Jump to content

Christ Was A Man And Became A God?


JohnBWalt

Recommended Posts

Joseph Smith would disagree with you about the Father being in YOU,

Muslims would say Mohamed had the same kinds of revelations in his experience with the Angel.

L. Ron's Folks would check your Thetan levels - and sell you the next level of clarity.

and from my side of the fence, we get into much, much bigger issues about veracity, history, orthodoxy and faith.

We're like folks looking at each other in August in Iraq on the other side of a minefield and trying to build a bridge over it made out of ice cream. There's no real middle ground but it makes for better understanding of what we each believe and why and frankly that's the core of apologetics.

Link to post

Muslims would say Mohamed had the same kinds of revelations in his experience with the Angel.

Hardly- that is, if you are comparing either the substance of or method of the revelations transmitted to Joseph Smith withMohammed.

The Koran was dictated by an angel to a man. The Book of Mormon was written by prophets from a while ago [not sure if you've read it to know that, apparently not, as you believe the receiving of the book was similar to the Koran, whereas the Intorduction to the BoM would have cleared that issue up. For that matter, I'm not convinced you've even read the Koran. So I could be wrong, and correct me if I am, here you are comparing two books you've never fully read.] The nature of the angel, the means of communication, and what was communicated are all demonstratably different, so I'm not sure where your comparison springs from.

L. Ron's Folks would check your Thetan levels - and sell you the next level of clarity.

What has this to do with Joseph Smith?

and from my side of the fence, we get into much, much bigger issues about veracity, history, orthodoxy and faith.

Uh...ok. I guess "if you say so."

We're like folks looking at each other in August in Iraq on the other side of a minefield and trying to build a bridge over it made out of ice cream. There's no real middle ground but it makes for better understanding of what we each believe and why and frankly that's the core of apologetics.

Wow. That paints a happy picture, doesn't it? From personal experience I can say apologetics has served a much larger purpose than building a bridge out of ice cream; I interpret this as saying you believe it is futile.

Link to post

I love that you added the word bipolar. Nice, I've never heard that used in Church. Also most churches from what I gather and have been told accept the Nicaean creed which came about 325AD. There have been many many discussion about what the early church believed. Hopefully we will all learn something new. Also I could just as easily say that many traditional Christians have a bipolar view of God. Does that make you feel good?

I fixed it to 'tri-polar' since it shows three distinct personalities.

Yes, the early Christian Church accepted a Trinitarian POV and made it dogma. It also failed to stamp out many of the early heresies of the church and often fell into the trap of inclusion of pagan ritual and beliefs (a valid point made by Joseph Smith, IMHO) for more political than faith-based reasons. Each of our respective faiths has made political adaptations to orthodoxy to accommodate the rulers of the time. That's just a side-effect of living in the temporal world.

To digress for a moment, the last point could also be a strong argument within LDS where polygamy is concerned. I am someone who thinks that Christianity has a strong, valid history of polygamy (see John Cairncross' After Polygamy was made a Sin) and thinks that we should all be able to practice plural marriage. (My wife OTOH has her own POV! :P )

As to what makes me 'feel good' is a good intellectual discussion about what we all believe and why.

Link to post

Wow. That paints a happy picture, doesn't it? From personal experience I can say apologetics has served a much larger purpose than building a bridge out of ice cream; I interpret this as saying you believe it is futile.

My point is that apologetics is a way for each of to understand the 'why' of each of our respective faiths. We all have, from our own perspective, valid perspectives. The key for me being here is to understand the 'why' of yours - and mine.

I do need to pick up the BoM and give it a read. Yes, I've read the Koran and spent a year in Iraq listening to morning prayers (and hoping it wasn't followed by a sniper or mortar attack).

The point I was trying to make is that we all claim some degree of Divine inspiration (okay, not the Scientologists - I was trying to make fun of them and lighten the mood) and from that we make our positions based on faith and hopefully some degree of physical and historical evidence.

Some folks here are sincere apologists for their faith and I look forward to chatting with them more.

Link to post

I fixed it to 'tri-polar' since it shows three distinct personalities.

Yes, the early Christian Church accepted a Trinitarian POV and made it dogma. It also failed to stamp out many of the early heresies of the church and often fell into the trap of inclusion of pagan ritual and beliefs (a valid point made by Joseph Smith, IMHO) for more political than faith-based reasons. Each of our respective faiths has made political adaptations to orthodoxy to accommodate the rulers of the time. That's just a side-effect of living in the temporal world.

