ECT The new rules for the Exclusively Christian forum

[Chandler]

I would just say--seriously--that not everybody in the gospels had the same literal interpretation. Matthew's Peter was no exception.

Son of God, God, Messiah, Savior, divine sacrifice--all of these designations ultimately depended on the specific gospel writer's theology, location and the particular events their communities lived through. For example, Mark's Jesus cries out "My God, why have you forsaken me?" on the cross. In John, Jesus is made to show that everything in the scriptures has been fulfilled and the crucifixion is just one aspect of that ("It is finished!").

Mark's community was written shortly after or during the Roman-Jewish wars. Many Jews were killed and died in agony. Mark's crucifixion narrative shows that.

John's gospel was written much later--probably in the 90s. By then the christology of Jesus was solidifying and John's gospel of Jesus speaking in long, theological discourses confirms that.


The later canonical designations (Son of God, Messiah, etc.) were all theological affirmations.

Interesting observations. I take the view that whatever the time and circumstances of the writing, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16).

I believe that Matthew originally wrote his gospel in Hebrew, intending this to be a conclusion to the Old Testament Hebrew writings. He also included many quotations showing fulfillment of prophesy in Jesus' lifetime. And of course, the gospels contain many prophetic utterances of Jesus. Hence, both the gospel writers and their readers must have acknowledged the gospel writings as scripture inspired by God and free from human error.

 

[Chandler]

To the contrary of this deceit:
"I and the Father are one"
John 10:30.

Jesus isn't His Father in the sense of replacing Him or of eradicating Their eternal Father-Son relationship and persons.

Jesus is His Father in the sense of being His Father's Son
(homousion, containing Him, expressing Him, including Him)


Jesus is a different person within the Trinity. Not a different person outside of, or separate from, the Father. Since Father, Son, and Spirit are inseverable. Being one Organism, one Being, one God: God.

Hello Writer. I wish that we could have a friendly discussion without you accusing me of misrepresentation and deceit.

Your view that Jesus is "not a different person from" the Father (do I understand you correctly?) is quite different from the Trinity doctrine: One God but three separate persons. This seems to lead to the idea that God the Father died for our sins (some early theologians believed this).

I disagree with you because Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is "the express image of his person" (KJV).

This pictures Jesus as having the "image" (Greek: "charakter") of God the Father but not actually being that person (Greek: "hypostasis" = substance).

Who existing in the form of God didn't consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man

The word for "grasped" in Philippians 2:6 is "harpagmos", a very strong term meaning "to snatch or seize with violence". The KJV correctly translates this as "robbery". Elsewhere in the scriptures forms of this word mean literal plunder and robbery. The name of the mythical harpy, a snatching half bird, half woman, is derived from this word.

The sense of Philippians 2:6 is that Jesus never ever gave consideration to violently seizing equality with God for himself (as Satan did). Becoming equal with God was never in his thoughts.

We'll see if they can or will

Any news on that? I consider myself a Christian but I can't help it if others do not.

 

[aikido7]

Interesting observations. I take the view that whatever the time and circumstances of the writing, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16).

I believe that Matthew originally wrote his gospel in Hebrew, intending this to be a conclusion to the Old Testament Hebrew writings. He also included many quotations showing fulfillment of prophesy in Jesus' lifetime. And of course, the gospels contain many prophetic utterances of Jesus. Hence, both the gospel writers and their readers must have acknowledged the gospel writings as scripture inspired by God and free from human error.

I agree with Timothy.

And I also believe that the gospel writers were inspired to make sense of Jesus' life by using their own scriptural tradition as a springboard for telling parts of the story in ways that would resonate with that traditon.

And I know that this view is a purely historical one. The popular, "theological view" is not persuasive to me. I am a minority on TOL. Whenever I sit at the counter I am denied service. Such is life.

 

[Chandler]

I agree with Timothy.

And I also believe that the gospel writers were inspired to make sense of Jesus' life by using their own scriptural tradition as a springboard for telling parts of the story in ways that would resonate with that traditon.

