Dogs and Cats beggetting eachother. :)

[BradtheImpaler]

Thanks Tan for another interpretation on this matters that I have not heard. It never ceases to amaze me how many interpretations MEN have. This is what every man and his bible (sola scriptura) gives us. Each man asserting himself as the one who has it right. He is the pillar and support of the truth.

I do agree that the Psalm is not specifically speaking of Christ in Mary's womb.

Funny how you never heard of this interpretation, when the interpretation, as pointed out by Tan, is the interpretation given by Paul himself. Was he just another man with another interpretation?

 

[thessalonian]

Can God be divided such that there are parts to him? Can we have a half God? Was there some part of Christ that was not God? God cannot be divided. That is what you are proposing with your theories. There was no part of Christ that was not God. Therefore there was no half God, half man. Sorry you cannot grasp this.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Can God be divided such that there are parts to him? Can we have a half God? Was there some part of Christ that was not God? God cannot be divided. That is what you are proposing with your theories. There was no part of Christ that was not God. Therefore there was no half God, half man. Sorry you cannot grasp this.

You are the one with the theories. "Can we have half a God"? No. We agree. Therefore Christ is not God even if his Father was. Why? Because that would make him only half-God. That's what I've been getting at all along. You just proved my point. Your argument seems to be that Christ has to be fully God because he can't be "half-God". But you begin with the supposition that he is God. Your reasoning is circular (yes, caught you "reasoning" again) I say he can't be God because His Father is God and there is only one God and Jesus is not his father. He can't be God and he can't be a "half-God".

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Was there some part of Christ that was not God?

Yes, absolutely. The part that came from Mary, which you yourself described as "humanity".

(That is, unless you want to take back your insistence that Catholics DON'T believe Mary is deity?

 

[thessalonian]

Was there some part of Christ that was not God?

Yes, absolutely. The part that came from Mary, which you yourself described as "humanity".

(That is, unless you want to take back your insistence that Catholics DON'T believe Mary is deity?

There is no part of his humanity that is not hypostatically joined to his divinity. So the answer to the question is no. You of course start from the assumption that he is not God. But that is not what he tells us in his word. He is the "Word made Flesh" and "the Word was God". Did you get that? "THE WORD MADE FLESH". THE WORD WHICH IS GOD WAS MADE FLESH.

No you probably don't get it. :

 

[Vic C.]

But that is not what he tells us in his word. He is the "Word made Flesh" and "the Word was God". Did you get that? "THE WORD MADE FLESH". THE WORD WHICH IS GOD WAS MADE FLESH.

Perhaps this is too simple for some to understand, Thess. 8-)

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Was there some part of Christ that was not God?

Yes, absolutely. The part that came from Mary, which you yourself described as "humanity".

(That is, unless you want to take back your insistence that Catholics DON'T believe Mary is deity?

[quote:fda9c]There is no part of his humanity that is not hypostatically joined to his divinity. So the answer to the question is no

So you're saying the humanity of Christ was God?

You of course start from the assumption that he is not God

Of course. He is the Son OF God, and there's only one God. What does "of" mean?

But that is not what he tells us in his word. He is the "Word made Flesh" and "the Word was God". Did you get that? "THE WORD MADE FLESH". THE WORD WHICH IS GOD WAS MADE FLESH.

No you probably don't get it. :

[/quote:fda9c]

Meaning I am not easily fooled. The word which (metaphorically) came out of God's mouth was "made flesh". A word is not a person, it's something that comes forth FROM a person. God's word was with him the way a man's word is with that man. It was not another "person" with God. The word was God's intention, when this intention was realized it "became flesh". I predict I will have a son. When my son is born he is my "word made flesh". The word BECAME a person.

 

[Imagican]

Brad,

nice post. Refreshing to hear such words when continually bombarded with others INSISTING that the Word WAS Christ. If the Word WAS Christ then WHY even use the word Word? I find it difficult to understand how one could so easily be deluded into such an understanding. It seems So simple yet 'trinitarians' seem to be blinded or something.

