "category" as is Jesus.

Yes, we do agree on this.

And I credit you as also realizing that Jesus is the unflawed example to us of that divine which we can become (not of our own power or will, but) by God's power and original purpose for us.

That is why he came to destroy the temple of our flesh that he might cleanse from us a temple after his image. A temple that is one with him and in him.

For only in such a holy temple can his Father's Holy Spirit take up residence.

 

[Sparkey]

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." - Isaiah 9:6 KJV

As Drew has stated, "Jesus is the full embodiment of Israel's God. God promised that He (God) would personally return to His people. Jesus acts and says things that show that He (Jesus) considers Himself to be the fulfiller of those prophecies. This makes Jesus God." Still, it is said that if we believe on the Name of Jesus, and that He was sent from God, we shall be saved. The essential issue upon which our salvation depends is not defined by the Bible as the "Divinity of Christ," although I do not dispute that -- instead it is that Jesus came in the flesh. As John clearly states, "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

"Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son." - 2 John 1:8-9 KJV

When we look to the verse above to know what the "Doctrine of Christ" is, we see, ""For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." - 2 John 1:7 KJV