To digress for a moment, the last point could also be a strong argument within LDS where polygamy is concerned. I am someone who thinks that Christianity has a strong, valid history of polygamy (see John Cairncross' After Polygamy was made a Sin) and thinks that we should all be able to practice plural marriage. (My wife OTOH has her own POV! :P )

As to what makes me 'feel good' is a good intellectual discussion about what we all believe and why.

Tri-polar. Actually that is funny. Tri-polar actually would have to do with classic trinitarianism. 3 Gods in one. Hmm as far as polygamy yeah it definatly has anceint roots. Hmm well lets keep talking. That tri-polar is making me laugh. At least you came in here with some humor instead of guns a blazen.

Link to post

The differences between LDS and traditional, mainstream Christianity are HUGE and ignoring the elephant in the living room doesn't make it go away.

I concur that there are difrences. BUt if you want to say they are huge that could be an overstatment.

I also dont think anybody denys the difrences. Diffrences are only as big as you want them to be.

Link to post

The differences between LDS and traditional, mainstream Christianity are HUGE and ignoring the elephant in the living room doesn't make it go away.

I must have misunderstood, I thought you were positioning one above the other.

Link to post

Tri-polar. Actually that is funny. Tri-polar actually would have to do with classic trinitarianism. 3 Gods in one. Hmm as far as polygamy yeah it definatly has anceint roots. Hmm well lets keep talking. That tri-polar is making me laugh. At least you came in here with some humor instead of guns a blazen.

Oh heck, this is a discussion and...

Not the Spanish Inquisition!

Image27.png

Link to post

My point is that apologetics is a way for each of to understand the 'why' of each of our respective faiths. We all have, from our own perspective, valid perspectives. The key for me being here is to understand the 'why' of yours - and mine.

I do need to pick up the BoM and give it a read. Yes, I've read the Koran and spent a year in Iraq listening to morning prayers (and hoping it wasn't followed by a sniper or mortar attack).

The point I was trying to make is that we all claim some degree of Divine inspiration (okay, not the Scientologists - I was trying to make fun of them and lighten the mood) and from that we make our positions based on faith and hopefully some degree of physical and historical evidence.

Some folks here are sincere apologists for their faith and I look forward to chatting with them more.

Sounds good, I just didn't see how the bridge of ice cream went along with the point.

Link to post

Oh heck, this is a discussion and...

Not the Spanish Inquisition!

Image27.png

Well you must know that sometimes people who claim to be "christian apologits" are quit zealous and very confrontational about it, so it nice that you are not. I agree this isnt the spanish inquisition.

Link to post

Sounds good, I just didn't see how the bridge of ice cream went along with the point.

We're never going to cross a bridge that can't exist due to the nature of our positions and faiths because, at the core, we (Apologists) all are True Believers in our respective faiths so a bridge really isn't possible except to agree to disagree.

Now that doesn't mean we can't understand and sharpen each other's POV and gain a deeper understanding of our own. It's just a polite acknowledgment between gentlemen and ladies about the nature of the discussion.

Well you must know that sometimes people who claim to be "christian apologits" are quit zealous and very confrontational about it, so it nice that you are not. I agree this isnt the spanish inquisition.

Not a Python fan? Now THAT will start a fight, by golly!!

Link to post

We're never going to cross a bridge that can't exist due to the nature of our positions and faiths because, at the core, we (Apologists) all are True Believers in our respective faiths so a bridge really isn't possible except to agree to disagree.

Now that doesn't mean we can't understand and sharpen each other's POV and gain a deeper understanding of our own. It's just a polite acknowledgment between gentlemen and ladies about the nature of the discussion.

Not a Python fan? Now THAT will start a fight, by golly!!

No. I love Money Python. Its just a little early and Im at work. So sometimes its hard to get in the spirit of it all.

Link to post

I must have misunderstood, I thought you were positioning one above the other.

From a guy who has a 'CTHULU' 'fish' sticker on his truck to make everyone go "HUH?" (My pastor and no one in our kinship has figured it out yet)

I won't suppose an air of superiority because that's contraindicated to good scholarship. We *will* have significant disagreements about Trinitarian versus Godhead, the role of Christ, and which planet God is really from - or not - and, yes, I may occasionally needle you to see what cards you have to show me but overall I'll be quite civil until someone else isn't.