Regardless of 'trinity' or a belief in it, the Word was simply THAT; The
Word of God. It is utterly amazing how this has been turn around into meaning NOTHING more than Word = Christ. If that were the case, then the words of John would have simply stated that 'In the beginning was Christ............. He certainly wasn't offering some vodooish spiritual mystery to try and 'fool' people. He was stating what he could in the best way that he knew how. That some chose to ignore the 'truth' and turn it into some 'man-made' creation was NOT his purpose behind these words.

 

[TanNinety]

His[Yashuah] divinity was begotten of God. (of course so was his humanity through Mary). The humanity and divinity were hypostatically joined in to one person.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Funny how Jesus forgot to mention to Nicodemus that which is born of the flesh and spirit is “hypostatically†joined man-god divine being. May be because flesh and spirit give birth to nephilim? The giants of the old? ..THE reason why a world cleansing with flood was necessary by God in Genesis?

Ever wonder you are “born again†at the point of resurrection? Not when “people lay hands on you†or “accept Jesus into your heart†or “filled with the holy spirit�

And at this point of born again resurrection is when you have an eternal spirit and that is what Yashuah had to go through so He could enter heaven and sit at the right hand of God?

 

[Imagican]

Was there some part of Christ that was not God?

Yes, absolutely. The part that came from Mary, which you yourself described as "humanity".

(That is, unless you want to take back your insistence that Catholics DON'T believe Mary is deity?

There is no part of his humanity that is not hypostatically joined to his divinity. So the answer to the question is no. You of course start from the assumption that he is not God. But that is not what he tells us in his word. He is the "Word made Flesh" and "the Word was God". Did you get that? "THE WORD MADE FLESH". THE WORD WHICH IS GOD WAS MADE FLESH.

No you probably don't get it. :

No Thess, It it YOU who continually insist that the Word was nothing BUT God. Christ was God's postrophy S, just as the Word was God's. I know, I know, I added the 'S. But, when one considers exactly WHAT the Word IS, then we see that it was NOTHING other than the WORD OF GOD. That Word WAS God, but also God's Word, get it?

The Word WAS made flesh through the creation of the 'man' Jesus Christ. Christ EVEN STATED plainly that the words, (get it? WORD), that He offered WAS NOT His OWN, but GIVEN Him BY THE FATHER, (GOD). When Christ TOLD us HOW we should pray, what did He offer? OUR FATHER WHO ART IN HEAVEN, a PURE indication that The Father IS God.

I trust in Jesus Christ and NO AMOUNT of words of 'men' will change what He plainly stated. I believe in the SIMPLICITY that is IN Christ Jesus. Jesus Christ was simply the Son of God. It's really THAT simple.

 

[thessalonian]

Imagican,

Thank you for your infallible personal opinion. You are very good at ignoring the many passages that have been offered to you that show that Christ was the Son of God who was God the Son. There is no point in laying them before you any longer as the scriptures tell us, it is a waste of time. You do not know God. Sorry.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Imagican,

I guess we should just forget about it and take solace in the fact it's not a few hundred years ago where all Thess would have to do is tattle on us and we'd get our feet dipped in boiling oil for the crime of questioning religious dogma?

 

[thessalonian]

Imagican,

I guess we should just forget about it and take solace in the fact it's not a few hundred years ago where all Thess would have to do is tattle on us and we'd get our feet dipped in boiling oil for the crime of questioning religious dogma?

I do believe that was a couched insult. Your views are Arian. Shall we discuss their methods of winning people over?

So do you think Jesus prexisted before he was conceived in Mary's womb or are you avoiding that question?

 

[BradtheImpaler]

I do believe that was a couched insult. Your views are Arian. Shall we discuss their methods of winning people over?

I place all organized religion in the same bucket. It has proven to be inherently evil throughout history.

So do you think Jesus prexisted before he was conceived in Mary's womb or are you avoiding that question?

I believe the original intention of the authors was that he pre-existed only in the mind/plan of God. That also corresponds with the idea of "logos". But I also believe some verses were manipulated by scribes in an attempt to indicate literal pre-existence and deity as the Trinity dogma developed. If you are one with your Protestant, bible-thumping cousins in their naive view that the NT "fell out of heaven" and hasn't been tampered with since the original copies were penned I don't know what to tell you other than do some more research.

I also want to apologize for the persecution quip. That was uncalled for. I have nothing against you personally. But there was a time when stuff like that happened and I'm just glad organized religion has lost it's hold over the civil powers at least in this nation - aren't you?

