Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Does Scripture support the Trinity?
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure: Quakers have traditionally taken the position--which probably seems paradoxical to other Christians--of acknowledging God as Father, God as Son, and God as Holy Spirit, while refusing to use the word "trinity" or subscribe to any creed. The reasons being that neither the word "trinity" nor any explicit schema defining it occurs in scripture, and (more substantively) that we believe that attempts to delineate the internal relations of God to himself in various persons so as to produce a definitive verbal formulation are nothing more than vain speculation about the unknowable, and serve only to create occasions for division among Christians, not unity.
Timothy
Sensible folk, Quakers.
-------------------- My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
OK - unpack your sermon a little for me...
Jesus is God but is not part of the trinity..?
C
[crosspost - directed at the Elder] [ 03. May 2005, 08:17: Message edited by: Cheesy* ]
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: 12uthy,
Are you happy with idea that someone or something less than God dwells within you?
And, are you happy with the idea that the Church is a Temple to something that isn't God?
Daron
The only thing that dwells within me that did not come from my beloved God is sin and no I am not happy about this, and will echo Paul's words on this: Rom 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. Rom 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: Rom 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity, to the law of sin which is in my members. Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself, serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.(KJV)
The point I wish to make is that we do not need to revere God's gift as if it were a God in itself in order to use it and cherish it. If a loved one gave you a gift would you treat that gift as though it were that loved one or would you cherish it because it was a gift from a dear loved one.
I have a much better understanding as to why some cherish the idea of a Trinity, and I flatter myself that I am not obdurate on any matter but I doubt if I will ever accept the teaching myself.
As I see it (and this brings me to Freddy's question) believing in the Trinity is not essential to salvation and I do not need it to worship my God in Spirit and Truth, as I endevour to do.
I still view it as an unnecessary confounding of the simple Christian message, which is this:
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.(KJV)
And insisting that the congregation believe such unnecessary doctrines run the risk of creating a barrier between God and his people,and by that I mean the simple amha'a´rets who do not have a degree in Theology or Philosophy so as to enable them to wrestle with such things.
Whether intentional or not, by insisting upon believing such things the Church could possibly be seen as doing the same as the Pharisee's did with the Jewish religion:
Mat 23:4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders...(KJV)
Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.(KJV)
The Church does not have to answer to me, but it must answer to Our Lord, and since it has positioned itself as a teacher of God's people it must bear a greater responsibility for the results of what and how it teaches God's Word.
Jam 3:1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. (ESV)
If I am to teach I would sooner do it in a manner that does not alienate the "foolish" ones of this world: 1Co 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, "He catches the wise in their craftiness," 1Co 3:20 and again, "The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile." (ESV)
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy:
PS On the point of using Jehovah's name in other names it is important to note that Jesus means "Jehovah Is Salvation" which might explain Jer 23:6 use of the name "Jehovah, our righteousness" as the name of the Messiah
12uthy, how do you explain Luke 2:30 in the light of this observation?
'For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people.' (NIV)
'...because mine eyes did see Thy salvation, which Thou didst prepare before the face of all the peoples.' (YLT)
'For mine eys have seen thy salavtion, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people.' (KJV)
Yes, YHWH is salvation. But Scripture clearly says that Jesus is the one that Simeon was speaking about. (see v.33)
Daron
Yes, that's especially important in the light of verses like Isaiah 43:3 & 11: quote: For I am the Lord your God, The Holy One of Israel, your Savior;
“I, even I, am the Lord, And there is no savior besides Me." New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Is 43:11). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
Isaiah 44 continues: quote: 6 “Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. 7 ‘Who is like Me? Let him proclaim and declare it; Yes, let him recount it to Me in order, From the time that I established the ancient nation. And let them declare to them the things that are coming And the events that are going to take place. 8 ‘Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it? And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.’ ” New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Is 44:6). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
Because Jesus is Jehovah there is no conflict between Jesus being our saviour and Jehovah being our only saviour.
Pax, anglicanrascal
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: The basic concept of the Trinity can be plainly read in the “Creed” (Credo) recited by Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians to this day.
And Anglicans, and many others. A huge majority of those that don't recite the Creed, accept the beliefs it contains as central to Christianity. It's probably fair to say that the Creed represents universal orthodox Christian belief.
quote: Trinitarian Christians insist that the One God, has made Himself manifest in three persons.
Eternally so. We're not modalists, this is not how God appears as certain times, but how He is eternally. I think your essay misunderstands Trinitarian doctrine, which is easily done to be fair.
quote: Let us look at this more closely. In asserting this, Christians would assume that Latter-Day Saints do not believe that Jesus Christ lived before He was in His bodily form. This could not be further from the truth.
You are mistaken in your assumptions about our assumptions. The early Arian heresy took your position, so those of us that have studied this question (I suspect most of us) are as familiar with that as with adoptionism.
quote: The fulfillment of God’s word! It is no wonder, therefore, that in the verse mentioned above, He refers to Jesus Christ as “the word.”
