Early Christian Theosis Quotes

[johnny]

Jersey Girl,

Hey, I'm taking this one. My head's in it now! Can't you multiply "rulers of all" if there are more worlds to rule?

Aren't the "more worlds" in the same eternal kingdom with the One God who is omnipotent ...

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

e=mc2 would disagree with you that only One God is omnipotent ...

So will the Bible which teaches of joint-heirs, but don't go to that source, it's probably even fallible.......

[johnny]

e=mc2,

I can't multiply omnipotent persons, but I have no doubt that God omnipotent can, because that is precisely His promise, and I have faith in Him and His promises. It's just that simple my friend.

For me it is also simple ... you are not being consistent with what the Bible reveals or what Irenaeus taught or with logic ...

[Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl,

e=mc2 would disagree with you that only One God is omnipotent ...

Explain how this can be if we are all in the same eternal kingdom with the One God who is omnipotent ...

I will if you answer this question....Johnny, I honestly don't remember what your religions orientation (I made that up) is...

What do you suppose we'll be doing in the eternities?

For example, do you think we will have work to do?

Will our bodies be immortal, perishable and incorruptible? (Thank you Hank)

Will our bodies be able to do things that our bodies can't do now?

Do you think we will be only singing praises for eternity or do you think that God might have another purpose for our immortal selves?

If you can give me the gist of what you believe/think about that, even in one sentence (and "I don't know" doesn't count!} I'll answer your question based, in part, on that.

I'm not LDS, nor have I ever been.

(I'll be back in a few minutes to see if you've chosen to reply)

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

Explain how you can have multiply omnipotent persons ... how can you have multiply "rulers of all"?

Well lessee.......the Father has given ***ALL*** power in heaven and earth to Christ, yes? Is He still the Father, namely GOD ALMIGHTY OMNIPOTENT? Hmmmmmmmm? If he can do wit with Christ, can he not with everyone else, as say oh um, lessee, the word that come to mind at this juncture I believe would be "joint-heirs."

[johnny]

e=mc2,

So will the Bible which teaches of joint-heirs, but don't go to that source, it's probably even fallible.......

Joint-heirs is not about being omnipotent ... joint-heirs is about the following:

2782 We can adore the Father because he has caused us to be reborn to his life by adopting us as his children in his only Son: by Baptism, he incorporates us into the Body of his Christ; through the anointing of his Spirit who flows from the head to the members, he makes us other "Christs."

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

For me it is also simple ... you are not being consistent with what the Bible reveals or what Irenaeus taught or with logic ...

Hee, hee,......... I have been, for the vast majority of my part, quoting the Bible to you, and in the Greek to boot. I suspect what you mean is I am not being consistent with *your interpretation of the Bible,* of which I will say a very loud and hearty AMEN BRUTHUH!!!!!!!

Johnny:

We can adore the Father because he has caused us to be reborn to his life by adopting us as his children in his only Son: by Baptism, he incorporates us into the Body of his Christ; through the anointing of his Spirit who flows from the head to the members, he makes us other "Christs."

This is not how the Bible teaches this. Interesting how you won't use the Bible when it doesn't suit your bias, and you do use it, again ironically, when it suits your bias........

[Jersey Girl]

Johnny:

Hee, hee,......... I have been, for the vast majority of my part, quoting the Bible to you, and in the Greek to boot. I suspect what you mean is I am not being consistent with *your interpretation of the Bible,* of which I will say a very loud and hearty AMEN BRUTHUH!!!!!!!

Uh, excuse me....Baptists own the copyright to the hearty AMEN, Brutha!!! Ya gotta roll it up from the back pew like the rumbling of thunder. Doesn't work on a message board! But if it did, it'd look something like this...

aaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MEN!

[johnny]

Jersey Girl,

I will if you answer this question....Johnny, I honestly don't remember what your religions orientation (I made that up) is...

I am Catholic ...

What do you suppose we'll be doing in the eternities?

> serving God

For example, do you think we will have work to do?

> we will have work

Will our bodies be immortal, perishable and incorruptible? (Thank you Hank)

> our bodies will be immortal and incorruptible

Will our bodies be able to do things that our bodies can't do now?

> yes, our bodies will be glorified

Do you think we will be only singing praises for eternity or do you think that God might have another purpose for our immortal selves?

