SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : The Triunity (my slightly differing view/ understanding)

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Do you see how this sounds weird?
before the incarnation of the Lord:
God/God, Word/God, Holy Spirit/God
after:
Father/God, Son/Word/God, Holy Spirit/God

I'm reminded of the verse about denying the Father and the Son. I'm not saying you're trying to blaspheme God intentionally or anything like that. I was almost drawn into the JW's teachings before so I know there's a lot of ideas out there but you're saying the Father Son relationship between God the ___? between 'God the God' and God the Word did not exist until the Word who is true God (by no means a part or piece of God but whole God) became flesh. Why would the relationship between the Father and the Son depend upon flesh? I don't mean to mock you David but unless you have some serious scripture for this (being "called" the Son is different that "being" the Son) then I think you should do more than just be open to criticism (which is good) but also be a lot more careful about speculating. Do you think that is fair and appropriate in this case? That doesn't mean I think we should stop discussing though. - Ben

 2008/11/18 19:00
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Logic,

Quote:
davidt wrote: Quote: Jesus is in the flesh glorified. The Holy Spirit is a spirit. The Father is Totaly other than, not a Spirit or in flesh. Yes I agree. I am not so sure about that last statement though.

What "last statement"?


When you said the Father is wholly other then and not a spirit. I say this because Scripture says that God is spirit. So I must say that the Father is spirit.

 2008/11/18 19:03Profile









 Re:

David, I just saw what you said about Christ referring to his divinity or humanity. I may have been inaccurate or inadequate to ealier say that you were dividing Christ but David, man to man, Do not begin to divide Christ in the way you are talking about. Absolutely forsake that train of thought. Christ is one Christ buddy! - not two. He is whole. You said yourself he is not 50/50 - well 100/100 makes 200 total which is the same as 50/50 - Please buddy forsake your human mind. Don't stumble like the greeks who wanted wisdom. We can talk about the rest of it but NO, NO! Christ's self is Christ's self! He IS the bread from heaven. His flesh. The Word BECAME flesh, That's Jesus David, he is whole. He is one Christ, not 100/100 --- Just 100 - God and Man - you won't be able to fathom it. It's not a trick - you have a limited mind. The Word BECAME flesh. Jesus. Just one. One self. One Man. One God. No Parts! No Parts! The Lord your God is one! - ok David? Slow down here. Don't be like Icarus. Ok?

 2008/11/18 19:13
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Ben,

Quote:
Do you see how this sounds weird?


I just try to go with what Scripture says. I think that the Triunity is intricate but not really. We are talking about God though and those are some deep waters.

Quote:
I'm reminded of the verse about denying the Father and the Son.


I don't think this applies. I am not denying the Father. God was always a Father. He did not become the Father of Jesus until He was born. I think also that this verse is talking about denying the Father presently which I definitely do not do. I accept the Father for He is.

Quote:
Why would the relationship between the Father and the Son depend upon flesh?


It doesn't the Word was always related to the Father in love for He loves Himself as God.

Quote:
a lot more careful about speculating.


I do not believe I am speculating. I from what I understand am not going beyond that which I know to be Scriptural.

Quote:
unless you have some serious scripture


I have been providing Scripture.


p.s. I didn't really understand all of the question.

 2008/11/18 19:14Profile









 Re:

David, I've never thought about what you are saying about the Father and Son like this but [b]first[/b] not dividing Christ. Unless someone else has actually come across this before? I have not up to this point.

 2008/11/18 19:20
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Ben,

in all respect my conversation with you has been a bit confusing. Especially compared to the other I have talked to. I have found there questions a little bit more reasonable and thought through. Sometimes you ask questions about what I believe and I already stated cleary what I believe a few times. Are you actually taking your time to read the posts and think about them? There are also things that I have already explained to you that you are still bringing up as if I hadn't. And, you have not answered the questions that I have asked you.


Quote:
Do not begin to divide Christ in the way you are talking about. Absolutely forsake that train of thought. Christ is one Christ buddy! - not two. He is whole. You said yourself he is not 50/50 - well 100/100 makes 200 total which is the same as 50/50 - Please buddy forsake your human mind. Don't stumble like the greeks who wanted wisdom.