Logos doesn't mean the fulfillment of the word, in my understanding.
quote: Even more striking in this verse, we read “and the word was with God.” This would assert a separation between them. In Greek, it can also be translated as “face to face with God.” John explicitly explains that the two were seperate.
Yes, which means that modalism or similar is not true.
quote: Further on we read that "the word was God." Another striking verse, which seems to correlate with Trinitarian thought at first glance. However, by acknowledging that Jesus Christ was (is) the “word”, whatever He does, is an order of God. Furthermore, the “word” is God. God made the Earth, by Jesus Christ (Jehovah.) This complex truth becomes hard to understand.
I'm sorry, but this seems a thoroughly weak argument to me. You are decoupling the Word as Christ from the Word as God on the basis that the Trinity makes no sense to you, but the text does not leave you room to say that.
You accept that Jesus is referred to as the Word, and then you are faced with "the Word was God". If St John did not mean that Jesus is God but rather his agent, he chose a catastrophically poor phrase with which to express it. Other Arians tend to take the view that this last is better translated as "the Word was a god", which although I believe is wrong, has some logic to it.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy:
PS On the point of using Jehovah's name in other names it is important to note that Jesus means "Jehovah Is Salvation" which might explain Jer 23:6 use of the name "Jehovah, our righteousness" as the name of the Messiah
12uthy, how do you explain Luke 2:30 in the light of this observation?
'For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people.' (NIV)
'...because mine eyes did see Thy salvation, which Thou didst prepare before the face of all the peoples.' (YLT)
'For mine eys have seen thy salavtion, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people.' (KJV)
Yes, YHWH is salvation. But Scripture clearly says that Jesus is the one that Simeon was speaking about. (see v.33)
Daron
I think you may have misunderstood me. Jesus was indeed the one of whom he was speaking, and he is indeed God's means of salvation. Simeon was not saying that he has seen God, but his means of salvation, ie Jesus.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (KJV)
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: 12uthy,
Are you happy with idea that someone or something less than God dwells within you?
And, are you happy with the idea that the Church is a Temple to something that isn't God?
Daron
The only thing that dwells within me that did not come from my beloved God is sin
I think mt was referring to John 14:16-18: quote: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you. New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Jn 14:16). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
If you do not know him, if you have not received the Holy Spirit, then you must be vary wary because the warning of Romans 8. quote: ... those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Ro 8:8). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
The Apostle Paul makes it very plain that if, as you said 12uthy, the Holy Spirit does not dwell in you, then you do not belong to Christ, you are in the flesh and cannot please God. That is a very dangerous position to be in.
Please pray for the Holy Spirit to enter your life and your heart.
Pax, ar
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
anglicanrascal, I am not sure that is a very kind thing to say to our guest. Who are you to say in whom the Spirit lives?
12uthy, you may have already answered this, but how do you hold that Jesus the Christ was the messiah and saviour without him being God?
C
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy:
PS On the point of using Jehovah's name in other names it is important to note that Jesus means "Jehovah Is Salvation" which might explain Jer 23:6 use of the name "Jehovah, our righteousness" as the name of the Messiah
12uthy, how do you explain Luke 2:30 in the light of this observation?
'For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people.' (NIV)
'...because mine eyes did see Thy salvation, which Thou didst prepare before the face of all the peoples.' (YLT)
'For mine eys have seen thy salavtion, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people.' (KJV)
Yes, YHWH is salvation. But Scripture clearly says that Jesus is the one that Simeon was speaking about. (see v.33)
Daron
I think you may have misunderstood me. Jesus was indeed the one of whom he was speaking, and he is indeed God's means of salvation. Simeon was not saying that he has seen God, but his means of salvation, ie Jesus.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (KJV)
He saw his Lord and Saviour - while he would have known from his OT that Jehovah is the only Saviour - as per my earlier post.
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Cheesy*: anglicanrascal, I am not sure that is a very kind thing to say to our guest. Who are you to say in whom the Spirit lives?
If our guest will say that the Holy Spirit lives in him/her, then I will rejoice and I will apologise.
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by anglicanrascal: quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy:
PS On the point of using Jehovah's name in other names it is important to note that Jesus means "Jehovah Is Salvation" which might explain Jer 23:6 use of the name "Jehovah, our righteousness" as the name of the Messiah
12uthy, how do you explain Luke 2:30 in the light of this observation?
'For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people.' (NIV)
'...because mine eyes did see Thy salvation, which Thou didst prepare before the face of all the peoples.' (YLT)
'For mine eys have seen thy salavtion, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people.' (KJV)
Yes, YHWH is salvation. But Scripture clearly says that Jesus is the one that Simeon was speaking about. (see v.33)
Daron
Yes, that's especially important in the light of verses like Isaiah 43:3 & 11: quote: For I am the Lord your God, The Holy One of Israel, your Savior;
“I, even I, am the Lord, And there is no savior besides Me." New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Is 43:11). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
Isaiah 44 continues: quote: 6 “Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. 7 ‘Who is like Me? Let him proclaim and declare it; Yes, let him recount it to Me in order, From the time that I established the ancient nation. And let them declare to them the things that are coming And the events that are going to take place. 8 ‘Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it? And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.’ ” New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Is 44:6). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
Because Jesus is Jehovah there is no conflict between Jesus being our saviour and Jehovah being our only saviour.