> I will be praising the Lord God Almighty

(I'll be back in a few minutes to see if you've chosen to reply)

Since it is my bedtime ... I will replay tomorrow ... good night.

[Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl,

I am Catholic ...

What do you suppose we'll be doing in the eternities?

> serving God

For example, do you think we will have work to do?

> we will have work

Will our bodies be immortal, perishable and incorruptible? (Thank you Hank)

> our bodies will be immortal and incorruptible

Will our bodies be able to do things that our bodies can't do now?

> yes, our bodies will be glorified

Do you think we will be only singing praises for eternity or do you think that God might have another purpose for our immortal selves?

> I will be praising the Lord God Almighty

Since it is my bedtime ... I will replay tomorrow ... good night.

Thanks, Johnny. I didn't catch my own typo on the "perishable" part! So if you think we will be serving God in some way, have work to do and all of that....

do you suppose that part of that could be creating new worlds? Or ruling over new worlds? I'm thinking in terms of another Creation Story in a sense.

[johnny]

e=mc2,

This is not how the Bible teaches this. Interesting how you won't use the Bible when it doesn't suit your bias, and you do use it, again ironically, when it suits your bias........

This is straight from the Bible ...

1Cor 6

[15] Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

[16] What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

[17] But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

[19] What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

Rom.8

[17] And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

[21] Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

[29] For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

[30] Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

[e=mc2]

Johnny tells me that redemption is what the atonement is all about. I agree sincerely with him, but he apparently is unaware of how the Greek works in this word.

It is the Greek word apolutrosis {ap-ol-oo'-tro-sis}

Meaning: 1) a releasing effected by payment of ransom 1a) redemption, deliverance 1b) liberation procured by the payment of a ransom

This does not seek to limit this to a mere few items, but is the releasing......releasing from what? The limitation of sin, a releasing of our sins. A releasing of our limitations , since that is the purest definition of sin, limiting ourselves through wrong action against God, and hence not being One with Him. This is paid for, so we again can join God. We are liberated from our sins, our humanity, our limitations, into the life of joint-heirs with Christ IN God.

Johnny:

This is straight from the Bible ...

You quoted the same scripture I am using. So apprently you are wrong again that I am ignoring the Bible. Apparently we are simply not seeing their meanings the same. See? we are limited here...... won't it be nice when you finally gain your Godhood and can see all things clearly as God promises?

[johnny]

Jersey Girl,

do you suppose that part of that could be creating new worlds? Or ruling over new worlds? I'm thinking in terms of another Creation Story in a sense.

We will not be creators like our heavenly father.

The just will reign with Christ for ever in the eternal kingdom.

[Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl,

We will not be creators like our heavenly father.

The just will reign with Christ for ever in the eternal kingdom.

And what might the work be that we will have to do? Do you have ideas about that?

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

We will not be creators like our heavenly father.

The just will reign with Christ for ever in the eternal kingdom.

Then you deny the power of God, for that is the promise. We will be JOINT-HEIRS with Christ IN God. Tell me what Christ is, what he can do, what He knows, and that's what we are promised.

[Jersey Girl]

Johnny,

I just want to say that my hat's off to you for fielding all that you have on this thread. I haven't read every single post but I can see how much you've taken on.

[johnny]

e=mc2,,

This does not seek to limit this to a mere few items, but is the releasing......releasing from what?

Released from the bondage of sin ... scripture does not reveal "A releasing of our limitations".

Apparently we are simply not seeing their meanings the same. See?

Did you see the verse about "your bodies are the members of Christ?" ... what does that mean to you?

I will reply tomorrow ... Goodnight ... it has been fun ...

[Lachoneus]

Your not making sense ... earlier you said all the Sons of God have every power ... every power would include the power to rule ... if everyone is ruling then there is no one ruling.

What I have said makes plenty of sense. Those sons of God who have obtained Godhood by becoming complete as the Father is complete will have every power, including the power to rule. They will rule that which the Father gives them.

[johnny]

Jersey Girl,

And what might the work be that we will have to do? Do you have ideas about that?

Caring for God's creation ..

I just want to say that my hat's off to you for fielding all that you have on this thread. I haven't read every single post but I can see how much you've taken on.

Thanks for the exchange of ideas ... it has been fun ... Goodnight

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

Released from the bondage of sin ... scripture does not reveal "A releasing of our limitations".

So, the Greek word for "bondage," is douleia {doo-li'-ah}

Meaning: 1) slavery, bondage, the condition of a slave......