I can definitely see traits of individuality in the gospel writings. Tax collector Matthew is always accurate with numbers. And physician Luke sometimes includes details of miraculous healing that the other three omit (Luke 22:51).

And I know that this view is a purely historical one. The popular, "theological view" is not persuasive to me. I am a minority on TOL. Whenever I sit at the counter I am denied service. Such is life.

As a Jehovah's Witness I am just a minority of one on TOL. And if Writer gets his way I will soon be a minority of zero on the Exclusively Christian forum.

 

[aikido7]

...As a Jehovah's Witness I am just a minority of one on TOL. And if Writer gets his way I will soon be a minority of zero on the Exclusively Christian forum.

I definitely can hear that. But maybe there's an upside: we heretics might get to choose the type of wooden stake we will be lashed to before we are burned.

 

[writer]

Chandler's evil misrepresentation 'n deceit of the apostles' teaching 102

Chandler's evil misrepresentation 'n deceit of the apostles' teaching 102

102 I consider myself a Christian but I can't help it if others do not.

i consider u not Christian in the least.
i should ask u: What's a Christian?

Hello Writer. I wish that we could have a friendly discussion without you accusing me of misrepresentation and deceit.

Then don't misrepresent or deceive

Your view that Jesus is "not a different person from" the Father (do I understand you correctly?)

What do u base that on?

...is quite different from the Trinity doctrine: One God but three separate persons.

Father, Son, and Spirit aren't separate.

That's a trinity of 3 Gods. Not 3 in 1

This seems to lead to the idea that God the Father died for our sins (some early theologians believed this).

God "died." Not God the Father

Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is "the express image of his person" (KJV).

This pictures Jesus as having the "image" (Greek: "charakter") of God the Father but not actually being that person (Greek: "hypostasis" = substance).

The image of the Father is the Son.

Father and Son are of the same Being.
Not the same "Person"

Who existing in the form of God didn't consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man

The sense of Philippians 2:6 is that Jesus never ever gave consideration to violently seizing equality with God for himself (as Satan did). Becoming equal with God was never in his thoughts.

To the contrary of Chandler' deliberate misrepresentative deceit regarding this Scripture (and others): Jesus didn't consider seizing Godhood because as Christ He emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, and that, the death of a cross.
For which reason God highly exalted Him, and gave Him the name above every name...

In other words, He not only returned to His Deity in form; Christ also made His human nature God

 

[aikido7]

...Father, Son, and Spirit aren't separate.

...for the Father is greater than I.John 14:28

I and the Father are One.John 10:30

Pick a verse, pick a side, start a movement, found a church, split into a schism and come out fighting.

 

[writer]

re 107's mistake

re 107's mistake

...for the Father is greater than I.John 14:28

I and the Father are One.John 10:30

Pick a verse, pick a side, start a movement, found a church, split into a schism and come out fighting.

Why?

Does Aikido7 mistakenly think they're contradictory?

 

[aikido7]

Why?

Does Aikido7 mistakenly think they're contradictory?

Nah. No more than love your enemies and kill terrorists or forgive 70 times 7 and condemn anyone who crosses you or the sun shines on the evil and the good and America is Number One. Or pay attention to the log in your own eye and belittle the other.

Contradictions? Aw, how can you say such a thing?

 

[Chandler]

i consider u not Christian in the least.
i should ask u: What's a Christian?


Then don't misrepresent or deceive


What do u base that on?


Father, Son, and Spirit aren't separate.

That's a trinity of 3 Gods. Not 3 in 1


God "died." Not God the Father


The image of the Father is the Son.

Father and Son are of the same Being.
Not the same "Person"


To the contrary of Chandler' deliberate misrepresentative deceit regarding this Scripture (and others): Jesus didn't consider seizing Godhood because as Christ He emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, and that, the death of a cross.
For which reason God highly exalted Him, and gave Him the name above every name...