Pax, anglicanrascal
OK lets put this in perspective,
At the time of Jesus, Israel was under the rulership of Rome. Yet it had a King, Herod. (Actually the different districts had different Kings)
The Romans permitted Herod to rule, but not to the extent or exclusion of the rulership of Caesar as Emperor.
Thus Jehovah, the Father, is, always has been and always will be Sovereign of the Universe, yet in recognision of Jesus' sacrifice and absolute faithfulness and love He has assigned his Son as King over the earth. This does not make him one and the same person.
On that point, Elder Moroni, where do you get the idea that Jesus is Jehovah if you do not believe in a trinity?
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by anglicanrascal: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: 12uthy,
Are you happy with idea that someone or something less than God dwells within you?
And, are you happy with the idea that the Church is a Temple to something that isn't God?
Daron
The only thing that dwells within me that did not come from my beloved God is sin
I think mt was referring to John 14:16-18: quote: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you. New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Jn 14:16). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
If you do not know him, if you have not received the Holy Spirit, then you must be vary wary because the warning of Romans 8. quote: ... those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Ro 8:8). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
The Apostle Paul makes it very plain that if, as you said 12uthy, the Holy Spirit does not dwell in you, then you do not belong to Christ, you are in the flesh and cannot please God. That is a very dangerous position to be in.
Please pray for the Holy Spirit to enter your life and your heart.
Pax, ar
Thank you for the warning, actually I do, several times each day.
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
Hi 12uthy,
I understand that might be what you have been taught, but it doesn't answer the verses from Holy Scripture that I mentioned in my earlier post.
It doesn't answer how Jehovah can be our only saviour and there can be "no savior besides [him]" if Jesus Christ (who dwells at his right hand in heaven) is our saviour.
Also, please don't believe that Christians believe that the Father and the Son are "one and the same person" - that is a complete misrepresentation of what Christians believe. We believe that the Bible reveals that there are three distinct persons who are of one divine nature. There are three persons, but one eternal God.
Pax, ar
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by anglicanrascal: quote:
'For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people.' (NIV)
'...because mine eyes did see Thy salvation, which Thou didst prepare before the face of all the peoples.' (YLT)
'For mine eys have seen thy salavtion, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people.' (KJV)
Yes, YHWH is salvation. But Scripture clearly says that Jesus is the one that Simeon was speaking about. (see v.33)
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (KJV)
He saw his Lord and Saviour - while he would have known from his OT that Jehovah is the only Saviour - as per my earlier post.
If you read the scriptures again you will find that Simeon was saying that his eyes had seen the means by which God saves, not God himself.
I suspect we are never going to agree on this.
[fixed code] [ 03. May 2005, 13:52: Message edited by: John Holding ]
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: Please pray for the Holy Spirit to enter your life and your heart.
Pax, ar
Thank you for the warning, actually I do, several times each day.
Yay! I rejoice, apologise and pray that the Holy Spirit will hear your prayer!
Pax, ar [ 03. May 2005, 09:28: Message edited by: anglicanrascal ]
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: quote: Originally posted by anglicanrascal: He saw his Lord and Saviour - while he would have known from his OT that Jehovah is the only Saviour - as per my earlier post.
If you read the scriptures again you will find that Simeon was saying that his eyes had seen the means by which God saves, not God himself.
I suspect we are never going to agree on this.
Maybe I could phrase that question a different way: Did Simeon see the only saviour of the world, or not? [ 03. May 2005, 09:30: Message edited by: anglicanrascal ]
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
Yes he did
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
Let me illustrate it this way, If you were dangling off the edge of a cliff, and I was the only one there. Who would you say was your only means of saving, me or the rope I throw to you?
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: Yes he did
OK - and does Isaiah 43:10 & 11 clearly state that the one true God is the only Saviour of the world?
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
anglicanrascal
Shipmate
# 3412
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: Let me illustrate it this way, If you were dangling off the edge of a cliff, and I was the only one there. Who would you say was your only means of saving, me or the rope I throw to you?
The analogy is false. We are talking about the person who takes on the title of saviour of the world. In your example there would only be one saviour - the rope would not be a saviour.
If Jesus is not Jehovah he cannot be the saviour of the world. Isaiah 43:10&11 rule that possibility out.
Pax, ar
Posts: 3186 | From: Diocese of Litigalia | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by anglicanrascal: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: Let me illustrate it this way, If you were dangling off the edge of a cliff, and I was the only one there. Who would you say was your only means of saving, me or the rope I throw to you?
The analogy is false. We are talking about the person who takes on the title of saviour of the world. In your example there would only be one saviour - the rope would not be a saviour.
