What is a liberal Christian theology?

[follower]

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.... "

sad that in egnish 'God' is used instead of His Name as in Hebrew and Aramaic original Scripture. ....
and that "which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth"
is not accepted except by a few in and by Yhwh's Grace in Yeshua.

truly, Yhwh wants to reveal the complete Truth to as many as call on Him and believe in Yeshua and are immersed in His Name and choose joyfully and willingly to obey Him (i.e. ?? "the call" ) (as in many are called)

but the spirit of the world, the wisdom of man, is like a tsunami over the earth, and there is a famine of the hearing of the word of Yhwh.

still, gracefully, thankfully, perfectly, anyone and everyone who seeks HIM will find HIM and be accepted by HIM in Yeshua; purchased as ordained before the world was created by the blood of the Lamb... ... ...

 

[childeye]

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.... "

sad that in egnish 'God' is used instead of His Name as in Hebrew and Aramaic original Scripture. ....
and that "which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth"
is not accepted except by a few in and by Yhwh's Grace in Yeshua.

truly, Yhwh wants to reveal the complete Truth to as many as call on Him and believe in Yeshua and are immersed in His Name and choose joyfully and willingly to obey Him (i.e. ?? "the call" ) (as in many are called)

but the spirit of the world, the wisdom of man, is like a tsunami over the earth, and there is a famine of the hearing of the word of Yhwh.

still, gracefully, thankfully, perfectly, anyone and everyone who seeks HIM will find HIM and be accepted by HIM in Yeshua; purchased as ordained before the world was created by the blood of the Lamb... ... ...

Thanks. Much is said here, with much to ponder.

 

[Free]

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.... "

sad that in egnish 'God' is used instead of His Name as in Hebrew and Aramaic original Scripture.

Except that you're quoting from the NT, which, having been written in Greek, uses theos, and simply means "deity" or "God". So the English is correct.

 

[jasonc]

free, has already delt with your post childeye. I was raised A NON-TRINITARIAN. if I saw you posted this, at the age of 12, you would be not aligning yourself with any Christian church if I had my way. you speak of revalation. I had no time to read what the bible said, I just prayed and asked GOD what his nature was he said to me im a trinity and I believed that.

a jw will know the arguments and how to twist them like a certain member here does. that is why I say don't argue with one, if you do it with the lords blessing. they will win. they know how to divert and twist. I didn't have to be told what the bible said to support both arguments. I know the anti-Trinitarian arguments. when I came here I learned how to debate the pro-trinitarian arguments from free. I had too.

 

[childeye]

free, has already delt with your post childeye. I was raised A NON-TRINITARIAN. if I saw you posted this, at the age of 12, you would be not aligning yourself with any Christian church if I had my way. you speak of revalation. I had no time to read what the bible said, I just prayed and asked GOD what his nature was he said to me im a trinity and I believed that.

It seems to me that those who really know the things of God, are the one's God expects to be showing patience with those who don't.

a jw will know the arguments and how to twist them like a certain member here does. that is why I say don't argue with one, if you do it with the lords blessing. they will win. they know how to divert and twist. I didn't have to be told what the bible said to support both arguments. I know the anti-Trinitarian arguments. when I came here I learned how to debate the pro-trinitarian arguments from free. I had too.

I admit I don't argue this topic very much. I'm sure I don't even know the points of division respective to all the denominations and their doctrine, or if there even are any. I only know the devil causes division and he uses semantics.

 

[jasonc]

this aint semantics. its simply not. semantics would be calling something else by a synonym and another person calls it the same thing with another related word that doesn't loose the definitions. ie I use YHWH and another poster uses Adonai. minor differences but we both know that person is GOD.

 

[childeye]

this aint semantics. its simply not. semantics would be calling something else by a synonym and another person calls it the same thing with another related word that doesn't loose the definitions. ie I use YHWH and another poster uses Adonai. minor differences but we both know that person is GOD.

No, I mean semantics caused by the different connotations and inferences, syntax, contained in human language. Not just in scripture interpretation, but how we interpret one another and how we express ourselves from our different perspectives.

 

[jasonc]

No, I mean semantics caused by the different connotations and inferences, syntax, contained in human language. Not just in scripture interpretation, but how we interpret one another and how we express ourselves from our different perspectives.

that not semantics that's simple misscommunitation and communication issues. free is dealing with you know. I see no further reason to dialogue on this matter.i have been a non-trinatarian. argued against it. its a hard concept to grasp but its in the bible. its by faith that I understand it.