In other words, He not only returned to His Deity in form; Christ also made His human nature God

Most of us on TOL can get along with each other without the fur flying too much. But if you are truly convinced that I am evil and deceitful then perhaps you and I should have no further discussion. I am not offended but I know when to back off.

I at least give the other members the honour of not doubting their sincerity.

 

[writer]

109's meaninglessness. 110's nonresponsiveness, then suggestion

109's meaninglessness. 110's nonresponsiveness, then suggestion

109 "kill terrorists," "condemn anyone who crosses you," "America is Number One," "belittle the other"
Contradictions?

Bible verses?

Aikido7's Satanic verses

Aw, how can you say such a thing?

Neither Scripture nor i said or say the above.
Aikido7 wrote em

110 if you are truly convinced that I am evil and deceitful then perhaps you and I should have no further discussion. I am not offended but I know when to back off.
I at least give the other members the honour of not doubting their sincerity.

Sincere lies are lies.
In any case, based on 2 John 10, your first sentence is an excellent suggestion to me, which i'll follow

 

[aikido7]

Bible verses?

Aikido7's Satanic verses


Neither Scripture nor i said or say the above.
Aikido7 wrote em


Sincere lies are lies.
In any case, based on 2 John 10, your first sentence is an excellent suggestion to me, which i'll follow

Nah. No more than love your enemies and kill terrorists or forgive 70 times 7 and condemn anyone who crosses you or the sun shines on the evil and the good and America is Number One. Or pay attention to the log in your own eye and belittle the other.

Contradictions? Aw, how can you say such a thing?

I have gone over in boldface the sentence fragments that actually go back to New Testament gospel verses that quote Jesus. You can look up the actual verses and their context by consulting a concordance. Unfortunately, these sayings attributed to Jesus are contradicted by those who call themselves Christian every day!

The contradictions I wrote next to each quote from Jesus are not necessarily found in the Bible, but in one's daily life. No lie there.

And I am sincere about it.

 

[Chandler]

I definitely can hear that. But maybe there's an upside: we heretics might get to choose the type of wooden stake we will be lashed to before we are burned.

How would you like your stake? Rare, medium or well done . . .

 

[mcarson1]

Hello all,

I want to find a thread that deals with fidelity or create one. Anyone know if one already exists?

 

[mcarson1]

:help:

Hello all,

I want to find a thread that deals with fidelity or create one. Anyone know if one already exists?

 

[Delmar]

Hello all,

I want to find a thread that deals with fidelity or create one. Anyone know if one already exists?

There are probably several, but it is always good to look at things from a fresh angle. I suggest you start a new thread. Let me know if you need any help doing so.

Oh, welcome to TOL!

 

[mcarson1]

Thank you Delmar,

I can't figure out how to start a new thread. Can you give me some instrucitons please?

Mark

 

[Delmar]

Sure
Go to the "forum jump" at the bottom right hand corner of this page, and select which "forum" you would like to start your thread in. Since the topic you suggested would be fitting in the "Exclusively Christian Theology" section ( that we are currently in) you really wouldn't even have to select a forum. Just click the "go" button beside the forum jump.

When you jump to the new screen. Look at the top left for a button that says "new thread" click on "new thread" and you will be ready to make your opening post. Don't forget to give it a title.


I would also suggest playing around with the "forum jump" to see where you can go on TOL.

 

[aikido7]

How would you like your stake? Rare, medium or well done . . .

Now that's the kind of last meal I'd like!

 

[Ps82]

...for the Father is greater than I.John 14:28

I and the Father are One.John 10:30

Pick a verse, pick a side, start a movement, found a church, split into a schism and come out fighting.

Hi Aikido7 and writer,
There is no reason to pick a side, because there is no contradiction. After a lot of personal Bible study I have discovered a theory (which I believe is a true interpretation of scripture) that shows how both of these statements can be correct simultaneously.

This thread is not a discussion thread however ... so I won't begin here.

However, if either of you are interested in my explanation, let me know, and I'll share my theory on another thread.