Bill “Papa” Lee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Posted November 10, 2011 Sorry, I'm having a hard time understanding your point....what did God give Himself?OK I get it you do not understand anything I write; lets just leave it at that. I think you are being disingenuous however.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Posted November 10, 2011 Bill,You're way too late. I not only brought up these texts before you did, I acknowledged--twice--that the ascended Jesus' intercession in these texts could be called praying. So your comments have added nothing to the discussion except confirmation of what I have already said!Then I missed it too???
saemo Posted November 10, 2011 Posted November 10, 2011 OK I get it you do not understand anything I write; lets just leave it at that. I think you are being disingenuous however.Think what you like, but that is not what I said or think. More like, I think you are making assumptions about belief in the Trinity that aren't made by people who worship the Trinity. I don't know what those assumptions are, and I don't think it would be productive for me to guess, but I see there is something(s) being assumed by your questions and comments.
jadams_4242 Posted November 11, 2011 Posted November 11, 2011 Pa Pa,Your opening post is full of misunderstandings or misrepresentations of my faith (i.e., orthodox Christianity). I will explain the problems as best I can. Your statements appear as block quotes, followed by my replies.Orthodox Christians believe in a clear distinction between the Father and the Son. The Father is not the Son; the Son is not the Father. Jesus Christ is the Son of the Father, sent by the Father into the world to redeem us. To suggest otherwise misunderstands our faith.John 17:3 does say that eternal life is knowing God the Father and Jesus Christ. Surely this means that if a religion radically misrepresents the nature of God, that religion is not a reliable path to eternal life. If orthodox Christianity is guilty of such misrepresentation of the nature of God, as you seem to believe, then we would not be teaching the truth about the way to eternal life. The same would apply to the LDS Church if it is guilty of such misrepresentation. At least one of our religions teaches serious error about God; that reality should not be ignored or sugar-coated. Therefore, it is important for people to face this issue and come to terms with it.They did not have "opposing" wills. They had distinct faculties or centers of volition, and Christ, by virtue of having become incarnate as a physical human, was capable of feeling the attraction of temptations to avoid the Father's will (i.e., to avoid the suffering and death that was imminent). However, as the incarnate Son, Jesus Christ never actually willed something opposed to the Father's will.Your own theology teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are perfectly one in purpose. Was this true while Jesus was living on the earth? If so, how, in your view, could he possibly "will" something other than the Father's will?Of course, this isn't what we believe. We believe the Father gave them to the Son. The Father and the Son are distinct persons in one infinite Deity.This is a big subject, so see my Parchment and Pen blog article on John 17 for a response to this argument.We do this.Correction: the Son did not know the exact time of the events he prophesied (Mark 13:32). There's no reason to think he continued not to know that exact time after his resurrection and ascension. Again, Christ had humbled himself by becoming a human being and experiencing finite limitations of human life, including not knowing everything about the future. This is not a problem for orthodox theology; it is part and parcel of what we believe, specifically of the orthodox doctrine of the Incarnation.See above. There was no concealment. The Son felt abandoned by the Father. The Son was not and is not the same person as the Father.CFR that most people in other churches do not pray to the Father. That is an absolute falsehood. Most prayers I hear in churches -- and I've been in many congregations in many different denominations -- are addressed to the Father.One anecdotal example does not an argument make.Obviously, I disagree. Your conclusion is based on several serious misunderstandings or misrepresentations of the faith expressed in the Nicene Creed. your parchment analogy is simply another not to be understood by any means whatsoever manner of thinking; none of that makes any sense... i wish some trinitarian would talk straight sense instead of complete nonsense... {sorry about being so blunt}..
Rob Bowman Posted November 11, 2011 Posted November 11, 2011 jadams,You wrote:your parchment analogy is simply another not to be understood by any means whatsoever manner of thinking; none of that makes any sense... i wish some trinitarian would talk straight sense instead of complete nonsense... {sorry about being so blunt}..The problem with your comment isn't that it is so blunt; the problem is that it is so vague. I have no idea what it is about my article that you think is nonsense. I'm not offended; I'm just lacking anything from you that is specific enough to consider or to answer.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted November 11, 2011 Author Posted November 11, 2011 Think what you like,I always do...
Recommended Posts