Pax, ar
No but I could not save you without it. Jehovah can use whatever and whoever he chooses to accomplish his will. Who better than the one person who has been with him from the beginning and with whom he created the earth and everything in it:
Pro 8:22 "The LORD possessed me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old. Pro 8:23 Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth. Pro 8:24 When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. Pro 8:25 Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth, Pro 8:26 before he had made the earth with its fields, or the first of the dust of the world. Pro 8:27 When he established the heavens, I was there; when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, Pro 8:28 when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, Pro 8:29 when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth, Pro 8:30 then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, Pro 8:31 rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man.
Simply because Jesus was a separate person does not mean that we were saved by anyone other than Jehovah, or that anyone else could do so.
However I accept that Jesus and Jehovah are inseperable, but they are inseparable because they are beloved father and son and because of their unparalleled personal affinity, their wills coincide so perfectly, not because they are part of the same person.
I think we have gone as far as we can on this subject and I agree to differ, but I appreciate the Trinity doctrine much more, thank you.
I still think that it is an unnecessary and therefore dangerous complication to God's Message.
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy:
Jehovah can use whatever and whoever he chooses to accomplish his will. Who better than the one person who has been with him from the beginning and with whom he created the earth and everything in it:
<snip>
Simply because Jesus was a separate person does not mean that we were saved by anyone other than Jehovah, or that anyone else could do so.
However I accept that Jesus and Jehovah are inseperable, but they are inseparable because they are beloved father and son and because of their unparalleled personal affinity, their wills coincide so perfectly, not because they are part of the same person.
I think we have gone as far as we can on this subject and I agree to differ, but I appreciate the Trinity doctrine much more, thank you.
I still think that it is an unnecessary and therefore dangerous complication to God's Message.
12uthy, I hope you don't think me stupid, but I am really struggling to understand your position. If Jesus and God are separate individuals (presumably immortal) how can we at the same time say there is only one God (given that we have just identified two)?
C
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Cheesy*: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy:
Jehovah can use whatever and whoever he chooses to accomplish his will. Who better than the one person who has been with him from the beginning and with whom he created the earth and everything in it:
<snip>
Simply because Jesus was a separate person does not mean that we were saved by anyone other than Jehovah, or that anyone else could do so.
However I accept that Jesus and Jehovah are inseperable, but they are inseparable because they are beloved father and son and because of their unparalleled personal affinity, their wills coincide so perfectly, not because they are part of the same person.
I think we have gone as far as we can on this subject and I agree to differ, but I appreciate the Trinity doctrine much more, thank you.
I still think that it is an unnecessary and therefore dangerous complication to God's Message.
12uthy, I hope you don't think me stupid, but I am really struggling to understand your position. If Jesus and God are separate individuals (presumably immortal) how can we at the same time say there is only one God (given that we have just identified two)?
C
Because My God is Jehovah, Jesus is my Lord, the one through whom Jehovah saved me. I laud my Lord as the one who willingly sacrificed himself for me and through whom I have my salvation but I attribute the praise, glory and honour for doing so to the only True God, Jehovah.
Rev 7:10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.(KJV)
Jehovah can give immortality to anyone and everyone he wishes, as indeed he has promised he will do for each one of us,(John 3:13-15) so yes Jesus as the firstfruits is immortal, but that does not make him The One True God.
1Co 15:20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 1Co 15:21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 1Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ.
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: However, if we are to take each role of God as a separate person, why limit it to a Trinity. After all, is he not: A creator (The Father) a Redeemer (The Son) an evangeliser (The Spirit) but also a Judge an avenger and a mighty warrior
That would make him a polytheism.
Sorry to go back to something on page 1, I've been away for the weekend and I've only just managed to get through this thread and no one seems to have addressed this point yet.
Your point would be well made if the Doctrine of the Trinity did say that each person is distinguished by seperate roles. The Doctrine doesn't teach that the Father created, the Son redeemed and the Spirit evangelises. It teaches that God does each of these, and the other roles you listed. Thus Father, Son and Spirit all created; they all redeem us, they all teach us, judge us etc.
-------------------- Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
12uthy, on this (I think) and other threads you've said that the word "god" was used to refer to anyone in a position of authority, rather than necessarily a diety. So, saying "the Word was (a) god" could simply mean he had authority, much as a king or emporer might, rather than being divine in the sense Trinitarian Christians would normally understand the phrase. Have I understood your position correctly?
If so, how do you handle the Ten Commandments? Specifically, "you shall have no other gods". Because the word there nust surely apply to a diety, either that or for most of Israels history they deliberately sinned in having leaders over them - first Moses, the Joshua and the Judges and then Saul, David, Solomon and the kings that followed them. And, the first Christians definitely deliberately sinned by worshipping Jesus.
-------------------- Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
Dear Grey face - i will respond to you later today - as I am a little cut for time atm.
But to 12uthy: quote: On that point, Elder Moroni, where do you get the idea that Jesus is Jehovah if you do not believe in a trinity?
There is a common theory amongst modern day theologions that different sections of the Old Testament were written by different people and even at different periods - because they have noticed a categorical pattern in the names that are used. The authors of scriptures that use the name of "Jehovah" are known as "Jahwists." The LDS church takes a different approach in showing that these are not different categories by different authors - but that "Elohim" and "Jehovah" are actually seperate persons. The famous verse:
Exo 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
It was Jehovah (Jesus Christ) who appeared frequently throughout the Old Testament. There are also places in the OT where the term "Elohim Jehovah" is used, like in Genesis 3. Such a vivid example would be when "Elohim Jehovah" was walking in the Garden of Eden. This would demontrate how both Elohim and Jehovah are present.
Please note - I can only discuss with you on the subject of biblical doctrine. I cannot argue with you about church history, since we believe there has been an apostasy. Furthermore, in that light of latter-day revelation, it has been revealed to us that "Jehovah" is the name of Jesus Christ and "Elohim" the name of the Father. I know I can not argue this to you, but this answers your question. Simply put - we can believe "that Jesus is Jehovah if you do not believe in a trinity" because we have received latter day revelation (in our opinion.)
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
quote: Jesus is God but is not part of the trinity..?
Jesus is a God. Jesus is a member of the Godhead. Members of the Mormon Church do not use the term "Trinity" simply because it denotes a oneness between the three. Although we believe that members of the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)are seperate - they are one in purpose. Therefore, the argument that a man shouldn't serve "two masters" becomes irrelevant to us. Christ has gained exaltation AFTER His death - as we believe we will to. Therefore, to refer to Jesus Christ as a "God" would not neccessarily meant that it is He we worship. In actual fact we do not directly worship Jesus Christ at any time - not even in hymns. We always pray in the name of Jesus Christ, but to our Heavenly Father. I can't remember who it was, but a General Authority of the church once said: "We worship the glory of the Father, and the selflessness of the Son."
Essentially, every single human being is as close to the Father as Jesus Christ is. If we believed in a concept like the Trinity, then this would mean that we all too must be included in it. Jesus Christ had to gain His exaltation just in the same way that we do.
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Alan Cresswell: 12uthy, on this (I think) and other threads you've said that the word "god" was used to refer to anyone in a position of authority, rather than necessarily a diety. So, saying "the Word was (a) god" could simply mean he had authority, much as a king or emporer might, rather than being divine in the sense Trinitarian Christians would normally understand the phrase. Have I understood your position correctly?
If so, how do you handle the Ten Commandments? Specifically, "you shall have no other gods". Because the word there nust surely apply to a diety, either that or for most of Israels history they deliberately sinned in having leaders over them - first Moses, the Joshua and the Judges and then Saul, David, Solomon and the kings that followed them. And, the first Christians definitely deliberately sinned by worshipping Jesus.
This has to do with your definition of Worship. There are those within my religion that believe that certain gestures are acts of worship. For example saluting the flag, which is one reason JW children have so much trouble in school in the States. That being said, would I be right in curtseying to a member of the royal family. Personally this would not conflict with my conscience (even though I'm not a royalist) because I do not consider curtseying to be an act of worship towards the state, only a gesture of respect for the authority of the land (whether I agree with that authority or not )
So, in order to have no other God's we must not give an inappropriate degree of reverence to anything or anyone other than our God, Jehovah.
Therefore, while I will praise Jesus I will only pray to and worship Jehovah (and not a triad of Gods).
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: Jesus is a God.
How many are there, then? And why do you worship just one of them?
quote: Christ has gained exaltation AFTER His death - as we believe we will to.
So he wasn't God before his death, and St John was mistaken?
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
I believe the idea is that you too can become a god.
-------------------- "Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: Jesus is a God. Jesus is a member of the Godhead. Members of the Mormon Church do not use the term "Trinity" simply because it denotes a oneness between the three. Although we believe that members of the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)are seperate - they are one in purpose. Therefore, the argument that a man shouldn't serve "two masters" becomes irrelevant to us. Christ has gained exaltation AFTER His death - as we believe we will to. Therefore, to refer to Jesus Christ as a "God" would not neccessarily meant that it is He we worship. In actual fact we do not directly worship Jesus Christ at any time - not even in hymns. We always pray in the name of Jesus Christ, but to our Heavenly Father. I can't remember who it was, but a General Authority of the church once said: "We worship the glory of the Father, and the selflessness of the Son."
Essentially, every single human being is as close to the Father as Jesus Christ is. If we believed in a concept like the Trinity, then this would mean that we all too must be included in it. Jesus Christ had to gain His exaltation just in the same way that we do.
I still don't understand. Either you are worshipping three gods (contravening the commandment) or you are saying that Jesus was not actually 'God' in any real sense.
I understand your comment about receiving a latter-day revelation but 1) how come we can't discuss that with you and 2) how can you be so sure that your new knowledge is more reliable than our old knowledge?
C
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: This has to do with your definition of Worship. There are those within my religion that believe that certain gestures are acts of worship. For example saluting the flag, which is one reason JW children have so much trouble in school in the States. That being said, would I be right in curtseying to a member of the royal family. Personally this would not conflict with my conscience (even though I'm not a royalist) because I do not consider curtseying to be an act of worship towards the state, only a gesture of respect for the authority of the land (whether I agree with that authority or not )
So, in order to have no other God's we must not give an inappropriate degree of reverence to anything or anyone other than our God, Jehovah.