I plan on asking questions that will vary from the basic to the obscure and expect you to do the same to me. Hopefully, we will find ourselves going to the library and our respective Elders to satisfy the other's questions! :P

Link to post

From a guy who has a 'CTHULU' 'fish' sticker on his truck to make everyone go "HUH?" (My pastor and no one in our kinship has figured it out yet)

I won't suppose an air of superiority because that's contraindicated to good scholarship. We *will* have significant disagreements about Trinitarian versus Godhead, the role of Christ, and which planet God is really from - or not - and, yes, I may occasionally needle you to see what cards you have to show me but overall I'll be quite civil until someone else isn't.

I plan on asking questions that will vary from the basic to the obscure and expect you to do the same to me. Hopefully, we will find ourselves going to the library and our respective Elders to satisfy the other's questions! :P

What planet is God from? Just curious it stuck out in my head when I first read this.

Link to post

My misreading from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob and popular media. :P Apologies to all!

But (!) I would take the position that God exists outside of time and space - and so does his throne.

No need for aplogies. After all you are a Christian Apologist. HA. Hmm I have read quit a few threads in the past about the iead that God exists out side of time and space. Can you share with us some of your favorite scriptures on the matter?

Link to post

No need for aplogies. After all you are a Christian Apologist. HA. Hmm I have read quit a few threads in the past about the iead that God exists out side of time and space. Can you share with us some of your favorite scriptures on the matter?

<treads out bible>

I'll go for something pretty basic and admit that my own mastery of physics isn't what it should be (though I suspect that it will be much better after this!) and that my own limited, human perception is what fuels my POV.

Gen 1:1

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

This implies that there was nothing before - no space and no time but that there was God. He existed outside of time and space and ergo, can continue to do so.

2 Peter 3:8

But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day

This seems to say that time is irrelevant to God - He was (existed before Creation), He Is (during Creation and after His bringing it into existence), He will be (after His Creation is gone - i.e., entropy). The statement of God's timelessness means that he is not constrained by time in any way which also implies that he is outside of time.

Though not a Biblical reference, I would posit that Augustine of Hippo's position that time only exists in a created universe. A Creator wouldn't be bound by his creation - except to do so voluntarily. I would posit that Christ becoming man meant that he allowed Himself to be bound by His physical laws (time and space) because he aged and suffered and died.

Keep in mind that a god bound by time wold be like a train on a track (much as we are) and they would only see what was coming like we do. We don't know the future because we are bound by time. Only a Creator with the ability to see time and space as a singular event (pencil example from another post) would have a full knowledge of His creation.

To be blunt, even within the Christian community over the last 30 years there seem to attempts to 'tame God' to something 'understandable'. A God who exists outside of time and space is too...God-like... for some theologians! :P

Link to post

<treads out bible>

I'll go for something pretty basic and admit that my own mastery of physics isn't what it should be (though I suspect that it will be much better after this!) and that my own limited, human perception is what fuels my POV.

Gen 1:1

This implies that there was nothing before - no space and no time but that there was God. He existed outside of time and space and ergo, can continue to do so.

Yikes, that's a stretch.

But I agree, God lives in eternity, and his course is "one eternal round." Does a circle have a start or finish?

Link to post

<treads out bible>

I'll go for something pretty basic and admit that my own mastery of physics isn't what it should be (though I suspect that it will be much better after this!) and that my own limited, human perception is what fuels my POV.

Gen 1:1

This implies that there was nothing before - no space and no time but that there was God. He existed outside of time and space and ergo, can continue to do so.

2 Peter 3:8

This seems to say that time is irrelevant to God - He was (existed before Creation), He Is (during Creation and after His bringing it into existence), He will be (after His Creation is gone - i.e., entropy). The statement of God's timelessness means that he is not constrained by time in any way which also implies that he is outside of time.

Though not a Biblical reference, I would posit that Augustine of Hippo's position that time only exists in a created universe. A Creator wouldn't be bound by his creation - except to do so voluntarily. I would posit that Christ becoming man meant that he allowed Himself to be bound by His physical laws (time and space) because he aged and suffered and died.

Keep in mind that a god bound by time wold be like a train on a track (much as we are) and they would only see what was coming like we do. We don't know the future because we are bound by time. Only a Creator with the ability to see time and space as a singular event (pencil example from another post) would have a full knowledge of His creation.

