What is the express image of God?

[StanJ]

I will cease to exist someday soon Stan, but the word of God will not. I pray that you will start thinking about what you read.

This type of condescending and self serving response has ALWAYS been your style keypurr but you have NEVER been able to support your fallacious teaching FROM scripture, so I have NO need to START thinking, as I have NEVER stopped, unlike YOU, who gave into apostasy.
I don't know how many years ago, because you keep changing the number.

 

[StanJ]

Just because I currently do not identify here as a 'Christian', does not mean I'm not a real 'Christian' in spirit and principle, besides the fact that it will vary if you ask anyone just what a so called 'Christian' is. You apparently haven't took time to research my religious bio, spiritual journey, experience and comparative religious studies to make an abrupt 'judgment' on what category of religionist I AM,...among other things. I suggest you expand your horizons a little farther, and do a little more investigation or inquiry with your fellow posters as to 'what' or 'who' they are, which may take you to an even more profound inquiry into the nature of reality itself, whereby you might transcend the more petty, denominational features of man-made religions and their various mythologies.

There is a reason why this sight has labels for the avatar on the left, so we don't have to do a lot of searching for info. As to your equivocal claim of a real Christian, read this; Matt 10:32 (NIV) Luke 12:8 (NIV)

I will directly challenge your assumption that early followers of Jesus automatically or originally from the foundation of Judaism, which was their native religious cult-ure, BELIEVED Jesus was 'God' (YHWH). Generally the Jewish concept of 'Messiah' did not include a concept of 'God coming in the flesh', nor a 'demigod' (God-man hybrid), but was only to be a MAN anointed by 'God'...hence the Messiah is the 'anointed one', and this 'term' could apply individually to a single 'person' as well as to a nation or community of priests...in this case as the collective of 'Israel'. Hence, the 'Messiah' and the 'Suffering Servant' descriptions apply also to a 'collective'. Jesus fails on many counts to fulfill the Jewish requirements for being their Messiah, but we've covered that elsewhere.

Judaism is a modern terminology, so it doesn't apply here, and I never said ALL Jews believed, that is clearly NOT the case in the NT.

Jesus is respected by many persons and communities of different religious cultures around the globe, they living lives that agree with the spiritual truths and principles he taught concerning serving God and their fellowman, since religious values and spiritual meanings are indeed universal, although differently represented or symbolized among various faith communities. NOTE that respect for Jesus and the kingdom of heaven he preached does not necessitate a BELIEF that he is 'God', as dogmatically defined by Orthodox Christian creeds. It is a belief among some demoninations, but not all. That Jesus represents 'God' and speaks for 'God' is enough.

Respect has nothing to do with being a Christian. I respected Ghandi but I am NOT a Hindu. I believe that Phil 4:8 (NIV), is a very important exhortation/instruction for Christians.

I disagree, since the acceptance of Jesus and his teaching, and the commitment to live the religion that he lived, in spirit and truth is what qualifies someone to be a 'Christian', and not just the assertion or mental assent to believing in any given Christian creed, approved as 'orthodox' as a later doctrinal development.

For the most part, except in a few verses in James, belief means obedience/allegiance, so although your comment is valid, it is assumed that belief connotes said obedience/allegiance in the NT.
Sadly it doesn't always manifest itself as such.

You can go Here for starters, to see that Unitarians are just as 'Christian' as Trinitarians in their essential theology (although differ in Christology), practical ethics and religious values. Debating whether Jesus is God, Man, or some 'compound' of the two, (then further battle over the ratio involved) kept church councils busy for centuries,...you might as well toss in "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" too.

I don't need to play with fire to know it is dangerous.

As far as the 'body of Christ' (to use Paul's metaphor) goes,.....what joins people together is the Spirit of God, not dogma necessarily....since we worship 'God' in spirit and truth. This spiritual unity and loving concord unites us as one in 'God', since 'God' in us is ONE...there is no seperation or division in SPIRIT. Jesus represents 'God' to us of course, and we live his spirit and his religion, if we are truly to be known as his disciples. Remember what Jesus said would be a sign to others that we are his disciples? Was it that we believe in a Trinitarian concept and dogma that he is 'God', or was it by the love we show one another, and to furthermore show that love to those who treat us with contempt?

Jesus IS God to us, but I agree with your assessment. Reality of course is a totally different animal sometimes, especially on forums like this where people hide behind anonymity. I try as much as possible, you will note, to not contribute to that, as I am NOT ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[daqq]

I have had the conflict of whether Jesus was man that assend up to become the son of God, or if God came down and manifested himself as Jesus. Which do you think?

No one has ascended into the heavens if not the one from the heavens has descended: the Son of man. And the Son of man became flesh and tabernacles among us: but all flesh is not the same flesh, (as Paul writes) there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds, and therefore likewise the Dove. If there is a soma-body psuchikos-natural and physical, then there is a soma-body pneumatikos-spiritual. And the Son of man descended in the somatikos-corporeal-bodily form of a dove and remained-abode with and in the man Yeshua when he was immersed in the Spirit of the Holy One.

 

[StanJ]

No one has ascended into the heavens if not the one from the heavens has descended: the Son of man. And the Son of man became flesh and tabernacles among us: but all flesh is not the same flesh, (as Paul writes) there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds, and therefore likewise the Dove. If there is a soma-body psuchikos-natural and physical, then there is a soma-body pneumatikos-spiritual. And the Son of man descended in the somatikos-corporeal-bodily form of a dove and remained-abode with and in the man Yeshua when he was immersed in the Spirit of the Holy One.

To: higherlevel energy

Did you understand a word of this reply from daqq?

 

[keypurr]

Not so! Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.



We DO NOT die. We exist forever. Where we spend eternity that's what we're supposed to do here. May God in His infinite mercy when the Good News is heard, make a way so that it be accepted by those hearing it.



Jesus IS GOD!

Jesus IS LORD!

Jesus IS SAVIOR!



May you return to the Truth you once had for ONLY GOD can SAVE anyone.

I would like to believe that but the dead ate dead, they know nothing, they see nothing and they have no thoughts.

Jesus is Not God
Jesus is Lord not LORD
Jesus is the savior.

There is no God the son

 

[keypurr]

To: higherlevel energy

Did you understand a word of this reply from daqq?

I know you didn't, it over your head.

 

[Aimiel]

Just because I currently do not identify here as a 'Christian', does not mean I'm not a real 'Christian' in spirit and principle...

Actually, it does, since it is by The Blood of The Lamb and the word of our testimony that we defeat the dragon (Satan) who inspired the Urantia Book and all other demonic doctrine. You don't have forgiveness of your sins because you don't believe in Jesus' Blood which was shed for you and you don't testify of That Blood to others. You're lost. Repent!

...besides the fact that it will vary if you ask anyone just what a so called 'Christian' is.

Yes and some will say that good is evil and evil is good, so what? It doesn't detract one iota of Truth from The Holy Scriptures.

I will directly challenge your assumption that early followers of Jesus automatically or originally from the foundation of Judaism, which was their native religious cult-ure, BELIEVED Jesus was 'God' (YHWH).

Sorry, but Scripture clearly shows us Who Jesus is (God, in The Flesh) and that the Apostles knew Him, intimately. Thomas exclaimed: "My Lord and my God!" when Jesus appeared in the room.

Generally the Jewish concept of 'Messiah' did not include a concept of 'God coming in the flesh', nor a 'demigod' (God-man hybrid), but was only to be a MAN anointed by 'God'...hence the Messiah is the 'anointed one', and this 'term' could apply individually to a single 'person' as well as to a nation or community of priests...in this case as the collective of 'Israel'.

Just because un-believing Jews interpret Scripture one way or another doesn't make that 'way' right, especially since Jesus has given us the TRUE explanation.

Jesus is respected by many persons and communities of different religious cultures around the globe, they living lives that agree with the spiritual truths and principles he taught concerning serving God and their fellowman, since religious values and spiritual meanings are indeed universal, although differently represented or symbolized among various faith communities.

Those who are not AGAINST Jesus are for Him. You and many others teach that there is forgiveness of sins without His Blood. That is teaching that goes AGAINST Jesus' own teachings. You are against Him. Many others are as well.

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

As far as the 'body of Christ' (to use Paul's metaphor) goes,.....what joins people together is the Spirit of God, not dogma necessarily....since we worship 'God' in spirit and truth.

No, you can't, without The Blood. You can try, but God cannot accept your presence. You're still full of sin.

This spiritual unity and loving concord unites us as one in 'God', since 'God' in us is ONE...there is no seperation or division in SPIRIT.

God is not in you. He is not in Satan. He is not in everything, even though you like to think that He is.

Remember what Jesus said would be a sign to others that we are his disciples? Was it that we believe in a Trinitarian concept and dogma that he is 'God', or was it by the love we show one another, and to furthermore show that love to those who treat us with contempt?

It is those of us who are Christian to whom Jesus was speaking when He told us that we would be able to recognize true believers by their love for their fellow-believer. You aren't. We don't see love for Truth in you. We see love for 'special' knowledge. We see love for demonic doctrine that diametrically opposes Truth. We see hatred of Christians in you. It's obvious to most everyone but you how deceived you are.

 

[StanJ]

I know you didn't, it over your head.

 

[Word based mystic]

Hey, Keypurr, thought I'd drop by and visit your thread.

Um... actually the Bible does not say this. This is a trinitarian type misconception. The Bible says that in the beginning the earth was without form, and that there were "waters" that the Lord apparently used to form the earth. Genesis 1:2. If trinitarians get such a simple thing wrong, what else do they get wrong?

are you implying that the universe and creation always existed and God never created the universe.

 

[StanJ]

are you implying that the universe and creation always existed and God never created the universe.

If I were you I wouldn't expect to get an answer from a 3 year old post, nor an accurate one from a Mormon.

 

[freelight]

Eternal Creation......

Eternal Creation......

are you implying that the universe and creation always existed and God never created the universe.

Here we dive into metaphysics, whether elements, substance, energy, consciousness is eternal or not, - whether 'God' uses substances already eternally existing or actually creates them out of nothing (ex nihilo) -

You may be aware that LDS theology holds to the eternally existing substance view, with 'God' or 'gods/goddesses' creating out of...or 'with' that eternal substance, various worlds, universes, offspring, etc. - the 'gods' are creating out of what already always IS.

I usually hold 'creation' and 'evolution' to be the same thing, since 'creation' is ever 'evolving', unfolding its creative potential exploring all possibilities. We assume 'God' is unborn, undying, eternal, immortal, unchanging in essence, but ever changing in creative expression as we see in the movement of creation. The eternal essence, substance, consciousness has always existed, while appearances change and elements are trans-formed in the play of consciousness. Creation is merely the creativity of Mind expressing itself in form.


See here.



pj

 

[keypurr]

Here we dive into metaphysics, whether elements, substance, energy, consciousness is eternal or not, - whether 'God' uses substances already eternally existing or actually creates them out of nothing (ex nihilo) -

You may be aware that LDS theology holds to the eternally existing substance view, with 'God' or 'gods/goddesses' creating out of...or 'with' that eternal substance, various worlds, universes, offspring, etc. - the 'gods' are creating out of what already always IS.

I usually hold 'creation' and 'evolution' to be the same thing, since 'creation' is ever 'evolving', unfolding its creative potential exploring all possibilities. We assume 'God' is unborn, undying, eternal, immortal, unchanging in essence, but ever changing in creative expression as we see in the movement of creation. The eternal essence, substance, consciousness has always existed, while appearances change and elements are trans-formed in the play of consciousness. Creation is merely the creativity of Mind expressing itself in form.


See here.



pj

I have often considered the 'creation' and 'evolution' theory you have.

 

[daqq]

No one has ascended into the heavens if not the one from the heavens has descended: the Son of man. And the Son of man became flesh and tabernacles among us: but all flesh is not the same flesh, (as Paul writes) there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds, and therefore likewise the Dove. If there is a soma-body psuchikos-natural and physical, then there is a soma-body pneumatikos-spiritual. And the Son of man descended in the somatikos-corporeal-bodily form of a dove and remained-abode with and in the man Yeshua when he was immersed in the Spirit of the Holy One.

To: higherlevel energy

Did you understand a word of this reply from daqq?

Awe, poor StanJ, do you again not understand the scripture which you claim to uphold? I thought you said that thinking was where Keypurr and I went wrong? Perhaps you should try thinking sometime yourself instead of just believing whatever your favorite church fathers have told you to believe.

1 Corinthians 15:39-47 ASV
39. All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fishes.
40. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42. So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43. it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44. it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.
45. So also it is written, The first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
46. Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; then that which is spiritual.
47. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is of heaven.

Different bodies and different kinds of flesh; one natural and physical, (psuchikos) and the other supernal and spiritual, (pneumatikos). If there is a psuchikos-natural body, then there is a corresponding pneumatikos-spritiual body, and you therefore abide in darkness as you deny the true Messiah and give his glory to a man because you see all things only according to the physical eyes and mind of the natural and carnal minded man. In fact your grossly erroneous theology ends in theoretical cannibalism just as does that of your mother church fathers. :crackup:

You either believe the entire Bible is inspired of God or you don't. There is no THINKING involved obviously, as THAT is what got you and daqq in trouble and made you apostate.

:sheep:

 

[RevTestament]

If I were you I wouldn't expect to get an answer from a 3 year old post, nor an accurate one from a Mormon.

Is that because you are the only one capable of interpreting the Bible Stan?
There were a lot of different interpretations of the creation story even in the early church.

 

[RevTestament]

are you implying that the universe and creation always existed and God never created the universe.

I am not implying anything. I just pointed out what the Bible actually says. Most trinitarians tend to think of the creation ex nihilo - that God created everything from nothing, but the Bible really doesn't support that notion. Man wasn't created from nothing, but from dust. I believe the Bible is telling us basically the same thing about the earth. Nowhere in Genesis does the Bible tell us the earth was created from nothing. That is an assumption of those reading the text and the YECs. I believe that God made the earth the same way we see other stars and planets being formed in our telescopes right now - out of existing dust and gas. That doesn't preclude Him from making everything in the earth.

 

[daqq]

Is that because you are the only one capable of interpreting the Bible Stan?
There were a lot of different interpretations of the creation story even in the early church.

Funny you should respond concerning the creation account at this time and place because what I just quoted from Paul lays bare that very subject. The first anthropos Adam is of the dust of the adamah, earthy or dust like, (Genesis 2:7). The second anthropos is from the heavens, (Genesis 1:26-27). Thus my understanding not only takes into account the creation record of the Book of Genesis, (and the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world) but also what was fulfilled in and through Yeshua at both his immersion and ultimately at Golgotha at the End of the Sixth Day. The understanding is therefore interlocked, foundational, and according to what is written: for all the prophets and THE TORAH PROPHESIED until Yochanan, as the Master has clearly said, (Matthew 11:13) but who will receive his Testimony?

:sheep:

 

[StanJ]

Is that because you are the only one capable of interpreting the Bible Stan?
There were a lot of different interpretations of the creation story even in the early church.

Among those I argue with, YES. Now stay on topic and stop trolling other threads.

 

[StanJ]

Awe, poor StanJ, do you again not understand the scripture which you claim to uphold? I thought you said that thinking was where Keypurr and I went wrong? Perhaps you should try thinking sometime yourself instead of just believing whatever your favorite church fathers have told you to believe.

Was just wondering if ANYONE understood that post daqq as you do have a habit of using language that is a mixture of mysticism and Judaism. The trick is to put your thoughts into actual cohesive and coherent words. You seem to not be able to do that. Just wanted someone else's perspective.

Different bodies and different kinds of flesh; one natural and physical, (psuchikos) and the other supernal and spiritual, (pneumatikos). If there is a psuchikos-natural body, then there is a corresponding pneumatikos-spritiual body, and you therefore abide in darkness as you deny the true Messiah and give his glory to a man because you see all things only according to the physical eyes and mind of the natural and carnal minded man. In fact your grossly erroneous theology ends in theoretical cannibalism just as does that of your mother church fathers.

You continue to combine Greek transliterations with English to convey some sort of mystical connotation to words where they DON'T exist. That is a sure sign of someone who has invented a dogma, not someone who understand the written word of God.
If you want to debate Greek then go find some Greek scholars, who I'm sure will tear you apart in that regard, but here we debate in English, which apparently is NOT your forte.
I'm not the one supporting keypurr and Arianism so the "grossly erroneous" teaching comes from your posts, NOT mine. All I see from you is typical supercilious comments WITHOUT substance.

 

[keypurr]

Was just wondering if ANYONE understood that post daqq as you do have a habit of using language that is a mixture of mysticism and Judaism. The trick is to put your thoughts into actual cohesive and coherent words. You seem to not be able to do that. Just wanted someone else's perspective.




You continue to combine Greek transliterations with English to convey some sort of mystical connotation to words where they DON'T exist. That is a sure sign of someone who has invented a dogma, not someone who understand the written word of God.
If you want to debate Greek then go find some Greek scholars, who I'm sure will tear you apart in that regard, but here we debate in English, which apparently is NOT your forte.
I'm not the one supporting keypurr and Arianism so the "grossly erroneous" teaching comes from your posts, NOT mine. All I see from you is typical supercilious comments WITHOUT substance.

You are unable to disprove my thoughts with scripture Stan. You theology has no depth. Your just a yes man to your traditions.

 

[StanJ]

You are unable to disprove my thoughts with scripture Stan. You theology has no depth. Your just a yes man to your traditions.

Same old same old keypurr.