 

[childeye]

that not semantics that's simple misscommunitation and communication issues. free is dealing with you know. I see no further reason to dialogue on this matter.i have been a non-trinatarian. argued against it. its a hard concept to grasp but its in the bible. its by faith that I understand it.

I appreciate Free caring what I believe. I've always been a believer in the Trinity. The letter to Eusebius proves it is semantics or miscommunication as you say, that and ungodly pride. Always it is Satan, and peoples carnal blindness of his deception that causes division.

 

[jasonc]

I appreciate Free caring what I believe. I've always been a believer in the Trinity. The letter to Eusebius proves it is semantics or miscommunication as you say, that and ungodly pride. Always it is Satan, and peoples carnal blindness of his deception that causes division.

its not carnal in your case but simply you not willing to see that you are in fact denying the trinity. the son was and is always the son. the father is always the father, the holy spirit is always the holy spirit. the son didn't loose his nature nor add to it when he became flesh.

 

[childeye]

its not carnal in your case but simply you not willing to see that you are in fact denying the trinity. the son was and is always the son. the father is always the father, the holy spirit is always the holy spirit. the son didn't loose his nature nor add to it when he became flesh.

Jason, I understand why you say this. But really, I completely believe in the Trinity, it's all over the scripture as well, even though the term trinity is not. there are some thing not true in the eternal sense that are in the temporal sense. That is why this miscommunication happens, because eternal things don't always square in temporal terms. Some things are true today that won't be true tomorrow, such as the number of hairs on my head.

 

[GrannyJ]

I think the nature of God is way beyond the grasp of our human brains; the truth is bigger than all of us, although each of us has a glimpse of it. The doctrine of the Trinity probably is the 'best fit' for the facts we have, but as soon as we start arguing the finer points of it, we are in danger of going beyond the capabilities of our limited brains. Which is probably why people have been arguing about it for 2000 years!

 

[childeye]

I think the nature of God is way beyond the grasp of our human brains; the truth is bigger than all of us, although each of us has a glimpse of it. The doctrine of the Trinity probably is the 'best fit' for the facts we have, but as soon as we start arguing the finer points of it, we are in danger of going beyond the capabilities of our limited brains. Which is probably why people have been arguing about it for 2000 years!

Granny J, I love sentiments of humility. They are like getting rid of a great weight.

 

[GrannyJ]

Well, I do think it is a relief to realise that it is for God to know, and for us to trust Him, love Him and obey His commands.

 

[jasonc]

I have spent a lot of time on the trinity, I haven't posted all the thoughts understanding of the visions I have of john, Ezekiel and Daniel. since one went there.
1) the vision of john, is akin to Ezekiel and in jewish thought and its supported the bible, the torah is what is seen in heaven. therefore, god gave the torah, the torah is His nature. the torah is love.

should then post that jesus= torah? NO why? because God forbid im reducing God. its a big part of HIM but his nature fully. the bible doesn't reveal all there is about god. I used the targum where John got the idea of in the beginning was the word( the jews say the Heshem spoke and the worlds came to be) and they used the word Meriba for that which means... WORD.chew on that for confusion. in the beginning was the word, and the word was god, and word was with God.

 

[childeye]

I have spent a lot of time on the trinity, I haven't posted all the thoughts understanding of the visions I have of john, Ezekiel and Daniel. since one went there.
1) the vision of john, is akin to Ezekiel and in jewish thought and its supported the bible, the torah is what is seen in heaven. therefore, god gave the torah, the torah is His nature. the torah is love.

should then post that jesus= torah? NO why? because God forbid im reducing God. its a big part of HIM but his nature fully. the bible doesn't reveal all there is about god. I used the targum where John got the idea of in the beginning was the word( the jews say the Heshem spoke and the worlds came to be) and they used the word Meriba for that which means... WORD.chew on that for confusion. in the beginning was the word, and the word was god, and word was with God.

I don't see any confusion here. I see you saying that God spoke and His Word created everything. God's Word is Himself in the sense that He spoke it and expressed Himself. #1) So if we were to say that the Word, before God spoke, did not yet exist as the Word, even though God existed, I would agree. #2) But yet, If we were to say that the Word was always there in God, just not yet spoken, I would agree with that also. Notice in #1, the Word does not yet exist. But in sentence #2, The Word has always existed. Yet both are true according to how they are said. This is why I say there is semantic confusion.

 

[GrannyJ]

Interesting and rather beautiful, that extract from the Targum, Jason. By the way - where do you read the Targum? Is it available online, or is it somehting you bought? It must throw a fair bit of light on some of the more obscure OT passages.