To be blunt, even within the Christian community over the last 30 years there seem to attempts to 'tame God' to something 'understandable'. A God who exists outside of time and space is too...God-like... for some theologians! :P

Very interesting. Have you by chance read the Book of Abraham? It is interesting to see the theroy of relativity taught there. Also I am not a great scholar and really dont know how to spell things very well, hopefully my mistakes will be minimal. I have often wondered if it matters if God is outside of time and space. The Bible seems to be ambiguos at best on the subjet. I was just curious. Some people on both sides of the fence have made hugh deals about it. I personly dont know if God is out side of space and time or how physics work before a universe or the universe was made.

I should point out that I dont think salvation rests on this issue one way or another. I do tend to think time is invovled in all things. BUt again proving it one way or another I dont know how.

Link to post

Mola Ram Suda Ram,

I have often wondered if it matters if God is outside of time and space. The Bible seems to be ambiguos at best on the subjet.

Christ DID NOT become God. God is outside of time and space. God is from everlasting to everlasting. In God there is no change (James 1:17). See links below for more discussion on how God is outside of time and space.

The Nature and Attributes of God

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm

By saying that God is eternal we mean that in essence, life, and action He is altogether beyond temporal limits and relations. He has neither beginning, nor end, nor duration by way of sequence or succession of moments. ... Eternity, therefore, as predicated of God, does not mean indefinite duration in time -- a meaning in which the term is sometimes used in other connections -- but it means the total exclusion of the finiteness which time implies. ... Space, like time, is one of the measures of the finite, and as by the attribute of eternity, we describe God's transcendence of all temporal limitations, so by the attribute of immensity we express His transcendent relation to space ...

What Spirits Are and What They Aren't

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0210clas.asp

Time is the measurement of change ... God is changeless, so time has no meaning in relation to him. We are in time, God is in eternity. ... God is changeless because he is infinite. ... Eternity does not mean everlasting time, time open at both ends .. Eternity is not time at all.

Link to post

Christ DID NOT become God.

Are you advocating a Unitarian heresy here? This statement was about a clear as Mississippi mud and it looks like you haven't been reading through the thread.

I don't think Unitarians are bad - I like to keep a couple around for cold winters and the occasional meeting of the Inquisition Auxiliary Local 223. :P

Link to post

docwatson223,

Are you advocating a Unitarian heresy here? This statement was about a clear as Mississippi mud and it looks like you haven't been reading through the thread.

I am adovacting what the Bible reveals. The Bible reveals that Jesus DID NOT become God.

What scriptural statements support that Jesus became a God?

Link to post

Mola Ram Suda Ram,

Christ DID NOT become God. God is outside of time and space. God is from everlasting to everlasting. In God there is no change (James 1:17). See links below for more discussion on how God is outside of time and space.

The Nature and Attributes of God

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm

By saying that God is eternal we mean that in essence, life, and action He is altogether beyond temporal limits and relations. He has neither beginning, nor end, nor duration by way of sequence or succession of moments. ... Eternity, therefore, as predicated of God, does not mean indefinite duration in time -- a meaning in which the term is sometimes used in other connections -- but it means the total exclusion of the finiteness which time implies. ... Space, like time, is one of the measures of the finite, and as by the attribute of eternity, we describe God's transcendence of all temporal limitations, so by the attribute of immensity we express His transcendent relation to space ...

What Spirits Are and What They Aren't

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0210clas.asp

Time is the measurement of change ... God is changeless, so time has no meaning in relation to him. We are in time, God is in eternity. ... God is changeless because he is infinite. ... Eternity does not mean everlasting time, time open at both ends .. Eternity is not time at all.

Were did you get the idea that Time is the measurement of Change? I have never heard that. Change really has nothing to do with it.

Link to post

My misreading from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob and popular media. :P Apologies to all!

But (!) I would take the position that God exists outside of time and space - and so does his throne.

Abr 3

9 And thus there shall be the reckoning of the time of one planet above another, until thou come nigh unto Kolob, which Kolob is after the reckoning of the Lordâ??s time; which Kolob is set nigh unto the throne of God, to govern all those planets which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest.

Id say he's smack dab in the middle of Time and space.

I mean... doesn't the bible say.

Eph. 4: 6

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

Link to post

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...