Examining Scripture to see if Jesus was, and is, God. (page 18)

jonathan dough

And of course the central issue that Jesus as the Word comes from Eternity and therefore is God to the reader says- hey! everything came through that route, there is no other way to get here....ie the Hindu claim that everything is God/Divine.

I don't think so. You might stretch logic that far but the doctrine of the Trinity and Christianity in general does not teach that like the pagan Hindus everything is God/divine. If you could quote something, cite something to that effect that would help. Following your train of thought, Satan is God and divine. Christians don't believe or teach that.

http://144000.110mb.com/607/index.html

frankiespeakin

Jona,

You forget one very important fact in your hurry to use "scripture" & "semantics" to prove Jesus is god (or any doctrinal point for that matter). Do you want to know what that is??

All bible we have today are drum roll for emphasis:::::::::::::::Translations::::::::::: and twice for emphasis because it seems you conveniently dodge this in your use of use scripture to prove a doctrinal point. Drum roll again for emphasis all scripture we have are a::::::::Translation:::::::: and as a:::::::: translation:::::::: they can be translated very easily to fit the doctrine of of the translators(ie NWT, King James, Wycliffe, Good News Bible etc...).

That being the case anything proven by using scripture is not hard proof but merely an exercise of semantics and clever arguments often using child like logic which glosses over the fact that no doctrine can be soundly proven with such faulty archaic logic.

designs

Joanthan,

The 'everything is god' is the metaphysical problem intrinsic to the Trinity due to its expressed teachings of-

Hypostatic union

Indivisibilty

Omnipresence

Matter, Energy, Time, Space etc. all coming from God. It doesn't leave 'room' for any exclusions unless you symantically remove something, but there is no science to that type of exclusion.

jonathan dough

The 'everything is god' is the metaphysical problem intrinsic to the Trinity due to its expressed teachings of-

Hypostatic union

Indivisibilty

Omnipresence

Can you cite any authority? The hypostatic union concerns the christology of Christ, His nature, that he was/is God-man. It does not stand for the proposition that "everything is God" as you claim and accordingly can't be a metaphsical problem intrinsic to the Trinity. The triune God's indivisibility refers to the fact that the three persons of the Trinity - Father, Son and Holy Spirit, are inseparable, indivisible among themselves, yet distinct. It does not mean "Everything is God." I think you are comingling Hindu religions with Trinitarian Christianity.

In most formularies the doctrine is stated by saying that God is one in His essential being, but that in this being there are three Persons, yet so as not to form separate and distinct individuals. They are three modes or forms in which the divine essence exists. ‘Person’ is, however, an imperfect expression of the truth in as much as the term denotes to us a separate rational and moral individual. But in the being of God there are not three individuals, but only three personal self-distinctions within the one divine essence. (New Bible Dictionary, 1299, 1300)

With respect to the Almighty's "omnipresence," what exactly are we arguing about? Are you saying that Hinduism and western theism hold to the exact same definition of omnipresence? I'm trying to sharpen the issue, and see how it relates to whether Jesus was, and is, God. Help me understand what point you are trying to make with respect to God's "omnipresence."

http://www.144000.110mb.com/trinity/index.html#3

designs

Jonathan,

If a hypothesis joins Jesus to God in any intrinsic way it should follow that as God is transcedent so are any "modes" that God expresses.

So if God is omnipresent then Jesus would be also under that theory, in other words Jesus should not be confined to a 5'6" human frame in his current existence, or if he were confined to that frame it would still make him God because he is 'filled' with the God things, and by that same hypothesis that makes Jesus God everything should also be considered in the same weight since you have a Divine Being everywhere.

The triune indivisibility should exist everywhere. There should be no place where God is not. Even if the brightness of God exists greater in some place rather than another that cannot diminish God's divineness, a Supreme Being can't exist 89% over there and 111% someplace else.

I was using Hinduism as an example of other cultures that have tackled contemplating the existence of God, but not in an exact Western Christian definition.

jonathan dough

DESIGN: If a hypothesis joins Jesus to God in any intrinsic way it should follow that as God is transcedent so are any "modes" that God expresses.

So if God is omnipresent then Jesus would be also under that theory, in other words Jesus should not be confined to a 5'6" human frame in his current existence, or if he were confined to that frame it would still make him God because he is 'filled' with the God things, and by that same hypothesis that makes Jesus God everything should also be considered in the same weight since you have a Divine Being everywhere.

The triune indivisibility should exist everywhere. There should be no place where God is not. Even if the brightness of God exists greater in some place rather than another that cannot diminish God's divineness, a Supreme Being can't exist 89% over there and 111% someplace else.

I was using Hinduism as an example of other cultures that have tackled contemplating the existence of God, but not in an exact Western Christian definition.

----------------------------

ME: I agree, sort of, see below, as long as we are talking about the resurrected Christ who was folded into the Trinity. So what are we arguing about? How does this prove that Jesus was/is not God?

jonathan dough

I was using Hinduism as an example of other cultures that have tackled contemplating the existence of God, but not in an exact Western Christian definition.

I'm glad you said that because their approaches are diametrically opposed, although Aquinas smacks of pantheism or panentheism, which is soundly rejected by the RCC.

So Designs, how come you stopped being an asshole? You were playing tricks on us.

http://www.144000.110mb.com/trinity/index.html

Examining Scripture to see if Jesus was, and is, God.

Share this