Are you seriously telling me you don't see the limitation this involves? BONDAGE OF SIN = LIMITATION. The releasing of our debts by Christ is a complete freeing from sins, which is, of course, a release from the limitations of the sins. They keep us from God, so they certainly are limitations.

And yes, thank you also, it has been most pleasant.

[johnny]

Lachoneus,

What I have said makes plenty of sense. Those sons of God who have obtained Godhood by becoming complete as the Father is complete will have every power, including the power to rule. They will rule that which the Father gives them.

Apparently they are NOT ruling ALL if the the Father is ruling them ...

[Doctor Steuss]

Doctor Steuss,

The Father and the Son are distinct, the Father dwelt in the Son.

And now weâ??re back to the same wing-nut. The Father is the source, and the Son receives (albeit, from your perspective through â??indwellingâ?).

Before you go answer my question from above, I will repeat them below.

Ok. But I must first warn you that my thoughts are at times not in line with LDS thought (and my thoughts are often in a state of flux).

Was there any point in time when the Son of God did not have have the divine nature?

IMO, no. Perhaps when He was an â??intelligenceâ? (whatever that may be) He may have not had â??completeâ? divinityâ?¦ but nonetheless, the divine nature was there.

Was there any point in time when a man did not the divine nature?

Yes and no. I believe there are variants of â??divine nature,â? and it can come and go (depending on righteousness/justification/and sanctification). When Iâ??m being a punk; I donâ??t have any divine nature.

[Lachoneus]

Apparently they are NOT ruling ALL if the the Father is ruling them ...

And your point is . . . ?

Don't tell me that "omnipotent" means "ruler of all." That is an interpretation, not a definition. The definition of "omnipotent" is "every power." Multiple beings can have every power.

[David Waltz]

Hello Johnny,

My goodness, this thread is moving way to fast for this beachbumâ?¦

Yesterday afternoon you posted:

>>Is your view of "become Gods" different than the Mormon's view of "become Gods"?>>

Me: It would be more accurate to say Mormon VIEWS (note the plural). Apart from the issue of creatio ex nihilo, my view concerning deification is pretty much the same as Tom Nosserâ??s (a Mormon), who is quite close to Blake Ostlerâ??s view (also Mormon); all of us being very close to St. Ireneausâ?? view.

>>Can God's adopted Son's become a Creator like the Father like the Mormon Church teaches?>>

Me: I would say that they will become creators like God the Son.

>>Can God's adopted Son's become omnipotent with infinite power like the Father?>>

Me: Once again, in this respect, they will become like God the Son.

Grace and peace,

David

[David Waltz]

Hello again Johnny,

You posted:

>> From a Mormon viewpoint ... does God have a ruler ... since some Mormons believe that the Mormon God has a God?>>

Me: Certainly some Mormons believe this, but some do not; and further, the above concept cannot be found in the LDS Quad. Now, with speculations aside, note the following from the pen of Bruce R. McConkie:

In the ultimate and final sense of the word, there is only one true and living God. He is the Father, the Almighty Elohim, the Supreme Being, the Creator and Ruler of the universe. Paul said: "There is none other God but one. For though there be [others] that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge." (1 Corinthians 8:4-7.) (Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, p. 51 â?? bold emphasis mine.)

Sounds exactly like what you adhere to, as you related earlier in this thread. McConkie continues with:

Three glorious persons comprise the Godhead or supreme presidency of the universe. They are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Each one possesses the same divine nature, knows all things, and has all power. Each one has the same character, the same perfections and the same attributes. In Christ, Paul says, "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Colossians 2:9.) Because of this perfect unity, they are spoken of as being one God. "Hear, O Israel," Moses proclaimed, "the Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." (Deuteronomy 6:4-5.) This unity and oneness is the perfect pattern for all who seek salvation for salvation consists in being one with the Lord our God. Thus Jesus prayed for all true believers, "that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us." (John 17:21.)â?¦ In the ultimate and final sense of the word, the Father is the Creator of all things. That he used the Son and others to perform many of the creative acts, delegating to them his creative powers, does not make these others creators in their own right, independent of him. He is the source of all creative power, and he simply chooses others to act for him in many of his creative enterprises. (Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, pp. 58, 63 â?? bold emphasis mine.)

Sure seems that Bruce got a lot of things right!

Grace and peace,

David