Therefore, while I will praise Jesus I will only pray to and worship Jehovah (and not a triad of Gods).
So, to clarify, you are saying that you can have other gods, but just not have them as more important than Jehovah?
I'm not sure that this is consistant with the biblical narrative as I read it.
[Incidentally, why is the name Jehovah? Surely that is an anglicised word - if the name is so important, why are you using a word that it plainly isn't?]
C
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
OK! hehe. Let me make this absolutely clear! This is the fastest forum I've even participated in!
quote: So, to clarify, you are saying that you can have other gods, but just not have them as more important than Jehovah?
We believe that there are other "exalted beings". We believe that the Father and Son are both Gods in their own right. However, the only God with which WE have anything to do with (concerning worship, glorification and praise) is Elohim (the father.)
quote: I understand your comment about receiving a latter-day revelation but 1) how come we can't discuss that with you and 2) how can you be so sure that your new knowledge is more reliable than our old knowledge?
You CAN discuss it with me - but what would be the point if you didn't agree with the excerpts from the Book of Mormon I posted? If you would like me to go into the ins and outs of Latter Day revelation on this subject, I could write a book (!) but I don't think it would be to your advantage because you don't believe it! Therefore, when I post on here, I try to only use biblical quotes and universally accepted sources rendered by all Christians.
quote: How many are there, then? And why do you worship just one of them? quote:
Christ has gained exaltation AFTER His death - as we believe we will to.
So he wasn't God before his death, and St John was mistaken?
No John was not mistaken. Perhaps in the essay I posted I didn't get the point accross to you that when John says "the word was [a] God" that they very "word" is God and not Jesus Christ. In the pre-existance, we believe that Jesus Christ was a semi-exalted being. In other words, he was Godly, Godlike and innocent but unperfected.
How many Gods are there? Please don't think that this is a shallow statement which I am about to make. It is a real LDS belief and there is MUCH reason behind it. How many Gods? = How many people have died who have gone through the LDS temple? How many people have had proxy baptisms and endowments? How many people from other worlds have gained exaltation? The number would be infinite. [ 03. May 2005, 15:04: Message edited by: Callan ]
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Cheesy*: quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: So, in order to have no other God's we must not give an inappropriate degree of reverence to anything or anyone other than our God, Jehovah.
Therefore, while I will praise Jesus I will only pray to and worship Jehovah (and not a triad of Gods).
So, to clarify, you are saying that you can have other gods, but just not have them as more important than Jehovah?
I'm not sure that this is consistant with the biblical narrative as I read it.
[Incidentally, why is the name Jehovah? Surely that is an anglicised word - if the name is so important, why are you using a word that it plainly isn't?]
C
That's pretty much it yeah!
Why Jehovah? Because since the Tetragrammaton has no vowels, none of us know how to pronounce it. I could just as easily use Yahweh, Ieovah, or simply Jah. I use the anglicised version because I am English, much the same reason, I suspect, you use Jesus rather than Yeshua.
Given the context of our discussion here, I think the name is very important to distinguish which "god" we are talking about, don't you?
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
I just explained something very badly - as my missionary companion has noticed!
The official church stance on whether Jesus Christ was a God, is this: 1)Jehovah WAS a God at the creation of the world 2) JESUS CHRIST [in His bodily form] was NOT a God while He was on the Earth 3) Jesus Christ is now fully God
About your comment on the name of Jehovah. We accept that there are no vowels in the original name "yud" "hey" "vav" "heh" however Latter Day revelation has shown us (LDS) that the correct way to pronounce and spell the name is Jehovah. We believe the translator Joseph Smith was inspired directly from God - it should be noted however that Joseph Smith did not have profound insight.
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni:
How many Gods are there? Please don't think that this is a shallow statement which I am about to make. It is a real LDS belief and there is MUCH reason behind it. How many Gods? = How many people have died who have gone through the LDS temple? How many people have had proxy baptisms and endowments? How many people from other worlds have gained exaltation? The number would be infinite.
Just pausing to allow that to sink in.
C
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: We believe that there are other "exalted beings". We believe that the Father and Son are both Gods in their own right.
So you're not monotheist, you're perhaps somewhere between henotheist and polytheist.
quote: However, the only God with which WE have anything to do with (concerning worship, glorification and praise) is Elohim (the father.)
Technically henotheist then. So are you defining a God as any exalted being, rather than the source of all being, the only self-existent, the Creator of all things?
quote: No John was not mistaken. Perhaps in the essay I posted I didn't get the point accross to you that when John says "the word was [a] God" that they very "word" is God and not Jesus Christ.
I assume you've now switched to God = The Father, and I fail to understand how you get this out of...
"1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning....
14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us."
(NIV - first one I came across)
If, as you say, the Word is referring to God and not Jesus, how do you interpret the Word becoming flesh if not in the person of Jesus Christ?
quote: How many Gods are there? Please don't think that this is a shallow statement which I am about to make. It is a real LDS belief and there is MUCH reason behind it. How many Gods? = How many people have died who have gone through the LDS temple? How many people have had proxy baptisms and endowments? How many people from other worlds have gained exaltation? The number would be infinite.
