Grandstand discussion: "Ghost's Views on The Nature of Christ"
- Thread starter Nang
- Start date
- Status
Ask AMR, it's been his turn to respond for nearly 6 days now.
Brother Ducky
New member
I think that only two natures have ever been the norm, not "minds" or "souls/spirits." But, regardless, if Jesus has but one nature, is it human or divine, or a mixture 50/50 60/40, or something altogether different?
If divine, how was he our sacrificial substitute? If human, how could he atone for sin? On the basis of his perfect life, and perfect keeping of the Law, he would have been saved, but with no merit left over for us.
Just something to keep you busy while AMR is otherwise occupied. And do you see that you could be accused of Docetism given the second sentence of your quote above?
Peace,
Rick
If you conclude that God did not die on the cross for our sins, then you have two independent beings.
God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. We were reconciled to God through His death Romans 5:10
No
The Word made flesh who is God died on the cross, the God-Man. The triune God, Father, Son, Holy Spirit did not incarnate, so they did not die. Your logic does not follow for a trinitarian view (but it may follow vs non sequitur for a modalistic/oneness view that only recognizes one person in the Godhead).
Brother Ducky
New member
I am not quite sure what you mean by this. Do you hold that the second person of the Trinity died and for a period of time there was a "Binity" Godhead?
I know it's bad form to kick a man when he's down, but I saw this one coming.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y55wvdcCJfk
I knew this guy couldn't handle a rational debate.
Rock on Ghost.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y55wvdcCJfk
I knew this guy couldn't handle a rational debate.
Rock on Ghost.
I have to agree
Matt. 12:34 You offspring of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.
I think he stopped his anti-psychotic's one day too soon. :]
Right. Ghost was crying from post one.
Eeeew......I post this under protest.....wah wah!
No skills.
WizardofOz
New member
This is not true. I will suggest that AMR may be stereotyping or lumping ghost in with the whole heresy when ghost (not the host with the most) has a similar point or two, but more differences. He may be Docetic on one small point, but that does not mean he embraces or is guilty of Doceticism as a whole. I would expect AMR to catch this rookie mistake.
Just because Arminians believe in free will does not make them Pelagians (Calvinistic false assumption).
Just because Socinus was right about the nature of the future does not mean Open Theists are Socinists (he denied the Deity of Christ, which Open Theists do not).
I think ghost has some aspects similar to some heresies, but his views are unique and inaccurate, but not off the deep end in total like Doceticism, Gnosticism, etc.
AMR is right to take him to task and note some parallels, but would probably be wrong to lump him in totally with these major heresies.
Ghost is guilty of the same and worse, though. He can dish it out, but he cannot take it.
He should not scold us for rejecting his truth because of his behavior. He should take responsibility for his fleshliness and let his views rise or fall on their own merit. Likewise, AMR's self-control and sophistication does not mean he is right about everything (but his vocab alone can intimidate people into silence).
The mediate position is to accept me as right, a better guru then both. PM me for my address so you can all send me money.
There is no excuse for his profanity and attacks. Anyone who dares say anything about his family risks death, but he can dish it out.
Jesus does not curse people and wish that they go to hell (yet ghost will use His name in vain and claim Spirit support for his sinfulness).
This is not true. I will
suggest that AMR may be
stereotyping or lumping
ghost in with the whole
heresy when ghost (not the
host with the most) has a
similar point or two, but
more differences.------knowingly making claims that are false is called lying no matter how you slice it godrulz.
suggest that AMR may be
stereotyping or lumping
ghost in with the whole
heresy when ghost (not the
host with the most) has a
similar point or two, but
more differences.------knowingly making claims that are false is called lying no matter how you slice it godrulz.
I am frequently misunderstood and misrepresented and I would not stoop to foul language and family attacks. Don't defend arrogant immaturity. If AMR did what ghost did, I could see him getting that upset. AMR made some valid points. Anything false could be refuted without personal attacks (but ghost does not have the same skill and knowledge as AMR, who is also far from perfect, like me).
This is what I've been saying all along.
Yes, there have been a time or two that I have gotten sucked into those tactics.
Look, it don't care what the issue is....there's a proper way to go about and an improper way. Ghost was a case study in gome home and do it again.
There's a thing called speaking the truth in love. That's what Jesus did. Just because Jesus went off on the Pharisee's does not give any follower of Christ an excuse to level both barrels and blast away at the people for whom Christ died. Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the pharisees.
If you have the truth, you speak the truth in love. The truth will speak to those who love the truth.
If you try to tell me that the cube root of nine is three, I will politely tell you that you are incorrect, and show you the proof.
That's the way you do it. You don't start cursing everyone on TOL, and your opponents' family. Sheez. Even old school mobsters had more respect for people than that.
- Status