 

[Imagican]

Thess, talk about insulting people. You just claimed that I 'don't know God' and then act like Brad was wrong for his comment. Wow, not only do you insist that I MUST accept 'your' understanding, but your understanding is SO far beyond mine that it's OK for you to insult but are too holy to be insulted. Wow, you really ARE a Catholic aren't you? he he he.

Thess, I love you brother. Your insults only amuse me. They anger me NOT in the LEAST. I find them quite entertaining at times, but mostly, just childish gestures of frustration.

Not only do I KNOW God, but more importantly He KNOWS me. I am a lowly worm deserving of NOTHING short of perpetual pain and suffering for my sins. Fortunately I have a LOVING God that has loved me regardless of my weaknesses. He loves you too but you must LET HIM. Your 'religion' gets in the way of 'your walk' my friend, and until you can 'get over it' I feel that you will constantly be at odds with His will. It doesn't HAVE to be this way, for there IS forgiveness to all who learn to forgive, and love for all those that learn to love. Dwelling in a religion of 'hate' will NOT allow one to 'see' this though. You are bound to suffer the same fate as those that you follow.

 

[mutzrein]

Brad - I'm an anti-trinitarian and believe that God's son was pre-existent, more than just in the mind/plan of God. I don't have any problem with the only begotten son of God (but not as God) having been the conduit (for want of a better word) through whom God created all things. Do you see it differently?

 

[BenJasher]

"Ego eimi" were the words of The Word. I am the I Am.
On another occasion, He told the religious leaders of His day:"Before Abraham was, I am." They wanted to stone Him for blasphemy because of it.

This thread shows that all unbelievers, from the ignorant and the unlearned, up to and including the very educated men of learning, will always wrest the scriptures to their own harm. They did it in Paul's day, and it is still going on. The gospel is foolishness only to them who perish.

 

[mutzrein]

Wow - I wondered where that thread went to.

Ben, is your post directed at me?

 

[Imagican]

And an Amen Ben. You are an observative individual. But what you offer, you seem as oblivious to as those that you 'accuse' of being so. I realize that in 'your mind', the words that you offered are insight. But what you probably 'don't' realize is that from 'my' perspective, they could be in reference to 'you' as well. For to 'accept' and 'teach' ANY other Gospel than that brought to us by Christ or His apostles, IS the 'foolishness' to which you refer.

MEC

 

[BenJasher]

: Sorry! Not at all Ed.

I need to go back through the thread here and see if my last post ended up in the thread I intended it for. It wouldn't be the first time I have had to delete a statement because I was nursing more than one thread that the same time. I quite embarrassed myself once with multiple tabs opened.


UPDATE:

Nope. That statement was supposed to go in this thread. Thank you for your patience.

End UPDATE

Frankly and in sincerity Ed, I find more to agree with you on. The points I see that we disagree on are such that I feel no need to draw attention to them.

For one thing, I am absolutely convinced that Jesus was God in person, not merely a man God used for a special purpose, or a specifically created person whose unique purpose was the redemption of the Nation of Israel. No. He was God in the flesh, dwelling among us for a short period of time.

That is something I have not deduced form any study of the scriptures I have undertaken at any time in the past. It is something that became part of me through some other means. It is such an intrinsic part of me that it cannot be taken away from me.

The idea that Jesus was someting other that God in the Flesh, and that His Deification was a fabrication of the disciples has been around since the very early days after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. It sprang from the Gnostic sects in an attempt to delude the weak amongst the Body of Christ, and has been disproven time and time again, by people such as Paul, James, John, Origen, Clement and Iraneus. This thread proves that the heresy hasn't died yet. It is still being debated.

HOWSOMEEVER: If a person has a struggle with The Son of God being God Himself, I am not going to throw stones and call them names. On the other hand, my hackles get straight up at the mention of the idea that Jesus was just a man that God used to atone for sin; or that He was a separate creation made solely for that purpose.

There is a fine line of difference here, but on one side of the line there are the earnest and sincere seekers of Truth, and on the other are the scoffers and mockers whose only end is their own destruction. Jude spoke quite plainly on this subject.

I apologize to any who has taken any unnecessary offense at my words. That goes the same for you as well Ed.