Ben I think you are getting a little ahead of yourself with exclamation points and comparing me to Greek philosophers and going off into my thoughts. That is not what I am doing I am deriving all my thought from the Scripture verbatim. Also, when I say 100/100 there is nothing wrong with that. All I am saying is that He is fully "%100" man and fully "%100" God.


Quote:
No Parts! No Parts!


This is an example of a question of yours that I already answered. I don't know maybe it is the fact that these things are hard to understand and the right language is hard to find or something but once again I am not having this problem with others. If it is just that it is hard to understand then please calm down and don't take shots at me. I am not saying any of this with a bad or hyped attitude.

 2008/11/18 19:25Profile
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Ben,

Quote:
David, I've never thought about what you are saying about the Father and Son like this


It is not a mainstream teaching that is probably why. But, most don't really think about these things this deeply or at least have not gotten there yet. I believe these things to be very important though for devotion, Christian understanding, outsiders perception.

 2008/11/18 19:28Profile









 Re:

David, I'll go back and read all of your posts if you want. I was skipping a lot of them because of the length and I had some direct questions. I'll go read them. The exclamations were only in concern because I believe it is seriously dangerous to go where you were going. I haven't at all felt that you have been unkind or disrespectful to me and I wasn't trying to say anything I said in a harsh or hard-hearted way. Do you believe me? I was very concerned. Not in a way to belittle you with pity or something like that. I apologize if anything was inappropriate especially if you are older than me or something like that! I was carried away but only in concern about what you had said. Do you understand the spirit I was writing in David? Like if you saw someone about to walk into traffic because they didn't see it coming. ok? I truly believe that beginning to divide Christ's sayings in that way is a perilous road. If I'm wrong than I'm a fool and that's that but I didn't mean to intimidate you with any of the things I said, I meant them in genuine concern. Do you understand? Tell me how I've been redundant and I'll try to understand. I'm sorry if I surprised you, I meant to surprise you in a good way. I'd gladly find myself to have been like a fool if I've misunderstood what you said. - Ben

 2008/11/18 19:38
davidt
Member



Joined: 2006/5/21
Posts: 326


 Re:

Ben,

Quote:
Do you understand?


I know that speaking on forums can be a hard thing. People are coming from all different places, attitudes, maturity and so forth. I understand that this doctrine can bother many especially since it is controversial and little told. All I would say is as James said be swift to hear and slow to speak. This is not meant as a rebuke just what I am trying to express to you for the sake of conversation. I just think we have to be careful about what we say on forums. For instance Mike quoted you as questioning whether or not I believe that there was no Father. When these things are written in an isolated way from explanation they can come off wrong. It is kind of like the news where rumors and such can be spread. That is all brother if you have question shoot but just be wise. The last instance I will mention is just all the warning laced with accusation that you have sent toward me. What I advise about this is just that you be a bit more patient in trying to understanding what I am saying before warning me of peril. I understand your concern but it is good not to get carried away in zeal at the same time. And also the form of your question can be hard to decipher at times.

 2008/11/18 19:47Profile









 Re:

If I have falsely accused you then I repent.
Or if my concern came across offensively then I'll restrain myself. I will be extremely careful not to twist or exaggerate anything you say. And which questions or which part of a question didn't you understand?
Here's what I was reacting to.

Quote:
He is not speaking of his humanity as the Son but His Divinity as the Logos. [b]When He says Me[/b] He is talking about His Divinity just as when He says I.

I confess I do not understand the last part of the sentence "just as when he says I" which like I said is probably from not reading all of the posts. But it sounded to me as if you were saying that "Me" doesn't just mean "Me" - Am I wrong? "Me" doesn't mean any more or less than "Me" and since then word "Me" is so easily understood as pointing to the one who said it we have to conclude that "Me" refers to Christ who is God and Man and not at all that "Me" is referring to one of his natures as if they were separate natures. I'll wait until you let me know whether I'm on the wrong track here so as not to add to the confusion. Peace to you sir. Sorry if you're older than me and I called you buddy, I meant it affectionately but it would be inappropriate if you're older which you probably are since I'm only 28. I hope you'll forgive me if I was out of line. - Ben

 2008/11/18 20:02





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy