The Biblical God as Literal Father

[johnny]

freakin a man,

â??God is spiritual, we do not mean that he has no body .

This disagrees with many of the early christians, Clement of Alexandria wrote

What is God? â??God,â?? as the Lord says, â??is a spirit.â?? Now spirit is properly substance, incorporeal, and uncircumscribed. And that is incorporeal which does not consist of a body, or whose existence is not according to breadth, length, and depth.

God is a local being in that he can only be in one place at a time. God moves around. If God was not a local being but some sort of omnipresent being, he would be at all points at the same time.

If God is a local being, how can he "in you all"?

Eph 4

[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

[maklelan]

freakin a man,

This disagrees with many of the early christians,

So does the Bible. The early Christians were middle-platonists and neo-platonists. You refuse to see this because you have so much invested in the transcendancy of their teachings, but every single scholar on the earth who has ever objectively studied PAtristics agrees that they took their ideas directly from Plato.

Clement of Alexandria wrote

What is God? â??God,â?? as the Lord says, â??is a spirit.â?? Now spirit is properly substance, incorporeal, and uncircumscribed. And that is incorporeal which does not consist of a body, or whose existence is not according to breadth, length, and depth.

Yeah, and none of this is biblical.

I've tried to get you to use reason and logic, but you refuse to do so. I'm never addressing a post to you again. You are incapable of using reason.

[Calm]

Man is created in the image of God, for a Trinitarian the Son is God, the Son has body, parts, and passions.

This may have been answered (dont' want to get interrupted as I read the rest of the thread and then forget my question), ignore it if so.

Christ while God the Son at the time of the creation of Adam did not have a body or parts and I am assuming did not have "passions" as well in the view of classical Christianity.

How then could Man be made in the "image of God"? Wouldn't it (with the view expressed in the quote) be more like God the Son was made in the image of Man? How do you reconcile this?

[johnny]

maklelan,

So does the Bible. The early Christians were middle-platonists and neo-platonists. You refuse to see this because you have so much invested in the transcendancy of their teachings, but every single scholar on the earth who has ever objectively studied PAtristics agrees that they took their ideas directly from Plato.

Some of the Early Church Father's were the immediate successors of the Apostles. Three of them were disciples of one or more of the Apostles. I would expect that those who were taught directly by the Apostles would themselves believe and teach correctly.

[johnny]

calmoriah,

Christ while God the Son at the time of the creation of Adam did not have a body or parts and I am assuming did not have "passions" as well in the view of classical Christianity.

God is all knowing, he would of known the image of "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:8 ) . God transcends space and time.

[ozemc]

I try to make it a habit to avoid trying to debate with people who tell me exactly why I have faith. Have a good one.

OK, you have a good one, too.

Please do take some psychology courses sometime. They really help explain why the mind thinks the way it does.

And when you get that "empirical" evidence of God, please bring it up so that we can all know exactly who, what, when, and where God is.

Happy New Year!

[PreviousLDS]

I've heard it said recently (may have been RC Sproul but not positive) that adam (man) was created in the image of God and because of the Fall, we (men since adam) are created in the image of Adam. I haven't given that much thought and don't know if I agree or not. Does it make sense to anybody? (And this may be besides the point but I believe that we are only in the image of God in that we (or Adam and Eve) were created to reflect his spiritual character, not in a physical sense).)

[Chaos]

And what exactly are those experiences? That you have a "feeling" in your heart that it's true? You have a testimony? That your "prophet" told you it's true?

Like I wrote, Mohammed's "God" told him to write a book in which Jews are pigs and should be slaughtered.

L. Ron Hubbard wrote Dianetics, and started Scientology.

Jim Jones had the People's Temple.

David Koresh had the Branch Davidians.

Heaven's Gate thought they were going to meet a spacecraft behind a comet.

I'm sure they all "felt" they were right too, and were guided by leaders, or prophets, if you will, who told them "the way".

What weight should their "actual experiences" have on the truth?

I don't.

I was responding to someone who, it appeared to me, was trying to make the case for a 7000 year old earth.

Once you resort to comparisons to criminals the other side wins the debate. Thread closed.