I don't understand. Are you back to using God = any exalted being? Or have I missed something that allows you to say that each of these Gods created all things ex nihilo, is our saviour, has no rival, and so on?
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
Okay - let me define what I mean by exalted being and God.
We believe in God - the Heavenly Father. The Supreme being - through who's power the cosmos was created. Through who's authority priests can do their duties.
We believe that Heavenly Father wants us to be more like Him - and God has given us a plan of salvation - all people that are faithful to the plan of salvation, can gain their own exaltation. We believe that we were born in the pre-existance - and we believe that we are the literal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father.
We believe that ALL people are saved through the atonement of Christ (save those few, the sons of perdition, who blaspheme the Holy Ghost or commit grievious murder.)
"In my fathers house there are many mansions" - the terrestrial, the tellestial and the celesital.
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: I just explained something very badly - as my missionary companion has noticed!
The official church stance on whether Jesus Christ was a God, is this: 1)Jehovah WAS a God at the creation of the world 2) JESUS CHRIST [in His bodily form] was NOT a God while He was on the Earth 3) Jesus Christ is now fully God
About your comment on the name of Jehovah. We accept that there are no vowels in the original name "yud" "hey" "vav" "heh" however Latter Day revelation has shown us (LDS) that the correct way to pronounce and spell the name is Jehovah. We believe the translator Joseph Smith was inspired directly from God - it should be noted however that Joseph Smith did not have profound insight.
So how do you spell it in a language that does not use our alphabet, or are you saying that he is only a God of English speaking people?
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
How did the death of a mere man save me?
How did a mere man become God?
-------------------- Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great price with direct inspiration from God. Joseph Smith also only wrote the Book of Mormon in English. Therefore, the English copy of the book of Mormon (the first translation) contains the English name we would give to Jehovah. Although universally in the LDS church the name of Jehovah is used - there is no reason why the name cannot be transliterated into the appropriate language (should it be neccessary.) However, looking at the Hebrew form of the name, "YHVH" there is an absolute possibility (which we believe to be so) that the name given to Moses was actually "Jehovah." The name "Jehovah" is not neccessarily angliscized in the way that it is written in English! It is an educated guess by biblical scholars as to which vowels could have been consituted into the name.
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elder Moroni
Shipmate
# 9432
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard: How did the death of a mere man save me?
How did a mere man become God?
There was a war in heaven. Jesus Christ was sinless, because He was born half God half Man (but it would not be correct to call Him a God while he was on the Earth.) Because Jesus Christ was sinless - he was the only person who could have been good enough to meet God's standards of true sacrifice.
There is more about this in the "Pearl of Great Price." If you would like a free copy let me know.
-------------------- Mo.
Posts: 215 | From: Ashton Stake | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: Okay - let me define what I mean by exalted being and God.
Please do. With respect, the rest of your post, didn't.
So far you've said the following (apologies if my paraphrasing or memory is inaccurate) There are an infinite number of Gods. Jesus was not a God until after his death. Jesus was never the Father. Only the Father is the Creator, source of all being, etc, who the rest of us call God. The Word in 1 John 1 is actually God (and by this you mean the Father). The Word in 1 John 1 is not Jesus. (I note that you haven't answered then, how God became flesh if not Jesus). All people existed logically prior to the creation of the universe.
Forgive me, but I'm having difficulty discussing this because you haven't defined your terms.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
[tangent]This is the best thread on the Trinity and the nature of Christ! Instead of a bunch of trinitarians splitting hairs on modality and the nature of Persons, we have a number of really distinct theological points of view. Plus we are learning scads about JW and LDS. Kudos, guys!
I hope this gets aworthy retirement in Limbo.[/tangent]
-------------------- "Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
I was just thinking the same thing!
Thank you Elder Maroni and 12uthy. You are very helpful and interesting.
-------------------- "Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by GreyFace: 1 John 1
Everyone please translate what I wrote into what I obviously meant
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
[TANGENT] quote: Originally posted by Elder Moroni: We believe the translator Joseph Smith was inspired directly from God - it should be noted however that Joseph Smith did not have profound insight.
Very interesting comment.
I should note that I am a Swedenborgian. Many Mormons read Swedenborg as his books were the source of much of what Smith wrote about heaven.
Anyway, you're not the only one in this discussion who believes in alternate authoritative revelations.
Of course, one could argue that this is exactly what the traditions of the Catholic and Orthodox churches are. [/TANGENT]
-------------------- "Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ley Druid
Ship's chemist
# 3246
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Margaret: And Ley Druid, I think you've misunderstood me - I'm not trying to attack or defend anyone, just pointing out that there are arguments to be made on both (or all?) sides of the discussion.
No one said you were attacking or defending anyone. Sure arguments can be made on all sides of any discussion, like whether the world is flat, or the moon is made of green cheese. quote: I think it's a great mistake to dismiss the Witnesses as a bunch of wild theological crazies;
No one has called anybody crazy either. quote: others may not agree with their interpretations of scripture, or the conclusions they draw from them, but they can always, in my experience, back them up with reasons.(I say this with feeling, having had a stand-up fight with a Witness friend over the Trinity, and he really knew his stuff!)
The plains are very flat and I have seen cheese that looks the same color as the moon. I am sure that anyone can provide reasons for anything they want. quote: Witnesses are deeply devoted to studying the Bible, and their approach to it strikes me as very logical and consistent, even if it's not one that I, as a liberal Christian aware of modern scholarship, could possibly buy into.
That is very rich of you. So from your position of privelege, you could never buy into it, but you won't bother sharing your awareness of modern scholarship with those who might be ignorant of it. Heck, you don't have to. Instead you make a bunch of unsubstantiated claims of how the NWT is "a pretty accurate translation", fruit of a "determination to give as exact a translation of Koine Greek". But why should you take responsibility for anything you post; I mean, we all know that this is stuff that you, "as a liberal Christian aware of modern scholarship, could possibly buy into."
Posts: 1188 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
Thanks for answering 12uthy! By the way I hope you don't feel that too many people are 'on your case'. If it's too much just pm me or just decline to answer!
quote: Originally posted by 12uthy: quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: 12uthy,
Are you happy with idea that someone or something less than God dwells within you?
And, are you happy with the idea that the Church is a Temple to something that isn't God?
Daron
The only thing that dwells within me that did not come from my beloved God is sin and no I am not happy about this, and will echo Paul's words on this:
The point I wish to make is that we do not need to revere God's gift as if it were a God in itself in order to use it and cherish it. If a loved one gave you a gift would you treat that gift as though it were that loved one or would you cherish it because it was a gift from a dear loved one.
<snipped to removed tangent on sin>
I still view it as an unnecessary confounding of the simple Christian message, which is this:
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.(KJV) <snipped to remove tangent on phariseeism>
Are you saying that Jesus Christ is God's gift? John clearly does! If you are saying that Jesus Christ is God's gift, are you saying that this gift dwells within you?
As you rightly say, John 3:16 clearly states that God's gift is a person: namely Jesus Christ; 'he gave his only Son'.
Furthermore, Scripture states in too many places to mention that Christ is to indwell the believer. So, Christ the person indwells the believer; right? Now, are you saying that Christ, a person who is less than God, dwells within you?
Are you really saying that you are a temple to someone, or something, that is less than God? Yes or no?
For my part, if I am to be a temple, I want to be a temple to God. Anything else would be idolatrous surely?
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
12uthy
Shipmate
# 9400
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by m.t_tomb: Thanks for answering 12uthy! By the way I hope you don't feel that too many people are 'on your case'. If it's too much just pm me or just decline to answer!
Are you saying that Jesus Christ is God's gift? John clearly does! If you are saying that Jesus Christ is God's gift, are you saying that this gift dwells within you?
As you rightly say, John 3:16 clearly states that God's gift is a person: namely Jesus Christ; 'he gave his only Son'.
Furthermore, Scripture states in too many places to mention that Christ is to indwell the believer. So, Christ the person indwells the believer; right? Now, are you saying that Christ, a person who is less than God, dwells within you?
Are you really saying that you are a temple to someone, or something, that is less than God? Yes or no?
For my part, if I am to be a temple, I want to be a temple to God. Anything else would be idolatrous surely?
Is Jesus Christ God's gift? Yes
Does this gift dwell within me? In the sense that I love him and follow his steps as closely as humanly possible, yes. But it would be more accurate to say that I hope to have his spirit dwell within me. Since Jesus had Jehovah's spirit it could thus be said that I hope to have Jesus' spirit too. (Does that make sense, I'm getting a bit tired )
I personally am not the temple, the Congregation of Jehovah's followers make up the temple (and by that I don't mean just JW's). Collectively we all make up the body of Christ (not literally of course) of which I'm probably something like a toe.
(1 Corinthians 12:12-13) 12 For just as the body is one but has many members, and all the members of that body, although being many, are one body, so also is the Christ. 13 For truly by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink one spirit. (sorry I'm too tired to go searching through the interlinear so you'll have to make do with the unreliable NWT )
So yes in a way I am a temple, or at least a part of one, to Jehovah God and no-one else. The way in which we have Jesus dwell in us is not by some mystic rite but through love and faithfulness in our hearts, plain and simple.
hth With all my Christian love ps I don't feel as though you are "on my case", I only appreciate the opportunity to share my views and hear others ideas (Malachi 3:16-18) 16 At that time those in fear of Jehovah spoke with one another, each one with his companion, and Jehovah kept paying attention and listening. And a book of remembrance began to be written up before him for those in fear of Jehovah and for those thinking upon his name. 17 “And they will certainly become mine,” Jehovah of armies has said, “at the day when I am producing a special property. And I will show compassion upon them, just as a man shows compassion upon his son who is serving him. 18 And YOU people will again certainly see [the distinction] between a righteous one and a wicked one, between one serving God and one who has not served him.”
, thanks
-------------------- Love 12uthy (Romans 12:1) . . .present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.. . .
Posts: 213 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|